herb4 said:

I don't know how much of a mainstream market there is for a Prince Aftershow collection or something like a full on Crystal Ball 2 crammed with vault tracks. The latter might unearth some unexpected freak surprise hit if they time it and market it right, but I doubt it. Even a live CD/DVD compilation I'm not entirely sure about from a sheer sales standpoint but I could be wrong.

Mainstream? There's no mainstream market for any of it. How many casual buyers are buying W2A deluxe, or SOTT SDE?

We are the money.

I think we tend to OVERTHINK the value of the catalog. I mean to us we can debate what should be out and what shouldnt, live shows, final shows, proteges, unreleased, what should be included. BUT we have to really look at the commercial side, 1999 and Purple Rain, easily his biggest, and they caused the interest in the albums after, I mean ATWIAD can thank PR for most of its sales and the interest and by the PARADE record Prince was already struggling with getting play and sales, so that buying public was quickly going back his early numbers and loyal fans only, he still had the interest and all and was getting things on the radio mtv and touring, but it was dwindling down, he was trying to be a 70's artist like Elton and Stevie in another decade, and though artists did release albums quicker back in the 80s then now of course, in the 70's it was odd if you didnt have an album an year, and it had NOTHING to do with your sales, I mean singer songwriter Harry Chapin when he signed his first record deal in 1972 it was for 7 years 9 albums, and by the time it ended he had 10 albums 8 studio, the other 2 were live, one of the live ones included studio tracks so his deal was fullfilled. But PRINCE as he said was born a little too late, he often said that he was that kind of an artist in a different generation and though he was helped with MTV and videos, his creative output was not fitting long term in the 80's and no way for the 90's but he was not that type of artist that was going to rest on a hit album and take a year to tour and a year to write and a year to record. So with Prince and what is going to get a deluxe reissue etc.. It does make sense for D&P to get one on the merit of hit singles and sales, and also the videos he was doing, extended ones, the whole Diamond and Pearl dancer thing, but also think the argument can be made for the Love Symbol album because of what he had that didnt make that album, even a version with no segue and longer ones, also the Chains of Gold VHS would be a nice thing to see on a blu ray after all this time, and even it would be interesting to even have a live show from this era as he was about to drop PRINCE the name. BATMAN was a big seller but I am not sure that record should get a deluxe reworking because I always felt a good amount of the sales of that record was off the Film more than a proper PRINCE record.

RODSERLING said:

If I were them, I would have, from the start, released the SDE chronologically,

.

Spectacularly bad idea. Nobody's interested in the debut album. It would bomb, and it would lose them money.

.

with a tv/netflix documentary about each album/era.

.

LOL. Some of you lot are utterly delusional.

.

I would have started with FOR YOU, and would have coincided it with the release of the autobiography, and a 2 part documentary about his childhood until signing with WB, and then the making of For You and its release, how it was perceived at the time, etc.

.

Just hilarious. Dude, nobody cares about that shit. Do you see documentaries about Bowie's life as a child? Etc.? At best that kind of thing is a side note along the way. And you think some company is goign to pay good money for a two hour documentary about it? Featuring what? Endless hours of mediocre noodling accompanied by a handful of the photos from that era, and a bunch of talking heads saying he was sooo talented?

BartVanHemelen said:

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

SantanaMaitreya said:

SantanaMaitreya said:

Michael Jackson became a star when he was a child, so it's obvious that his childhood would feature in a documentary about him. With Prince it's different. He came from a broken family and started playing piano at an early age. Interesting background, but not a story in its own right.

Hard disagree.

I think Prince's story is incredibly compelling, mysterious and largely unexplored. Or at least largely reknown.

I don't see any reason why a well done and comprehensive documentary couldn't catch on. Fucking Tiger King of all things set the internet on fire. Even non fans are fascinated by Kevin Smith's stories and anecdotes from Jimmy Fallon. Prince was an incredibly charismatic and interesting individual.

It'll come down to how it's done, who does it and what they focus on. If it's 80% Purple Rain and "oh, yeah, he also did the Super Bowl, changed his name to a symbol and played that R&RHoF solo", then yeah it will suck. But if they can peel back the purple curtain, really reveal who he was, shine a light on the things he kept private and show the world all the things we've seen him do in aftershows, report on his philanthropy, showcase his sense of humor and dig into the music we've all heard on bootlegs, I can see it making some noise.

Absolutely I can.

Even people who don't like him admit his talent, recognize his genius and, at a minimum, find him an eccentric curiosty. He wasn't a "child star" like MJ but he still did a lot at a VERY young age (producing, playing instruments, turning down a record contract, etc.) All before he was old enough to drink. Shit like The Undertaker and Exodus has blown away non fans I know who like rock and funk. Just about EVERYONE I know has been taken aback in one way or another by something I played for them that he did. They just DON'T KNOW because he was so cagey, private and unorthadox in his approach.

He's a household name, a certified rock and roll legend and I think that people might find it interesting to learn about the world's most famous and mainstream underground superstar. If only to see how "weird' he was. Or even not weird. Just show him as a brilliant but flawed human being and one of the hardest working artists in any genre and it could open some eyes.

And ears.

SantanaMaitreya said:

RODSERLING said:

SantanaMaitreya said:

I mean, if you're gonna do an in depth documentary on him, you HAVE to go over his childhood.

RIght?

nextedition said:

but people love to complain....

Fucking hell, they do.

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

fortuneandserendipity said:

Well vinyl is more expensive. Plus it also clutters up the home. And for sound quality 320kbps MP3 beats vinyl.

I guess this is another reason bootlegs are good, as someone who had no interest in them before P passed. They're cheap, only requiring a small flash drive to back them up. And if you want them on vinyl you can't, so you cry instead.

"And for sound quality 320kbps MP3 beats vinyl. "

If you're going to spout absolute nonsense like that, then no-one's going to listen to/believe a single word you say, I'm afraid. Utter nonsense.

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

Et voila. It'd almost be funny if it weren't also so sad.

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

Rimshottbob said:

fortuneandserendipity said:

Well vinyl is more expensive. Plus it also clutters up the home. And for sound quality 320kbps MP3 beats vinyl.

I guess this is another reason bootlegs are good, as someone who had no interest in them before P passed. They're cheap, only requiring a small flash drive to back them up. And if you want them on vinyl you can't, so you cry instead.

"And for sound quality 320kbps MP3 beats vinyl. "

If you're going to spout absolute nonsense like that, then no-one's going to listen to/believe a single word you say, I'm afraid. Utter nonsense.

I guarantee that's the truth. There are articles showing noone has golden ears that can tell the difference between a quality MP3 encoder at 320 bitrate and CD. That's just a fact from unsighted tests.

There are also opinion pieces that demonstrate CD is discernibly different from vinyl (better), due to improved signal to noise ratio and dynamic range, transparent with very few pieces of music, maybe, but the differences are there. So some people may prefer the 'warm' sound of vinyl - because of cozy spinny thing (placebo), or maybe due to the missing frequencies (actual, albeit rare), or maybe down to the occasional crackly sound. But these are limitations inherent to the analogue vinyl format, which do not apply to the clean CD process. Read below.

https://www.fast-and-wide.com/more/wideangle/2969-vinyl-vs-cd-the-wrong-conclusions

and in the record engineer's opinion ... "When running-in new loudspeakers and setting up monitor systems in good control rooms I still use a CD of Michael Jackson’s Dangerous album. A look at the response of several of the tracks on a spectrum analyser makes it clear how it would be impossible to reproduce that sort of bass from vinyl. That CD has some very impressive dynamics, some very low frequencies and an extremely low noise floor".

[Off topic snip - luv4u]

I am very much in the "more is more" camp; I would love to have everything in the vault released. Is that commercially viable ? I have no idea and honestly don`t care.

So far I have really liked 1999 deluxe, SOTT deluxe, Originals and W2a, and the joy of having these releases outweighs any desire I might have to nit pick them