OperatingThetan said:

With the subtitle 'Jamie Starr has taken control.' Hmm...

This is not an official thing, eh?

It's on Apple Music too, says copyright 2017 Spectrum and dated March 17, 2017

Amazon Music also has it, with this info:

• Original Release Date: March 17, 2017
• Release Date: October 6, 2017
• Label: Spectrum

[Edited 10/21/17 4:46am]

alandail said:

laurarichardson said:

laurarichardson said:

alandail said:

It's on Apple Music too, says copyright 2017 Spectrum and dated March 17, 2017

Amazon Music also has it, with this info:

• Original Release Date: March 17, 2017
• Release Date: October 6, 2017
• Label: Spectrum

[Edited 10/21/17 4:46am]

I think WB sold these masters. See info about Spectrum. https://www.discogs.com/l...um-Music-2 [Edited 10/21/17 6:36am]

Nonsense. And I wish a confirmed orger like you would not spread absurd theories like that: you're no rookie and you should know better.

.

This upload is, of course, totally illegal and unofficial.

.

1/ WB probably never owned those masters in the first place. They declined to release the record on Paisley Park Records in 1993. Even if WB had briefly owned the masters at some point in 1993, which is quite unlikely given that the record was refused, they would have reverted to Prince alongside the rest of the Paisley Park catalogue in 1994. It is well known that Prince planned to release it on Edel in 1994, then again in a slightly modified version 1995, before plans to develop NPG Records into a real label were abandonned for unknown reasons. Therefore, the masters for this album (as well as the first 2 Madhouse albums) are currently the property of NPG Records, i.e. the estate.

.

2/ We have no evidence that this is the same "Spectrum" company.

.

3/ Anyone can upload any album on an agregattor and see it end-up on Tidal and iTunes, and bootlegging can therefore exist there until the rights owners raise a complaint.

.

4/ The "Jamie Starr has taken control" sentence on the (fake) album cover is an open admission of bootlegging.

.

All those side projects appearing on streaming sites without any WB or NPG Records copyright notice are nothing less than pirate uploads, most likely made by fans who realized they could get away with it. Someone calling themselves "All Music" uploaded 8 and 16, so someone thought if it's gonna be like that why not upload bootlegs.

.

Case closed.

OperatingThetan said:

laurarichardson said:

I think WB sold these masters. See info about Spectrum. https://www.discogs.com/l...um-Music-2 [Edited 10/21/17 6:36am]

This seems very significant because Madhouse 24 was never officially released until now. I thought this would've been intended as an NPG records album back in 94/95, unless Warners obtained the masters to some unreleased side-project albums when Prince renegotiated with Warners in 2014?

Nonsense.

databank said:

Tidal will end up as a decaying coral reef, at the bottom of the ocean. Right next to Osama bin Laden's beard.

I just bought it off of Amazon. It won't play in my Windows Media Player so I had to download the Amazon Music app.

fortuneandserendipity said:

Tidal will end up as a decaying coral reef, at the bottom of the ocean. Right next to Osama bin Laden's beard.

It has nothing to do with Tidal, really. When an artist or label uploads a song to streaming services such as Tidal and online stores such as iTunes, they don't do it site by site (unless you're a major or an artist as big as Prince and you sign a specific deal with each or some specific site, but not generally speaking).

Regular users (indie artists, small labels) are actually not allowed to upload their material on the site themselves (you will note that there's no "login and upload your music" page on those sites). They must use a third party called an agregattor who, for a fee, will allow you to upload your material then automatically redistribute it to all those streaming sites and online stores.

kingricefan said:

I just bought it off of Amazon. It won't play in my Windows Media Player so I had to download the Amazon Music app.

You've just purchased a bootleg that's been circulating for free on the internet for 20 years, in the same quality since what you've purchased is sourced from said bootleg.

If I was you, I'd write to Amazon, explain the situation and ask for a refund.

It's not a big deal. At least I paid for it instead of scalping it from the net. I got it for a dollar less than the other places were asking for it.

databank said:

kingricefan said:

I just bought it off of Amazon. It won't play in my Windows Media Player so I had to download the Amazon Music app.

You've just purchased a bootleg that's been circulating for free on the internet for 20 years, in the same quality since what you've purchased is sourced from said bootleg.

If I was you, I'd write to Amazon, explain the situation and ask for a refund.

OperatingThetan said:

With the subtitle 'Jamie Starr has taken control.' Hmm...

means Jay-z is a thief.....

kingricefan said:

It's not a big deal. At least I paid for it instead of scalping it from the net. I got it for a dollar less than the other places were asking for it.

databank said:

You've just purchased a bootleg that's been circulating for free on the internet for 20 years, in the same quality since what you've purchased is sourced from said bootleg.

If I was you, I'd write to Amazon, explain the situation and ask for a refund.

You've paid for it but who gets the money?

The whole point of paying is to support artists and labels.

am so confused, who has launched this album?! and where did it come from? Who is geeting paid for this release?

maceoparker007 said:

Is it the same quality as the bootlegg version? And which vesion of 24 is it?

[Edited 10/21/17 14:27pm]

Yeah, I see it on Amazon, too.

Thing is, it's better to get it free online because that's fans sharing, this is someone who has no connection to Prince or the music profiting off that which they have no right to.

dbpdexter said:

luvsexy4all said:

And sharing bootleg copies gives money to whom? The artists sure don't see any money when bootlegs are 'shared', do they?

databank said:

kingricefan said:

It's not a big deal. At least I paid for it instead of scalping it from the net. I got it for a dollar less than the other places were asking for it.

You've paid for it but who gets the money?

The whole point of paying is to support artists and labels.

dbpdexter said:

Is it the same quality as the bootlegg version? And which vesion of 24 is it?

[Edited 10/21/17 14:27pm]

Just got it off Apple Music. Yes, it has the same quality as a boot. Track 2 is clearly sourced from a tape.

It's the version that has "Got To Give It Up" on it, but I've never heard this one until now.

I used to have the other version, but I got rid of it. The quality was even worse on that one.

The previous two Madhouse albums are out there as well, clearly unofficial uploads.

databank said:

dbpdexter said:

Is it the same quality as the bootlegg version? And which vesion of 24 is it?

[Edited 10/21/17 14:27pm]

You may want to read previous replies before posting.

None of the previous replies said anything about quality but,thanks for the reply

[Edited 10/21/17 20:01pm]

OperatingThetan said:

databank said:

laurarichardson said:

OperatingThetan said:

Not unless he also owns Amazon and Apple music where Madhouse 24 is also available, he's not.

Everyone thinks this is a boot that some how made it on all the services!

It IS a bootleg. This is not the first time that a bootleg "made it on all the services", nor the last.

And, there have been more than one label to use the name Spectrum, not just the reissue sublabel you've mentioned.

[Edited 10/21/17 20:40pm]

kingricefan said:

And sharing bootleg copies gives money to whom? The artists sure don't see any money when bootlegs are 'shared', do they?

databank said:

You've paid for it but who gets the money?

The whole point of paying is to support artists and labels.

So it's better to give money to third parties who have no legal rights to, or involvement with the music?

dbpdexter said:

databank said:

dbpdexter said: You may want to read previous replies before posting.

None of the previous replies said anything about quality but,thanks for the reply

[Edited 10/21/17 20:01pm]

You may want to reread the previous replies, then.

laurarichardson said:

databank said:

Nonsense. And I wish a confirmed orger like you would not spread absurd theories like that: you're no rookie and you should know better.

.

This upload is, of course, totally illegal and unofficial.

.

1/ WB probably never owned those masters in the first place. They declined to release the record on Paisley Park Records in 1993. Even if WB had briefly owned the masters at some point in 1993, which is quite unlikely given that the record was refused, they would have reverted to Prince alongside the rest of the Paisley Park catalogue in 1994. It is well known that Prince planned to release it on Edel in 1994, then again in a slightly modified version 1995, before plans to develop NPG Records into a real label were abandonned for unknown reasons. Therefore, the masters for this album (as well as the first 2 Madhouse albums) are currently the property of NPG Records, i.e. the estate.

.

2/ We have no evidence that this is the same "Spectrum" company.

.

3/ Anyone can upload any album on an agregattor and see it end-up on Tidal and iTunes, and bootlegging can therefore exist there until the rights owners raise a complaint.

.

4/ The "Jamie Starr has taken control" sentence on the (fake) album cover is an open admission of bootlegging.

.

All those side projects appearing on streaming sites without any WB or NPG Records copyright notice are nothing less than pirate uploads, most likely made by fans who realized they could get away with it. Someone calling themselves "All Music" uploaded 8 and 16, so someone thought if it's gonna be like that why not upload bootlegs.

.

Case closed.

Unless you can prove that these releases are from a bootlegger you have no idea. Funny coincidence that Spectrum is s real label that reissues older material. Got to the belief in coincidence on this board.

I believe I have proved it, or at least made a demonstration that leaves very little room for doubt. Basically your reasoning would mean that the estate (not WB), in its current chaotic condition, has decided to licence an obscure unreleased side project to a third party, most likely using a bootleg as a source, and chosen not to communicate about it at all whatsoever even though it would constitute the first previously unreleased full length album made available by the estate. And on the other hand, to make matters simpler, the first 2 Madhosue albums would have been licenced to yet another third party ("All Music"). While not entirely impossible, this whole scenario is so unlikely that believing it constitutes a leap of faith that defies all rationality.

.

Now if you will choose to base your convictions on faith rather than available information, logic and common sense, you're entitled to it. I have never been able to convinced anyone who believed the Earth was flat that it wasn't.