databank said:

TwiliteKid said:

No, those don't equate,

Well I'll give you that "conspiracy theory" is a somewhat approximative comparison, but my point was the reasoning process is the same. + see all the accusations against Duane being in league with etc. If that ain't a conspiracy theories kind of atmosphere we're getting here, IDK what it is.

and frankly your position is based about as much evidence as mine.

My position requires less entities. As long as you don't understand the virtues of Ockam's razor, there really is no point for me continuing this discussion.

I see your delusions of grandeur continue to expand. And not only do I understand Ockham's razor, but I can spell it too!

What "entities" are you referring to? Ultimately it all comes down to the Estate's wishes. Pulling apart albums they intend to reissue in the near future would like be cutting off their nose to spite their face. You weren't shocked that Joy In Repetition wasn't on the SDE, were you? No, because it belongs on Graffiti Bridge, just as Good Love belongs on Crystal Ball.

JorisE73 said:

udo said:

.

Would be a very interesting item.

Don't you think 'smart' would imply not just IQ but also EQ here?

(not the 'audio' EQ that is)

.

Further:

In Dutch we have a certain saying, saying 'Wiens brood men eet, diens woord men spreekt', which implies that if a person is paid for work by another person, the worker tends to align their opinions to the person that is paying's opinions.

This would be a factor in the Duane/Estate situation.

You take the words right of my mouth. This is exactly what I meant.
Even if Duane is a freelancer for The Estate he would still burn bridges with them if he didn't left out or altered things in his book that they want or approve off. In the end The Estate isn't trustworthy and they pay Duane for whatever he does there so if they say he can't provide something he has to comply or leave.

Y'all are funny. Now you're making up stuff out of nowhere. The Estate isn't Duane's publisher. There is no reason to believe they would demand to read his book and approve of its content before release. And we have no reason to believe Duane would even accept such bullying if they tried it anyway. I certainly dare to hope he has more integrity than that and I have no reason whatsoever to believe he doesn't. Besides, by acting that way, the Estate would risk some nasty backlash in case Duane would refuse, not take the job then go tell online that he's been bullied that way.

.

Worst that can happen is:

1/ Duane gets info from the Estate that he cannot use in his book (in which case he wouldn't have gotten the info anyway if he'd not taken the job, so we get the same book either way, and I don't see what the problem is).

2/ Duane gets to know about certain quality control issues with Estate releases, including tampering with mixes, but will refrain from openly criticizing the Estate. The good news is that we'll be able to assess whether this is the case very soon, because the next book covers certain songs from Originals that we know for almost sure have been messed-up with. I wouldn't be surprised if Duane's policy was to describe the sessions as they happened, thus tacitely disowning the Estate, but without explicitely saying anything about the 2019 release (after all, the Bolas mixes weren't made in 85-86, so the book isn't really about them). So we'll see, won't we? Let's continue this conversation once the book is out.

.

All I can say is that I'm grateful I don't live in a dark world of distrust and suspision, where one assumes the worst of everyone all the time. Living that way must be exhausting.

TwiliteKid said:

databank said:

I see your delusions of grandeur continue to expand. And not only do I understand Ockham's razor, but I can spell it too!

What "entities" are you referring to? Ultimately it all comes down to the Estate's wishes. Pulling apart albums they intend to reissue in the near future would like be cutting off their nose to spite their face. You weren't shocked that Joy In Repetition wasn't on the SDE, were you? No, because it belongs on Graffiti Bridge, just as Good Love belongs on Crystal Ball.

My bad about the spelling. In French we tend to spell it "Occam", so I'm not used to the English spelling.

.

If you'd read what I wrote before, you'd know exactly which specific entity I'm talking about and why your whole "it belongs with Crystal Ball" argument is too fragile to be taken into consideration, not in the absolute of course, but in context. I shall not be trapped in an endless loop conversation where I keep repeating things and you keep ignoring them, so I'll see you in another thread where we can have a sensible conversation about something else (which, I'm sure, we will). Peace

^ (+ you're moving the goalposts. The original argument was "WB did a favor to Sony" and now it's "it has to do with the logic of how they choose tracks for each SDE". Either way, you still have the exact same extraordinary entity in the middle of the path, so moving the goalposts didn't help a bit, I fear).

databank said:

anyone who touches the prince estate is compromised. it's like ice 9

lustmealways said:

anyone who touches the prince estate is compromised. it's like ice 9

.

Hmm.

This echoes from Prince's past...

databank said:

JorisE73 said:

You take the words right of my mouth. This is exactly what I meant.
Even if Duane is a freelancer for The Estate he would still burn bridges with them if he didn't left out or altered things in his book that they want or approve off. In the end The Estate isn't trustworthy and they pay Duane for whatever he does there so if they say he can't provide something he has to comply or leave.

Y'all are funny. Now you're making up stuff out of nowhere. The Estate isn't Duane's publisher. There is no reason to believe they would demand to read his book and approve of its content before release. And we have no reason to believe Duane would even accept such bullying if they tried it anyway. I certainly dare to hope he has more integrity than that and I have no reason whatsoever to believe he doesn't. Besides, by acting that way, the Estate would risk some nasty backlash in case Duane would refuse, not take the job then go tell online that he's been bullied that way.

.

Worst that can happen is:

1/ Duane gets info from the Estate that he cannot use in his book (in which case he wouldn't have gotten the info anyway if he'd not taken the job, so we get the same book either way, and I don't see what the problem is).

2/ Duane gets to know about certain quality control issues with Estate releases, including tampering with mixes, but will refrain from openly criticizing the Estate. The good news is that we'll be able to assess whether this is the case very soon, because the next book covers certain songs from Originals that we know for almost sure have been messed-up with. I wouldn't be surprised if Duane's policy was to describe the sessions as they happened, thus tacitely disowning the Estate, but without explicitely saying anything about the 2019 release (after all, the Bolas mixes weren't made in 85-86, so the book isn't really about them). So we'll see, won't we? Let's continue this conversation once the book is out.

.

All I can say is that I'm grateful I don't live in a dark world of distrust and suspision, where one assumes the worst of everyone all the time. Living that way must be exhausting.

I don't think you understand what NDA's are or never had to sign one.
If Duane signed one and it states that he's not allowed to publicly speak about Prince's vault contents or parts of it (like Michael Howe) or let alone publish a book about it then how can we trust his book(s) to be complete and accurate?
This has nothing to do with living in a dark world of distrust and suspicion. This is just a basic business NDA thing. The Estate is a business.

JorisE73 said:

This has nothing to do with living in a dark world of distrust and suspicion. This is just a basic business NDA thing. The Estate is a business.

.

It simply implies Duane is compromised, tainted.

BartVanHemelen said:

Yet more reasons to be pissed of at the SOTT SDE for not including a song that was actually planned to be included on the album.

Eh, Good Love is already available, no biggie. Nothing from Crystal Ball, in terms of verbatim takes/edits/mixes were included on the set

ForceofNature said:

BartVanHemelen said:

Yet more reasons to be pissed of at the SOTT SDE for not including a song that was actually planned to be included on the album.

Eh, Good Love is already available, no biggie. Nothing from Crystal Ball, in terms of verbatim takes/edits/mixes were included on the set

.

Sure.But how 'complete' does that make the set?

(aside from the SOTT configuration issue, perhaps the no-Revolution issue, etc)

It simply makes the statement that the fan can now assemble Crystal Ball, etc from the SOTT SDE discs a false claim.

One has to have the old Crystal Ball release as well.

.

Good love is on CD, but is it in print?

.

Then there's the idea that Prince removed all Revolution references in the tracks that he put on the final SOTT album.

Why is there a load of Revolution tracks on the SDE set?

udo said:

JorisE73 said:

This has nothing to do with living in a dark world of distrust and suspicion. This is just a basic business NDA thing. The Estate is a business.

.

It simply implies Duane is compromised, tainted.

-

Exactly. The Estate is a business,

and that does not imply that Duane Tudahl is compromised, nor tainted.

It is not up to him to make the final decision, iirc.

-

udo said:

ForceofNature said:

Eh, Good Love is already available, no biggie. Nothing from Crystal Ball, in terms of verbatim takes/edits/mixes were included on the set

.

Sure.But how 'complete' does that make the set?

(aside from the SOTT configuration issue, perhaps the no-Revolution issue, etc)

It simply makes the statement that the fan can now assemble Crystal Ball, etc from the SOTT SDE discs a false claim.

One has to have the old Crystal Ball release as well.

.

Good love is on CD, but is it in print?

.

Then there's the idea that Prince removed all Revolution references in the tracks that he put on the final SOTT album.

Why is there a load of Revolution tracks on the SDE set?

Is it supposed to be complete or comprehensive? On the sticker when I got my set it didn't say "every SOTT era track ever"

I will give one the config thing not being possible via stricly digital files verbatim, but again no biggie

And regarding why the Revolution tracks? Because they are from the era and time of SOTT and have no reason not be included.

Think it was a good call. Would have been one of the weaker tracks on the set. That dog bark sound always drove me nuts - makes me think of Gene from Bob's Burgers.

ForceofNature said:

udo said:

.

Sure.But how 'complete' does that make the set?

(aside from the SOTT configuration issue, perhaps the no-Revolution issue, etc)

It simply makes the statement that the fan can now assemble Crystal Ball, etc from the SOTT SDE discs a false claim.

One has to have the old Crystal Ball release as well.

.

Good love is on CD, but is it in print?

.

Then there's the idea that Prince removed all Revolution references in the tracks that he put on the final SOTT album.

Why is there a load of Revolution tracks on the SDE set?

Is it supposed to be complete or comprehensive? On the sticker when I got my set it didn't say "every SOTT era track ever"

.

Why else put all the other stuff on the set besides the album?

Different versions of known songs, songs with Revolution input, songs which were not on any configuration, etc.

They make it look like that was the intention.

.

I will give one the config thing not being possible via stricly digital files verbatim, but again no biggie

.

Why then claim this?

Do they think we're stupid?

That we do not want perfection?

.

And regarding why the Revolution tracks? Because they are from the era and time of SOTT and have no reason not be included.

.

Why did Prince erase all Revolution input for the tracks on SOTT?

Why didn't he simply put them on the set as is?

This was to be his album, not theirs.

So why didn't the `experts` recognize this and work with this in mind?

All in all regarding Revolution album vs. Prince, to me that is an easy one, they were handpicking Prince tracks, regardless of who also was on it, because that was the era they were picking additional tracks from

[Edited 1/22/21 21:24pm]

ForceofNature said:

All in all regarding Revolution album vs. Prince, to me that is an easy one, they were handpicking Prince tracks, regardless of who also was on it, because that was the era they were picking additional tracks from

.

I guess you did not get 'it' yet.

'Era' is the wrong thing as he ('suddenly') changed course.

Then it does not matter anymore what happened before.

He worked according to the new course.

This would result in a thinner SOTT SDE and in a thicker Parade SDE.

(and I do not mean the book stuff!)

.

The 'era' thing would imply you can put all TBA tracks (including alternates, outtakes, etc) on the Lovesexy SDE because they are from the same era but not honoring the idea that he did not want to release TBA and instead changed course towards Lovesexy.

It's the same kind of idea.

This would not imply that the tracks would not be relased, just not in this combination.

.

This type of thinking does not reflect from the SDE releases at all.

All in all I am totally cool with how it was presented. Hell perfer it even

[Edited 1/23/21 15:02pm]

udo said:

ForceofNature said:

Eh, Good Love is already available, no biggie. Nothing from Crystal Ball, in terms of verbatim takes/edits/mixes were included on the set

.

Sure.But how 'complete' does that make the set?

(aside from the SOTT configuration issue, perhaps the no-Revolution issue, etc)

It simply makes the statement that the fan can now assemble Crystal Ball, etc from the SOTT SDE discs a false claim.

One has to have the old Crystal Ball release as well.

.

Good love is on CD, but is it in print?

.

Then there's the idea that Prince removed all Revolution references in the tracks that he put on the final SOTT album.

Why is there a load of Revolution tracks on the SDE set?

Good point UDO , the Bright Lights Big City soundtrack went out of print everwhere decades ago and Good Love (the long version) would have been a welcome inclusion

andrewm7 said:

TwiliteKid said:

databank said:

^ (+ you're moving the goalposts. The original argument was "WB did a favor to Sony" and now it's "it has to do with the logic of how they choose tracks for each SDE". Either way, you still have the exact same extraordinary entity in the middle of the path, so moving the goalposts didn't help a bit, I fear).

I haven’t moved anything. My first post on the subject was to suggest that Good Love wasn’t included on the SDE because it’s on Crystal Ball. You objected, I elaborated. You objected again, I restated my case. [Edited 1/21/21 16:42pm]

Yet you carefully avoided addressing the inconsistancy in your reasoning. I consider the case closed

JorisE73 said:

databank said:

Y'all are funny. Now you're making up stuff out of nowhere. The Estate isn't Duane's publisher. There is no reason to believe they would demand to read his book and approve of its content before release. And we have no reason to believe Duane would even accept such bullying if they tried it anyway. I certainly dare to hope he has more integrity than that and I have no reason whatsoever to believe he doesn't. Besides, by acting that way, the Estate would risk some nasty backlash in case Duane would refuse, not take the job then go tell online that he's been bullied that way.

.

Worst that can happen is:

1/ Duane gets info from the Estate that he cannot use in his book (in which case he wouldn't have gotten the info anyway if he'd not taken the job, so we get the same book either way, and I don't see what the problem is).

2/ Duane gets to know about certain quality control issues with Estate releases, including tampering with mixes, but will refrain from openly criticizing the Estate. The good news is that we'll be able to assess whether this is the case very soon, because the next book covers certain songs from Originals that we know for almost sure have been messed-up with. I wouldn't be surprised if Duane's policy was to describe the sessions as they happened, thus tacitely disowning the Estate, but without explicitely saying anything about the 2019 release (after all, the Bolas mixes weren't made in 85-86, so the book isn't really about them). So we'll see, won't we? Let's continue this conversation once the book is out.

.

All I can say is that I'm grateful I don't live in a dark world of distrust and suspision, where one assumes the worst of everyone all the time. Living that way must be exhausting.

I don't think you understand what NDA's are or never had to sign one.
If Duane signed one and it states that he's not allowed to publicly speak about Prince's vault contents or parts of it (like Michael Howe) or let alone publish a book about it then how can we trust his book(s) to be complete and accurate?
This has nothing to do with living in a dark world of distrust and suspicion. This is just a basic business NDA thing. The Estate is a business.

It's pretty incredible how you can get stuck in loops conversations on this board. No matter what is said, it shall be ignored and the person you speak with will act as if you said nothing at all. Usually, when you debate with someone, they will bother dismissing your arguments or explaining why they disagree. But here, no: people will just go on talking as if you said nothing at all, wasting your time in ways that defy imagination.

.

As I said, and I will say it for the last time, either Duane got access to some information beyond the scope of his own research that he cannot use, either he didn't get access to any such information beyond what was given to him for his liner notes (= the information is now public anyway).

.

Either way, we get the exact same book as if he hadn't worked for the Estate in the first place, because there is no way in the world any NDA can prevent Duane using information he got by himself.

.

Clearly, y'all want something fishy to be there and that's pretty much it. Y'all want it badly. And if y'all won't find it, you'll make it up in order to avoid any cognitive dissonance or challenge your understanding of the world. Makes life easier to live, huh?

.

Now I said my part and I have no more to add on the topic. Peace

udo said:

ForceofNature said:

.

Why then claim this?

Do they think we're stupid?

That we do not want perfection?

.

And regarding why the Revolution tracks? Because they are from the era and time of SOTT and have no reason not be included.

.

Why did Prince erase all Revolution input for the tracks on SOTT?

Why didn't he simply put them on the set as is?

This was to be his album, not theirs.

So why didn't the `experts` recognize this and work with this in mind?

Because anything involving their name sells like hotcakes regardless if it makes sense or not

databank said:

JorisE73 said:

I don't think you understand what NDA's are or never had to sign one.
If Duane signed one and it states that he's not allowed to publicly speak about Prince's vault contents or parts of it (like Michael Howe) or let alone publish a book about it then how can we trust his book(s) to be complete and accurate?
This has nothing to do with living in a dark world of distrust and suspicion. This is just a basic business NDA thing. The Estate is a business.

It's pretty incredible how you can get stuck in loops conversations on this board. No matter what is said, it shall be ignored and the person you speak with will act as if you said nothing at all. Usually, when you debate with someone, they will bother dismissing your arguments or explaining why they disagree. But here, no: people will just go on talking as if you said nothing at all, wasting your time in ways that defy imagination.

.

As I said, and I will say it for the last time, either Duane got access to some information beyond the scope of his own research that he cannot use, either he didn't get access to any such information beyond what was given to him for his liner notes (= the information is now public anyway).

.

Either way, we get the exact same book as if he hadn't worked for the Estate in the first place, because there is no way in the world any NDA can prevent Duane using information he got by himself.

.

Clearly, y'all want something fishy to be there and that's pretty much it. Y'all want it badly. And if y'all won't find it, you'll make it up in order to avoid any cognitive dissonance or challenge your understanding of the world. Makes life easier to live, huh?

.

Now I said my part and I have no more to add on the topic. Peace

I'm not here to offend, argue or troll you man, you're cool in my book and I understand your points.
What I've seen from different NDA's I've signed is that companies can ask or even (try to) demand in there NDA that all previous (non-public domain) info regarding there business and even info gotten from third parties or by you own previously be kept confidential and not be shared without there consent or approval. I don't think anyone knows what kind of NDA Tudahl has signed or even if he has signed one but it is something to keep in the back of your mind regarding his future book(s).

JorisE73 said:

databank said:

It's pretty incredible how you can get stuck in loops conversations on this board. No matter what is said, it shall be ignored and the person you speak with will act as if you said nothing at all. Usually, when you debate with someone, they will bother dismissing your arguments or explaining why they disagree. But here, no: people will just go on talking as if you said nothing at all, wasting your time in ways that defy imagination.

.

As I said, and I will say it for the last time, either Duane got access to some information beyond the scope of his own research that he cannot use, either he didn't get access to any such information beyond what was given to him for his liner notes (= the information is now public anyway).

.

Either way, we get the exact same book as if he hadn't worked for the Estate in the first place, because there is no way in the world any NDA can prevent Duane using information he got by himself.

.

Clearly, y'all want something fishy to be there and that's pretty much it. Y'all want it badly. And if y'all won't find it, you'll make it up in order to avoid any cognitive dissonance or challenge your understanding of the world. Makes life easier to live, huh?

.

Now I said my part and I have no more to add on the topic. Peace

I'm not here to offend, argue or troll you man, you're cool in my book and I understand your points.
What I've seen from different NDA's I've signed is that companies can ask or even (try to) demand in there NDA that all previous (non-public domain) info regarding there business and even info gotten from third parties or by you own previously be kept confidential and not be shared without there consent or approval. I don't think anyone knows what kind of NDA Tudahl has signed or even if he has signed one but it is something to keep in the back of your mind regarding his future book(s).

We're cool. But seriously, what sense would it make for Duane Tudahl to sign a NDA that would interfere with his research or books? He's not dumb or something. And I don't think the Estate paid him so many millions of dollars for his little liner notes that he thought it was worth compromising one of his life's most important and time consuming projects. It actually also does happen that when presented a fishy offer, people decline it. I'm pretty sure Duane would have.

.

This is very much a situation where a case is being made before anyone has any reason to. If, one day, we find in one of these books something that looks fishy, we certainly shall discuss it and its implications in regards to NDA's. So far, we have no reason to throw crazy accusations at Duane like some people have been doing here. It's guilt by mere association. It's not valid, and it's also awfully disrepectful.

databank said:

It actually also does happen that when presented a fishy offer, people decline it. I'm pretty sure Duane would have.

.

.

The 'fame' thing does not work on Duane? (having written notes for a fairly high profile release...)

.

This is very much a situation where a case is being made before anyone has any reason to. If, one day, we find in one of these books something that looks fishy, we certainly shall discuss it and its implications in regards to NDA's. So far, we have no reason to throw crazy accusations at Duane like some people have been doing here. It's guilt by mere association. It's not valid, and it's also awfully disrepectful.

.

So far, perhaps yes.

But in the future?

udo said:

databank said:

It actually also does happen that when presented a fishy offer, people decline it. I'm pretty sure Duane would have.

.

.

The 'fame' thing does not work on Duane? (having written notes for a fairly high profile release...)

You must be pretty anonymous IRL to think writing liner notes on a SDE brings fame to anyone. If anything brought public attention to Duane in the media, it's his books.

Besides his Prince-related projects, Duane also works in documentary and TV stuff. The world of media and fame that makes ordinary people salivate is nothing special to people who work in the arts or the media. I guess by blue collar standards, Duane is already living "the glamorous life", so while some nobodies may be willing to sell their soul for 5 minutes of TV exposure, I very much doubt Duane cares for such things. If nothing else, he appears to be a very down to earth family man.

Besides, do you mean that anyone who is exposed to corruption is necessarily gonna fall for it? What a depressing conception of human beings you have.

.

This is very much a situation where a case is being made before anyone has any reason to. If, one day, we find in one of these books something that looks fishy, we certainly shall discuss it and its implications in regards to NDA's. So far, we have no reason to throw crazy accusations at Duane like some people have been doing here. It's guilt by mere association. It's not valid, and it's also awfully disrepectful.

.

So far, perhaps yes.

But in the future?

This is exactly what I'm talking about. Duane is already judged and sentenced, so it don't matter if we have no evidence, since he has to have done something wrong and it will be exposed (and even if it's not, we know better anyway, don't we?). Shall we go lynch him and burn his house now, so it'll be done and we can move on to the next target? I mean seriously, this line of reasoning is sick and it makes me sick. What a terrible, terrible and miserable life you must all live, always looking over your shoulder, always suspecting everyone of wanting to stab you in the back... People are not, by default, corrupt and dangerous until proven innocent and harmless.

databank said:

IAdoreWeronika said:

databank said:

Maybe they should cancel him. Like some do to people they don't like or disagree with.

Luckily I'm not American or a Millennial so I'm not into this kind of nonsense and was raised to discus and talk about issues and not point fingers and play the "guilty until proven innocent" game that Americans and Millennials so love.