I used to agree with the Warner Brothers executives who said 'Prince releases far too much music to make market sense'.

They were implying that Prince should have released a new album every three or four years like Jacko, U2 or REM when they achieved super stardom instead of one album per year.

In orther words after Purple Rain, Prince should have released his next album in 1987 or 1988.

But what if he followed their advice.

No ATWIAD, no Parade, no SoTT, no Lovesexy.

Just imagine nine or ten songs from that four year period (probably the greatest album ever) and a multi million seller but how much great music would have been lost to the world.

Try making a 9 or 10 track album from 85 to 88 and then disregarding all the other tracks into the waste bin.

You probably end up with a brilliant album but you end up throwing 20 or 30 great songs from that four year period in the bin.

And that was Prince's golden period, his next album after that would have been released in the early 90's when his genius was on the wane.

He was right to release so much great music during his genius period and not worry about marketing.

Thank you Prince.

BobPaisleyPark said:

I used to agree with the Warner Brothers executives who said 'Prince releases far too much music to make market sense'.

They were implying that Prince should have released a new album every three or four years like Jacko, U2 or REM when they achieved super stardom instead of one album per year.

In orther words after Purple Rain, Prince should have released his next album in 1987 or 1988.

But what if he followed their advice.

No ATWIAD, no Parade, no SoTT, no Lovesexy.

Just imagine nine or ten songs from that four year period (probably the greatest album ever) and a multi million seller but how much great music would have been lost to the world.

Try making a 9 or 10 track album from 85 to 88 and then disregarding all the other tracks into the waste bin.

You probably end up with a brilliant album but you end up throwing 20 or 30 great songs from that four year period in the bin.

And that was Prince's golden period, his next album after that would have been released in the early 90's when his genius was on the wane.

He was right to release so much great music during his genius period and not worry about marketing.

Thank you Prince.

Exactly what I think.

For the hard-core fans, such as ourselves, it would've been what you might call an "artistic tragedy". We and really even those who didn't or haven't paid those albums much attention would've SERIOUSLY lost out.

That said, from an economic or marketing point of view it's basically impossible to argue with them. As you increase quantity beyond any optimal point, demand and theoretical value will fall in correspondence. (And album sales did exactly that following Purple Rain even though, as we know, while you maybe can't say things got better and better through 1988, you could get away with saying they got more and more interesting while quality remained at that unimaginable peak.)

[Edited 8/19/17 20:41pm]

AThacker said:

For the hard-core fans, such as ourselves, it would've been what you might call an "artistic tragedy". We and really even those who didn't or haven't paid those albums much attention would've SERIOUSLY lost out.

That said, from an economic or marketing point of view it's basically impossible to argue with them. As you increase quantity beyond any optimal point, demand and theoretical value will fall in correspondance. (And album sales did exactly that following Purple Rain even though, as we know, while you maybe can't say things got better and better through 1988, you could get away with saying they got more and more interesting while quality remained at that unimaginable peak.)

Basically, what I'm trying to say is thank God that Prince disregarded conventional business practice and was as loyal as he was to music. He's one of the few artists who are truly EXCEPTIONAL and NEED to recognize that for the benefit of everyone. Thankfully, he either recognized that or was so loyal to music itself so as to disregard convention. But there's a feedback effect between being so loyal to music and his becoming the exceptional artist that he was so I guess it was destined to be. Again. Thank God for that!

BobPaisleyPark said:

I used to agree with the Warner Brothers executives who said 'Prince releases far too much music to make market sense'.

They were implying that Prince should have released a new album every three or four years like Jacko, U2 or REM when they achieved super stardom instead of one album per year.

.

Gotta love how you make up stupid BS and then pretend it's real.

.

The reason U2 took 3 years to release an album (Unforgettable Fire - Joshua Tree) was because they were touring all over the place and then took a long while to record their next album. Note that they release Rattle & Hum a year after TJT.

.

REM released an album every year until Green in 1988, and then... toured the world. For ELEVEN MONTHS. And then really blew up with Out Of Time in 1991, and released their next albums in 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998...

.

And comparing to MJ is just ridiculous. He had to follow up the most popular album of all times, of course that will cause people to hesitate etc.

.

So now Prince. Who did get to release albums on a yearly basis plus tons of side projects, and then failed to promote them properly. He only toured Purple Rain in the US. Parade got a dozen hit-and-run gigs in the US and a short Euro tour and a Japan Tour. SOTT got a two month Euro Tour which skipped the UK due to bad weather. Meanwhile there are unfortunate single choices. And while plenty of singles feature new music, several don't (Take Me With You, Girls & Boys, Anotherloverholenyohead).

.

And it's easy to see why a record company isn't happy with that. Because Prince is high maintenance, but unlike other artists he's not having a great ROI. Promoting a new Prince album or single costs just as much as a new Madonna one, but it doesn't resolve in similar sales. And in the meantime they've also got to support his hobby, i.e. Paisley Park Records, which is also eating money and not resulting in massive sales.

.

Quite frankly, it's a bit of a miracle that Warners let Prince get away with murder.

.

Also note that Prince did play the game with D&P: tons of promo, a long-ass world tour, videos, etc. to show Warners that he could be a responsible artist. And look, he sold 5+ million of that record, and used it to negociate his infamous $100 million deal.

.

Quite frankly I don't get the point of this "what if". Warners never forced Prince to limit his output, other than reducing CB's three LPs to SOTT's two. And in the end Prince couldn't even be bothered to promote his masterpiece with a serious tour.

I don't understand "what if"-ing it either. Prince did what he did, Warners did what they did, it worked the way it worked for as long as it did. It's impossible to really think of any meaningful different path--not only because it's not what happened--but also there's no model for what Prince would have produced if he had done all the promo that Warners wanted. He wouldn't have had the same catalog of songs, because he wouldn't have had the time in the studio--he would have been touring. He might have been making completely different songs when he did get to the studio. It would have been more focussed recording. He certainly wouldn't have recorded the same songs over the four year period but just releasing 10 of them. And yes, four years is arbitrary and not the norm for many of the other big stars. Four years was a long time to be away from the radio. That wasn't what Warners wanted, anyway. They just wanted to let the full cycle go, and two years would have been more than enough for that, probably.

BartVanHemelen said:

BobPaisleyPark said:

I used to agree with the Warner Brothers executives who said 'Prince releases far too much music to make market sense'.

They were implying that Prince should have released a new album every three or four years like Jacko, U2 or REM when they achieved super stardom instead of one album per year.

.

Gotta love how you make up stupid BS and then pretend it's real.

.

The reason U2 took 3 years to release an album (Unforgettable Fire - Joshua Tree) was because they were touring all over the place and then took a long while to record their next album. Note that they release Rattle & Hum a year after TJT.

.

REM released an album every year until Green in 1988, and then... toured the world. For ELEVEN MONTHS. And then really blew up with Out Of Time in 1991, and released their next albums in 1992, 1994, 1996, 1998...

.

And comparing to MJ is just ridiculous. He had to follow up the most popular album of all times, of course that will cause people to hesitate etc.

.

So now Prince. Who did get to release albums on a yearly basis plus tons of side projects, and then failed to promote them properly. He only toured Purple Rain in the US. Parade got a dozen hit-and-run gigs in the US and a short Euro tour and a Japan Tour. SOTT got a two month Euro Tour which skipped the UK due to bad weather. Meanwhile there are unfortunate single choices. And while plenty of singles feature new music, several don't (Take Me With You, Girls & Boys, Anotherloverholenyohead).

.

And it's easy to see why a record company isn't happy with that. Because Prince is high maintenance, but unlike other artists he's not having a great ROI. Promoting a new Prince album or single costs just as much as a new Madonna one, but it doesn't resolve in similar sales. And in the meantime they've also got to support his hobby, i.e. Paisley Park Records, which is also eating money and not resulting in massive sales.

.

Quite frankly, it's a bit of a miracle that Warners let Prince get away with murder.

.

Also note that Prince did play the game with D&P: tons of promo, a long-ass world tour, videos, etc. to show Warners that he could be a responsible artist. And look, he sold 5+ million of that record, and used it to negociate his infamous $100 million deal.

.

Quite frankly I don't get the point of this "what if". Warners never forced Prince to limit his output, other than reducing CB's three LPs to SOTT's two. And in the end Prince couldn't even be bothered to promote his masterpiece with a serious tour.

Yes, Prince's ceative force and whimsical approach toward marketing and markets were certainly things that Warner Brothers would not able to fully digest. The organization fortunately introduced him to the public and lended him the tools and finance to sharpen his studio craft, so they get the props for that. They were also rewarded for their generosity. Prince would require more outlets for his creativity, contrary to the typical industry contract stipulations of the day, as he was constantly in motion with his touring, writing and producing, juggling these activities non-stop. I'm supremely grateful for that. Now--if we can only have a chance to hear a fraction more of the fruits of his labors....

[Edited 8/20/17 11:49am]

BobPaisleyPark said:

I used to agree with the Warner Brothers executives who said 'Prince releases far too much music to make market sense'.

They were implying that Prince should have released a new album every three or four years like Jacko, U2 or REM when they achieved super stardom instead of one album per year.

In orther words after Purple Rain, Prince should have released his next album in 1987 or 1988.

But what if he followed their advice.

No ATWIAD, no Parade, no SoTT, no Lovesexy.

Just imagine nine or ten songs from that four year period (probably the greatest album ever) and a multi million seller but how much great music would have been lost to the world.

Try making a 9 or 10 track album from 85 to 88 and then disregarding all the other tracks into the waste bin.

You probably end up with a brilliant album but you end up throwing 20 or 30 great songs from that four year period in the bin.

And that was Prince's golden period, his next album after that would have been released in the early 90's when his genius was on the wane.

He was right to release so much great music during his genius period and not worry about marketing.

Thank you Prince.

I'm so with you on this. I used t think about this all the time. If he waitied for so many years before releases:what would we have missed. Ultimately, like you say, it worked out best forus in that we got more material. Great matrial even though at that time I was let down by some material I grew to love. For someone like Prince...hell..anyone really back then, yers awaiting to put out material was not the norm and could stfle creativity. JB, EWF, Journey, damn ner everyone signed, would put out material year after year and tour with them :"We'll see ya next year..thank you goodnight"-It really wasn't until the 1984 triumverate of Prince, Springsteen, and Madonna did comapanies and marketing begin to worry about strtergizing the squeezing out as much from one release at a time really began. He won and we won with the way it came out. Cant see Prince and company taking years off getting out of shape, getting into troubles, life bs issues and shit. These guys were athletes of music. Ya have to keep in shape..creativity wise.

I used to think SOTT would be the next release but it took all those other two releases, b-sides, expeiences, performances, to GET to the level of SOTT.

To only release one album every 3-4 years would be ridiculous, at least for someone as talented and relentlessly prolific as Prince. But on the other end of the spectrum, I've heard people claim that WB was too stifling when it came to Prince's career, even with as acommodating as they were. He may have been working under the guise of his proteges and side projects, but Prince was still putting out multiple albums per year while on a major label, and they still did a lot to help him at the time. Talent and hard work can get you very far, but Prince may have never become Prince: The Superstar without the help of a label like WB.

tomds said:

Although I think sott is better than Bad[Edited 8/20/17 16:54pm]

You THINK S ☮ T T is better

[Edited 8/21/17 6:15am]

The public still kept up alright: Prince had six top ten albums and 14 top ten singles in the 1980s.

NOW they should release as much as possible and will sell as much as one album back in the day when CDs sold

Yes, it's a silly thought in retrospect.

"We would have gotten less music from him, but it would have been totally worth it because then more people would have bought the fewer albums he'd put out!"

Btw, I don't think it was that unusual in the 80s that artists would put out a record almost every year.

Wolfie87 said: