funkbabyandthebabysitters said:

Remasters.

Personally I don't want any of his original studio releases remastered. In particular I don't want newly mastered versions of his work, which he's never heard and never signed-off on, gradually pushing out and replacing the true originals everywhere one might go to stream and listen. It's heart breaking quite honestly, just marketing bollocks.

Also, I really don't need the 7 inch edits, the radio edits, the shortened-for-radio edits of his songs. Fuck that.

ian said:

Remasters.

Personally I don't want any of his original studio releases remastered. In particular I don't want newly mastered versions of his work, which he's never heard and never signed-off on, gradually pushing out and replacing the true originals everywhere one might go to stream and listen. It's heart breaking quite honestly, just marketing bollocks.

Also, I really don't need the 7 inch edits, the radio edits, the shortened-for-radio edits of his songs. Fuck that.

I don't like them either, but maybe they're for the uninitiated. Or maybe a posterity thing, a way of cataloguing everything. So noone can say they missed the 12 inch version of 'Orgasm'.

[Edited 9/26/20 13:43pm]

ian said:

Remasters.

Personally I don't want any of his original studio releases remastered. In particular I don't want newly mastered versions of his work, which he's never heard and never signed-off on, gradually pushing out and replacing the true originals everywhere one might go to stream and listen. It's heart breaking quite honestly, just marketing bollocks.

Also, I really don't need the 7 inch edits, the radio edits, the shortened-for-radio edits of his songs. Fuck that.

I don't think it is marketing bollocks at all! Remasters, when done well, reveal and highlight what is recorded and on the original master tapes more than the original CDs ever could due to limitations of the digital conversation technology at the time. I would say it would be heartbreaking if all we had were uneven, volume issue laden, thin sounding CDs of SOTT that pale in comparison to the vinyl masterings, for example


Ironically Prince himself with the Welton delegation on PR did more damage to that legacy of that album with compression and brickwalling than Bernie has done with any of the Estate releases thus far

fortuneandserendipity said:

ian said:

ian said:

databank said:

SantanaMaitreya said:

SantanaMaitreya said:

databank said:

Well some people want these radio edits. No one forces you to listen to them. IDK what's wrong with people being offended by things being released that no one forces them to buy or listen to.

If you want to listen to the outtakes, you're forced to buy the whole damn box. I wish they'd just put out the unreleased songs and the live shows as seperate releases.

You can listen to them on Spotify right now and hand pick whichever ones you want to jam out to

ForceofNature said:

ian said:

Remasters.

Personally I don't want any of his original studio releases remastered. In particular I don't want newly mastered versions of his work, which he's never heard and never signed-off on, gradually pushing out and replacing the true originals everywhere one might go to stream and listen. It's heart breaking quite honestly, just marketing bollocks.

Also, I really don't need the 7 inch edits, the radio edits, the shortened-for-radio edits of his songs. Fuck that.

I don't think it is marketing bollocks at all! Remasters, when done well, reveal and highlight what is recorded and on the original master tapes more than the original CDs ever could due to limitations of the digital conversation technology at the time. I would say it would be heartbreaking if all we had were uneven, volume issue laden, thin sounding CDs of SOTT that pale in comparison to the vinyl masterings, for example


Ironically Prince himself with the Welton delegation on PR did more damage to that legacy of that album with compression and brickwalling than Bernie has done with any of the Estate releases thus far

Agreed regarding the PR remaster, definitey. However I personally think we're getting into the realms of diminishing returns at this point - all the WB era stuff that was already originally mastered by Bernie Grundman and company, there's nothing wrong with those records. My original pressing of SoTT still sounds fantastic.

The concern I have is that these modern remasters can never be rubber-stamped by Prince himself for obvious reasons, so who can say really how representative they are of the artist's wishes? And inevitably younger people looking up these albums on streaming services will start to find the modern remasters first rather than the original versions that we've all enjoyed for decades. Even Bernie himself (in his recent Michael Deane interview) admitted that a lot of the remastering recently is driven by marketing rather than something specifically wrong with the original master.

Probably the strongest case that could be made for remastering would be some of the 90s era stuff that seemed to suffer from being collateral in the loudness wars, but we've heard from Morris Hayes interviews that this is what Prince was going for, he was comparing his work with the hits of the era.

Everything after Lovesexy era except the unedited versions of Dopamine Rush, Hallucination Rain, Right Back Here In My Arms, and The War

[Edited 9/27/20 1:46am]

'Daddy Pop' or 'Push' remixes, edits, versions

[Edited 9/27/20 2:22am]

ian said:

ForceofNature said:

I don't think it is marketing bollocks at all! Remasters, when done well, reveal and highlight what is recorded and on the original master tapes more than the original CDs ever could due to limitations of the digital conversation technology at the time. I would say it would be heartbreaking if all we had were uneven, volume issue laden, thin sounding CDs of SOTT that pale in comparison to the vinyl masterings, for example


Ironically Prince himself with the Welton delegation on PR did more damage to that legacy of that album with compression and brickwalling than Bernie has done with any of the Estate releases thus far

Agreed regarding the PR remaster, definitey. However I personally think we're getting into the realms of diminishing returns at this point - all the WB era stuff that was already originally mastered by Bernie Grundman and company, there's nothing wrong with those records. My original pressing of SoTT still sounds fantastic.

The concern I have is that these modern remasters can never be rubber-stamped by Prince himself for obvious reasons, so who can say really how representative they are of the artist's wishes? And inevitably younger people looking up these albums on streaming services will start to find the modern remasters first rather than the original versions that we've all enjoyed for decades. Even Bernie himself (in his recent Michael Deane interview) admitted that a lot of the remastering recently is driven by marketing rather than something specifically wrong with the original master.

Probably the strongest case that could be made for remastering would be some of the 90s era stuff that seemed to suffer from being collateral in the loudness wars, but we've heard from Morris Hayes interviews that this is what Prince was going for, he was comparing his work with the hits of the era.

Come on - the SOTT CD is probably the worst mastered CD I have in my whole CD collection.

I want to say I don't want any more remasters. I really do.

Purple Rain was not a remaster. It was made louder.

1999 was not a remaster. It was damage limitation. But thankfully it wasn't messed around with too much. I'll still take the original CD vs the remaster.

SOTT was not a remaster. It was an exercise in turning the bass up to 11.

Fudge it.

I don't want any more remasters.

If they did to Around The World In A Day or Dirty Mind what they did to Sign of the Times I just might ... type REALLY ANGRILY and that may result in breaking my keyboard.

Can you imagine Paisley Park with a super thick heavy bassline, Condition of the Heart sounding like Do Me, Baby (take 7).

No thank you.

ThePersian said:

I want to say I don't want any more remasters. I really do.

Purple Rain was not a remaster. It was made louder.

1999 was not a remaster. It was damage limitation. But thankfully it wasn't messed around with too much. I'll still take the original CD vs the remaster.

SOTT was not a remaster. It was an exercise in turning the bass up to 11.

Fudge it.

I don't want any more remasters.

If they did to Around The World In A Day or Dirty Mind what they did to Sign of the Times I just might ... type REALLY ANGRILY and that may result in breaking my keyboard.

Can you imagine Paisley Park with a super thick heavy bassline, Condition of the Heart sounding like Do Me, Baby (take 7).

No thank you.

Huh, a lot of people seem to like the sound of the last two remasters. Nobody is forcing you to replace your originals if you're happy with the way they sound.

funkbabyandthebabysitters said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

I don't like them either, but maybe they're for the uninitiated. Or maybe a posterity thing, a way of cataloguing everything. So noone can say they missed the 12 inch version of 'Orgasm'.

[Edited 9/26/20 13:43pm]

Theres a 12" version of orgasm?

Probably, knowing Prince.

ThePersian said:

I want to say I don't want any more remasters. I really do.

Purple Rain was not a remaster. It was made louder.

1999 was not a remaster. It was damage limitation. But thankfully it wasn't messed around with too much. I'll still take the original CD vs the remaster.

SOTT was not a remaster. It was an exercise in turning the bass up to 11.

Fudge it.

I don't want any more remasters.

If they did to Around The World In A Day or Dirty Mind what they did to Sign of the Times I just might ... type REALLY ANGRILY and that may result in breaking my keyboard.

Can you imagine Paisley Park with a super thick heavy bassline, Condition of the Heart sounding like Do Me, Baby (take 7).

No thank you.

I don't neccesarily hear intrusive bass bossting on SOTT, just a better and more appropriate low end. If someone listens on a resonably flat system I think that the 1999 and SOTT remasters completely smoke the original issued CDs in terms of frequency balance IMO

[Edited 9/27/20 15:25pm]

ian said:

ForceofNature said:

I don't think it is marketing bollocks at all! Remasters, when done well, reveal and highlight what is recorded and on the original master tapes more than the original CDs ever could due to limitations of the digital conversation technology at the time. I would say it would be heartbreaking if all we had were uneven, volume issue laden, thin sounding CDs of SOTT that pale in comparison to the vinyl masterings, for example


Ironically Prince himself with the Welton delegation on PR did more damage to that legacy of that album with compression and brickwalling than Bernie has done with any of the Estate releases thus far

Agreed regarding the PR remaster, definitey. However I personally think we're getting into the realms of diminishing returns at this point - all the WB era stuff that was already originally mastered by Bernie Grundman and company, there's nothing wrong with those records. My original pressing of SoTT still sounds fantastic.

The concern I have is that these modern remasters can never be rubber-stamped by Prince himself for obvious reasons, so who can say really how representative they are of the artist's wishes? And inevitably younger people looking up these albums on streaming services will start to find the modern remasters first rather than the original versions that we've all enjoyed for decades. Even Bernie himself (in his recent Michael Deane interview) admitted that a lot of the remastering recently is driven by marketing rather than something specifically wrong with the original master.

Probably the strongest case that could be made for remastering would be some of the 90s era stuff that seemed to suffer from being collateral in the loudness wars, but we've heard from Morris Hayes interviews that this is what Prince was going for, he was comparing his work with the hits of the era.

Ultimately if what we were talking about were remixes marketed in a way that would make people go for the remix without realizing it is a remix, I totally would agree. In the case of remastering from just my own personal perspective, there is no real replacing, changing, or altering of the actual music itself, just in its ideal scenario a better representation of what is on the master tapes and certain frequencies being highlighted more

Unless a remaster is really really poorly done, the differences are subtle. With SOTT to me it would be a shame if even if this is all happening post-Prince's passing, that all we would have digitally is a thin, volume-issue laden CD issue!

[Edited 9/27/20 15:24pm]

ian said:

CAL3 said:

But the “vault” studio material. Yeesh! It’s ruining his legacy.

i can't even begin to imagine the mental gymnastics required to unironically think this. his legacy is there. right in front of us, in front of the whole world. it's set in stone. it is what it is. first and foremost, it would take an actual fan to even seek out the SDE sets to hear said vault tracks, and then on top of that anyone and everyone listening realizes they weren't released in his lifetime. it's not rocket science, every single important artist goes through it, some are fortunate enough to come to terms with it during their lifetime and begin archival releases with them still around. it's actually a vital part of maintaining a legacy for an artist who's either dead or not active anymore.

these people who get so offended that material, some of it not totally up to par, is getting released are some of the most delusional folks i've ever met. like, it just shows such a total lack of knowledge about the artistic process, the recording process, and a lack of respect for talented minds. no one can only write perfect, ten out of ten, songs. there's going to be some stuff that only hardcore fans can really appreciate or find interesting. this isn't some fucking fantasy world where the curtain has been pulled back and your image of an artist has been smashed, life doesn't work like that and art doesn't work like that. i see people claiming the vault tracks "ruin the magic" and it just strikes me as some of the most gobsmacklingy stupid shit i've ever read in my life.

word.

^ i know this is rude and over the top but i'm just so over this way of thinking, it's so irritating to read. sick of it, CAL3, i'm sick of it!!!

lustmealways said:

CAL3 said:

lustmealways said:

i can't even begin to imagine the mental gymnastics required to unironically think this. his legacy is there. right in front of us, in front of the whole world. it's set in stone. it is what it is. first and foremost, it would take an actual fan to even seek out the SDE sets to hear said vault tracks, and then on top of that anyone and everyone listening realizes they weren't released in his lifetime. it's not rocket science, every single important artist goes through it, some are fortunate enough to come to terms with it during their lifetime and begin archival releases with them still around. it's actually a vital part of maintaining a legacy for an artist who's either dead or not active anymore.

these people who get so offended that material, some of it not totally up to par, is getting released are some of the most delusional folks i've ever met. like, it just shows such a total lack of knowledge about the artistic process, the recording process, and a lack of respect for talented minds. no one can only write perfect, ten out of ten, songs. there's going to be some stuff that only hardcore fans can really appreciate or find interesting. this isn't some fucking fantasy world where the curtain has been pulled back and your image of an artist has been smashed, life doesn't work like that and art doesn't work like that. i see people claiming the vault tracks "ruin the magic" and it just strikes me as some of the most gobsmacklingy stupid shit i've ever read in my life.

word.

. Respectfully I disagree with pretty much this entire outlook. . Perhaps - PERHAPS - I overstated by choosing the word “ruining.” . Diluting is more appropriate. . You may not respect anyone else’s point of view - obviously not mine. I wish I had the energy at the moment to go through your post point by point to really make my own case since you’ve drawn a whole lot of conclusions based on not-very—fully-expressed opinions on my part. Probably not worth it. . Prince didn’t release this stuff during his lifetime. Some of the heretofore unreleased songs are brilliant, some suck. But he left them in the vault.

I must agree with lustmealways.

.

1/ Prince said in his lifetime that he expected vault material to be released after his death. What he left behind, he knew could and probably would get out.

.

2/ It's a normal thing in the history of arts to unearth an artists' archive after they die, and the more important they were the bigger the interest. This is important from an academic perspective (and believe me, I'd rather have a public institute than a bank in charge). We cannot, will not and should not destroy what great artists leave behind.

.

3/ This does not in any way dilute or demean Prince's legacy. The canonical discography (i.e. what he let out in his lifetime) is there for all to enjoy and will remain the "gold standard". As with every artist, the archives are an addition that's mostly aimed at afficionados and scholars. Look for example at the upcoming Joni Mitchell box set (and she's not even dead): I doubt 5 CD's of what one can assume will be low-fi recordings from a young and probably, at the time, somewhat clumsy artist before she got her record deal will be the greatest thing in her discography. But she knows it won't dilute it either: it'll add an important documentation to her legacy, one that'll help fans and scholars understand better where she was coming from as an artist by the time she released her first official album.

While possible, it's unlikely anyone who wants to get their first taste of Bowie will listen to the demos on the recent Conversation Piece box set and conclude "Huh? David Bowie's music is nothing but lo-fi acoustic shit, yuk, I don't like Bowie!" Or if it happens, such a person would be so dumb that they don't deserve to listen to Bowie anyway

Now if you've already absorbed most of/all the official catalogue, plunging into 1999 SDE or SOTT SDE gives you a fantastic documentation that will allow you to realize the scope of P's work, even if not all the songs are as good as what he released. Similarly, being able to compare the 2 new SOTT concerts with the film adds a layer of complexity and diversity to how people can perceive that particular tour. Anyone who approaches these recordings from a pure "like/dislike" or "good/not good" perspective, in the hope to be entertained and nothing else, is completely misguided.

.

4/ One could argue that Prince should have died the day after he released SOTT, since many fans and critics claim it was only downfall from there onwards (it's not my opinion). Some could argue that All My Dreams is a more interesting piece of music than Jughead, yet Jughead was released and AMD wasn't. Where do you draw the line?

.

5/ Anyway, the vault's is progressively gonna be released. It's like that. So you better make peace with it because there's more, much much more coming your way

The same folk be screamin' for a Purple Rain blu-ray with deleted scenes.