VaultCurator said:

Dear Michael Howe,

Please DO NOT release any of the following material from the vault as it’s already out there for us to listen to…

Does he have other stuff to release is the question?

Are they really being completists or grabbing the low hanging fruit? Are we basically getting official versions of that list with the occassional surprise? Is that all there is? Cool, that's a good bundle to look forward to, but my expectations will be different.

yeah,I know it's not the same thing.But,I just don't think that an old song that Prince wrote in 1981/82 is gonna generate much controversy/anger in these days.It was so long ago.There would not have been some huge backlash/media firestorm over those songs,imo.

NouveauDance said:

SoulAlive said:

I totally agree.I don't think we would have seen a big media firestorm if these two songs had been included on the set.Look at the song "Vagina",where Prince is singing about meeting a "boy/girl" in a gay bar.It hardly raised any eyebrows

Gender-fluidity is not equivalent to sexual violence.

.

.

Strive said:

Michael Howe wants his cake and eat it too. To be the face of the estate but take no responsibility for being a cowardly A&R snake in the grass.

Yes, people will be aggressive against a person like that. Most people don't like liars.

.

He should share them for us hardcores. We won't tell!

toejam said:

He should share them for us hardcores. We won't tell!

YESSSSSS!!!

sulls said:

toejam said:

He should share them for us hardcores. We won't tell!

YESSSSSS!!!

toejam said:

VaultCurator said:

NouveauDance said:

.

Besides that, they're both out there for fans to hear if they want.

Dear Michael Howe,

Please DO NOT release any of the following material from the vault as it’s already out there for us to listen to

As you know, I was specifically talking about these two tracks, for this specific release, at this specific time.

Trotting the dead horse out again I see.

You guys do realise that Howe is not the person who decides what is and isn't released right? From your nasty and frankly immature comments you seem to think that he's the sole person who signs off on releases. He isn't.

embmmusic said:

The answer changes with the day. Because Micheal Howe is a bullshitter :lol:

When the Nothing Compares 2 U single release happened, it was because he just found the master and had to release it.

When P&M83 came out, he told an elaborate story about how he heard about that tape through the grapevine, tracked it down to 10 possible tapes before he found it and pitched it to the estate. How it had to be the next release and how it was a release that would come full circle with what Prince was doing before his death.

Originals, he compiled the possible song list and selected the tracklist besides Love...Thy Will Be Done which was requested by Jay-Z.

When 1999 Deluxe came out, suddenly he was just an employee of the Estate, pulling material requested by labels with no input on what was getting released. Can't blame Michael Howe, he has nothing to do with the selection process. Except all the times in the interviews where he directly makes the claim.

toejam said:

He should share them for us hardcores. We won't tell!

I'd like people to be able to choose to listen (or not) to these (unedited!) tracks. I also love Purple Music.

On an earlier thread concerning this topic, OldFriends4Sale described a part of Purple Music as being about someone "being 'coerced' into something by" an employer. I'm sure Old Friends4Sale is far from alone in finding that to be a possible interpretation of...

""It's time 4 ur morning bath, sir
What would U like 2 bathe n this morning?
With all due respect sir, I think that it...
I think that it might...
Oh, oh no
I... don't wanna play anymore
I don't want 2 play anymore"

I understand that it can be easier, relatively speaking, for people to latch onto a single word.

Still, doesn't something seem a little off about all this? From the outside looking in, it can seem like the decision makers had no concern about releasing Purple Music, but felt compelled to withhold Lust U Always and Extraloveable.

Don't want to jinx things, as I'm so grateful to have Purple Music in this form, and so grateful that a larger audience will hear it.

But the situation still has me shaking my head.

This 'Michael' situation will make us question each release even more:

which songs did they leave out this time?

Also:

Michael, nor the Estatee, does not have the ethical high ground they claim with these actions.

We as a group, not inhibited by commercial brouha, can decide more freely what is 'right' to do.

They should not think for us.

We can think for ourselves.

udo said:

Also:

Michael, nor the Estatee, does not have the ethical high ground they claim with these actions.

We as a group, not inhibited by commercial brouha, can decide more freely what is 'right' to do.

They should not think for us.

We can think for ourselves.

-

Let me get some figures here.

If you're a true Prince fan, you'll possibly be on the .org, right ?

Now. Look at the numbers here.

The 'most views' a thread can get is up to 35k highest 45k (viewers),

which means fans that visited that specific 'highly visited' thread multiple times.

So these are not 35k fans, but probably up to 10k fans or even less.

How many (multiple) replies on such a thread ? 400 maybe 600 ?

It isn't all that much, right ?

Just to point out that 'we as a group' here on the .org don't mean that all that much as numbers.

From a (commercial or any other) point of view we're peanuts.

It just won't be enough to put weight in a scale of decisions to what is best for a hopefully major release of a dead pop star, just sayin'.

-

You state that "Michael Howe, nor the Estatee have the ethical high ground", they claim...

Well, much to your suprise maybe, yes they do... It's their job, it's a business.

If you think that we 'with no inhibit of commercial brouha' are capable to 'decide more freely and what is right to do' ? Nope.

Well, not me, but you and a couple of other volunteers should apply for the job.

Have a degree, be skilled, be ready for the industry, lawyers, the estate, the familymembers, and a couple of other hundreds involved, and go fot it. I personally don't think that being a massive har core Prince fan isn't enough to get the job tbh. But,I could be wrong.

I'll support you in any way possible to get what 'we' want though.

'We as a group' is unfortunately not worth much so to speak.

-

Michael howe (and his team) - I don't know the guy - did a pretty good job if you ask for my humble opinion. Difficult task knowing that Prince left a shitload of undocumented and unorganised very badly taken care of enormous body of work to choose from.

They probably had valid opinions to leave out in what they did, (who am I to judge).

I don't always agree, but that is not important.

For as far as it all goes, it's too slow for me, but again, my opion is again not all that important.

I'm happy with what we got so far. Sure it's a mess (sometimes),

but it is what it is, and that's what our dear Prince left behind, a huge mess.

-

Peace though.

-

[Edited 5/6/20 5:34am]

Vannormal said:

It isn't all that much, right ?

.

So?

.

Just to point out that 'we as a group' here on the .org don't mean that all that much as numbers.

.

Name any other group of Prince consumers organised in some way.

.

From a (commercial or any other) point of view we're peanuts.

.

Tell that to the bootleggars.

.

You state that "Michael Howe, nor the Estatee have the ethical high ground", they claim...

Well, much to your suprise maybe, yes they do... It's their job, it's a business.

.

They might have the ethical high ground in the eyes of the company or other entity that they work for.

But they do not have the general high ground that the public as a whole would have.

When we can poke holes in their choices, they are flawed to say the least/

.

If you think that we 'with no inhibit of commercial brouha' are capable to 'decide more freely and what is right to do' ? Nope.

.

Well, please explain your limiting factors.

WB/Estate/etc do not pay me.

They cost me.

.

Well, not me, but you and a couple of other volunteers should apply for the job.

.

No payment please...

.

Have a degree, be skilled, be ready for the industry, lawyers, the estate, the familymembers, and a couple of other hundreds involved,

.

Does one need a degree to have an opinion in the ethics area over in your area?

.

Michael howe (and his team) - I don't know the guy - did a pretty good job if you ask for my humble opinion.

.

To the contrary.

They let Prince posthumously butcher his greatest work in the eyest of the avrage fan by releasing the PR 'remaster' as it was conceived. No job redone by a proper mastering engineer or whatever.

.

So much for quality awareness, quality control, protection of the brand that is `Prince`.

.

Difficult task knowing that Prince left a shitload of undocumented and unorganised very badly taken care of enormous body of work to choose from.

.

Then think about it.

Make a plan, define a strategy.

.

Then have some hands to make work lighter.

And proceed from there.

.

I'm happy with what we got so far. Sure it's a mess (sometimes),

but it is what it is, and that's what our dear Prince left behind, a huge mess.

.

Some b00tleg releases top the PR quality or the lack thereof.

That says plenty.

Been listening to Let's Pretend We're Married on repeat. Except for the 'r' word, it's every bit as bad / good at EL and LUA. Wish so much that we had those two to enjoy in the same quality!!! PLEEEEEEASE, ESTATE!!!

Thanks heaps for posting the original quote Bart, I knew that I had "read it somewhere" but it was nice to have the attribution

It's an overcorrection isn't it? No one would have even noticed these tracks on a reissue that only the faithful are buying. I understand their thinking even if I disagree with both their reasoning and final decision. What can you do though

It was always clear that they wanted to monetize the estate for maximum value, which means playing it as safe as possible at all times; they're happy to play lip service to his talent and how he didn't compromise but they will never take action that might risk the estate bottom line. And many on here cheer it on arguing that if these releases don't sell bucketloads then we won't get any more. I don't agree with that either.

At least they haven't yet bowed to pressures (that i'm sure exist) to "update" his sound, get a modern beatmaker in to "finish" some tracks, and maybe fit in a duet with the latest popstar.

[Edited 5/7/20 5:20am]

jaawwnn said:

It was always clear that they wanted to monetize the estate for maximum value, which means playing it as safe as possible at all times;

.

I see that you do not `get` risk vs. reward yet.

Low risk equals low reward.

You deduce the rest.

.

This also means that if your low risk observation is correct `they` do not get risk vs. reward yet.

If that is the case, then what about the training for exponential growth?

udo said:

jaawwnn said:

It was always clear that they wanted to monetize the estate for maximum value, which means playing it as safe as possible at all times;

.

I see that you do not `get` risk vs. reward yet.

Low risk equals low reward.

You deduce the rest.

.

This also means that if your low risk observation is correct `they` do not get risk vs. reward yet.

If that is the case, then what about the training for exponential growth?

Not advocating for a particular strategy with this.

Just want to point out (in a general way) that there is another side to the coin with a risk/reward concept.

That is, greater chance of exposure to (more frequent and/or larger) rewards is not all that risk entails. Risk entails the same for exposure to punishment.

Again speaking generally to include stuff beyond the purple world, I think it's really sad when decisions result in great music/writing/art not being experienced by people who would love it.

udo said:

jaawwnn said:

It was always clear that they wanted to monetize the estate for maximum value, which means playing it as safe as possible at all times;

.

I see that you do not `get` risk vs. reward yet.

Low risk equals low reward.

You deduce the rest.

.

This also means that if your low risk observation is correct `they` do not get risk vs. reward yet.

If that is the case, then what about the training for exponential growth?

What training would that be now? I didn't go to business school.

I have no idea what the estates revenue targets are, nor do I know if they are meeting them, but I do know, since it's stated in the interview linked to in this thread, that they are making risk-adverse decisions where they favour censorship over artistic merit because of a fear that certain songs released in "the current climate" would lead to a drop in sales.

[Edited 5/7/20 7:48am]

jaawwnn said:

udo said:

If that is the case, then what about the training for exponential growth?

What training would that be now? I didn't go to business school.

.

Exponential growth is especially relevant these days.

Be it in finance, epidemiology, tree hugging, etc.

I did not go to business school, I did not really learn a trade.

.

I have no idea what the estates revenue targets are, nor do I know if they are meeting them, but I do know, since it's stated in the interview linked to in this thread, that they are making risk-adverse decisions where they favour censorship over artistic merit because of a fear that certain songs released in "the current climate" would lead to a drop in sales.

.

So they do not dare to start explaining the artist's context at the time of writing at all.

That is kinda very, very weak indeed.

Not all art has to be beautiful at first sight; it has to be interesting, mesmerizing, thought evoking, etc.

Discussion is a good thing, but the stupid identity politics made too big an impression on `the management`. This means that they do not even grasp the why nor how of that thing.

I do not claim to be the wisest nor to have the best insights, but when a mere mortal like me can make these observations then there is a problem there.

Honestly, I see no reason to try and encourage exponential growth in the sales of a dead artist. His life's work is done, it's up to the more academic side of the fandom to review it now, leave big sales to the next biggest pop thing. Others may disgree with this, fair enough. I'd like to think it'd help if a proper career-spanning release came out, but maybe not considering streaming is king now.


As for the rest of the post, I pretty much agree. 'Management' have their opinions on how to maximize sales and I have little interest in them, I just want to hear the music. If people want to cancel a dead artist over a song he didn't even see fit for release himself then they don't deserve to listen to Prince until they grow the fuck up. Management shouldn't be trying to pander to children.

This is all they had to do.

1) Make Lust U Always and Extraloveable exclusive to the physical edition. Put them on their own disc. This way they aren't on YouTube or streaming services. People could choose if they wanted to listen to those songs.

2) Include an essay explaining the times that the songs were created and say that, while Warner doesn't condone the way things were, they are presenting the art as is.

3) Mention that both Prince and the fans selected those two for Crystal Ball 2. So it wasn't a thing that Prince or fans would have wanted vaulted, even though he re-recorded Extraloveable.

That's it. There would have been articles but if Warner wouldn't respond, beyond the statements above, they would have gone nowhere. Cancel culture is only as powerful as the power you give them.

The really sad thing is that is what Warner Bros do with Looney Tunes cartoons. Actual children's entertainment gets more respect than adult Prince fans. That's how little they think of you.

[Edited 5/7/20 11:05am]

Strive said:

This is all they had to do.

1) Make Lust U Always and Extraloveable exclusive to the physical edition. Put them on their own disc. This way they aren't on YouTube or streaming services. People could choose if they wanted to listen to those songs.

2) Include an essay explaining the times that the songs were created and say that, while Warner doesn't condone the way things were, they are presenting the art as is.

3) Mention that both Prince and the fans selected those two for Crystal Ball 2. So it wasn't a thing that Prince or fans would have wanted vaulted, even though he re-recorded Extraloveable.

That's it. There would have been articles but if Warner wouldn't respond, beyond the statements above, they would have gone nowhere. Cancel culture is only as powerful as the power you give them.

The really sad thing is that is what Warner Bros do with Looney Tunes cartoons. Actual children's entertainment gets more respect than adult Prince fans. That's how little they think of you.

[Edited 5/7/20 11:05am]

TheGloved1 said:

TheGloved1 said:

"B-but art!" He didn't release that version for a reason. How is that for artistic intention?

Couldn't you argue he didn't release anything beyond disc 1 "for a reason", though?