Before everyone jumps on Erick, he did emphasize this is his opinion. I give him credit for at least listening to the collection.
I don't share his opinion, and
very few musicians would either.
Don't worry as I don't care if anyone disagrees here as it's just opinions. I like how he infused rock guitar into pop and blues and I'm not discounting his talent or that he was one of the great entertainers. It's just that I feel some of his most popular hits don't stand the test of time. Oddly I find Batdance one of his most creative songs as it's like three different songs fused into one weird song that's like nothing you have ever heard. Very creative guy I just don't love his library like some do.
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Erick Estrada For This Useful Post:
Prince is an artist for which the majority of his mind blowing work has never been studio recorded or released to the public. You don't see him as a rock god because you have literally never seen what he is capable of doing and does in all his live shows.
Even as a diehard Prince fan, I will agree that most of the albums are not great. I think most of them are terrible in fact. However, when I see/hear bootlegs of his live performances, of material in the vault, I simply am left breathless and despondent that I might never hear or see that stuff in it's true glory. He was a musician's musician and maybe you need to have that perspective to understand how this is affecting everyone from Eric Clapton to Alicia Keys to John Mayer to Gene Simmons, to Bruce Springsteen, to Beyonce, to Bono etc.
- note he's dancing to a mix that starts and ends with the acoustic piano version that Prince did live
Last edited by Hack&Lube; 05-06-2016 at 12:00 AM.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Hack&Lube For This Useful Post:
^^ Yeah, he really understood what it meant to be a musician. True and honest respect to his craft, and sincere hard work. A "musicians musician" definitely describes him well, but he had a pretty loyal following from casual fans -- mainly because of how good his live shows were. That's the bread and butter of a real musician imo.
He's not my cup of tea either, and I get sick of guitar wankering pretty quick. Obviously he's very talented, but I think he was more style over substance. If an artist has a lot of gimmicks like he does they're usually compensating for something. In Prince's case it's average pop songs. Though I admit I'm mostly familiar with his 80's heyday hits, and not much of his newer stuff.
Prince was certainly a musical virtuoso, an innovator and a great performer, but in my personal opinion the quantity of real killer songs in his repertoire has always been overblown. (Especially the number of hits he wrote for others. There really aren't that many notable ones.) Of course that very much depends on what you compare it to, and of course what kind of music you're into. But still. That's my opinion.
For example Nothing compares 2 U is a pretty mediocre song, which is pretty obvious when you start hearing how many covers of it are just bad or instantely forgotten. It was elevated to unbelievable heights by Sinead O'Connor, who is just an amazing singer. She can turn the silliest folk song into something that sounds like high art.
I think that goes for a lot of his other songs too. The songs themselves are often nothing special, but he coult turn them into something that sounded fresh and interesting by interesting production ideas and great musicianship. Essentially he could make songs work that wouldn't have worked for anyone else.
Which isn't really much of a knock on him overall. Just a matter of what you appreciate the most in music.
Prince was certainly a musical virtuoso, an innovator and a great performer, but in my personal opinion the quantity of real killer songs in his repertoire has always been overblown. (Especially the number of hits he wrote for others. There really aren't that many notable ones.) Of course that very much depends on what you compare it to, and of course what kind of music you're into. But still. That's my opinion.
For example Nothing compares 2 U is a pretty mediocre song, which is pretty obvious when you start hearing how many covers of it are just bad or instantely forgotten. It was elevated to unbelievable heights by Sinead O'Connor, who is just an amazing singer. She can turn the silliest folk song into something that sounds like high art.
I think that goes for a lot of his other songs too. The songs themselves are often nothing special, but he coult turn them into something that sounded fresh and interesting by interesting production ideas and great musicianship. Essentially he could make songs work that wouldn't have worked for anyone else.
Which isn't really much of a knock on him overall. Just a matter of what you appreciate the most in music.
IMO he's a better musician than a song writer as outside of Purple Rain most of his top songs are all about partying and women and as shallow as anything Motley Crue or AC/DC (bands I like very much BTW) put out in the 80's. Lenny Kravitz was largely inspired by Prince and he as well played all the instruments in most of his recordings but I feel Kravitz is a better overall package of song writing and music artist.
A great deal of Prince's music is over-looked. There is just so much that was released and unreleased. When he was at war with the record company his records were not getting promoted. Later, he released much of his music on-line, and it would not appear on commercial radio. It is a huge body of work, and I have only scratched the surface myself. His estate could release 1-2 albums a year for a long time.
The landmark album Sign O' The Times was not a shallow record:
I liked Prince and when he toured 5 years ago I thought based on some live performances I had seen, that he's one of those artists you have to see live.
After the show I came to worship at the Alter. I danced for 3 straight hours and had so much fun, and loved the show even though there were a number of songs I had never heard before.
It really made me appreciate what people had been saying all those years ago.
__________________
The Following User Says Thank You to corporatejay For This Useful Post:
I thought he was a bit of a joke too....until I saw him live. It totally changed my perspective. He had an ability to understand the music in a way I haven't seen with any other artist. He knew exactly what was going on with every part of the stage and he could seamlessly jump in and out of it. His guitar work was far more than gimmicky riffs.
A major issue with his studio stuff was that he often explored trends in music. So a lot of his music got dated very quickly. From what I've seen, he also surrounded himself in an Andy Warhol style factory/entourage. So a lot of his studio music was this bizarre mish mash of trends, avant-garde, and pop. A lot of it was very self-indulgent too.
I'm not a huge fan of his studio stuff, but after seeing him live recognized him as a true and very rare musical genious.
The Following User Says Thank You to blankall For This Useful Post:
Prince suffers from being an artist from the eighties, the change over from analog to digital in the studio made for an era of thin sounding recordings none of which sound great today.
Prince suffers from being an artist from the eighties, the change over from analog to digital in the studio made for an era of thin sounding recordings none of which sound great today.
That's only partially true. Music is louder today. It's simpler music with added loudness and we have got used to it so when you listen to older stuff it sounds like the volume was turned down when in reality it's more pure;
That's only partially true. Music is louder today. It's simpler music with added loudness and we have got used to it so when you listen to older stuff it sounds like the volume was turned down when in reality it's more pure;
I think the eighties were worse than just that, early digital sampling at 8x coupled with poor D/A converters and, possibly more importantly, a massive overuse of fairly lousy synths that were just coming onto the lo to mid priced market gave you a massive preponderance of synth based rhythms that just sound dreadful today.
It's not just Prince, most of the breakthrough artists have a similer lack of depth in their recordings
He's not my cup of tea either, and I get sick of guitar wankering pretty quick. Obviously he's very talented, but I think he was more style over substance. If an artist has a lot of gimmicks like he does they're usually compensating for something. In Prince's case it's average pop songs. Though I admit I'm mostly familiar with his 80's heyday hits, and not much of his newer stuff.
As a musician (and you see the same sentiment from other legendary performers paying tribute recently), I don't hesitate to say that Prince had the most substance of any living musician I know in terms of the broad skill and comprehensive mastery of every musical genre and style.
The problem again, is that his studio albums are frankly a product of the era, of Warner Brothers, and of his own personal desires to make them that way for whatever reason.
He could pick up a bass and play the most incredible funk. He could get on his electric guitar and give Hendrix a run for his money. He could get behind a piano and play the most subtle jazz. Some of his best concerts were just him with only a piano or only an acoustic guitar.
The Following 8 Users Say Thank You to Hack&Lube For This Useful Post:
I'm out of thanks but thanks. Those were probably two of the coolest music videos I've ever watched. The first just displays his command of music and the second is the richest I've ever heard an acoustic guitar sound.
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to Frequitude For This Useful Post:
