TQ of "Westside" fame covered it a couple years ago as well.....I would rather modern singers cover a classic than put out new BULLS**T!!!! But then again, Silk are veterans. And to an extent, so is TQ!!!!!

My last comment on this subject: NOTHING BEATS THE O.G. VERSION!!!!!

Stymie said:

Graycap23 said:

FYI: it would have been the tracking and mixing that made the recording such great quality, mastering is just the final touch up. If anything modern mastering makes the quality of the recording worse mainly due to the "Loudness wars".

Peace!

I was going 2 buy this cd last night and noticed that the LEAD singer is gone. They should change their name. No lead singer, no Silk.

What this CD shows me is that people are just not trying or willing to use their imagination and make an album worth of original material. Yes, these guys can sing, but gimme something original. Doing Adore or all Secret Garden, over just tells me that they are afraid to do something of their own and that they are just riding that "nostalgia train". If I wanna hear covers I will go to a karioke club. For establised artists like them, this is unacceptable. It has nothing to do with Prince being "uncoverable", cause I have heard some people who have covered Prince, respectively. As I said before, for them to put out an CD full of covers is just laziness.

Stymie said:

Right???

I have come to hate the song altogether, which is a damn shame.

Giovanni777 said:

Hey Gio

I'm with you on that, my friend. Nina and Billie could (and often did) record the same song and they'd sound like two entirely different songs.

Stymie said:

ROTFL!

FunkMistress said:

Hi Mistress. How's your catsuit today?

Giovanni777 said:

At the cleaners. (Watched too many live Prince performances over the weekend, I think) I'm incognito today.

ElCapitan said:

I'm opposed to an "Adore" cover on principle, so I prolly won't listen to it at all. Your word is enough!

(RIP the 'Dox).

ElCapitan said:

Are they even still signed? Maybe that's all they coould afford to do. Ever think of that?

i thought them fools were out of a career by now. they were hot when i was in junior high and i haven't heard a peep from 'em since then.

sexxydancer said:

I totally agree!

And what's up with Silk not writing their own songs? If this is a tribute album to other artists, then why doesn't it sound like it? Why does the quality sound so cheap?

it is difficult to do a prince cover. . .


Gary Glenn should have been more relaxed and soulful.

I am not infavor of the remake bt i want more original music from them


anybody know where little g went

1FRO said:

Silk has written plenty of their own songs. As for the low budget quality, why do you send them a note on their MySpace page and ask them? It sounds like a tribute CD to me; I don't know what you are listening to. There's nothing new about this concept; many rock artists do this all of the time.

shorttrini said:

Silk, lazy? Maybe.

But remember, the late great Luther Vandross was famous for doing cover versions of songs too. And he was damn good at it, IMO.

BlaqueKnight said:

That may be the case. But their financial capabilities are not my concern. I'm just critiquing the music I'm hearing, which the last time I checked is what people do here. To me, this sounds cheap and unimaginative.

ymmv

TonyVanDam said:

True indeed. Perhaps the only person that could have pulled off such a coup.

Does anybody remember the Silk song "Freak Me"? That song, to me, has always sounded like a Prince song. I remember a male friend of mine saying he hated that song, but I've always liked it (still do).

Why mess with a classic?

I've always liked SILK. But, I dont think they do the best remakes. I havent listened to their take on ADORE but I do remember a few yrs ago, they remade EBONY EYES by Rick James and Smokey Robinson. It was alright. Thats about it...but I think ADORE is a song thats an "experience" moreso than just a song. I remember reading a review of SIGN O THE TIMES that said that "adore" sounded like Prince and an orchestra and I think that anything below that type of an experience is not comparable to the original. "Adore" is more than just hitting falsetto notes, "Adore" is the soulful Gospel organ underlying the whole song, the longing and tension in Prince's voice as he sings, etc.

TonyVanDam said:

Luther and Silk are not in the same league. Luther made covers all his own. Silk on the otherhand, don't. Groups like Silk, 112 and Jagged Edge, should just stick with that stuff that they call music. The only group that has done a cover decent, is "Intro". Their cover of "Ribbon in the Sky", was awesome. I have not heard anything like it since.

shorttrini said:

You put Silk in the same league as 112? You must not know their music. They are miles ahead of 112 and Jagged Edge can sing but are limited. Before you start generalizing, at least know an artist's work.

vashti1999 said:

damn i thought you meant silk the shocker

shorttrini said:

I don't think anyone here would dispute that.



Now Silk can sing. I've heard'em a capella. They can blow.

SILK is so like, well, done....

WTF is the fucking point?????

BlaqueKnight said:

To be honest, I think that "Silk" is very limited. They are not like the groups of the 70's and early 80's. The material that the choose to sing is not as deep as it could be and the songs sound just like everybody elses. So yes, I place them in the same catagory.

Nice falsetto but that's about it. Why try and fix something that ain't broken... Original is way better as always.