The thread about which vault songs could be hits in 2026 made me think of something. For about a decade between 1984 and 1993, Prince was an in-demand songwriter/producer in the music industry, writing all those songs for other artists. A practice that abruptly stopped, with a few exceptions, in 1994, when he decided he didn't want to give away his songs' master anymore.

.

Nevertheless, there's a ton of unreleased songs in the vault, some the Estate could try and shop around to new artists to rerecord (most likely from scratch in most cases, though some may choose to use parts of the original multitracks) and sing. I suspect that would be a better way to make "hits" than releasing decades-old tunes as such.

.

Now IDK whether that could work, but I suspect quite a few contemporary artists may feel honored to release an exclusive Prince track. And the Estate could always release the originals afterwards, getting more interest into them by having them sung by others first.

.

I know this idea may shock those who know me as a purist, but as as it doesn't involve tinkering with P's versions and may help getting those out later, I wouldn't mind such a practice.

.

Opinions?

databank said:

ShellyMcG said:

Nice idea, I like it. I agree it could be a good chance of getting exposure and raise interest among younger generations.

thisisreece said:

I think is a bad idea. One, first And foremost, as fans, I’m pretty sure we don’t want this. We want to hear Prince’s vault from Prince. Two, the prestige totally evaporates when it’s not Prince giving this song away. There’s little honour in being a marketing tool for an estate. Sure, some covers while Prince was alive were genuine covers - but the agency then lies with the artist to choose to cover the song. I like that Elvis Costello did Moonbeam Levels live, which shows an appreaciation of his unreleased catalogue from a similarly revered artist, but to be given unreleased songs feels schlocky.

I hear the argument. It's sound.

.

I think this would very much depend how the Estate and the people running it are perceived within the industry. If the perception is similar to what it is in the fandom, well...

But it's very possible that it's different. We see things from an audience's perspective. In-industry perspectives may be vastly different.

.

IDK, when the Hendrix Estate commissioned the Power of Soul tribute album, many great artists answered the call (including Prince). Granted , it was covers not first releases, but I guess the point I'm trying to make is if the artists perceive the Prince Estate as honorable, they may feel honored. If they don't, well...

.

But OK, I submitted the idea being ready for people to think it's a terrible idea, and maybe it is. Let's see what others say.

.

On a sidenote, Costello wasn't the only one "covering" Prince bootlegs. It's also happened—studio or live—with In A Large Room With No Light, Extraloveable and Electric Intercourse (incidentally, each by 2 or 3 artists). I always suspected this might be the reason Prince decided to pull those out of the vault and reappropriate them (at least on stage for EI)—the timing was particularly revealing for Extraloveable, which got released soon after 2 "covers" made their way to YT. Vibrator was also "covered" circa 2002 (and recently rereleased on that covers comp), but I guess Prince wasn't gonna release his own version of that one no matter what

[Edited 3/3/26 23:40pm]

databank said:

ShellyMcG said:

Dont like it.

Not gonna lie, the idea of shopping Vault tracks to other artists is actually pretty interesting as a way to monetize the Vault.

Prince himself gave songs away too.

That said, as a fan I still want to hear the original Prince version.
So if they ever go this route, the OG version must be included too.

My opinion is they shouldn't fuck around with his material and especially not have some 15 minute no talent nobody rape his music.
His music should be left alone and only releasesd as is without outsiders or less then mediocre acts and producers downgrade it.
Having established acts doing his music is also not that great especially because most if not all of his sonbgs in the vault were recoerded with a specific artist in minnd or just for himself, then having not the artist he intended it for record it is even worse than them doing those horrible covers like the ones MAriah Carrey and Alicia Keys did or some corny karaoke act like Bruno Marrs would do.

databank said:

The thread about which vault songs could be hits in 2026 made me think of something. For about a decade between 1984 and 1993, Prince was an in-demand songwriter/producer in the music industry, writing all those songs for other artists. A practice that abruptly stopped, with a few exceptions, in 1994, when he decided he didn't want to give away his songs' master anymore.

.

Nevertheless, there's a ton of unreleased songs in the vault, some the Estate could try and shop around to new artists to rerecord (most likely from scratch in most cases, though some may choose to use parts of the original multitracks) and sing. I suspect that would be a better way to make "hits" than releasing decades-old tunes as such.

.

Now IDK whether that could work, but I suspect quite a few contemporary artists may feel honored to release an exclusive Prince track. And the Estate could always release the originals afterwards, getting more interest into them by having them sung by others first.

.

I know this idea may shock those who know me as a purist, but as as it doesn't involve tinkering with P's versions and may help getting those out later, I wouldn't mind such a practice.

.

Opinions?

[Edited 3/4/26 9:50am]

databank said:

The thread about which vault songs could be hits in 2026 made me think of something. For about a decade between 1984 and 1993, Prince was an in-demand songwriter/producer in the music industry, writing all those songs for other artists. A practice that abruptly stopped, with a few exceptions, in 1994, when he decided he didn't want to give away his songs' master anymore.

.

Nevertheless, there's a ton of unreleased songs in the vault, some the Estate could try and shop around to new artists to rerecord (most likely from scratch in most cases, though some may choose to use parts of the original multitracks) and sing. I suspect that would be a better way to make "hits" than releasing decades-old tunes as such.

.

Now IDK whether that could work, but I suspect quite a few contemporary artists may feel honored to release an exclusive Prince track. And the Estate could always release the originals afterwards, getting more interest into them by having them sung by others first.

.

I know this idea may shock those who know me as a purist, but as as it doesn't involve tinkering with P's versions and may help getting those out later, I wouldn't mind such a practice.

.

Opinions?

.
I welcome any ideas that spark further thinking and discussions as they can all contribute to better decisionmaking, even if an idea ends up being deemed bad.
.
Actually, I can imagine giving songs to new artists to cover to work, so I kind of like the basic idea, however, I would consider an ethical and a legal aspect of it as well:
– is it ethical towards P to give away one of his compositions/lyrics to someone without his consent BEFORE the world gets to hear his original recording of it? My anwswer is no. I'm not against giving away some of his songs, but I would definitely make sure that P's original is released first – not only as a fairness gesture to him, but also to avoid the new cover being mistaken for some AI-generated shit "in the style of Prince" (and I'm sure there'll be plenty of those soon).
– is it legal for the Estate to give away his unreleased songs? It is, of course, but we shouldn't forget that if P would still be alive, this would NOT be the case. It is illegal to cover an unpublished work without the writer's consent, exactly because the law recognises the creator's right to decide to publish something or not, which leads us to the previus question.
.
Now whether the Estate should give away actual P-recorded tracks for others to work with: that's a strict no-no, if you ask me. And frankly, I'm surprised you're bringing this up, Databank, as you've always been very much against the so-called 'Frankenstein-versions', and I share your ill-feelings towards them. But would it be any different if a new artist would create their own 'Frankenstein-versions' by adding their own parts to P's? I think this is a very bad idea, sorry. (It reminds me of the outrageous case when Kenny Gorelick had the audacity to "duet" with the late great Louis Armstrong – although I'd very much prefer to forget ever hearing it.)
Furthermore, it would also complicate things legally, considering that Warner Music has the right of first refusal for all pre-1996 vault tracks, and they would have to give up their rights for a multitrack to be used by Universal, for example, which would theoretically block them from releasing P's own version in the future (altough such tricky dealings have been done in the past, as we know about Sugar Walls, for instance).

[Edited 3/4/26 9:15am]

databank said:

ShellyMcG said:

Having a bunch of other artists, old and new, big and small, do covers of Prince's greatest hits. Sure, it's not exactly what I would want. But I think it could be an interesting project if you had the right people covering the right songs. Bruce Springsteen doing Purple Rain, Chromeo doing Dirty Mind, Janelle Monae doing Kiss, etc. And of course, the estate could make the whole package more worthwhile if they included a couple of bonus tracks from the vault or something.

.
Now that's a real bad idea in my humble opinion, sorry! We've had plenty of P-covers already and they all suck. Even the most respected artists failed miserably trying to cover P, whether it was Billy Cobham or Aretha Franklin or Herbie Hancock or Eric Clapton or whomever. The only P-cover I really like is Amanda Palmer's Purple Rain. That was truly done from the heart. Most others were lazy and arrogant, thinking they are good enough to pull it off without any studying and proper rehearsals.

[Edited 3/4/26 9:54am]

Kares said:

ShellyMcG said:

Having a bunch of other artists, old and new, big and small, do covers of Prince's greatest hits. Sure, it's not exactly what I would want. But I think it could be an interesting project if you had the right people covering the right songs. Bruce Springsteen doing Purple Rain, Chromeo doing Dirty Mind, Janelle Monae doing Kiss, etc. And of course, the estate could make the whole package more worthwhile if they included a couple of bonus tracks from the vault or something.

.
Now that's a real bad idea in my humble opinion, sorry! We've had plenty of P-covers already and they all suck. Even the most respected artists failed miserably trying to cover P, whether it was Billy Cobham or Aretha Franklin or Herbie Hancock or Eric Clapton or whomever. The only P-cover I really like is Amanda Palmer's Purple Rain. That was truly done from the heart. Most others were lazy and arrogant, thinking they are good enough to pull it off without any studying and proper rehearsals.

[Edited 3/4/26 9:54am]

Agreed, they did this a couple of times with Jimi Hendrix and even Prince did this really bad versioj of Red House. All those albums suck ass so for Prince it would be even worse lol.
All those tributes were nice of the artists to do when Prince died but honestly I hope to never hear shit again, the only one that made me feel somethig was that David Gilmour who incorporated a part of Purple Rain into Confortably Numb, that was honorable.

[Edited 3/4/26 10:00am]

Kares said:

databank said:

The thread about which vault songs could be hits in 2026 made me think of something. For about a decade between 1984 and 1993, Prince was an in-demand songwriter/producer in the music industry, writing all those songs for other artists. A practice that abruptly stopped, with a few exceptions, in 1994, when he decided he didn't want to give away his songs' master anymore.

.

Nevertheless, there's a ton of unreleased songs in the vault, some the Estate could try and shop around to new artists to rerecord (most likely from scratch in most cases, though some may choose to use parts of the original multitracks) and sing. I suspect that would be a better way to make "hits" than releasing decades-old tunes as such.

.

Now IDK whether that could work, but I suspect quite a few contemporary artists may feel honored to release an exclusive Prince track. And the Estate could always release the originals afterwards, getting more interest into them by having them sung by others first.

.

I know this idea may shock those who know me as a purist, but as as it doesn't involve tinkering with P's versions and may help getting those out later, I wouldn't mind such a practice.

.

Opinions?

.
I welcome any ideas that spark further thinking and discussions as they can all contribute to better decisionmaking, even if an idea ends up being deemed bad.
.
Actually, I can imagine giving songs to new artists to cover to work, so I kind of like the basic idea, however, I would consider an ethical and a legal aspect of it as well:
– is it ethical towards P to give away one of his compositions/lyrics to someone without his consent BEFORE the world gets to hear his original recording of it? My anwswer is no. I'm not against giving away some of his songs, but I would definitely make sure that P's original is released first – not only as a fairness gesture to him, but also to avoid the new cover being mistaken for some AI-generated shit "in the style of Prince" (and I'm sure there'll be plenty of those soon).

– is it legal for the Estate to give away his unreleased songs? It is, of course, but we shouldn't forget that if P would still be alive, this would NOT be the case. It is illegal to cover an unpublished work without the writer's consent, exactly because the law recognises the creator's right to decide to publish something or not, which leads us to the previus question.
.
Now whether the Estate should give away actual P-recorded tracks for others to work with: that's a strict no-no, if you ask me. And frankly, I'm surprised you're bringing this up, Databank, as you've always been very much against the so-called 'Frankenstein-versions', and I share your ill-feelings towards them. But would it be any different if a new artist would create their own 'Frankenstein-versions' by adding their own parts to P's? I think this is a very bad idea, sorry. (It reminds me of the outrageous case when Kenny Gorelick had the audacity to "duet" with the late great Louis Armstrong – although I'd very much prefer to forget ever hearing it.)
Furthermore, it would also complicate things legally, considering that Warner Music has the right of first refusal for all pre-1996 vault tracks, and they would have to give up their rights for a multitrack to be used by Universal, for example, which would theoretically block them from releasing P's own version in the future (altough such tricky dealings have been done in the past, as we know about Sugar Walls, for instance).

[Edited 3/4/26 9:15am]

TBH, I don't know anything the Estate did so far was "ethical", but I see where you're coming from.

.

Just to clarify where I stand about the "frankensteining", I think everyone here knows how opposed to it I usually am (whether official or fanmade)there are a few grey areas where I can tolerate the approach. This would be one because the final product by ARTIST X couldn't possibly be confused with the original. Another one (though it was rarely ever used to great results), is posthumous remixes of released songs by another established artist, like what Bill Laswell did with Bob Marley, because that usually cannot be confused with the originals either (now let me be clear: I'd rather they don't do this with Prince's music ).

.

TBH I only suggested the idea of using P's backing tracks in passing, because it was common when he gave away songs, but I don't think that would be the most interesting approach for any musician doing it. Regarding the legalities of it all, I gotta admit I hadn't thought about it. Warner could only object to the use of a recording, though, not a composition.

ShellyMcG said:

databank said:

. I see your point. . What I would (cautiously) counterargue is: . 1/ I, as a fan, don't care to hear those "covers" much, The idea was more to answer to others' préoccupations about legacy and monetization. Though I'm sure it could be fun in some cases (IDK, Khruangbin, Chromeo, Say She She or Louis Cole could probably do something interesting with a Prince song, for example), but it's not something I need, of course. . 2/ Whether talented acts would be interested or not remains to be seen. You name big names, but it could also be smaller acts with devoted fanbases (usually, nowadays, those are much, much more interesting than the big stars). . 3/ Back in the 80s and early 90s, I guess many people who didn't own any Prince record did own a record with a Prince song on it. Did it get any of them into Prince? I don't know. But some albums with one or two Prince songs on them were big sellers. . 4/ While Prince wrote for some very talented artists who were songwriters in their own right, and for some really big names as well, he also gave songs to quite a few second, or third rate acts. He wasn't very picky himself (I don't know that he ever refused to give a song to anyone who asked), he was merely interested in the paycheck and, perhaps in some cases, the exposure. . 5/ If the current Estate showed any interest in releasing vault material, I may not even have had this idea. But since, according to some insiders info, vault releases are now considered a waste of money, I was trying to think out of the box to reinstate interest in the material, with the endgame always being to release new Prince records. [Edited 3/4/26 2:58am]

1. See. Even you're not particularly interested in this kind of thing. And it was your idea . 2. Smaller acts like Chromeo or Mayer Hawthorne may be capable of doing interesting covers but like I said earlier, their versions would likely sound nothing like the Prince originals. So what's the point in having them cover the song in the first place? I'd rather just hear the Prince version. 3. This isn't the 80s anymore. Prince is not a popular artist among the youth and his particular brand of music does not appeal to the youth of today. Now, maybe if someone like Bruno Mars or something covered it, it could potentially be a medium sized hit with the right promotion. But again this leads me back to what I said earlier, do we, as Prince fans, have any interest in hearing the big popstars of today covering unreleased Prince songs? Maybe some do but I feel that the majority of us don't because the modern popstars that appeal to the youth and are capable of selling records nowadays are shit. And if we're talking about the likes of Chromeo or other smaller artists doing it instead then any kind of sales potential is further reduced because those smaller artists are considered "smaller" for a reason. They don't sell in big numbers. And releasing an unknown Prince cover isn't going to help. 4. True. But that was when there was a paycheck there to be made. Giving out songs to lesser artists won't make you any money these days. All it does is further aggravate a fan base who just want to hear Prince's unreleased material performed by nobody else but Prince. Besides, repeating Prince's bad business decisions is probably not the best way to honour the man's legacy. 5. I understand why you're making these suggestions and I appreciate the effort. As fans, we're all kind of just throwing shit at the wall to see what sticks. In the absence of any actual releases from the vault, it's all we've got. I don't think this particular idea is a good one though. You mentioned the Jimi Hendrix tribute album earlier. I think something like that would be a much better idea. Having a bunch of other artists, old and new, big and small, do covers of Prince's greatest hits. Sure, it's not exactly what I would want. But I think it could be an interesting project if you had the right people covering the right songs. Bruce Springsteen doing Purple Rain, Chromeo doing Dirty Mind, Janelle Monae doing Kiss, etc. And of course, the estate could make the whole package more worthwhile if they included a couple of bonus tracks from the vault or something.

As you said, it was indeed throwing shit to the wall to see what would stick. So far, most of the feedback isn't too hot about the idea, so OK, fair enough.

JorisE73 said:

Kares said:

.
Now that's a real bad idea in my humble opinion, sorry! We've had plenty of P-covers already and they all suck. Even the most respected artists failed miserably trying to cover P, whether it was Billy Cobham or Aretha Franklin or Herbie Hancock or Eric Clapton or whomever. The only P-cover I really like is Amanda Palmer's Purple Rain. That was truly done from the heart. Most others were lazy and arrogant, thinking they are good enough to pull it off without any studying and proper rehearsals.

[Edited 3/4/26 9:54am]

Agreed, they did this a couple of times with Jimi Hendrix and even Prince did this really bad versioj of Red House. All those albums suck ass so for Prince it would be even worse lol.
All those tributes were nice of the artists to do when Prince died but honestly I hope to never hear shit again, the only one that made me feel somethig was that David Gilmour who incorporated a part of Purple Rain into Confortably Numb, that was honorable.

[Edited 3/4/26 10:00am]

IDK, I only know Herbie's cover in the above, but I think you guys are being a little harsh. Granted, few Prince covers (if any) blew my mind, but there's been quite a few that I found rather decent.

.

Either way, tribute albums usually come from a good place. But where I don't see this happening anyway is because in order to commission such a project ,the Estate would most likely have to pay the artists for studio time, session musicians and some advance whatsoever. I guess this could still be profitable in 2004 (and even more in 1993 when the first Hendrix tribute album was made), but I don't think the Estate would make a penny with anything like that in 2026.

I don't care if other people do covers, so long as we can hear a Prince original. I've got no interest in hearing others sing the songs, but if it makes money for the estate and we get the original, then I'm happy.

I have never been particularly bothered about side projects, proteges etc. For me, I like when Prince sings.

EnglishGent2 said:

I don't care if other people do covers, so long as we can hear a Prince original. I've got no interest in hearing others sing the songs, but if it makes money for the estate and we get the original, then I'm happy.

I have never been particularly bothered about side projects, proteges etc. For me, I like when Prince sings.

It's funny, because many fans seem to feel that way. I love Prince's voice, obviously, but if his vision for one song was to have Paul or Jill or Morris or Mavis sing it, to me it was never different from him choosing to have Michael or John play the drums when he could just as well do it himself (and I never heard anyone ask for the version of such or such song with Prince on drums, or any other instrument except his voice—yet, his drumming style was vastly different from that of most of his drummers, same with every other instrument).

Kares said:

ShellyMcG said:

Kares said:

.
Now that's a real bad idea in my humble opinion, sorry! We've had plenty of P-covers already and they all suck. Even the most respected artists failed miserably trying to cover P, whether it was Billy Cobham or Aretha Franklin or Herbie Hancock or Eric Clapton or whomever. The only P-cover I really like is Amanda Palmer's Purple Rain. That was truly done from the heart. Most others were lazy and arrogant, thinking they are good enough to pull it off without any studying and proper rehearsals.

[Edited 3/4/26 9:54am]

No need to apologize to me . I never said it was a good idea. I even said that it's not what I would want. But it would make more sense from a business perspective for the Estate to do have established artists cover established songs rather than have modern popstars cover unreleased songs. At least there's a precedent for this kind of project, i.e. the aforementioned Jimi Hendrix thing.

Thinking marketing purely, I would think doing something unprecedented with new songs would generate more media attention than doing something normal with yet another bunch of hits covers (of which there are, by now, several hundreds).

Now IDK, I'm not a label exec, IDK exactly what works in 2026. Same way I think today smaller acts with faithful audiences are a solid model equal to superstars (who, by comparison to our youth, seem like an endangered species—but I may be wrong about this, too). Just trying to think outta the box I guess.

ShellyMcG said:

I do also have to echo databank's sentiments here in that it's a bit harsh to say every Prince cover has been shit. Sure, many of them are. If I never hear Tom Jones singing Kiss again it will be too soon. But several artists have done good covers. Springsteen's Purple Rain for one. I don't even particularly like that song but he did a decent job of it. D'Angelo did several Prince covers over the years like She's Always In My Hair, Sometimes It Snows In April and Pop Life. Ok, none of them were as good as Prince's original but they were still good versions. So it's not really right to assume that a possible tribute album would definitely be crap. There exists a possibility that it could be really good. Would I want to hear it? Probably not. Would I buy it? Almost definitely not. But I could see how the estate might think of it as a worthwhile project for them and even though it's not something I would personally want, I'm sure there are some people who would be interested.

I'd completely forgotten about that one.

It had the merit of standing out at the time, but I really would have to hear it again.

Love the way you phrased it anyway

databank said:

ShellyMcG said:

databank said:

Thinking marketing purely, I would think doing something unprecedented with new songs would generate more media attention than doing something normal with yet another bunch of hits covers (of which there are, by now, several hundreds).

Now IDK, I'm not a label exec, IDK exactly what works in 2026. Same way I think today smaller acts with faithful audiences are a solid model equal to superstars (who, by comparison to our youth, seem like an endangered species—but I may be wrong about this, too). Just trying to think outta the box I guess.

In theory, you're correct. New songs sounds more appealing than old songs. But in reality, from a marketing perspective, what would be easier to sell? Chromeo covering Lust U Always or Lady Gaga covering Purple Rain? I know which of those I would rather hear but I also know that I'm in the minority. And, if given the choice, I would rather just hear Prince. I like that you're thinking outside the box though. If nothing else, it gives us all something new to talk about rather than rehashing the same conversations. I'm expecting another lively debate about condensing Emancipation down to one disc any day now

ShellyMcG said:

databank said:

Thinking marketing purely, I would think doing something unprecedented with new songs would generate more media attention than doing something normal with yet another bunch of hits covers (of which there are, by now, several hundreds).

Now IDK, I'm not a label exec, IDK exactly what works in 2026. Same way I think today smaller acts with faithful audiences are a solid model equal to superstars (who, by comparison to our youth, seem like an endangered species—but I may be wrong about this, too). Just trying to think outta the box I guess.

In theory, you're correct. New songs sounds more appealing than old songs. But in reality, from a marketing perspective, what would be easier to sell? Chromeo covering Lust U Always or Lady Gaga covering Purple Rain? I know which of those I would rather hear but I also know that I'm in the minority. And, if given the choice, I would rather just hear Prince. I like that you're thinking outside the box though. If nothing else, it gives us all something new to talk about rather than rehashing the same conversations. I'm expecting another lively debate about condensing Emancipation down to one disc any day now

Did we ever try trimming it to two discs, BTW? That could be innovative.

databank said:

Kares said:

.
I welcome any ideas that spark further thinking and discussions as they can all contribute to better decisionmaking, even if an idea ends up being deemed bad.
.
Actually, I can imagine giving songs to new artists to cover to work, so I kind of like the basic idea, however, I would consider an ethical and a legal aspect of it as well:
– is it ethical towards P to give away one of his compositions/lyrics to someone without his consent BEFORE the world gets to hear his original recording of it? My anwswer is no. I'm not against giving away some of his songs, but I would definitely make sure that P's original is released first – not only as a fairness gesture to him, but also to avoid the new cover being mistaken for some AI-generated shit "in the style of Prince" (and I'm sure there'll be plenty of those soon).

– is it legal for the Estate to give away his unreleased songs? It is, of course, but we shouldn't forget that if P would still be alive, this would NOT be the case. It is illegal to cover an unpublished work without the writer's consent, exactly because the law recognises the creator's right to decide to publish something or not, which leads us to the previus question.
.
Now whether the Estate should give away actual P-recorded tracks for others to work with: that's a strict no-no, if you ask me. And frankly, I'm surprised you're bringing this up, Databank, as you've always been very much against the so-called 'Frankenstein-versions', and I share your ill-feelings towards them. But would it be any different if a new artist would create their own 'Frankenstein-versions' by adding their own parts to P's? I think this is a very bad idea, sorry. (It reminds me of the outrageous case when Kenny Gorelick had the audacity to "duet" with the late great Louis Armstrong – although I'd very much prefer to forget ever hearing it.)
Furthermore, it would also complicate things legally, considering that Warner Music has the right of first refusal for all pre-1996 vault tracks, and they would have to give up their rights for a multitrack to be used by Universal, for example, which would theoretically block them from releasing P's own version in the future (altough such tricky dealings have been done in the past, as we know about Sugar Walls, for instance).

[Edited 3/4/26 9:15am]

TBH, I don't know anything the Estate did so far was "ethical", but I see where you're coming from.

.

Just to clarify where I stand about the "frankensteining", I think everyone here knows how opposed to it I usually am (whether official or fanmade)there are a few grey areas where I can tolerate the approach. This would be one because the final product by ARTIST X couldn't possibly be confused with the original. Another one (though it was rarely ever used to great results), is posthumous remixes of released songs by another established artist, like what Bill Laswell did with Bob Marley, because that usually cannot be confused with the originals either (now let me be clear: I'd rather they don't do this with Prince's music ).

.

TBH I only suggested the idea of using P's backing tracks in passing, because it was common when he gave away songs, but I don't think that would be the most interesting approach for any musician doing it. Regarding the legalities of it all, I gotta admit I hadn't thought about it. Warner could only object to the use of a recording, though, not a composition.

When Justin Timberlake somehow was allowed to use Prince's vocal stems from IWD4U just to further his own failimng career was awful and disrespectful enough. I don't think we need more of this kind of shit with other nobodies messing with or using Prince's work just to sell there own bullshit records.