Hmmm, I thought that it was pointless to voice complaints, since estates and record labels etc. don't listen to the "unreasonable demands" from fans. At least that's what a bunch of Prince fans always yell loudly. You're just supposed to shut up and swallow whatever slop you're getting fed.

.

Yet here is an example where an estate and record label did listen to the fans and drastically improved an already announced release: https://superdeluxeeditio...t-blu-ray/ .

.

BTW Paul from SDE.com has managed to start up hiw own Blu-ray audio line and has released about ten albums in the past year or so, often with exclusive mixes. How come some amateur with a website can manage to release that much *physical* product in cooperation with major labels, yet the Prince Estate has managed *two tracks* in two years (or one year if we're generous and only start counting at when the current regime took over) and bungled that release in numerous ways while beating themselves on the chest about what a great job they're doing?

bizzie said:

GustavoRibas said:

According to PrinceVault. com, "The song was recorded on 4 September 2006".

.

*Sigh*. No, this is *according to the estate*. Read the fucking press release.

.

Just read it. This time, Princevault. com probably took it from there. But still no credits on the press release, which proves my point.

bizzie said:

GustavoRibas said:

According to PrinceVault. com, "The song was recorded on 4 September 2006".

.

*Sigh*. No, this is *according to the estate*. Read the fucking press release.

Bort

Neil Young is going to release a "lost" 1970s album called Chrome Dreams: https://superdeluxeeditio...me-dreams/ . Most of its contents have already been released over the years, but not all of it:

.

01 Pocahontas (same version as Hitchhiker)

.

02 Will To Love (same version as Stars ‘n’ Bars)

.

03 Star Of Bethlehem (same version as Stars ‘n’ Bars)

.

04 Like A Hurricane (same version as Stars ‘n’ Bars)

.

05 Too Far Gone (same version as Archives Vol II)

.

06 Hold Back The Tears (previously unreleased except on bootleg)

.

07 Homegrown (same version as Stars ‘n’ Bars — possibly slightly different mix?)

.

08 Captain Kennedy (same version as Hitchhiker?)

.

09 Stringman (same version as Archives Vol II)

.

10 Sedan Delivery (Previously unreleased except on bootleg)

.

11 Powderfinger (same version as Hitchhiker)

.

12 Look Out For My Love (Same version as Comes a Time)

.

And some dweebs call this "terrible value for money"! Dudes, you're getting a "lost" album which includes several unreleased songs! I'd love to get an official Camille, even though I've already heard all of it.

.

Also, just look at all these releases: https://en.wikipedia.org/...g_Archives .

bizzie said:

GustavoRibas said:

According to PrinceVault. com, "The song was recorded on 4 September 2006".

.

*Sigh*. No, this is *according to the estate*. Read the fucking press release.

Bizzie/Bart, you are always condescending when people write stupid stuff. Well, this time you wrote something stupid.

PV lists the date as 4 September 2006. Therefore, it's reasonable to cite PV.

The fact that PV got the information from the Estate doesn't mean it's wrong to cite PrinceVault.

*ALL* information on PrinceVault is ultimately attributable to a primary source, right? If your logic held true (i.e. you can't cite PV if it got its info elsewhere), that would mean no one could ever cite PV because everything on PV originally came from an outside source.

lurker316 said:

bizzie said:

.

*Sigh*. No, this is *according to the estate*. Read the fucking press release.

Bizzie/Bart, you are always condescending when people write stupid stuff. Well, this time you wrote something stupid.

PV lists the date as 4 September 2006. Therefore, it's reasonable to cite PV.

The fact that PV got the information from the Estate doesn't mean it's wrong to cite PrinceVault.

*ALL* information on PrinceVault is ultimately attributable to a primary source, right? If your logic held true (i.e. you can't cite PV if it got its info elsewhere), that would mean no one could ever cite PV because everything on PV originally came from an outside source.

.

This is one of the problems with PV: it doesn't clearly cite its sources. In some cases there is a reference to an article, or perhaps a note at the bottom. In general, it can be assumed the data originates from researchers like Duane Tudahl, Uptown's work, etc.

.

But in this case, we know where the date comes from: the less than reliable current regime at the estate. I say "less than reliable", since we've seen conflicting dates between the original presentation of tracks at the Celebration vs. the dates on the tape.

.

To me, saying "according to PV" has a certain weight, and in this case I would hesitate to assign that weight to data that is coming from a not very reliable source.

.

Also, always try to go to the source. Far too often Prince fans post links to second generation reporting, crappy screenshots, etc. Or even worse: paraphrasing badly remembered tweets or Instagram posts etc.

.

In this case, here is the source: https://shorefire.com/rel...es-singles .

bizzie said:

bizzie said:

lurker316 said:

Bizzie/Bart, you are always condescending when people write stupid stuff. Well, this time you wrote something stupid.

PV lists the date as 4 September 2006. Therefore, it's reasonable to cite PV.

The fact that PV got the information from the Estate doesn't mean it's wrong to cite PrinceVault.

*ALL* information on PrinceVault is ultimately attributable to a primary source, right? If your logic held true (i.e. you can't cite PV if it got its info elsewhere), that would mean no one could ever cite PV because everything on PV originally came from an outside source.

.

This is one of the problems with PV: it doesn't clearly cite its sources. In some cases there is a reference to an article, or perhaps a note at the bottom. In general, it can be assumed the data originates from researchers like Duane Tudahl, Uptown's work, etc.

.

But in this case, we know where the date comes from: the less than reliable current regime at the estate. I say "less than reliable", since we've seen conflicting dates between the original presentation of tracks at the Celebration vs. the dates on the tape.

.

.
I'd just like to add that just because we have a photo of a tape box with a date on it and the Estate is reporting a different recording date for a song, it's not neccessarily wrong. We can't say that for sure before having a complete catalog of the entire vault (and I guess even the Estate is still years away from that stage). There could be more than one recordings of the same song, therefore there could very easily be another tape with a different date...
.
Transparency would be of key importance. Whenever the Estate releases something they should absolutely make sure they include ALL information they have about that track, including explanations for any alteration (be it an edit or a different mix or whatever) and photos of the tape boxes too.
.

bwaaatch said:

bizzie said:

.

This is one of the problems with PV: it doesn't clearly cite its sources. In some cases there is a reference to an article, or perhaps a note at the bottom. In general, it can be assumed the data originates from researchers like Duane Tudahl, Uptown's work, etc.

.

But in this case, we know where the date comes from: the less than reliable current regime at the estate. I say "less than reliable", since we've seen conflicting dates between the original presentation of tracks at the Celebration vs. the dates on the tape.

.

To me, saying "according to PV" has a certain weight, and in this case I would hesitate to assign that weight to data that is coming from a not very reliable source.

.

Also, always try to go to the source. Far too often Prince fans post links to second generation reporting, crappy screenshots, etc. Or even worse: paraphrasing badly remembered tweets or Instagram posts etc.

.

In this case, here is the source: https://shorefire.com/rel...es-singles .

Bizzie, if you really are Bort, I’d just wanted to say that I always enjoyed the old Bart, but that this response seems to show a new restraint in your tone and I like it even more. I could cite some old Bart posts for contrast, but too lazy! Point is, you have such valuable contributions and it’s great when they can be conveyed in this positive way, which surely aids the whole community.

Yes he is.

[Edited 7/24/23 0:30am]

Kares said:

.
I'd just like to add that just because we have a photo of a tape box with a date on it and the Estate is reporting a different recording date for a song, it's not neccessarily wrong.

.

I'm talking about the differences between the dates that were mentioned in the first report of the listening sessions at the celebration vs the dates that the estate presented later. Of course those initial reports could have been wrong, but IIRC there were multiple errors (including the estate not knowing one of the tracks they played was a cover of an Aretha Franklin song, which shows their utter lack of research), and considering the shitshow that was the release of these two tracks I'm far more inclined to presume the estate got shit wrong in that presentation.

.

But even under the previous regime the estate has been far too secretive. Still, at least then we got photos of tape boxes.

bizzie said:

Kares said:

.
I'd just like to add that just because we have a photo of a tape box with a date on it and the Estate is reporting a different recording date for a song, it's not neccessarily wrong.

.

I'm talking about the differences between the dates that were mentioned in the first report of the listening sessions at the celebration vs the dates that the estate presented later. Of course those initial reports could have been wrong, but IIRC there were multiple errors (including the estate not knowing one of the tracks they played was a cover of an Aretha Franklin song, which shows their utter lack of research), and considering the shitshow that was the release of these two tracks I'm far more inclined to presume the estate got shit wrong in that presentation.

.

But even under the previous regime the estate has been far too secretive. Still, at least then we got photos of tape boxes.

.
Fair points.

Where can you buy these?

Gustavm said:

Where can you buy these?

.
Good question
The answer is: nowhere, if you'd want a physical format. You can only stream or download them. One of them only in mono, and it's an edit too. Say thanks to the Estate.

.

[Edited 7/27/23 1:44am]

bwaaatch said:

bizzie said:

In this case, here is the source: https://shorefire.com/releases/entry/npg-records-releases-prince-vault-series-singles .

Bizzie, if you really are Bart, I’d just wanted to say that I always enjoyed the old Bart, but that this response seems to show a new restraint in your tone and I like it even more. I could cite some old Bart posts for contrast, but too lazy! Point is, you have such valuable contributions and it’s great when they can be conveyed in this positive way, which surely aids the whole community.

Fully agree.

6 days in August and still no news.

except for another error on the official Prince instagram page, again...

''Electronic Intercourse"

MIRvmn1 said:

Can we hope for an announcement today since it's august 7th? or maybe it will happen 17th or 27th

August 8 and counting.

don't hope for the 'seven' thing...

my guess is that it either will be by the end of the month, or not at all

Vannormal said:

MIRvmn1 said:

Can we hope for an announcement today since it's august 7th? or maybe it will happen 17th or 27th

August 8 and counting.

don't hope for the 'seven' thing...

my guess is that it either will be by the end of the month, or not at all

.
Well, at least McMillan announced he was chosen by God. The man has serious issues and a thick skin...

31 is the new 7

.

.

sigh

Catch 32

ShellyMcG said:

I haven't been following this all that closely but was it ever confirmed that we'd get an announcement in August or is this just going by information from a third party source?

I feel like at this point, we don't even know that much.

ShellyMcG said:

Welcome 2 The Dusk...

A third of the way through the month and still nothing.

SO I HAVE A THEORY....

And yes it's probably nothing. BUT...

On an artist's YouTube channel, there are playlists, but their albums are also there. It's typically newest first, then it goes backwards. When you come to the beginning of their album catalog, it continues to singles or even random Very Best and Greatest Hits compilations, the one-off demo releases (Do Me, Baby, I Feel For You), singles from PaaM, Gett Off, etc all random shit.

So today I'm talking to Fenwick on the phone. I'm cruising the albums for reference real quick. And I noticed something.

So when Purple Rain was re-released, the old one got pushed to before For You (in that misc section), and the newer one is closer to recent stuff. However, 1999 only the original release in 1982 space. (The SDE isn't there at all.) Sorta weird.

Then I realized - Parade is pushed back to that misc section. But for what reason? There hasn't been a new version of it come out, so why would the original be in that misc section with the other been-replaced stuff? I thought, HUH! Is this an unintentional hint that Parade SDE could actually be the next release? It's always been Parade or Diamonds and Pearls that are up for debate.

A good source close to it all told me that there is a Parade SDE totally done. I think a lot of us here know this, so that's not a secret. But why would the regular Parade be suddenly pushed to that misc section, leaving a big hole after ATWIAD?

Now listen, having said that, SOTT is still in its normal place as well as the SDE being in the more recent area.

So it is just the weirdness of YouTube, or is Parade being put in a different area a hint to something big something? That was my theory.

My theory is that we all have way-than-more-than-enough knowledge of Prince's music and history to conjure a super-solid purplemedia release plan, but choose to bitch about what is being otherwise decided because we are all poor.

nayroo2002 said:

My theory is that we all have way-than-more-than-enough knowledge of Prince's music and history to conjure a super-solid purplemedia release plan, but choose to bitch about what is being otherwise decided because we are all poor.

Gheez, at least my theory was hopeful.