I will not be leaving this website.

This song is 100 percent'

1. Fake

And if everyone had only listened to me you would've known that sooner...

lustmealways said:

Revolution81 said:

your moneys safe

the chance of me and fredmagnus agreeing on anything is slim lol

That was the game all along, I knew a european and american could never reach agreement on a charity.

-

He's not American

And i'm not European, i'm English

Revolution81 said:

-

He's not American

And i'm not European, i'm English

Wow I guess I'm just doomed to get everything wrong for the rest of my life.

nirforward said:

Sooo....the same youtube user just posted a "Full version" 4 minute long, that is clearly AI .
How depressing.

Yeah, this went sideways fast!

Well, Fuck!

Well, shit.

lustmealways said:

nayroo2002 said:

Did you upload this "100% real outtake snippet"?
The only way to get followers is to convince them of the "truth", J.C.!

No. I'm spiritually opposed to the usage of AI for anything musical and wouldn't do it even as a joke. I find it sickening.

Which is why I love this song so much because it's definitely him.

When you type "him", what do you mean exactly?
(here's your loophole, dude )

So it's AI ??? WTF

That's what happens when the estate won't OFFICIALLY release vault music.

madison said:

I love it … if it’s AI keep them coming!!! I could care less.

How much less do you care now?

paisleyparkgirl said:

So it's AI ??? WTF

That's what happens when the estate won't OFFICIALLY release vault music.

You were fooled, PP Girl, don't blame it on someone else

nayroo2002 said:

paisleyparkgirl said:

So it's AI ??? WTF

That's what happens when the estate won't OFFICIALLY release vault music.

You were fooled, PP Girl, don't blame it on someone else

You know what ? I'll stick to original Prince stuff +SDE and pre-2025 bootlegs from now on. Anything that's allegedly "leaked" will be automatically dismissed.

I believe that Prince's song, actually constructed with AI, despite the fact that it doesn't last the entire length of the piece, constitutes a dramatic first encounter with a sort of Theseus's ship of cultural practice. Let's assume, hypothetically, that someone were able to recreate a Prince song (but this obviously applies not only to any artist, but also to other media) that reproduces all of Prince's vocal, musical, and arrangement features. The one uploaded to YouTube last week came close, at least in the first minute and a half.

What I'm trying to say: while listening to the snippet of the song, I heard and recognized what I liked about Prince: his voice, the phrasing, the shifting between tones, the use of backing vocals, and all the other elements that make Prince's music, Prince. In that recognition, in that recognition that occurs every time I find and recognize an artistic or cultural product that belongs to my history, a kind of mimesis occurred: I was allowing that musical fragment to enter my history because that piece held the password to my memory. It was worth it, among the many things that inhabit the world, to become a part of me, and vice versa.

The encounter with a cultural product is a double metamorphosis: we who read, listen to, play, or watch the product are overwhelmed by the panorama of techniques, content, and immanence of the work (the fact that it is there, in that moment, for us), and—at the same time—the work is distorted by our reading, our taste, and our interpretation. To the extent that we are changed by the work, to the extent that the work's purpose is modified by how we, as individual users, exploit it for things and in ways the artist may not have even conceived.

From this perspective, listening to a non-Prince song and making it feel like a Prince song because it masquerades as such risks becoming a Prince song, because our projection makes it so. Eating something, anything, turns that thing into food, whether it was actually food or not.

The transition is dramatic because it eliminates the relationship of trust we've always had toward that indistinct thing we call "author" or "creator." There are people we trust, a kind of intellectual love/hate relationship with, with whom we establish a privileged channel of communication. Artists, directors, musicians, programmers, journalists, writers. A series of codes, styles, and tools allow us to define them, follow them on their journey, define the mile-long milestones of their biography, and ultimately draw that (somewhat pathetic) historical gospel of their existence.

The entire history of literature, for example, is constructed this way. Now: these algorithmic creation techniques will give rise to products that are a derivative of that entire gospel, products that could not exist without a load of data and training that stems from the mass of information, stylistic elements, and works that each individual artist has left behind. These products will and will not be the artist's, because in reality there is a second artist, the one who creates the clone; but this second artist could do nothing without the algorithmic mass of training based on the first.

But for me, listening, the problem is dramatic because—from now on—every cultural product is a Trojan horse, something that pretends to be something else and—note—is composed of its own substance. Artificial intelligence has dismantled the Trojan horse fiber by fiber and rebuilt it from the same substance as the original, only it isn't. But at this point, when the new product is composed of the same substance as the original, which has the passwords to enter my imagination and become the memory of my life, how important is it that there is an author behind it?

It is—in some ways—the death of the author and the birth of a prompter who feeds on the author's carcasses, trains his intestines, and then metamorphoses into him. And there are potentially thousands of prompters; once the training has taken place, anyone can create metamorphoses. The author, his story, that distorted relationship he has with the consumers of his work may no longer exist when anyone, at this point even the consumer himself, can autonomously create a simulacrum of pleasure.

Songs like the one uploaded to YouTube last week kill Prince a second time, because they kill the idea of ​​a singular author, they kill the idea of ​​an artist as the twentieth century, with a certain naiveté, handed it down to us. And this creates—in me—a certain level of excitement and dismay.

(I wrote this in italian and used an automatic translation, I hope it is understandable. I posted this in Reddit too)

^thank you for this post, very well said. but please people, don't post and spread these AI "creations" unless they are labelled as such clearly.

[Edited 5/17/26 13:16pm]

This song being AI has rocked me a little bit.

The piano didn't feel quite right but the vocals were on point - and the song is GOOD.

Well. I guess this settles the debate: we have entered a brave new world and we cannot say for sure whether a Prince song is a Prince song anymore.

Welcome 2 the dawn...

themanfromneptune said:

I believe that Prince's song, actually constructed with AI, despite the fact that it doesn't last the entire length of the piece, constitutes a dramatic first encounter with a sort of Theseus's ship of cultural practice. Let's assume, hypothetically, that someone were able to recreate a Prince song (but this obviously applies not only to any artist, but also to other media) that reproduces all of Prince's vocal, musical, and arrangement features. The one uploaded to YouTube last week came close, at least in the first minute and a half.

What I'm trying to say: while listening to the snippet of the song, I heard and recognized what I liked about Prince: his voice, the phrasing, the shifting between tones, the use of backing vocals, and all the other elements that make Prince's music, Prince. In that recognition, in that recognition that occurs every time I find and recognize an artistic or cultural product that belongs to my history, a kind of mimesis occurred: I was allowing that musical fragment to enter my history because that piece held the password to my memory. It was worth it, among the many things that inhabit the world, to become a part of me, and vice versa.

The encounter with a cultural product is a double metamorphosis: we who read, listen to, play, or watch the product are overwhelmed by the panorama of techniques, content, and immanence of the work (the fact that it is there, in that moment, for us), and—at the same time—the work is distorted by our reading, our taste, and our interpretation. To the extent that we are changed by the work, to the extent that the work's purpose is modified by how we, as individual users, exploit it for things and in ways the artist may not have even conceived.

From this perspective, listening to a non-Prince song and making it feel like a Prince song because it masquerades as such risks becoming a Prince song, because our projection makes it so. Eating something, anything, turns that thing into food, whether it was actually food or not.

The transition is dramatic because it eliminates the relationship of trust we've always had toward that indistinct thing we call "author" or "creator." There are people we trust, a kind of intellectual love/hate relationship with, with whom we establish a privileged channel of communication. Artists, directors, musicians, programmers, journalists, writers. A series of codes, styles, and tools allow us to define them, follow them on their journey, define the mile-long milestones of their biography, and ultimately draw that (somewhat pathetic) historical gospel of their existence.

The entire history of literature, for example, is constructed this way. Now: these algorithmic creation techniques will give rise to products that are a derivative of that entire gospel, products that could not exist without a load of data and training that stems from the mass of information, stylistic elements, and works that each individual artist has left behind. These products will and will not be the artist's, because in reality there is a second artist, the one who creates the clone; but this second artist could do nothing without the algorithmic mass of training based on the first.

But for me, listening, the problem is dramatic because—from now on—every cultural product is a Trojan horse, something that pretends to be something else and—note—is composed of its own substance. Artificial intelligence has dismantled the Trojan horse fiber by fiber and rebuilt it from the same substance as the original, only it isn't. But at this point, when the new product is composed of the same substance as the original, which has the passwords to enter my imagination and become the memory of my life, how important is it that there is an author behind it?

It is—in some ways—the death of the author and the birth of a prompter who feeds on the author's carcasses, trains his intestines, and then metamorphoses into him. And there are potentially thousands of prompters; once the training has taken place, anyone can create metamorphoses. The author, his story, that distorted relationship he has with the consumers of his work may no longer exist when anyone, at this point even the consumer himself, can autonomously create a simulacrum of pleasure.

Songs like the one uploaded to YouTube last week kill Prince a second time, because they kill the idea of ​​a singular author, they kill the idea of ​​an artist as the twentieth century, with a certain naiveté, handed it down to us. And this creates—in me—a certain level of excitement and dismay.

(I wrote this in italian and used an automatic translation, I hope it is understandable. I posted this in Reddit too)

That, and worse.

It doesn't just kill the idea of a singular author. it kills the idea that there are certain things only human beings can do. And we're only at the very dawn of AI. Think the Internet in 1994 vs the Internet now. Think cars in 1926 vs cars today.

On the one hand, scientific research keeps showing that we are much less unique, in the animal kingdom, as we liked to think we were.

On the other hand, we are in the process of creating our own replacement with AI, making ourselves obsolete.

.

When I come to think of it, isn't that what many Prince fans wished for? During the last 25 years+ of Prince's career, many fans very vocally complained that he didn't record the music they wanted him to record (whatever that was), thinking of artists as machines that should be prompted to please the fans. The good news is that soon enough, y'all can prompt your own Prince tracks and have them be exactly what you want them to be. No more Tony M., guys!

lustmealways said:

madison said:

I love it … if it’s AI keep them coming!!! I could care less.

This is how society ends and we're all part of the problem.

Indeed.

paisleyparkgirl said:

So it's AI ??? WTF

That's what happens when the estate won't OFFICIALLY release vault music.

To their defense, they could be releasing an album a month, this still would happen, certain people still wouldn't know what's real or not and certain people still wouldn't care.

.

The real question is why is it we created and unleashed a technology that can imitate anything without thinking about the consequences and regulating it upfront?

I think with every post assuring you this was real I made here, in this thread, I was lying to myself and slowly realizing it was 100 percent

1. fake

paisleyparkgirl said:

MIRvmn1 said:

paisleyparkgirl said:

So it's AI ??? WTF

That's what happens when the estate won't OFFICIALLY release vault music.

I think some fans get bored and start creating AI Prince songs to fill the gap because of the lack of new releases. The problem is when they pretend it’s a real Prince song, in this case by claiming it was from 2014. That created confusion and did more harm than good. I’m glad the person who uploaded it finally realized it was better to be honest and label it as AI in the description.

Let's not forget that it's Londell & Co who killed Prince's legacy in the first place, not AI.

If we'd be getting 3/4 releases every year, we won't even be discussing this topic here.

Yet, I agree that it's going to be very harmful if some people starts passing off fake tracks as authentic Prince songs. This said, nothing surprises me anymore when it comes to this Prince community.

i remember when that "the dawn" fan-made fake bootleg was dropped and many true fans thought it was a real unreleased album configuration.
that shit kinda made me mad, but at least it was a labor of love compared to this sort of lazy-ass bullshit