LoveGalore said:

9to5People said:

IstenSzek said:

Militant said:

What rape references are in Cosmic Day? As far as I was aware, the complete version wasn't circulating, only the first two verses and hook. Are you sure you aren't thinking of another song, or did I miss something?

silly joke, that's all, is my guess

.

Sarcasm should be made clearer, it's true. I was trying to combine the adulation of the snippet, the outcry of the missing 1999 tracks and the 2 surprises that are coming up in a humorous way. I guess I failed.

.

Apologies for any distress.

bluegangsta said:

BartVanHemelen said:

newpowergeneration said:

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition".

.

Not true. There are tons of types of film, and it greatly depends on how they were stored etc.

.

For instance, it is well known that The Godfather required extensive restoration.

Actually, if it was shot on normal "speed" 35mm film it likely falls into the consumer slang of "HD". That jargon refers to image resolution. HD was first introduced in two consumer formats, 1280x720 and 1920x1080 and now of course upwards of that (like "4K").

It's also true that a badly stored negative can degrade, but that is a different set of issues than what "HD" or pixel resolution refers to.

The resolving power of 35mm film (at the "speed"/light sensitivity/grain-size used for industry quality narrative filmmaking from the 1920's onward) is inherently more than 1280x720, and in many cases more than 1920x1080 pixels, because the organic grain of the film was finer per frame than those pixels number at that ratio. In fact most old Hollywood movies were shot on very very fine grain film.

This includes a movie like "the Godfather". It even applies to a movie as old as Gone With the Wind which looks immaculate on blu-ray and perhaps even more solid than many contemporary productions (They used very low speed/fine grain film).

The restoration of an old negative doesn't have anything to do with the original resolution of the negative or prints when it was fresh. Restoration= the action of returning something to a former condition.

In the case of SOTT actual concert footage, what happened was they probably did not use the optimal lens & film stock combo, resulting in very murky grainy footage.... but it would still have more detail in an HD transfer than an SD transfer. Basically you'd probably see the grain better

An easy way to compare is to pick a shot of real concert footage in the SOTT movie and compare the DVD image to the Blu-ray image.

BartVanHemelen said:

mediumdry said:

That used to be the narrative. From interviews with many of the people involved with the film, it seems now that, while the film was a bit dark at times (for which there are many technologies now to make that less of a problem)

Or you could, I dunno, watch the Blu-ray and easily spot when they use actual concert footage since it really stands out as grainy and bad.

.

Relative to the U Got The Look video, it's worlds better already. And I find those shots quite watchable. ymmv. Also, this is the transfer that was edited and worked on back then. It might be possible to get better results by going back to the original film. It's also possible that the end result will still leave some people unsatisfied, but for my money, almost anything is better than the movie.

jaawwnn said:

BartVanHemelen said:

newpowergeneration said:

For anyone curious, if something is recorded on film, it really doesn't matter how old it is, it's "high definition".

.

Not true. There are tons of types of film, and it greatly depends on how they were stored etc.

.

For instance, it is well known that The Godfather required extensive restoration.

Whether something requires restoration and whether something is high definition are two different questions. The first is a question of degradation. The second is a question of resolution. One has no bearing on the other. You conflated two different concepts.

A simple Google search would have cleared up your confusion.

[Edited 6/24/20 12:24pm]

ufoclub said:

BartVanHemelen said:

.

Not true. There are tons of types of film, and it greatly depends on how they were stored etc.

.

For instance, it is well known that The Godfather required extensive restoration.

Actually, if it was shot on normal "speed" 35mm film it likely falls into the consumer slang of "HD". That jargon refers to image resolution. HD was first introduced in two consumer formats, 1280x720 and 1920x1080 and now of course upwards of that (like "4K").

It's also true that a badly stored negative can degrade, but that is a different set of issues than what "HD" or pixel resolution refers to.

The resolving power of 35mm film (at the "speed"/light sensitivity/grain-size used for industry quality narrative filmmaking from the 1920's onward) is inherently more than 1280x720, and in many cases more than 1920x1080 pixels, because the organic grain of the film was finer per frame than those pixels number at that ratio. In fact most old Hollywood movies were shot on very very fine grain film.

This includes a movie like "the Godfather". It even applies to a movie as old as Gone With the Wind which looks immaculate on blu-ray and perhaps even more solid than many contemporary productions (They used very low speed/fine grain film).

The restoration of an old negative doesn't have anything to do with the original resolution of the negative or prints when it was fresh. Restoration= the action of returning something to a former condition.

In the case of SOTT actual concert footage, what happened was they probably did not use the optimal lens & film stock combo, resulting in very murky grainy footage.... but it would still have more detail in an HD transfer than an SD transfer. Basically you'd probably see the grain better

An easy way to compare is to pick a shot of real concert footage in the SOTT movie and compare the DVD image to the Blu-ray image.

Exactly. Bart conflated resolution with degradation.

If anyone else would have made that mistake I'd be sympathetic. But Bart jumps on people for making the slightest mistake, so I have no sympathy for him.

LoveGalore said:

Questlove doesn't even like most of Prince's post Revolution material, lol.

If that were true, it just makes him more qualified to pick out the material that holds up to a bigger cross section of fans and can be repackaged to show it's been pure Prince the whole time, just kinda buried. He did that in the podcasts pretty well.

I think the remixes and singles edits are the label or estate though. I'm sure some people like them, but nobody is picking them over unreleased new material or different versions of classics.

AvocadosMax said:

I’d vote for Questlove to take over everything

I wouldn't be surprised if Questlove is acting as a consultant to this project and others, receiving some sort of stipend in exchange for providing input. Obviously I am speculating here (let's call this the "supposedly" rule) but that kind of arrangement would not be at all unusual, and might explain his early access to the set.

LoveGalore said:

databank said:

- As pointed by others, it won't be totally possible for us to recreate any DF, Camille or CB config with the material included there.

Roadhouse Garden too. Leaves some questions about the idea of unreleased full albums from this period not just alternative sequencing and what became outtakes or repurposed tracks. He obviously wasn't going to release Witness 4 the Prosecution more than once. We're also still trying to account for just what we know about.

My only gripe about the 'Purple Rain' deluxe:

No "17 Days (Extended Version)"

My only gripe about 'Sign "O" The Times' deluxe:

No "The Ballad Of Dorothy Parker (Extended Version)"

I'm old n grumpy like that!!!

dustoff said:

AvocadosMax said:

I’d vote for Questlove to take over everything

I wouldn't be surprised if Questlove is acting as a consultant to this project and others,

I get the same vibe, which is why he had tracks already..but maybe not even in an official capacity, he's just positioned himself as sort of a diplomat in that Prince world, and you could see who showed up to watch his podcast weren't people that always intermingle.

nayroo2002 said:

To me it seems like the mindset for the SOTT deluxe isn't neccesarily to assemble congifurations of working tracklistings for albums that never existed but rather just providing a vast array of songs from that time which just happens to be (nearly) comprehensive for those albums minus a couple of different mixes for songs, or edited parts

Man, sometimes it's easy to understand when people say Prince fans can't ever have nice things. Imagine you love pizza. I mean, you REALLY love pizza. And you're told you'll be getting as much pizza at one time as you've ever gotten. Enough pizza to keep you fed for a long, long time. And instead of being jovial and appreciative, you'd rather complain about how the pizza is being sliced before being served, what type of pizza box it's being served in, etc. It's madness. Just enjoy the f'ing pizza!! Don't worry about how it's being prepared. It shouldn't be this hard...

ThirdStrike said:

Man, sometimes it's easy to understand when people say Prince fans can't ever have nice things. Imagine you love pizza. I mean, you REALLY love pizza. And you're told you'll be getting as much pizza at one time as you've ever gotten. Enough pizza to keep you fed for a long, long time. And instead of being jovial and appreciative, you'd rather complain about how the pizza is being sliced before being served, what type of pizza box it's being served in, etc. It's madness. Just enjoy the f'ing pizza!! Don't worry about how it's being prepared. It shouldn't be this hard...

I am with you. I guarantee even if they included repetitious tracks that make the CB or DF configurations available 100% you would still have people complaining about how Girl O' My Dreams isn't there, or how they didn't include this one obscure very specific confirguration that had a 30 edit on "__"


Ultimately I feel like if people focus on what we are getting as opposed to what obscure edit or version isn't on the album, we will all see how amazing this release is gonna be! This release with the officially released songs on singles and other albums (Rockhard, Feel U Up, the '98 CB tracks from this era) we have it all in some form

[Edited 6/24/20 13:29pm]

databank said:

.

- The 3 CDs of outtakes sound fine to me. The most blatant omission is the Dream Factory Musical suite (Can't Stop, Data Bank, We Can Funk, Girl O' My Dreams), but admitedly they couldn't include everything anyway, and that leaves material for future releases.

.

- As pointed by others, it won't be totally possible for us to recreate any DF, Camille or CB config with the material included there. I think it's better that way because, as suggested by someone, those early album configurations would make perfect RSD releases. Prince left many work in progress configurations behind him, and if the estate was to release one or 2 each year for RSD, this would make many a fan happy. Hopefully they'll consider it. Then, sequencing (including the length of silence between tracks) could be respected and we'd get exactly what Prince tried.

Can't Stop, Data Bank, We Can Funk, and Girl O' My Dreams were recorded for The Dawn, so perhaps there's something planned for that? I know When The Dawn of the Morning Comes, Crucial, and Cocoa Boys are also part of that project, but IDK what else would be the reasoning.

.

As for DF and Camille: We can create Camille with this release of Rebirth and we can create the July 18 1986 configuration of DF. What's missing?? You'd probably have to do a few edits if you're a legit completist: clipping the first second of Last Heart, the crowd noise on Movie Star, the alarm from Starfish. I guess you mean the longer ICNTTPOYM? Aside from that and the intro of Joy in Repetition, this fills in all the gaps of all three albums.

ForceofNature said:

ThirdStrike said:

Man, sometimes it's easy to understand when people say Prince fans can't ever have nice things. Imagine you love pizza. I mean, you REALLY love pizza. And you're told you'll be getting as much pizza at one time as you've ever gotten. Enough pizza to keep you fed for a long, long time. And instead of being jovial and appreciative, you'd rather complain about how the pizza is being sliced before being served, what type of pizza box it's being served in, etc. It's madness. Just enjoy the f'ing pizza!! Don't worry about how it's being prepared. It shouldn't be this hard...

I am with you. I guarantee even if they included repetitious tracks that make the CB or DF configurations abailable 100% you would still have people complaining about how Girl O' My Dreams isn't there, or how they didn't include this one obscure very specific confirguration that had a 30 edit on __


Ultimately I feel like if people focus on what we are getting as opposed to what obscure edit or version isn't on the album, we will all see how amazing this release is gonna be

Exactly!! Listen, for YEARS I've heard the same damn snippet of "Cosmic Day". In 90 days, I'll get to hear not only the rest of that damn song, but I'll get to hear it in crystal clear sound quality. Not to mention "Adonis & Bathsheba", which is one of my all-time favorite tracks. Then "Rebirth of the Flesh", "Cocoa Boys", etc. Fuck the pizza!!! This could be a damn SALAD and I'd still ove the shit out of it...

ForceofNature said:

Musze said:

I wish he had allowed himself to look back/reflect more during his life and to celebrate these classics with releases like this.

Regardless, I'm just glad it's happening now.

Prince(r.i.p.) knew that his muziq would be heard when he was long gone. That's what he wanted. I met a dancer that worked for him. She said he wanted an album released a year for 21 years after he was gone.

I played around with preordering it without success. They won't ship to me in Australia or my son in Canada