zobilamouche said:

Isn't this largely a case of us, fans, to expect everyone who has worked with Prince to be limitlessly praising him?

Just as there are non-Prince fans, there will have been musicians Prince worked with who clearly found it interesting and fun etc, but who were not star struck, or indeed, were not molded by Prince.

Eric was not a young novice when joining the band and had largely found his voice as a musician. Whether he's less successful or known than Prince does not mean his position towards his Prince days is throwing shade or unrespectful.

For once someone is really talking about their journey and putting things in perspective when it comes their time with Prince and fans are already getting annoyed.

The problem here is not Eric but the expectations and tolerance levels of some fans when Prince is subject of discussion.

No, the problem is Eric and the fact that he is a music snob. I have posted a two hour interview were he admits it. If that is how he feels then he very much has the right to feel that way but he is a snob.

I wish people would call a spade a spade and stop pussy footing around.

he's a bit player in the prince story, sax on a few albums and in some shows, nothing more. Alan Leeds is a lot more significant as are many other musicians. The man's free to his opinion though, i ran into a few people who said they didn't like prince's music after I mention how devestated i was about him dying, they don't say it in a negative way but like "ya sad, I wasn't too into him though" the same way I'd say about the recent suicide of chris cornell, wouldn't be negative, I was just never that into grunge but oh sure, dude had one of the all time great voices.

laurarichardson said:

zobilamouche said:

Isn't this largely a case of us, fans, to expect everyone who has worked with Prince to be limitlessly praising him?

Just as there are non-Prince fans, there will have been musicians Prince worked with who clearly found it interesting and fun etc, but who were not star struck, or indeed, were not molded by Prince.

Eric was not a young novice when joining the band and had largely found his voice as a musician. Whether he's less successful or known than Prince does not mean his position towards his Prince days is throwing shade or unrespectful.

For once someone is really talking about their journey and putting things in perspective when it comes their time with Prince and fans are already getting annoyed.

The problem here is not Eric but the expectations and tolerance levels of some fans when Prince is subject of discussion.

No, the problem is Eric and the fact that he is a music snob. I have posted a two hour interview were he admits it. If that is how he feels then he very much has the right to feel that way but he is a snob.

I wish people would call a spade a spade and stop pussy footing around.

GuyBros said:

zobilamouche said:

Isn't this largely a case of us, fans, to expect everyone who has worked with Prince to be limitlessly praising him?

FFS, this.

Not everybody is going to stan every aspect about him be it his artistry, style, disposition, work, etc.

People are entitled to their own opinions based upon their actual direct interactions with the man.

Exactly. Which is why threads like this are pointless. Anyone who offers a reasonable interpretation of Leeds's comments is met with, "Fuck you! Leeds is just a douche!" Even though the stans do not know Leeds personally, did not know Prince personally, and have no first-hand knowledge of their working relationship.

purplerabbithole said:

Oh my goodness. I am no professional writer or poet but it might suprise you to learn that my major in college was English secondary education and my minor was creative writing.

As for my post that you responded to, I understand specializing in different aspects of a writer's body of work for the purpose of a symposium or conference, but I still believe that the experts/speakers on certain writers should at least be a fan of the majority of their work. A conference about Prince's work would most likely focus on his studio albums more than his live performances due to the limited number of official concert films out there from Prince. (bootlegs probably wouldn't count). If the conference were to focus on a performer known primarily for his live stage work or performance style, then maybe Leeds would be a good choice since he was there on tour and could provide history. I still contend that he is a poor choice for this conference due to his general lack of interest in Prince's artistry other than what he himself contributed.

I used a poor analogy earlier with the Hemingway short stories obviously. So, I will attempt another one. Its almost like Leeds is Hemingway's editor saying something akin to "I dislike Heminway's turn of phrase but I love his penmanship and work effort; and yeah, check out how wonderfully I corrected his grammar". Okay, here's another one. What expert on Shakespeare would contend that his tragedies are the only thing worth reading? A preference is one thing.. I personally rather read his plays than his poems but I acknowledge that they are all well-written. Gushing over Prince isn't what a conference should do but a certain degree of reverence would be good considering its not supposed to be a takedown of Prince.

As for your belief that his live version of unreleased music is prefereable to the studio versions, I agree but I also believe that his best studio work is the stuff he chose to release.

1725topp said:

*

Well, as a poet and fiction writer, myself, I can tell you that I admire a lot of different writers' techniques and styles even if I'm not a big fan of their books or collections. For instance, I love a lot of the imagery used in Claudia Rankine's awarding-collection of poetry, Citizen, but I don't care much for the lyrical aspects of the poetry or the resolution, or lack-thereof, of the book. In fact, other than her use of imagery, there is not much of her work that I like. Also, there are a lot of writers who write in various genres of whom I like their work in one genre over another. To that point, I thank that Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants” is a fine as anything he’s written, including his novels. The socio-politics of gendered communication—or how genders are taught to communicate—presented in the story is well-executed.

*

As for Leeds speaking at the conference, he should because he can provide technical and historical accounts and affirmations, which is a major purpose of a conference. A prerequisite of speaking at any conference is having critical/scholarly knowledge of the topic, which, again, Leeds has. A conference is not just to "gush" over or about an artist but to engage in serious study of an artist. So, again, Leeds' personal reflections as well as his professional knowledge are very much valued for a "serious" study of Prince's work. The real question or issue should be if the folks there asked Leeds any scholarly questions regarding songwriting, recording, and playing techniques. I'm sure they would have gotten more extended, if not better, answers if they would have asked these types of questions. Furthermore, I'm knowledgeable of Prince's studio bootlegs and his live bootlegs, but I like his live bootlegs more. In fact, I'm not moved nearly as much by Prince's unleased studio work as I am by his unreleased live shows. I probably listen to/like about ten percent of the unreleased studio songs; yet, I spend a great deal more time listening to/enjoying his live shows. As such, I could present a paper at a conference discussing how/why Prince's live performances are critical to understanding Prince as much as his studio work. I could probably even write a thorough paper asserting that, often, Prince's live performance of a song seems always to be enjoyed more than the recorded studio version.

*

Finally, if you have ever attended any conferences, you know that most folks at conferences specialize in one or two aspects of an artist's works. There are some scholars who specialize in Shakespeare's tragedies while other scholars specialize in his comedies. (There are classes at many universities that teach only the tragedies or the comedies.) Believe it or not, there are Shakespearean scholars that specialize in his poetry. And, the same is true of Hemingway. Some scholars specialize in his short stories while others specialize in his novels. So, at a conference, there will be various scholars discussing various aspects of an artist's work, which provides a well-rounded, insightful, and illuminating conference. Just think how boring it would be if a conference invited twenty scholars all to discuss the same aspect. What would be the point of attending more than one of the panels? So, I hope that this conference had scholars that specialized in various aspects of Prince's work and legacy so as to produce well-spring of knowledge.

[Edited 5/18/17 20:33pm]

[Edited 5/18/17 20:42pm]

[Edited 5/18/17 20:45pm]

*

Leeds worked in the studio with Prince, recorded with Prince a countless number of times; as such, he knows how Prince wrote songs and how Prince executed those songs into recordings. Thus, Leeds is an insightful/valuable source to have at a conference about Prince. And, we can just agree to disagree about Leeds being negative, belittling, or marginalizing Prince because I don't read/perceive that in Leeds' interview. I read/perceive someone objectively discussing a musician with whom he worked. He's giving a very matter-of-fact statement about Prince's skills and influence.

*

A conference about Prince's work could concentrate on any number of things just like a conference on Ralph Ellison or Harper Lee could concentrate on the books that they officially released or a conference on either of these two brilliant writers could concentrate on their unreleased works or works that were released after their deaths. Scholars have speculated on how much of Ellison’s and Lee's books released after their deaths is written by them or by editors/ghost writers. My point is that there are enough folks who have/know of Prince's unreleased studio or unreleased live work to produce a conference on either. Therefore, since most of Prince's unreleased studio work doesn't move/interest me, I would focus more on his released studio work and his unreleased live work. However, I have presented papers at conferences (CLA for one) discussing Prince's songs as poetry and short stories, analyzing released and unreleased songs in those papers, for what it's worth. Also, I never doubted that Prince released his best studio work. In fact, I've said on this site that, often, when I hear Prince's unreleased studio work, my first thought is, "I see why I didn't get released." That’s not me saying that Prince is a terrible songwriter; that’s me saying that this particular unreleased song doesn’t move me like his released work.

*

It's not a question of an expert asserting that Shakespeare's tragedies are better than his comedies. My point was/is that there are scholars who have decided to concentrate on one aspect of Shakespeare, and they have produced insightful research that illuminates Shakespeare's work for future readers or viewers. In this same vein, scholars could concentrate on any or several aspects of Prince’s work/art, and produce insightful papers and conferences.

*

Actually, your first analogy is better than your second analogy because Leeds never presented himself or put himself in the place or position of an editor or producer, which would be the equivalent of a literary editor. Leeds actually never says anything negative about Prince in the interview so I'm not even certain how to respond to your second analogy. Leeds essentially says that Prince is a great musician who produced some great songs that influenced the next generation by using his art to connect that current generation to the previous generation. I don't understand how that can be taken as a negative simply because Leeds makes a point to say that he, himself, was influenced by other great songwriters/musicians with whom Leeds places Prince in that company. I may be missing something in the Leeds’ interview, but I just don’t see where he belittles or marginalizes Prince’s talents.

Genesia said:

GuyBros said:

FFS, this.

Not everybody is going to stan every aspect about him be it his artistry, style, disposition, work, etc.

People are entitled to their own opinions based upon their actual direct interactions with the man.

Exactly. Which is why threads like this are pointless. Anyone who offers a reasonable interpretation of Leeds's comments is met with, "Fuck you! Leeds is just a douche!" Even though the stans do not know Leeds personally, did not know Prince personally, and have no first-hand knowledge of their working relationship.

But whether or not he personally was into some of his songs should disqualify him from speaking at this event is kind absurd. He has insights that deal directly with the content of the event that don't necessitate him having to personally love the music.

GuyBros said:

Genesia said:

Exactly. Which is why threads like this are pointless. Anyone who offers a reasonable interpretation of Leeds's comments is met with, "Fuck you! Leeds is just a douche!" Even though the stans do not know Leeds personally, did not know Prince personally, and have no first-hand knowledge of their working relationship.

But whether or not he personally was into some of his songs should disqualify him from speaking at this event is kind absurd. He has insights that deal directly with the content of the event that don't necessitate him having to personally love the music.

I totally agree.

Genesia said:

GuyBros said:

FFS, this.

Not everybody is going to stan every aspect about him be it his artistry, style, disposition, work, etc.

People are entitled to their own opinions based upon their actual direct interactions with the man.

Exactly. Which is why threads like this are pointless. Anyone who offers a reasonable interpretation of Leeds's comments is met with, "Fuck you! Leeds is just a douche!" Even though the stans do not know Leeds personally, did not know Prince personally, and have no first-hand knowledge of their working relationship.

We can go by the comments that have come out of his own mouth.

laurarichardson said:

Genesia said:

Exactly. Which is why threads like this are pointless. Anyone who offers a reasonable interpretation of Leeds's comments is met with, "Fuck you! Leeds is just a douche!" Even though the stans do not know Leeds personally, did not know Prince personally, and have no first-hand knowledge of their working relationship.

We can go by the comments that have come out of his own mouth.

its not about knowing them personally none of claim 2 we go by what the people say and out of all the people that have worked with prince he try 2 come across as he is better than prince music because he play jazz. yet fact remains he played for prince prince didnt work for him. regardless of their work relationship we can only take eric leeds for the words he speak

cbarnes3121 said:

laurarichardson said:

We can go by the comments that have come out of his own mouth.

its not about knowing them personally none of claim 2 we go by what the people say and out of all the people that have worked with prince he try 2 come across as he is better than prince music because he play jazz. yet fact remains he played for prince prince didnt work for him. regardless of their work relationship we can only take eric leeds for the words he speak

Even if Leed's personal preferences for music lean towards jazz, that does not disqualify him from speaking at this event which if one has read the program covers many facets that do not require one to be a fan of the music.

paulludvig said:

Prince was a brilliant pop artist. Leeds is a mediocre jazz musician. Is anyone really interested in Leeds outside of his work with Prince? Is he truly respected in jazz circles? Nope. Jazz musicians tend to respect Prince more than they respect Leeds. Probably because they recognize a true artist.

.

You've got some salt to use the word mediocre to describe Leeds, even in that context. The dude really helped elevate the Prince material he played on.

GuyBros said:

cbarnes3121 said:

its not about knowing them personally none of claim 2 we go by what the people say and out of all the people that have worked with prince he try 2 come across as he is better than prince music because he play jazz. yet fact remains he played for prince prince didnt work for him. regardless of their work relationship we can only take eric leeds for the words he speak

Even if Leed's personal preferences for music lean towards jazz, that does not disqualify him from speaking at this event which if one has read the program covers many facets that do not require one to be a fan of the music.

Well I never said he should not speak but do you not think someone should be speaking that actually liked the damm music. His on record saying he did not care for the music which is just strange.

He has come off in interviews as if this time in his life was insignifcant and what is he doing now playing in clubs in Minnesota and putting out one tune on Tidal that I found accidently.

If this music did not mean anything why is he even on the panel?

laurarichardson said:

Well I never said he should not speak but do you not think someone should be speaking that actually liked the damm music.

If this music did not mean anything why is he even on the panel?

Did you check out the event listing?

GuyBros said:

Just a little bit insight if we're going to discuss the propriety of who and who should not be speaking here. Per the actual event:

About

Purple Reign: An interdisciplinary conference on the life and legacy of Prince is a three day international academic conference hosted by the School of Arts and Media, University of Salford, UK and the Department of Recording Industry, Middle Tennessee State University, USA.

The conference, taking place between 24th-26th May 2017, will provide fresh perspectives on the creative and commercial dimensions of Prince’s career, re-examining the meanings of his work in the context of his unexpected death.

Purple Reign presents a timely consideration of the cultural impact, iconic status of Prince and his global legacies across many media platforms. It will examine all aspects of his creative output and the ways in which it intersects with video, performance, literature, theatre, film, digital culture, design and fashion.

We will address the issue of Prince’s significant influence and lasting appeal from a number of multi-disciplinary perspectives. We have welcomed scholars from across the globe, covering study fields of popular music and sound, gender and culture, television, film and celebrity studies, visual arts, performance studies, and digital media.

Bold is mine.

But yeah, given the actual aims of the event, one doesn't really have to be a fan of his music in order to be able to speak any of these many different topics not limited to the actual music.

Eric's comments do speak to Prince's influence. I don't see how his perspective is not relevant to this specific event's aims.

The insights Eric mentions in the interview support that mission because he can provide insight about those intersections with comments and insights like

Prince had a lot going for him. He might have been known just for the guitar player that he was. Or for the entertainer that he was. But add to that the depth and diversity of his music, and the songwriter that he was.

and

But he clearly distinguished himself in how he used this established vocabulary to present a musical persona that would not only stand the test of time, but would provide a template for others to follow. I

I knew how this conversation was gonna go, the Leeds bros. never really fondly of Prince. I had this same conversation a few weeks ago about them. They seems to always come off in a negative way. Maybe there was some bad blood that we don't know about.

Genesia said:

jdcxc said:

Genesia said:

I totally agree.

Of course he is not disqualified from speaking on Prince...but when he does he is also fair game for critique.

Is anybody saying he's above being critiqued?

Also being critiqued is why some question why he is not qualified for this specific event.

[Edited 5/19/17 14:22pm]

I know plenty of top level musicians that aren't huge fans of Prince music, yet respect his talents. I have always loved the fact that Eric Leeds isn't one to just kiss alot of ass to please Prince and his fans. Eric Leeds was more fan of jamming, playing jazz and playing live. He wasn't a very "emotional" guy when it comes to the impact pop music can have on people. He said the same things about James Brown. He didn't know what was so special about James Brown back then. Eric was a talented sax player, but wasn't and probably still isnt able to see music in a bigger historical perspective and context. His interest in music seems rather narrow, no matter how ironic it might seem. Jazz musicians should have an even more open mind if they want jazz to be something that pushes the envelope. He's a dude I'd never trust if he wrote a review on an amazing pop album. But when it comes to his honesty, I think he's credible.

Replica said:

I know plenty of top level musicians that aren't huge fans of Prince music, yet respect his talents. I have always loved the fact that Eric Leeds isn't one to just kiss alot of ass to please Prince and his fans. Eric Leeds was more fan of jamming, playing jazz and playing live. He wasn't a very "emotional" guy when it comes to the impact pop music can have on people. He said the same things about James Brown. He didn't know what was so special about James Brown back then. Eric was a talented sax player, but wasn't and probably still isnt able to see music in a bigger historical perspective and context. His interest in music seems rather narrow, no matter how ironic it might seem. Jazz musicians should have an even more open mind if they want jazz to be something that pushes the envelope. He's a dude I'd never trust if he wrote a review on an amazing pop album. But when it comes to his honesty, I think he's credible.

I dont consider anyone with all those faults to be credible.

rdhull said:

Replica said:

I know plenty of top level musicians that aren't huge fans of Prince music, yet respect his talents. I have always loved the fact that Eric Leeds isn't one to just kiss alot of ass to please Prince and his fans. Eric Leeds was more fan of jamming, playing jazz and playing live. He wasn't a very "emotional" guy when it comes to the impact pop music can have on people. He said the same things about James Brown. He didn't know what was so special about James Brown back then. Eric was a talented sax player, but wasn't and probably still isnt able to see music in a bigger historical perspective and context. His interest in music seems rather narrow, no matter how ironic it might seem. Jazz musicians should have an even more open mind if they want jazz to be something that pushes the envelope. He's a dude I'd never trust if he wrote a review on an amazing pop album. But when it comes to his honesty, I think he's credible.

I dont consider anyone with all those faults to be credible.

Those James Brown comments in context dont seem like that. He said

When I was young and listening to Ray Charles, James Brown etc it never occurred to me that one day universities would consider their place in music worthy subjects for academic analysis).

In that podcast linked in this thread, he was asked about what inspired him to pick up an instrument. He said

"Ray Charles... that was my Prince."

In context the remarks about Ray Charles and James Brown don't dismiss their artistry. He is saying

when he was young, he didn't think universities would analyze music by the likes of James Brown or Ray Charles who was his inspiration for getting into music.

There's probably a lot of folks who listened to Prince growing up as kids, and when they were kids they probably didn't think that his music would be college type material that would analyzed. That ain't the same thing as saying he wasn't special.

1725topp said:

purplerabbithole said:

Saying he is not a fan of Prince's music (but a fan of him as a musician) whilst speaking at a conference about Prince??? (BTW, how can you be a fan of the musician but not his recorded music? What the fvck does that even mean?)

His collaborators don't have to worship the ground Prince walks on or think highly of his albums, but if they don't like at least his music, they shouldn't speak at conferences about him. Appreciating his music (on record) should be a prerequisite for even speaking at this conference.)

It would be like speaking about the legacy of Ernest Hemingway at a conference but believing that only his short stories were any good.

*

Well, as a poet and fiction writer, myself, I can tell you that I admire a lot of different writers' techniques and styles even if I'm not a big fan of their books or collections. For instance, I love a lot of the imagery used in Claudia Rankine's awarding-collection of poetry, Citizen, but I don't care much for the lyrical aspects of the poetry or the resolution, or lack-thereof, of the book. In fact, other than her use of imagery, there is not much of her work that I like. Also, there are a lot of writers who write in various genres of whom I like their work in one genre over another. To that point, I thank that Hemingway’s “Hills Like White Elephants” is a fine as anything he’s written, including his novels. The socio-politics of gendered communication—or how genders are taught to communicate—presented in the story is well-executed.

*

As for Leeds speaking at the conference, he should because he can provide technical and historical accounts and affirmations, which is a major purpose of a conference. A prerequisite of speaking at any conference is having critical/scholarly knowledge of the topic, which, again, Leeds has. A conference is not just to "gush" over or about an artist but to engage in serious study of an artist. So, again, Leeds' personal reflections as well as his professional knowledge are very much valued for a "serious" study of Prince's work. The real question or issue should be if the folks there asked Leeds any scholarly questions regarding songwriting, recording, and playing techniques. I'm sure they would have gotten more extended, if not better, answers if they would have asked these types of questions. Furthermore, I'm knowledgeable of Prince's studio bootlegs and his live bootlegs, but I like his live bootlegs more. In fact, I'm not moved nearly as much by Prince's unleased studio work as I am by his unreleased live shows. I probably listen to/like about ten percent of the unreleased studio songs; yet, I spend a great deal more time listening to/enjoying his live shows. As such, I could present a paper at a conference discussing how/why Prince's live performances are critical to understanding Prince as much as his studio work. I could probably even write a thorough paper asserting that, often, Prince's live performance of a song seems always to be enjoyed more than the recorded studio version.

*

Finally, if you have ever attended any conferences, you know that most folks at conferences specialize in one or two aspects of an artist's works. There are some scholars who specialize in Shakespeare's tragedies while other scholars specialize in his comedies. (There are classes at many universities that teach only the tragedies or the comedies.) Believe it or not, there are Shakespearean scholars that specialize in his poetry. And, the same is true of Hemingway. Some scholars specialize in his short stories while others specialize in his novels. So, at a conference, there will be various scholars discussing various aspects of an artist's work, which provides a well-rounded, insightful, and illuminating conference. Just think how boring it would be if a conference invited twenty scholars all to discuss the same aspect. What would be the point of attending more than one of the panels? So, I hope that this conference had scholars that specialized in various aspects of Prince's work and legacy so as to produce well-spring of knowledge.

Thoughtful and quite interesting, thank you.

zobilamouche said:

Isn't this largely a case of us, fans, to expect everyone who has worked with Prince to be limitlessly praising him?

Just as there are non-Prince fans, there will have been musicians Prince worked with who clearly found it interesting and fun etc, but who were not star struck, or indeed, were not molded by Prince.

Eric was not a young novice when joining the band and had largely found his voice as a musician. Whether he's less successful or known than Prince does not mean his position towards his Prince days is throwing shade or unrespectful.

For once someone is really talking about their journey and putting things in perspective when it comes their time with Prince and fans are already getting annoyed.

The problem here is not Eric but the expectations and tolerance levels of some fans when Prince is subject of discussion.

Preach to the choir.

ah, I just read Replicas response

GuyBros said:

rdhull said:

In that podcast linked in this thread, he was asked about what inspired him to pick up an instrument. He said

"Ray Charles... that was my Prince."

In context the remarks about Ray Charles and James Brown don't dismiss their artistry. He is saying

when he was young, he didn't think universities would analyze music by the likes of James Brown or Ray Charles who was his inspiration for getting into music.

There's probably a lot of folks who listened to Prince growing up as kids, and when they were kids they probably didn't think that his music would be college type material that would analyzed. That ain't the same thing as saying he wasn't special.

rdhull said:

Replica said:

I know plenty of top level musicians that aren't huge fans of Prince music, yet respect his talents. I have always loved the fact that Eric Leeds isn't one to just kiss alot of ass to please Prince and his fans. Eric Leeds was more fan of jamming, playing jazz and playing live. He wasn't a very "emotional" guy when it comes to the impact pop music can have on people. He said the same things about James Brown. He didn't know what was so special about James Brown back then. Eric was a talented sax player, but wasn't and probably still isnt able to see music in a bigger historical perspective and context. His interest in music seems rather narrow, no matter how ironic it might seem. Jazz musicians should have an even more open mind if they want jazz to be something that pushes the envelope. He's a dude I'd never trust if he wrote a review on an amazing pop album. But when it comes to his honesty, I think he's credible.

I dont consider anyone with all those faults to be credible.

I'd argue Prince was like that. He liked his stuff from when he was a kid and a teenager and he liked whatever pretty girl he was promoting that week. He didn't seem to care about much else.

Yeah, people will say he liked this, that and the other but he never said it himself. Took him how long to get on board with hip hop?

jaawwnn said:

rdhull said:

I dont consider anyone with all those faults to be credible.

I'd argue Prince was like that. He liked his stuff from when he was a kid and a teenager and he liked whatever pretty girl he was promoting that week. He didn't seem to care about much else.

Yeah, people will say he liked this, that and the other but he never said it himself. Took him how long to get on board with hip hop?

He did care. He played with Winehouse, Macy, Badu, Chaka (who isnt mad anymore), Lenny, etc. He cared a lot of what was going at the current times.

rdhull said:

jaawwnn said:

I'd argue Prince was like that. He liked his stuff from when he was a kid and a teenager and he liked whatever pretty girl he was promoting that week. He didn't seem to care about much else.

Yeah, people will say he liked this, that and the other but he never said it himself. Took him how long to get on board with hip hop?

He did care. He played with Winehouse, Macy, Badu, Chaka (who isnt mad anymore), Lenny, etc. He cared a lot of what was going at the current times.

Yes he played with the people at the top of their fame (and Chaka who he grew up a fan of) like everyone else in Hollywood. Didn't mean nothing. About the only person who I was really curious about was his support of Harts, that actually seemed genuine.

Prince was a old school guy who generally like old school music, I don't begrudge him that. I didn't expect him to be telling me about the latest up and coming act on Sub Pop or whoever, he had a pretty narrow focus in what he supported. By the time he got around to discovering Janelle Monae I was like "well it's about time" and she had half the industry backing her.

[Edited 5/19/17 23:26pm]

erics work with prince is fantastic.how many awesome songs did they cut?

One of the questions from the interview: "As a musician, what was the most important lesson Prince taught you musically?"

Right there is one of the problems. Eric Leeds had already been playing professionally for 15 years before he worked with Prince (according to the interview).

As a saxophone player -- which, according to Candy Dulfer, Prince tried and wasn't very good -- I would imagine this question as a bit off-putting.

I am certain they didn't mean what he taught him as a horn player. They could be refering to concentration, work effort, inspiration, minimalism, etc.

A musician for 15 years can still learn something from other musicians. Even Prince in his interview on the Arsenio Hall show in 2014 (35 years as a musician) admitted that his young associates were teaching him stuff as he was teaching them stuff.

Its a conference about Prince's legacy.

Se7en said:

One of the questions from the interview: "As a musician, what was the most important lesson Prince taught you musically?"

Right there is one of the problems. Eric Leeds had already been playing professionally for 15 years before he worked with Prince (according to the interview).

As a saxophone player -- which, according to Candy Dulfer, Prince tried and wasn't very good -- I would imagine this question as a bit off-putting.

[Edited 5/20/17 6:57am]

He claimed to be an old school guy but occassionally he would surprise us with who he was a fan of. Janele is not the only modern musician he supported...MOno Neon? and a number of beautiful female singers. I even remember Prince handing a grammy to Goyte and Kimbra for "Somebody we used to know" and saying under his breath before doing so, "I love this song,"..

Can you imagine Prince showing up to a do a conference for Ray Charles and saying "I don't really like his music but I enjoy his piano playing in live performances"? People on this very site would have ripped him to shreads (while he was alive, that is)

People are so quick to defend Prince associates. Eric rubs me the wrong way despite his talent for many reasons. His 'tribute' to Prince on his facebook page on the day of his death had more subtle shade, self-aggrandizement, and tributes to his "Family" associates than it had sadness over Prince's death. Sometimes it is not a time to be honest. Sometimes you just need gracefully bow out of the discussion or just find something nice to say (especially on the day of someone's death or at a conference honoring that person.)

jaawwnn said:

rdhull said:

He did care. He played with Winehouse, Macy, Badu, Chaka (who isnt mad anymore), Lenny, etc. He cared a lot of what was going at the current times.

Yes he played with the people at the top of their fame (and Chaka who he grew up a fan of) like everyone else in Hollywood. Didn't mean nothing. About the only person who I was really curious about was his support of Harts, that actually seemed genuine.

Prince was a old school guy who generally like old school music, I don't begrudge him that. I didn't expect him to be telling me about the latest up and coming act on Sub Pop or whoever, he had a pretty narrow focus in what he supported. By the time he got around to discovering Janelle Monae I was like "well it's about time" and she had half the industry backing her.

[Edited 5/19/17 23:26pm]

[Edited 5/20/17 6:50am]

[Edited 5/20/17 6:53am]