Do you think people will still remember him once 90 % of his core audience is dead and gone in 2051?

Well, I guess at least as much as kids today know John Coltrane, Jim Morrisson, Jimi Hendrix, Janis Joplin, Elvis Presley or Bob Marley, meaning if you're even remotely interested in old music, you will know. 2051 isn't in a very long time.

As much as any other old dead musician. 30 years from now, he'll be appreciated. But in 100 years, may be a different story. He'll never be OMG IT'S PRINCE all the time.

You think about the greats like Elvis, Lennon, Fitzgerald, Mozart, etc... they're still highley regarded. But there's not a lot of material 40 years after Lennon's death.

Prince could potentially have music coming out at that time. Will there be a market for it? Are people - our grandchildren or great grandchildren - going to give a shit?

Eh, maybe. We'll never really know.

"i've seen the future and it will be"

RODSERLING said:

According to serious scientists studies, by 2051, you will be listening to music via a chip in your brain. No more physical format. No more streaming, because that won't be ecological. The charts and sales will be based on the numbers of neurons used during the listening of a song. One sale will be equal to 150 millions neuronal connections. Prince songs are so complicated, that you need to use more neurons to understand it than any other artists in pop music history. Then Prince will rule the charts all over again. So, yes he will matter more than ever, if that's the sense of your question. Now, the real question is : will he still matter in 2086? I'm perplexed. Because by then, human brain would have already been replaced by robotic brain. And I don't know on what will be based charts and sales.

Prince's songs are not complicated. Not by a longshot. Occasionally clever and defintiely more creativly arranged that his simple pop peers, but hardly complicated. The Cross is not complicated, for example. Gett Off is not complicated. The much-loved song Sign 'O' the Times has three chords only and they are the very common i-iv-v progression. The songs of Sting either solo or with the Police are often more complex in terms of musical language and structure. That doesn't make them better because people like what they like and tastes are thus subjective. What YOU mean by "complicated" is closer to something objective and Prince's songs are not that.

As to the original question, he will be remembered more than his peers MUSICALLY. In terms of non-musical aspects Madonna and Michael Jackson might be there with him, but in terms of art he stands pretty tall.

steakfinger said:

Without a doubt.

-

Consider:

-

As of this moment in 2021 It's easier for you and me to access (and be exposed to) all of the music for from the past (Mozart, Miles Davis, The Beatles, Hendrix, James Brown, Michael Jackson, and Weird Al, Beyonce) than it ever was before.

-

Think about that: It's easier for me to listen to a Beatles album now, than at the zenith of there popularity.

-

Because of that, music is less and less divided by time and space. It's all blended together in the instant now of cyberspace. Everything is at your streaming finger tips.

Youth today can barely discern if MJ's Thriller was from 2, 20, or 40 years ago because they have instant access to a pristine version of the song/album.

-

Icons are outselling and outshining many modern acts. So it is (and forever will be) with Prince.

[Edited 10/2/21 15:28pm]

[Edited 10/2/21 15:29pm]

Great music last 4ever.

donnadiavolo said:

Thirty years from now? Certainly.

He was bigger than Elvis (a much-less talented performer), more talented than MJ (or nearly everyone), was frankly beautiful, and appealed to both men and women throughout the world.

We might not like to think about it, but some of his songs have become standards (Nothing Compares 2 U, Purple Rain, Raspberry Beret) among the massive amount of music he created.

His artistry has been (and will be) studied for many years.

If people are still visiting Graceland 44 years after Elvis' death, I'm sure Paisley Park will remain as a functional museum, memorial and (hopefully) educational facility.

funkman88 said:

Do you think people will still remember him once 90 % of his core audience is dead and gone in 2051?

.

Why would I care if Prince mattered, even in 2051?

You are too obsessed with irrelevant stuff.

RODSERLING said:

Oh, yes. Most definitely. His legacy is cemented.

Yes of course. But going off his Spotify monthly listeners count, it's going to be a steady road...

herb4 said:

Oh, yes. Most definitely. His legacy is cemented.

steakfinger said:

RODSERLING said:

According to serious scientists studies, by 2051, you will be listening to music via a chip in your brain. No more physical format. No more streaming, because that won't be ecological. The charts and sales will be based on the numbers of neurons used during the listening of a song. One sale will be equal to 150 millions neuronal connections. Prince songs are so complicated, that you need to use more neurons to understand it than any other artists in pop music history. Then Prince will rule the charts all over again. So, yes he will matter more than ever, if that's the sense of your question. Now, the real question is : will he still matter in 2086? I'm perplexed. Because by then, human brain would have already been replaced by robotic brain. And I don't know on what will be based charts and sales.

Prince's songs are not complicated. Not by a longshot. Occasionally clever and defintiely more creativly arranged that his simple pop peers, but hardly complicated. The Cross is not complicated, for example. Gett Off is not complicated. The much-loved song Sign 'O' the Times has three chords only and they are the very common i-iv-v progression. The songs of Sting either solo or with the Police are often more complex in terms of musical language and structure. That doesn't make them better because people like what they like and tastes are thus subjective. What YOU mean by "complicated" is closer to something objective and Prince's songs are not that.

As to the original question, he will be remembered more than his peers MUSICALLY. In terms of non-musical aspects Madonna and Michael Jackson might be there with him, but in terms of art he stands pretty tall.

Prince's songs are not complicated in the traditional (and quite antique IMO) perspective of musical notation and melodies. But they are complicated in the arrangement and mix of textures, and his attempts at subverting or mixing his musical influences in startling ways. He was always trying to combine bizarre sound textures and volume levels, combine soulful musicianship with robotic mechanized precision, peel away the comfortable bass and rhythm tracks to reveal the skeleton of a musical concept (the entire overriding idea of the sound of the album "Sign o The Times"). He took the graphic design idea of white space and minimalism and applied it to sonic ambitions. "Sign o' the Times" the song is case in point.

But just listen to the resultant mix textures and "sonic imagery" invoked by "The Ball". That is complex. But not on paper as musical notes.

I bolded "trying" because many times his song sounds would fall flat to me. I think "Cinammon Girl" sounds awful and is simple in every way. But when they hit, they were so cool.

I think you could draw an analogy to contemporary art vs historic art (for example a minimalist sculpture with an entire potential essay of underlying concept vs a photo real oil painting portrait of a real person.)

RODSERLING said:

According to serious scientists studies, by 2051, you will be listening to music via a chip in your brain. No more physical format. No more streaming, because that won't be ecological. The charts and sales will be based on the numbers of neurons used during the listening of a song. One sale will be equal to 150 millions neuronal connections. Prince songs are so complicated, that you need to use more neurons to understand it than any other artists in pop music history. Then Prince will rule the charts all over again. So, yes he will matter more than ever, if that's the sense of your question. Now, the real question is : will he still matter in 2086? I'm perplexed. Because by then, human brain would have already been replaced by robotic brain. And I don't know on what will be based charts and sales.

-

You and your constant use of like 'charts and sales' and numbers and figures etc. LOL

I like that kinda shit to be honest.

-

Since the Family will stretch out the releases.

I think Prince's cultural stock will only rise in the future.

ufoclub said:

steakfinger said:

Prince's songs are not complicated. Not by a longshot. Occasionally clever and defintiely more creativly arranged that his simple pop peers, but hardly complicated. The Cross is not complicated, for example. Gett Off is not complicated. The much-loved song Sign 'O' the Times has three chords only and they are the very common i-iv-v progression. The songs of Sting either solo or with the Police are often more complex in terms of musical language and structure. That doesn't make them better because people like what they like and tastes are thus subjective. What YOU mean by "complicated" is closer to something objective and Prince's songs are not that.

As to the original question, he will be remembered more than his peers MUSICALLY. In terms of non-musical aspects Madonna and Michael Jackson might be there with him, but in terms of art he stands pretty tall.

Prince's songs are not complicated in the traditional (and quite antique IMO) perspective of musical notation and melodies. But they are complicated in the arrangement and mix of textures, and his attempts at subverting or mixing his musical influences in startling ways. He was always trying to combine bizarre sound textures and volume levels, combine soulful musicianship with robotic mechanized precision, peel away the comfortable bass and rhythm tracks to reveal the skeleton of a musical concept (the entire overriding idea of the sound of the album "Sign o The Times"). He took the graphic design idea of white space and minimalism and applied it to sonic ambitions. "Sign o' the Times" the song is case in point.

But just listen to the resultant mix textures and "sonic imagery" invoked by "The Ball". That is complex. But not on paper as musical notes.

I bolded "trying" because many times his song sounds would fall flat to me. I think "Cinammon Girl" sounds awful and is simple in every way. But when they hit, they were so cool.

I think you could draw an analogy to contemporary art vs historic art (for example a minimalist sculpture with an entire potential essay of underlying concept vs a photo real oil painting portrait of a real person.)

-

I kinda agree.

I do think in his ballads he's a very great and unique melodic songwriter (and sometimes in his more poppy songs too, like 'Raspberry Beret' or 'Little Red Corvette' for instance.

I find Prince first of all a fantastic arranger!

And because of his 'funk' that is often very 'dry', 'sparse', 'tight', 'drilled', as if it all sounds metronomically contagious (to me, and that's what i like about it the most).

To me, Prince was a master in creating space around the notes.

Leaving air/space for us to fill-in imaginative continuing sounds as you wish.

He knows how to embellish simple chord structures and make them sound complex(er than we think).

Another important thing to me is that he's very inventurous in off-key sounds/chords, and also immens colourful in the use of the most conventional instruments like drums, keys & guitars.

Like, listen to his guitar sound during the Purple Rain era, the innovative sound in use of drum computers, the way his accoustic drums sound in for instance '' Crystal Ball'' and ''In A Large Room With No Light'', very un-produced, but still overal unique and extraordinairy.

For me he is a true arranger and sound wizzard on all levels.

As if he often produced or arranged a song with the performance in mind for live use.

Therefor i found his songwriting rather playful and uplifting melodic, sometimes even childish (like lullaby melodies, but still he knew how to make it funky and digestable).

Though, compare him with Leonard Cohen, Burt Bacharach, Randy Newman, even Steely Dan, Kate Bush or Joni Mitchell, etc.

All these artists have a more variety of complex styles and writing imho.

Quite different actually, not easy to compare even.

Sure Prince has rightfully his own share in the pop, rock and R'nB songwriting history.

He deserves his place amongst the greats (for various other reasons too).

-

Thats a question I have because I live in Brasil, and Prince never had many fans here. How is his legacy doing in the USA right now? Is he respected/talked about as much as Bowie or Freddie Mercury, for example? Or more known in a specific circle, like Earth Wind and Fire and Curtis?

[Edited 10/4/21 9:11am]

funkman88 said:

Do you think people will still remember him once 90 % of his core audience is dead and gone in 2051?

Does Bach? Hendryx? Sammy Davis Jr?