67minutes said:

akira7 said:

My only complaint is that the DVD is of the Paisley Park New Years Eve show and not a multi-cam SOTT concert. I have the feeling that were never going to see a show from this tour!

But it IS the complete New Years Eve show, so that makes me happy.

I agree, having the compleate New Years Eve show as opose to the incompleate verion that has been circulating for years is a good thing. However, I have long hoped to oneday see a full, multi-cam SOTT concert. No audience recordings from this tour are circulating and the only pro footage that has been released is a single cam performance of PITSS that is less than 2 minutes long.

If a full concert were to of ever been released then this would of been the right time to do so. The fact that it apparently wont happen indicates that we'll most likely never get to see one, which disapoints me greatly as this is my faviourite era.

mestizo5000 said:

It would have been great to have the 11 minute plus version of “Crystal Ball” with the “brothers and sisters of the purple underground” and jazz part intact. The edited Clare Fischer version from the 1998 Crystal Ball 🔮 set has become the definitive version unfortunately 😐 Where is “We Can Funk 86”, “Can’t Stop This Feeling I Got 86”, “Girl O’ My Dreams” and “Databank” At??? We don’t need 2 versions of “Big Tall Wall”!

Parade Deluxe

psyche2 said:

67minutes said:

But it IS the complete New Years Eve show, so that makes me happy.

No doubt about that -Even if we have seen/own half of it for years already it's great to have the complete show, hopefully in slightly better video quality.

But the sad bit is that it jeopardizes any chance to see any video of an actual show from the tour. I wonder WHY any of the supposedly professionally filmed Dutch gigs didn't make the cut for this set. Could it be they haven't located the masters? ... Or even worse, could they be deteriorated to the point of making them impossible to use for a commercial release?

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

zobilamouche said:

psyche2 said:

No doubt about that -Even if we have seen/own half of it for years already it's great to have the complete show, hopefully in slightly better video quality.

But the sad bit is that it jeopardizes any chance to see any video of an actual show from the tour. I wonder WHY any of the supposedly professionally filmed Dutch gigs didn't make the cut for this set. Could it be they haven't located the masters? ... Or even worse, could they be deteriorated to the point of making them impossible to use for a commercial release?

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

Yes, apparently most of the footage was too dark IIRC.

67minutes said:

zobilamouche said:

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

Yes, apparently most of the footage was too dark IIRC.

I understand the gigs filmed on the Europen tour might have been too dark for a theatrical release. I woulnd't expect anything "better" than let's say Syracuse'85 in terms of video quality (which is horribly dark, I mean). But to deem them those films as "unusable" for a project such as this makes me afraid we'll never get to see them at all.

psyche2 said:

67minutes said:

Yes, apparently most of the footage was too dark IIRC.

I understand the gigs filmed on the Europen tour might have been too dark for a theatrical release. I woulnd't expect anything "better" than let's say Syracuse'85 in terms of video quality (which is horribly dark, I mean). But to deem them those films as "unusable" for a project such as this makes me afraid we'll never get to see them at all.

Agreed, I'd have preferred a regular tour gig as well... Maybe in the next SOTT deluxe package right?

AhPook said:

mestizo5000 said:

It would have been great to have the 11 minute plus version of “Crystal Ball” with the “brothers and sisters of the purple underground” and jazz part intact. The edited Clare Fischer version from the 1998 Crystal Ball 🔮 set has become the definitive version unfortunately 😐 Where is “We Can Funk 86”, “Can’t Stop This Feeling I Got 86”, “Girl O’ My Dreams” and “Databank” At??? We don’t need 2 versions of “Big Tall Wall”!

Parade Deluxe

Parade: 31 March 1986

We Can Funk: 17 June 1986
Can't Stop This Feeling I Got: 17 June 1986
Databank: 17 June 1986
Girl O My Dreams: 18 June 1986

It would seem rather silly to include these.

LoveGalore said:

jaawwnn said:

LOL that it doesn't even include all the Crystal Ball, Dream Factory, or Camille songs.

Why on Earth would we have Good Love or Rockhard on there when both songs were officially released on other albums, LOL. In fact, why would it have previously released songs on the unreleased outtakes discs at all unless there was some sort of meaningful difference?

My point was rather that it's an album that grew out of 3 other projects, and you couldn't even recreate any of them using this 8 cd release! I'm laughing joyously at just how much he recorded, not being an org whinge.

jaawwnn said:

LoveGalore said:

jaawwnn said: Why on Earth would we have Good Love or Rockhard on there when both songs were officially released on other albums, LOL. In fact, why would it have previously released songs on the unreleased outtakes discs at all unless there was some sort of meaningful difference?

My point was rather that it's an album that grew out of 3 other projects, and you couldn't even recreate any of them using this 8 cd release! I'm laughing joyously at just how much he recorded, not being an org whinge.

It's a stretch, but I'm now hoping that the missing pieces (ICNTPOYM Alt, Starfish - non alarm, etc) will be included in Record Day releases of Dream Factory, Camille and Crystal Ball as they were intended.

SquirrelMeat said:

jaawwnn said:

My point was rather that it's an album that grew out of 3 other projects, and you couldn't even recreate any of them using this 8 cd release! I'm laughing joyously at just how much he recorded, not being an org whinge.

It's a stretch, but I'm now hoping that the missing pieces (ICNTPOYM Alt, Starfish - non alarm, etc) will be included in Record Day releases of Dream Factory, Camille and Crystal Ball as they were intended.

I still think much of that stuff will be on the Parade boxset. They can't put everything on SOTT Deluxe.

bluegangsta said:

AhPook said:

Parade Deluxe

Parade: 31 March 1986

We Can Funk: 17 June 1986
Can't Stop This Feeling I Got: 17 June 1986
Databank: 17 June 1986
Girl O My Dreams: 18 June 1986

It would seem rather silly to include these.

Exactly. It seems strange to think that a Shep Pettibone remix is considered more essential for inclusion than We Can Funk 86 or Databank. These are incredible tracks that shouldn't stay hidden away.

I suppose you could make a case - stay with me here - for these tracks appearing on an expanded Graffiti Bridge. We Can Funk segues in from Can't Stop, so they're earlier versions of 2 tracks from this album. You could argue that they're not from the same era as Graffiti Bridge, but they actually are from the same era as Joy In Repetition and Question of U.

I can't believe I'm actually now advocating for an expanded version of GB, it seems like it would be an album to go the other way with and create a reduced version! But it could be a good thing in terms of outtakes if these songs are added here along with The Grand Progression, God Is Alive and Joy In Repetition with the intro. I would actually want this just for the vault tracks.

GB Expanded may not seem like a priority, but it will be one of the few options Warners will have left soon, so maybe they will look to do this after Parade.

[Edited 6/24/20 3:25am]

massing said:

bluegangsta said:

Parade: 31 March 1986

We Can Funk: 17 June 1986
Can't Stop This Feeling I Got: 17 June 1986
Databank: 17 June 1986
Girl O My Dreams: 18 June 1986

It would seem rather silly to include these.

Exactly. It seems strange to think that a Shep Pettibone remix is considered more essential for inclusion than We Can Funk 86 or Databank. These are incredible tracks that shouldn't stay hidden away.

I agree that a remix shouldn't be more essential than those track - but I'm still pretty hyped about hearing it. Shep Pettibone is a moster in the vast world of remixing and while I didn't particularly enjoy his remixes of Prince, I am very much looking forward to hearing this one.

With that said - we're in the digital age and the estate should be taking advantage of it. An unreleased single remix would make a great single release NOW. It doesn't have to be included in the package itself. It doesn't even have to be good. But it would make a nice little promo to build up hype.

That's what I'm a little concerned about with this release. We're almost three months away from the supposed release date and if it's anything like 1999, we'll just get two single releases (in which case was an alternate version and a previous leak) and the set will leak a week early. Hopefully they have a more stimulating promotional campaign in place and a proportionate amount of stock.

lustmealways said:

Romeoblu said:

Oh my la-di-da-da
Wally, where'd U get those glasses?
Those r the freakiest glasses I've ever seen
Can I try 'em on?
U see, I'm goin' 2 a party 2night and I could b so clean
R U goin' with that same dame?
U know, the 1 with the beautiful chest and the gorgeous mouth
Cuz if U r, I was wonderin' if she had a sister
Cuz Wally, that dame is so fine
Eeh-hee!

Check it out Wally, huh (growl), I'm on the prowl 2night
Cuz my baby don't love me no more
She said, she said, "Well maybe I do, just not like I did b4"

Ain't that a trip, Wally?
U know, I'd give her all my money b4 I'd give it all 2 Uncle Sam
Can U believe it, Wally?
Where'd U get those glasses?
Those r the freakiest glasses I've ever seen
Ooh
Wally, can U tell me why did my baby leave?
La-la-la-di-da, oh my la-di-da

Wally, come on, go out with me 2night
We'll tear it up like we used 2 do
U wanna bring ur lady, it's alright
But if U'd rather stay at home 2night, it's cool
Oh no, I understand
We'll b able 2 hook up sometime when I find another
Then the 4 of us, I mean the 4 of us can
Ooh
Oh my la-di-da

It's 2 late 4 sympathy
Whatever will b will b
I'm goin' 2 a party
And if I don't find somebody, somebody will find me!
Huh, what am I gonna do?!
She was the only 1 n the whole world that I could talk 2

Wally, where'd U get those glasses?
Those r the freakiest glasses I've ever seen
Ooh
La-la-la-di-da, oh my la-di-da
Ooh
La-la-la-di-da, oh my la-di-da {repeat}
Ooh...
Oh my la-di-da

LoveGalore said:

Romeoblu said:

Me too. What could they be. I think the main thing would be if they omitted a couple of tracks, but why would they list them. I just can't think what else it could be. I guess we'll find out soon.

One of the discrepancies is the release date. It's Sept 25, not 18.

ok, if that's true than that's not too bad. only one more discrepancy to go

bluegangsta said:

AhPook said:

Parade Deluxe

Parade: 31 March 1986

We Can Funk: 17 June 1986
Can't Stop This Feeling I Got: 17 June 1986
Databank: 17 June 1986
Girl O My Dreams: 18 June 1986

It would seem rather silly to include these.

Data Bank (released by The Time) and Girl O My Dreams (released by TC Ellis) could well turn up on another volume of Originals.

zobilamouche said:

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

.

When will you lot understand the difference between FILM and VIDEO?

BartVanHemelen said:

zobilamouche said:

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

.

When will you lot understand the difference between FILM and VIDEO?

When you explain it to us, I guess?

BartVanHemelen said:

zobilamouche said:

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

.

When will you lot understand the difference between FILM and VIDEO?

Probably never - but FWIW, "film" is often used as a general verb.

I filmed myself jacking off and sent it to you.

I recorded myself jacking off and sent it to you.

Both these sentences would be fine in plain English. In fact, there's like at least 6 different possible meanings there as "recorded on video" and "recorded audio of" aren't mutually exclusive.

Bloody hell Bart, I would say "never change" but that would just affirm your asshattery, going on 20+ years strong now. You could have used that post to explain the difference, or link to something that did?

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition". Assuming everything else is good about the recording, it can be used to make HD remasters today, even 4K remasters. This is because it's an optical medium - the pictures are encoded as, well, pictures and your only limits are the limits of the optical process(es) themselves. Nearly all proper films are filmed on.. film.

VIDEO, however, is a whole different ball game. Even when it's been done absolutely brilliantly, VHS is never going to approach high definition - it barely makes the grade for what we nowadays call SD (standard definition, aka 480p). Or is it 576 lines? Anyway, video is cheaper and on the whole easier to film with, but to make it look acceptable nowadays is tough, and to make it high definition is impossible.

To best illustrate the difference, check out Prince and the Revolution L!VE (video) and compare it to, um, I dunno, the SOTT film.

Now I've done my standard Bart slaying (also going on 20 years strong! ha), I'd just like to say two things about this forthcoming release: 1) called it and 2) VERY VERY EXCITED, hundreds of years from now this release will be the most significant thing about September and 3) is it September yet?

newpowergeneration said:

Bloody hell Bart, I would say "never change" but that would just affirm your asshattery, going on 20+ years strong now. You could have used that post to explain the difference, or link to something that did?

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition". Assuming everything else is good about the recording, it can be used to make HD remasters today, even 4K remasters. This is because it's an optical medium - the pictures are encoded as, well, pictures and your only limits are the limits of the optical process(es) themselves. Nearly all proper films are filmed on.. film.

VIDEO, however, is a whole different ball game. Even when it's been done absolutely brilliantly, VHS is never going to approach high definition - it barely makes the grade for what we nowadays call SD (standard definition, aka 480p). Or is it 576 lines? Anyway, video is cheaper and on the whole easier to film with, but to make it look acceptable nowadays is tough, and to make it high definition is impossible.

To best illustrate the difference, check out Prince and the Revolution L!VE (video) and compare it to, um, I dunno, the SOTT film.

Now I've done my standard Bart slaying (also going on 20 years strong! ha), I'd just like to say two things about this forthcoming release: 1) called it and 2) VERY VERY EXCITED, hundreds of years from now this release will be the most significant thing about September and 3) is it September yet?

That's a great explanation! Unfortunately, Bart didn't understand the context. The person he quoted was well within acceptable definitions of the word "refilm" - it wasn't about the medium at all, but the action. And "filming" something on a medium other than film is fine English.

newpowergeneration said:

Bloody hell Bart, I would say "never change" but that would just affirm your asshattery, going on 20+ years strong now. You could have used that post to explain the difference, or link to something that did?

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition". Assuming everything else is good about the recording, it can be used to make HD remasters today, even 4K remasters. This is because it's an optical medium - the pictures are encoded as, well, pictures and your only limits are the limits of the optical process(es) themselves. Nearly all proper films are filmed on.. film.

VIDEO, however, is a whole different ball game. Even when it's been done absolutely brilliantly, VHS is never going to approach high definition - it barely makes the grade for what we nowadays call SD (standard definition, aka 480p). Or is it 576 lines? Anyway, video is cheaper and on the whole easier to film with, but to make it look acceptable nowadays is tough, and to make it high definition is impossible.

To best illustrate the difference, check out Prince and the Revolution L!VE (video) and compare it to, um, I dunno, the SOTT film.

Now I've done my standard Bart slaying (also going on 20 years strong! ha), I'd just like to say two things about this forthcoming release: 1) called it and 2) VERY VERY EXCITED, hundreds of years from now this release will be the most significant thing about September and 3) is it September yet?

to be fair to bart in this case, he as already explained this many times over multiple threads
and provided many, many links for it. for instance on the SOTT movie threads etc.

BartVanHemelen said:

zobilamouche said:

Well the whole reason to refilm most of the show back home in the US was exactly because of the material shot in Europa was unusable.

.

When will you lot understand the difference between FILM and VIDEO?

I was only picking up on the fact that the pro-footage (film/pelicule) was deemed not usable and not referring to any video (videotape) footage of other concerts.

LoveGalore said:

newpowergeneration said:

Bloody hell Bart, I would say "never change" but that would just affirm your asshattery, going on 20+ years strong now. You could have used that post to explain the difference, or link to something that did?

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition". Assuming everything else is good about the recording, it can be used to make HD remasters today, even 4K remasters. This is because it's an optical medium - the pictures are encoded as, well, pictures and your only limits are the limits of the optical process(es) themselves. Nearly all proper films are filmed on.. film.

VIDEO, however, is a whole different ball game. Even when it's been done absolutely brilliantly, VHS is never going to approach high definition - it barely makes the grade for what we nowadays call SD (standard definition, aka 480p). Or is it 576 lines? Anyway, video is cheaper and on the whole easier to film with, but to make it look acceptable nowadays is tough, and to make it high definition is impossible.

To best illustrate the difference, check out Prince and the Revolution L!VE (video) and compare it to, um, I dunno, the SOTT film.

Now I've done my standard Bart slaying (also going on 20 years strong! ha), I'd just like to say two things about this forthcoming release: 1) called it and 2) VERY VERY EXCITED, hundreds of years from now this release will be the most significant thing about September and 3) is it September yet?

Wrong. You can improve the quality of filmed material, sure, but what's not captured can not be made visible. Just like with analog photo film, you can improve a lot using software but what's not there will not appear like a miracle.
So, if the source material was unusable back then it's not very likely it would be great material to use now.

LoveGalore said:

Romeoblu said:

Me too. What could they be. I think the main thing would be if they omitted a couple of tracks, but why would they list them. I just can't think what else it could be. I guess we'll find out soon.

One of the discrepancies is the release date. It's Sept 25, not 18.

could the other could be the price...

Not really a bootleg fan, least I wasn't, but these compilations make me crave proper albums; meaning, the quasi ad hoc posthumous albums, such as prince vault on youtube. You get the idea. Yes there's filler but you can do your own edits to something special, as in P golden age special. These deluxe editions are more Graceland. But obviously it's still far better than not getting them at all.

CONFIRMED !

AMAZON TRACKLISTleaked yesterday IS THE GOOD & FINAL ONE !

SanDiegoFunkDaddy said:

Its going to be brickwalled like the other releases. No dynamic range

Stop spreading nonsense. Why would it be brickwalled when the previous, Super Deluxe 1999 was not?

Even if there is brickwalling - which I highly doubt - that will only be on the CDs. The vinyl version of 1999 Super Deluxe sounds incredible, I have no reason to believe the vinyl version of Sign Super Deluxe will sound any less great.