LittleAmy said:

Reasonable minds can disagree, but research publications, blogs, reviews of Sign O' The Times, et cetera and you'll see there are reasonable grounds for that assertion. Many folk agree with you, but many folk agree with me too.

And, of course, "widely regarded" goes beyond your own opinion, and of course, beyond mine. The key word is "regarded," i.e., perceived. And, especially in later years, I've seen critics and fans alike who hold that perception.

There's no right or wrong. As the word "regarded" implies. I didn't say that Adore WAS one of the best, now did I? And it is, quite possible, would you not concede, that it would "rivet" me and others, and not :"rivet" you or others? No firm conclusions can be drawn on whether the song is "riveting," then, right?



Welcome to the Org. I'm honored that you chose to respond to me as your first post.
[Edited 1/29/08 11:59am]
[Edited 1/29/08 11:59am]
[Edited 1/29/08 12:20pm]

namepeace said:

It is a matter of opinion, but I have read many reviews of "Sign 'O' the Times" and combining that with observation (radio airplay, general reactions to the song, etc.) since the album came out more than 20 years ago and I have never seen, read or heard anything that considers "Adore" more than just a good song. Nothing terrible by any means, but hardly as effusive or as held in as high regard as you suggested.

That's how I took the phrase "two of the best soul songs over the past 30 years," and considering the other songs in question is Marvin Gaye's "Sexual Healing" that implies that "Adore" is considered as some landmark song.
[Edited 1/30/08 19:52pm]

namepeace said:

you saw that thread someone started.. 'Father Figure vs. Adore'?.. you saw which one i picked? .. yes, i committed a crime and picked 'Father Figure'.. i cant get into 'Adore' ... i just cant .. i dont know why that is.. cause im in love with 'IIWYG' .. same theme, but Adore ... i dunno

LittleAmy said:

Google it. This'll get you started.

http://www.rollingstone.c..._the_times

http://www.washingtonpost...26_pf.html



I've been listening to and following the criticism of the album for 20 years too. You're not the only one, sister.





No it doesn't, if read literally and in the context of the post to which it replied.

The only reason I lumped them together is because they were mentioned together by Dance. "Two OF the best" of the last 30 years doesn't imply that Adore has the popular or critical cachet of SH, which was a No. 1 song and one of the iconic 80's singles.

Your argument is rebutted by my own list. Neither of the songs are on there. There are others I consider better, but that doesn't eliminate them as two of the best.
[Edited 1/31/08 10:56am]
[Edited 1/31/08 10:58am]

Flowerz said:

I turn your attention, Flowerz, to the original question. You're relying on your opinion, which is fine, many share it. But many others also share the opinion addressed in my question.

My statements left enough room so as not to be regarded as a definitive opinion on the merits of Adore, just a well-grounded opinion of how many music fans perceive it. As evidenced by the thread you're referring to.

I'm not saying you're wrong, but your own opinion doesn't prove you right.

namepeace said:

uhm right.. i wasnt proving anything.. just saying that everybody doesnt like that song.. and you're finding that hard to believe..

Since when is When Doves Cry an R&B song? Did I miss something?

Flowerz said:

I mistook your post. But you mistook mine too.

Check my posts and you'll see I don't make a definitive opinion. Re-read the highlighted portions of my response and my response to LittleAmy, and you'd see I never implied that, just that many people hold the song in higher regard than either of you.

And, like I said to LittleAmy, "Adore" didn't even appear on my list of 25, based on the criteria I used to come up with my list (also included in that very first post).

It's not a stretch to say that Adore is regarded among critics and fans alike as one of the best soul songs in decades. Even you don't think those opinions are right, or unanimous, they are shared by many.


[Edited 1/31/08 15:38pm]
[Edited 1/31/08 15:39pm]

I still disagree, namepeace.

I read that Rolling Stone review you sent me by PM. Not that I consider Rolling Stone any authority on soul music (given its historical low to no black American representation on its staff plus it historically has looked at soul artists' relevance only in the context of its white rock core audience), not to mention being a music review of the "Sign 'O' the Times" album it is merely a columnist's opinion ...

But I was in my 20s when "Sign 'O' the Times" came out, and I've never heard or read where ANYONE who listens to soul music then and now refer to "Adore" as one of the greatest soul ballads ever (NOTE: I was a newspaper journalist myself who also did music reviews and was an entertainment/lifestyles editor for a fair stint; prior to that, I was an FCC-licensed radio DJ for a soul music format). Not radio DJs, not musicians, not music fans, not even PRINCE fans with any sense of bearings of soul music.

If you were talking about someone arguably calling one of following songs among the greatest soul ballads ever:

* Luther Vandross' covers of "Superstar," "A House Is Not a Home," "If This World Were Mine" (with Cheryl Lynn) or his own composition "Here and Now;"

* The Isley Brothers' "For the Love of You," "Footsteps in the Dark," "Voyage to Atlantis" and "Between the Sheets;"

* Earth, Wind & Fire's "Reasons;" (particularly the live version)

* Heatwave's "Always and Forever;"

* LTD's "Love Ballad;"

* Freddie Jackson's "You Are My Lady;"

* Teddy Pendergrass' "Close the Door" and "Turn Off the Lights"

I definitely can understand that. After all, these songs resonated strongly with soul music fans then and now (and definitely, to quote that review, made women "soft and wet"). These are the type of songs that generally are held in such regard among soul music fans. Not coincidentally, these are the types of songs periodicals like Rolling Stone DON'T cite in such terms, because they didn't resonate with them or their fans.

But "Adore" has NEVER been regarded in that terms by any soul music fan I know -- definitely in the same regards as the aforementioned and definitely not in that regard by any black woman I know (and virtually every black woman I've ever met has been a soul music fan). And having lived in this mortal coil listening to soul music almost exclusively and being around people who have listened to or been influenced by this music for the past three-plus decades, I'm not going to take the opinion of a columnist in Rolling Stone (of all places) as some gospel on soul music.

That sounds like the type of comment you will hear from someone who doesn't listen to soul music but calls himself or herself some authority on it -- without actually gauging the interests of those who actually listen to the genre.

As for the Washington Post article, it's a more objective article that referred to "Adore" as a "wedding song staple" but nothing more than that. I can find room for argument on that one, because I've never heard that song played at any wedding over the past 20 years (though I imagine someone could, but considering it's a Prince song about getting strung out on a one-night stand with some rather suggestive and at times odd lyrics ...).
[Edited 2/1/08 5:38am]

MrSoulpower said:

"When Doves Cry" initially was released to the soul music audience before it crossed over and it spent eight weeks at No.1 on the Billboard R&B Singles charts in 1984. Let's not act like Prince is not some soul act.

LittleAmy said:

Prince is not a Soul act, but he still has a pretty massive amount of nice Soul tracks. I just don't think that "When Doves Cry" qualifies as one of them.
The fact that it topped the R&B charts doesn't really mean much ... that could be blamed on the racial background of the artist.

MrSoulpower said:

That's really your opinion, but I don't know it's based on. Prince's fan base -- and the focus of his music -- was a soul music audience until "Purple Rain" crossed over. He was arguably the most influential soul music act of the '80s.

"When Doves Cry" was a song that really resonated with soul audiences when it was released in 1984 -- and that's not based on chart position, but that's based on being a teen-ager when the song was released during the summer of '84. Soul radio stations played that song to death, Prince's majority fan base (which was mostly black) played that song to death and it was a must-have song for any soul music collection in that period.

What you're saying applies to songs like "Let's Go Crazy" and "Purple Rain," but definitely not to "When Doves Cry."
[Edited 1/31/08 17:09pm]

LittleAmy said:

My judgement is based on the musical structure of that song. I'm not dissin' the song, it's not my favorite, but I get the idea of it. Of course it crossed over to the black audience, but that's not the criteria to qualify as a R&B tune.

I also disagree with you that Prince was the most influential Soul music act of the 1980s. Prince was never a Soul artist, nor a Funk artist, even before "Purple Rain", and I don't believe that he would agree with you either. Like I wrote before, he's recorded a pretty nice amount of Soul songs, but he has never released a Soul album per se. However, I am not denying his influence on Soul artists up to this day.

MrSoulpower said:

1.) It also is based on how the song resonates with the audience and the reception it received. "When Doves Cry" was a song that was hugely embraced by the black music audience.

2.) "When Doves Cry" didn't cross over to the black audience. It was released primarily to the black audience and THEN crossed over to the pop/white audience.

MrSoulpower said:

It sounds more like the issue is how you're defining soul music than anything I'm saying. Black popular contemporary music always used different elements from other genres beyond those stereotypically associated with it.

I would say an artist whose early 1980s albums (particularly "1999") became the template for the sound for the decade -- not to mention the success of Prince's splinter acts like The Time -- definitely can be considered arguably the most influential artist of that decade. "The Minneapolis Sound" dominated the soul music genre until the emergence and influence of rap music in the late 1980s.
[Edited 1/31/08 19:22pm]

LittleAmy said:

You remind me of Najee, an orger who used to frequent here until a couple of months ago.

Rodya24 said:

I have no idea who that is -- I joined here a week ago. I'm sorry for any confusion.
[Edited 1/31/08 17:28pm]

LittleAmy said:

No need to apologize! It is a compliment. He was very knowledgeable when the discussion would come around to soul music.

And welcome to the Org! Most orgers are really nice.

Rodya24 said:

OK, then.

However, I do find it interesting that there are people on a Prince Web site who act like Prince was someone who never had a presence in soul music (and act like he had little to no success before "Purple Rain"). Prince was a dominant and influential act in the soul market before crossing over with "Purple Rain."
[Edited 1/31/08 17:34pm]

LittleAmy said:

So you are saying because a song is embraced by the black audience, it's automatically categorized as R&B?
"When Doves cry" is definetely difficult to categorize. If I had to, I'd simply say it's a Pop tune. While the vocal harmonies are structured similar to many Soul classics, it's the music itself that troubles me with giving it the Soul certificate. But since Prince at that time somewhat rebelled against his R&B roots, I think it's safe to say that he would not have categorized as a R&B track either.
The Minneapolis Sound was definetely influential - but it wasn't Soul or Funk. It almost was a genre of its own. The Time had some pretty funky tunes, but they also did a lot of pop stuff. And if you listen to Vanity and Apollonia 6 - well, not much needs to be said about the soulful characteristics of their tracks.
That said, the 1980s were a pretty sad decade for Soul music. Which is why I am glad that Prince was around. He had something different to bring to the table.

MrSoulpower said:

No, I said that how a song is received by that particular audience also plays a factor into this conversation.

It seems like some people act like black popular musicians has never used rock elements in soul music -- Prince was preceded by acts like The Isley Brothers, The Bar-Kays and Sly and The Family Stone in the late 1960s and 1970s who were preceded by acts like Chuck Berry and Ike Turner in the '50s and '60s. Even acts like The Temptations used rock aspects in its psychedelic soul period.

The guitar solo in "When Doves Cry" obviously has rock influences, but the industrial-sounding drum pattern was something typical of the early '80s soul sound in which he was a major influence. But again, guitar solos in soul music is hardly anything new and neither is mixing rock, funk and other elements into popular black music.

Soul music is not merely defined by (near stereotypical) gospel influences -- historically, its roots have been tangled with rock and other elements. What Prince did was add his own stamp to the marriage.
[Edited 1/31/08 17:54pm]

LittleAmy said:

I agree with your references to oldschool Soul and Funk - groups like Mandrill had difficulties being properly promoted because they did not fit any of the stereotypical definitions of their genre. But while Mandrill was still a very obvious Funk group that borrowed from Rock, Latin, Jazz and Blues, I believe Prince is different. I would never classify him as a Funk or Soul act who just borrows from different styles. I have always viewed him as a very versitile Pop musician who borrowed elements of Soul music. This may have something to do with my own puristic approach. But at the same time I could not name one artist, DJ or associate in the business that I know who would label Prince as a Soul artist.
Still, nice discussing this with you. I'm about to call it a night.

MrSoulpower said:

You can't compare Prince's music to Mandrill's -- prior to "Around the World in a Day," he definitely had more in common with The Isley Brothers' 3+3 era blend of rock and funk elements as well as Sly and The Family Stone's. And quite frankly, you're wrong if you thought "When Doves Cry" was not considered a relevant song by soul music (or black popular music or whatever umbrella term you want to use) fans; it is arguably considered his signature song in that audience.

I've come to realize it really depends on who you talk to when it comes to trying to pigeonhole Prince in one genre. IMO, he's an artist who has his feet in both major markets and over his career he has had some songs that appeal to one market more than others. But without a doubt, his most enduring audience even when his crossover appeal was immense and then waned is in the soul music market -- even in his most crossover-oriented days he still had funk-tinged jams like "Kiss," "Erotic City" and "Hot Thing." It's the audience that supported him since since Day One.

If you're talking from the "For You" album to "1999," Prince was considered a black music act. After all, it's those albums that resonated heavily with that audience when he was arguably the major player (along with Rick James and Michael Jackson) in that period. Not coincidentally, this was during the time he didn't have a white audience and was ignored by the pop community (he first received crossover recognition with "Little Red Corvette").

From "Purple Rain" through most of the rest of the '80s (outside of pockets of "Sign 'O' the Times" and some singles and B-sides) he is referred to as a rock/pop crossover act. This was when he was considered relevant to white audiences. Prince still had a black audience, but the songs favored in that market seem to be viewed differently from how white audiences view them. It's also during this period that some of his core fans did move on, only to pop their heads back in when hearing a song ("Kiss," "Erotic City," "Housequake") that reminded them of "the old Prince."

"When Doves Cry" was well received in both markets, but the majority of the "Purple Rain" album was definitely a rock album. "Around the World in a Day," most of "Parade" and "Lovesexy" received mixed reviews from soul fans but not coincidentally seem to be more regarded by white fans. Songs like "I Could Never Take the Place of Your Man" would become a top 10 pop hit and never see the light of day on the soul charts. Conversely, songs like "Scandalous!" would chart high on the soul charts but were ignored by white audiences.

From the '90s forward, Prince has been described as both and not surprisingly some songs are more received than others, depending on the market. "Gett Off" and "Insatiable" were received by soul audiences but not as much by pop audiences; likewise, "Cream" and "Seven" were more relevant with pop audiences while largely ignored by soul audiences.

When he started becoming less relevant to pop audiences by the mid-90s, not surprisingly he was lumped in with the other soul acts (in no small part because of his increasingly erratic behavior). Listen to most of Prince's recent music and it seems like it's more back to his pre-"Purple Rain" vibe -- songs like "Musicology" and "Black Sweat" sound like music more appealing to a soul audience.

Any way, nice talking to you. Sorry about making this a Prince discussion.
[Edited 2/1/08 5:04am]

namepeace said:

The problem is that the word "many" would imply that over the past 21 years as a music/entertainment reviewer, former DJ and all-around soul music fan -- not to mention a part of that core music-buying audience 20 years ago -- I would and should have heard or met someone (or more specifically, a fair number of people) who shared that same sentiment. You're the first people I've ever met who ever tried to make an argument that "Adore" is on some arguable short list of the greatest soul ballads ever -- which once again, is the point of discussion.

I've never heard of hardcore Prince fans try to make that argument, to be truthful. I've heard of a blindly loyal Prince try to make that argument once, but this was a person who had no true bearings of soul music.
[Edited 2/1/08 5:31am]

Dance said:

LittleAmy -- you have some problems in your post.

LittleAmy said:

That's fine, I allow in my post that there's room for disagreement.

And again, I posted but a few examples of comments on the song. If you refuse to even do a cursory Google search to see what bloggers and columnists (like Bomani Jones . . . is he black enough for you?) say about the song, then you're not providing yourself with enough information to discredit the statement I made.



Your background is impressive. Your view, seemingly focused on the past tense.

With your background as a journalist and DJ (I've done just a little DJing myself), I shouldn't have to tell you that opinions evolve and art is re-evaluated over time. At the time SOTT came out, I was in my teens. So I might as well have been in a different generation from a music perspective. Many if not most of my friends and associates who have "sense of bearings of soul music" have a very high opinion of the song. The song has gained more acclaim by critics, bloggers and fans alike over the years. You'll find the evidence if you seek it out.



Please, LittleAmy, read the original post again.

The problem is many if not most of these songs fall outside of the 30-year window I originally cited. And I also said soul SONGS. I didn't limit the scope to ballads. After all, I mentioned "Sexual Healing" (not a ballad) and "Adore" in the first post.




Footnote: Rolling Stone cites "Soft and Wet" in Prince's bio.

http://www.rollingstone.c.../biography

But it's good to know that you've spoken with each and every soul fan and know their emotional reaction to the song, and that all of them don't consider "Adore" as a great soul song. Everyone, of course, except the people I know who've talked to me about the song, the critics who've talked about the song, and the bloggers and webmasters who list the song as among the best (done that Google search yet?)



Oh, so black women are the only authorities on soul music? Keep digging, LA, bless your heart.

I cited RS as an example.



Get over yourself.

That comment sounds like the type made by someone who is so entrenched in her own experiences and perspectives that she is unwilling to consider or even review any other evidence to the contrary.



The article also mentioned "Adore" as Prince's greatest love song.

Again, you've never heard the song played at a wedding.

So are your wedding experiences definitive of all weddings?

At least my posts leave some room for disagreement. An intellectually honest music fan will understand that there are strong sentiments on either side of a song.

Maybe your experience on the Org will expand your viewpoints and convince you not to indict the competence or knowledge of people with different and informed points of view.

I wouldn't call "When Doves Cry" R&B or soul in the same way I wouldn't class "Billie Jean" as R&B.
[Edited 2/1/08 12:32pm]
[Edited 2/1/08 12:33pm]

LittleAmy said:

1. The universe of opinion expands far beyond any one person's personal experiences and perspectives. No matter who they are.

2. If you're going to attribute an argument to me, get it right.



It's not even on my 25, so how can you even say I made that argument?



If I were making the argument that you attribute to me, I'd be wrong. But I'm not making that argument, so I fail to see what the point of the quote cited above is..
[Edited 2/1/08 12:10pm]

namepeace said:

My thoughts exactly. I respect your diligence.

Unfortunately, I have an R&B Favorites list of at least 200 tunes from the 60s alone.


tA

Tribal Disorder

http://www.soundclick.com...dID=182431
[Edited 2/1/08 15:18pm]

Maybe I'm too old skool on this, and I know there's very fine line between old R n' b and soul music, but as most of the lists already posted include the Temptations and Marvin Gaye but NOT Roy Brown, Wynonie Harris or Ruth Brown, I take it we're really discussing '60s and post '60s soul music -


FAR too many to remember, let alone list.

Today -

The Temptations - Get Ready ('Cause Here I Come)
Stevie Wonder - Uptight (Out of Sight) - This is joy on wax imo.
Isley Brothers - Who's That Lady? - Original '60s version - NOT overslcik '70s version with overslick guitar solo
Four Tops - Reach Out - I'll Be There
Tina Turner with Phil Spector - River Deep, Mountain High (One of the best records of all time imo)
Ike and Tina Turner - Nutbush City Limits

Tomorrow, it could be -

Green Onions - Booker T and the MGs
Almost anything on Stax by Wilson Pickett or Albert King
Crazy Love - Beyonce
And many, many more.



No funk on this list as that is a child of R n B imo .
[Edited 2/1/08 14:24pm]

namepeace said:

Quite frankly, someone who gives an OPINION is that ... giving an OPINION. If one journalist gives an editorial OPINION, it is from THAT person's perspective. That's not a FACT. A fact is, "Prince's 'When Doves Cry' spent eight weeks atop the Billboard R&B Singles chart." It's conclusive, irrefutable -- beyond a shadow of a doubt.

It sounds like to me you can't differentiate between an OPINION and a FACT. A published OPINION is simply an OPINION broadcast via mass communications. It certainly doesn't make it more valid than MY opinion.

namepeace said:

(NOTE: Your Rolling Stone critique of "Sign 'O' The Times" apparently was written by someone with the userid Toure on October 31, 2002 -- some 15 years after the album was released -- according to the attributed tag.)

That's ridiculous. I also take the opinions of others sharing the same viewpoint as me is discounted as well, right? Several people on this thread alone have said the opposite, and you're trying to REFUTE them like they don't know what they are talking about.

Just out of humor, I spoke with various people I know who are still in the print journalism and radio broadcasting industries on the historical significance of "Adore," and they also shared the opinion, "Good song (none of them said "GREAT"). One of the greatest soul ballads ever? That's out there."

I'm sorry, but if a subjective argument is considered to be factual in some sense wouldn't there be more of a consensus? For instance, if you posed that question to Earth, Wind & Fire's "Reasons," you're not going to get strongly divisive opinions on its subjective relevance. The vast majority of people who follow soul music considers "Reasons" then and now in that regard -- there's certainly not any wavering or a large enough population saying the opposite to doubt its regard.

Oh, and for what it's worth, Rolling Stone didn't exactly give "Reasons" and "That's the Way of the World" such glowing reviews (in an actual review, not the apparent online fan review of "Sign 'O' The Times" you posted) in its 1975 evaluation of EWF's breakthrough album (not surprising). So I guess since you look at the rock magazine columnist at that time's OPINION as gospel, that must mean both songs aren't considered great soul music songs -- even though practically any soul music fan over the past 30 years would consider them great songs, right?

namepeace said:

AN OPINION from one person, one that cannot be regarded or disregarded on the basis you cannot force a person to change his or her value system. Do you actually think that just because an OPINION is published that somehow that makes it FACTUAL? That actually MAKES SENSE to you?!?!

IN MY OPINION, most people don't listen to Prince for love songs so the fact it's called "Prince's greatest love song" in THAT PERSON'S OPINION is relative and fairly marginal, IMO. What are the other choices for "love songs," considering a lot of his ballads are typically of the sexual, ribald nature? "The Most Beautiful Girl in the World," "Pink Cashmere" -- that's about it. If you're counting "Diamonds and Pearls" as a "love song," then you can forget this tangent because that definitely is more associated with Prince than "Adore" ever has been.
[Edited 2/2/08 5:39am]