Prince RIP

[Beef Oven!]

Actually, I agree wholeheartedly with much of Ian's OP.

It's a shame that people choose to show their ignorance and dislike of certain artists and certain music on these RIP threads. And as a host, you ought to behave better.

[Ed: I keep reading the OP: it seemed entirely respectful of - and expressed great admiration for - the artist in question. There seems nothing wrong with agreeing with it - ff]

[Eine Alpensinfonie]

Given that you have an almost pathological hatred of all amplified music i'm not surprised.i

[Richard Barrett]

Disagreements:

the last great figure in black popular music before rap eventually led to the diminution in standards

Out comes the prejudice right away. The general standard in popular music (and every other area of music) has always been fairly mediocre, that's the way things are. At any time there are artists whose work transcends the mediocrity. Each generation has its Thumwoods tirelessly riffing on variations of "things ain't what they used to be", which is not only a pessimistic way to think but ultimately antimusical, a refusal to accept that change and evolution is part of what keeps music alive and meaningful. Kanye West doesn't have to be cited as a counterexample in order to show the value of Prince's music.

Prince was probably the most significant pop artist in the 1980's

Nor does a silly generalisation like this say much about what makes Prince special. Anyone can say this about anyone. And: significant in what way? to whom? What about Madonna and Michael Jackson? surely they were as "significant" in the wider world, if not more so, even if their work might lack the sophistication of Prince's - something doesn't become significant just on the say-so of someone with a constantly demonstrated narrowness of musical taste. For example

the point at which jazz started to rediscover itself

is quite without meaning, especially given that this was the period when free jazz was evolving and expanding (while traditional forms were retrenching and undergoing a transformation into academically approved static preservation). But of course on the planet Thumwood that isn't really jazz.

Prince was a far more significant artist than David Bowie but probably too challenging for most white audiences.

What exactly is supposed to have been so "challenging" about Prince and his music? And how can one possibly imagine that he achieved the position he had in the music world in the 1980s without the support and enthusiasm of white audiences? This is the most nonsensical part of the post, even without the reference to David Bowie.

[Beef Oven!]

Disagreements:
Out comes the prejudice right away. The general standard in popular music (and every other area of music) has always been fairly mediocre, that's the way things are. At any time there are artists whose work transcends the mediocrity. Each generation has its Thumwoods tirelessly riffing on variations of "things ain't what they used to be", which is not only a pessimistic way to think but ultimately antimusical, a refusal to accept that change and evolution is part of what keeps music alive and meaningful. Kanye West doesn't have to be cited as a counterexample in order to show the value of Prince's music.
Nor does a silly generalisation like this say much about what makes Prince special. Anyone can say this about anyone. And: significant in what way? to whom? What about Madonna and Michael Jackson? surely they were as "significant" in the wider world, if not more so, even if their work might lack the sophistication of Prince's - something doesn't become significant just on the say-so of someone with a constantly demonstrated narrowness of musical taste. For example
is quite without meaning, especially given that this was the period when free jazz was evolving and expanding (while traditional forms were retrenching and undergoing a transformation into academically approved static preservation). But of course on the planet Thumwood that isn't really jazz.
What exactly is supposed to have been so "challenging" about Prince and his music? And how can one possibly imagine that he achieved the position he had in the music world in the 1980s without the support and enthusiasm of white audiences? This is the most nonsensical part of the post, even without the reference to David Bowie.

Why waste your time on Ian's racial stereotyping? Whilst his racism is perhaps not the most unsanitary type, it's still racism and he's best ignored on these things (that's to say nothing of his ludicrous perspective on music).

[jayne lee wilson]

Raspberry Beret
The kind you find in a secondhandstore
Raspberry Beret
And if it was warm, she didn't wear much more

Raspberry Beret
I think I luhrrrrved her




Oh Prince, soundtrack of my 80s life....
Goodbye....



I'm not a woman
I'm not a man
I am something that you'll never understand

I'm not your lover
I'm not your friend
I am something that you'll never comprehend, cos

I would - die for - you
darlin if you want me to...



I don't care where we go
I don't care what we do
I don't care pretty ba-aby
Just TAKE - ME - WITH -YOU...

[Beef Oven!]

Raspberry Beret
The kind you find in a secondhandstore
Raspberry Beret
And if it was warm, she didn't wear much more

Raspberry Beret
I think I luhrrrrved her




Oh Prince, soundtrack of my 80s life....
Goodbye....



I'm not a woman
I'm not a man
I am something that you'll never understand

I'm not your lover
I'm not your friend
I am something that you'll never comprehend, cos

I would - die for - you
darlin if you want me to...



I don't care where we go
I don't care what we do
I don't care pretty ba-aby
Just TAKE - ME - WITH -YOU...

Wonderfully put

[Ian Thumwood]

I suppose that it is ironic that Richard has responded to my original post with a comprehensive contribution that perhaps fails to a greater extent with it's own generalisations. It is a shame that he never really bothered to consider the contents of my opening gambit which, I would suggest, contained far more than a grain of truth. Richard does himself a disservice in his response which is suggestive that he disagrees that my contention that the step from the musicianship of Prince to the cut and paste antics of Kanye West can be seen as a disaster for pop music. Granted that we are not talking about Classic music or jazz or any of other style of music that Richard considers to be "worthy" (even including music that sounds like someone tripping over a load of cardboard boxes and then falling down the stairs. ) It did actually state Miles' comment that Prince was a "new" Duke Ellington was too generous yet I stand by my position that Prince was a genuinely creative musician in his field. I cannot for the life of me understand why someone of Richard's stature could not concur that a non-musician sampling other's work as opposed to someone who could play 27 different instruments is a lowering of standards. For me, Prince followed in the line of people like Stevie Wonder who had a degree of musical nous and respect for his musical heritage including jazz. For me, this is a good thing.

As far as being considered "racist" this just seems a further adjunct to the argument about musicality. My musical taste centres around all type of jazz from 1917 through to contemporary but it also embraces blues, a lot of Classical music and some pop. There are generally two ways of looking at music - either from a musicological point of view or from a social perspective. A lot of black , American pop artists have emerged from a church / gospel culture and I think this does afford them the edge over most white artists. This is not racist but a matter of fact. In comparison, I think that white artists seem to get more credit with the press (particularly in this country) because they lazily like to see bands of guitar-welding youngsters transcend their working class roots. Middle class bands either tend to lack this credibility or need to ape working class tropes to match the expectations of the media. This almost mirrors the country blues craze in the 1950's where more "established" players like Josh White were considered too commercial for fans who liked to see their stars emerge from obscurity and hardship. I think that if you looked at the musical ability of black, popular artists as a whole you would, until recently, find the level of musical prowess to be much higher. Indeed, a fair proportion of the musicians featured in these bands have come from either a jazz background or were familiar with this music. In contrast, a lot of British pop acts can probably barely muster a handful of chords before they are thrust on to the lime light.

So, to return to my earlier comment before I was rudely taken to task, Prince seems to me to be approaching pop music from a genuine musical perspective. This is a musician who functioned both as a song writer and arranger as well as useful improviser on the guitar. As I alluded originally, I don't think that it is too much of a large step to draw parallels with a pop artist who emerged at a time in the 1980's when jazz was again finding it's feet. I would clarify that I am not just talking about Wynton Marsalis but the whole range of jazz that emerged at this time where styles / modes of expression were challenged far more extensively that Richard's suggestion. There was an appetite for more musical pop acts and maybe the 1980's were the apogee of pop music in this respect. I am not a pop fan but even the most aloof and anal of musicians posting on this board should be able to appreciate that Prince is a marked improvement on the kind of "British invasion" acts pf the 1960's or the excrement that often passes for pop music today. I would also add that Prince cannot be so bad if he had received not only the fulsome praise of Miles Davis ( no doubt to enhance his "hipster status") through to the likes of musicians as diverse as John Scofield, Ben Williams, Herbie Hancock, Taylor Ho Bynam, (who led a project entirely dedicated to Prince's music), Bob Belden (ditto) and Steve Bernstein whose MTO has performed his music - as well as Sly & the Family Stones' for that matter too. Maybe "genius" is too strong a word ( and should be reserved for the likes of Bach, Bartok or Ellington?) but I firmly believe that, setting aside the obvious rhythmic and "groove" appeal of his music ( probably not too important in Richard's field of expertise) , Prince was a musician of genuine stature in his field.

[johncorrigan]

Despite the sad situation I have been really enjoying hearing Prince tunes on the radio. I had a couple of tapes of 'Sign of the Times' and another one but never got round to converting them to CD. '1999' is still my favourite song by him but I was delighted to be reminded today of one of my favourite opening song lines, 'It's been seven hours and fifteen days since u took your love away' from Sinead O'Connor's version of Prince's 'Nothing Compares 2 U'. Heartbreakingly simple.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCiHsIfrOg

[Beef Oven!]

A lot of black , American pop artists have emerged from a church / gospel culture and I think this does afford them the edge over most white artists. This is not racist but a matter of fact.

No, it's an opinion.

An opinion firmly tied-down to a bedrock of racial stereotyping.

[MrGongGong]

I suppose that it is ironic that Richard has responded to my original post with a comprehensive contribution that perhaps fails to a greater extent with it's own generalisations. It is a shame that he never really bothered to consider the contents of my opening gambit which, I would suggest, contained far more than a grain of truth. Richard does himself a disservice in his response which is suggestive that he disagrees that my contention that the step from the musicianship of Prince to the cut and paste antics of Kanye West can be seen as a disaster for pop music. Granted that we are not talking about Classic music or jazz or any of other style of music that Richard considers to be "worthy" (even including music that sounds like someone tripping over a load of cardboard boxes and then falling down the stairs. ) It did actually state Miles' comment that Prince was a "new" Duke Ellington was too generous yet I stand by my position that Prince was a genuinely creative musician in his field. I cannot for the life of me understand why someone of Richard's stature could not concur that a non-musician sampling other's work as opposed to someone who could play 27 different instruments is a lowering of standards. For me, Prince followed in the line of people like Stevie Wonder who had a degree of musical nous and respect for his musical heritage including jazz. For me, this is a good thing.

As far as being considered "racist" this just seems a further adjunct to the argument about musicality. My musical taste centres around all type of jazz from 1917 through to contemporary but it also embraces blues, a lot of Classical music and some pop. There are generally two ways of looking at music - either from a musicological point of view or from a social perspective. A lot of black , American pop artists have emerged from a church / gospel culture and I think this does afford them the edge over most white artists. This is not racist but a matter of fact. In comparison, I think that white artists seem to get more credit with the press (particularly in this country) because they lazily like to see bands of guitar-welding youngsters transcend their working class roots. Middle class bands either tend to lack this credibility or need to ape working class tropes to match the expectations of the media. This almost mirrors the country blues craze in the 1950's where more "established" players like Josh White were considered too commercial for fans who liked to see their stars emerge from obscurity and hardship. I think that if you looked at the musical ability of black, popular artists as a whole you would, until recently, find the level of musical prowess to be much higher. Indeed, a fair proportion of the musicians featured in these bands have come from either a jazz background or were familiar with this music. In contrast, a lot of British pop acts can probably barely muster a handful of chords before they are thrust on to the lime light.

So, to return to my earlier comment before I was rudely taken to task, Prince seems to me to be approaching pop music from a genuine musical perspective. This is a musician who functioned both as a song writer and arranger as well as useful improviser on the guitar. As I alluded originally, I don't think that it is too much of a large step to draw parallels with a pop artist who emerged at a time in the 1980's when jazz was again finding it's feet. I would clarify that I am not just talking about Wynton Marsalis but the whole range of jazz that emerged at this time where styles / modes of expression were challenged far more extensively that Richard's suggestion. There was an appetite for more musical pop acts and maybe the 1980's were the apogee of pop music in this respect. I am not a pop fan but even the most aloof and anal of musicians posting on this board should be able to appreciate that Prince is a marked improvement on the kind of "British invasion" acts pf the 1960's or the excrement that often passes for pop music today. I would also add that Prince cannot be so bad if he had received not only the fulsome praise of Miles Davis ( no doubt to enhance his "hipster status") through to the likes of musicians as diverse as John Scofield, Ben Williams, Herbie Hancock, Taylor Ho Bynam, (who led a project entirely dedicated to Prince's music), Bob Belden (ditto) and Steve Bernstein whose MTO has performed his music - as well as Sly & the Family Stones' for that matter too. Maybe "genius" is too strong a word ( and should be reserved for the likes of Bach, Bartok or Ellington?) but I firmly believe that, setting aside the obvious rhythmic and "groove" appeal of his music ( probably not too important in Richard's field of expertise) , Prince was a musician of genuine stature in his field.

Would you care to expand on this a bit?

(so many words, so much cr*p)

[teamsaint]

There is an awful lot of fantastic music that is based on just a handful of chords.

In any case, creative musicians surely have to grow, develop, mature, experiment, fall flat on their faces , make 39 albums, many of which will become footnotes in musical history, or whatever.


Scott Walker might make an interesting case study. But maybe he is the wrong colour.

[Richard Barrett]

any of other style of music that Richard considers to be "worthy" (even including music that sounds like someone tripping over a load of cardboard boxes and then falling down the stairs. )

I know you don't like Kanye West, but there's no need to insult his work like that.

[EdgeleyRob]

Despite the sad situation I have been really enjoying hearing Prince tunes on the radio. I had a couple of tapes of 'Sign of the Times' and another one but never got round to converting them to CD. '1999' is still my favourite song by him but I was delighted to be reminded today of one of my favourite opening song lines, 'It's been seven hours and fifteen days since u took your love away' from Sinead O'Connor's version of Prince's 'Nothing Compares 2 U'. Heartbreakingly simple.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-ZCiHsIfrOg

[EdgeleyRob]

Raspberry Beret
The kind you find in a secondhandstore
Raspberry Beret
And if it was warm, she didn't wear much more

Raspberry Beret
I think I luhrrrrved her




Oh Prince, soundtrack of my 80s life....
Goodbye....



I'm not a woman
I'm not a man
I am something that you'll never understand

I'm not your lover
I'm not your friend
I am something that you'll never comprehend, cos

I would - die for - you
darlin if you want me to...



I don't care where we go
I don't care what we do
I don't care pretty ba-aby
Just TAKE - ME - WITH -YOU...

Lovely

[Conchis]

I suppose that it is ironic that Richard has responded to my original post with a comprehensive contribution that perhaps fails to a greater extent with it's own generalisations. It is a shame that he never really bothered to consider the contents of my opening gambit which, I would suggest, contained far more than a grain of truth. Richard does himself a disservice in his response which is suggestive that he disagrees that my contention that the step from the musicianship of Prince to the cut and paste antics of Kanye West can be seen as a disaster for pop music. Granted that we are not talking about Classic music or jazz or any of other style of music that Richard considers to be "worthy" (even including music that sounds like someone tripping over a load of cardboard boxes and then falling down the stairs. ) It did actually state Miles' comment that Prince was a "new" Duke Ellington was too generous yet I stand by my position that Prince was a genuinely creative musician in his field. I cannot for the life of me understand why someone of Richard's stature could not concur that a non-musician sampling other's work as opposed to someone who could play 27 different instruments is a lowering of standards. For me, Prince followed in the line of people like Stevie Wonder who had a degree of musical nous and respect for his musical heritage including jazz. For me, this is a good thing.

As far as being considered "racist" this just seems a further adjunct to the argument about musicality. My musical taste centres around all type of jazz from 1917 through to contemporary but it also embraces blues, a lot of Classical music and some pop. There are generally two ways of looking at music - either from a musicological point of view or from a social perspective. A lot of black , American pop artists have emerged from a church / gospel culture and I think this does afford them the edge over most white artists. This is not racist but a matter of fact. In comparison, I think that white artists seem to get more credit with the press (particularly in this country) because they lazily like to see bands of guitar-welding youngsters transcend their working class roots. Middle class bands either tend to lack this credibility or need to ape working class tropes to match the expectations of the media. This almost mirrors the country blues craze in the 1950's where more "established" players like Josh White were considered too commercial for fans who liked to see their stars emerge from obscurity and hardship. I think that if you looked at the musical ability of black, popular artists as a whole you would, until recently, find the level of musical prowess to be much higher. Indeed, a fair proportion of the musicians featured in these bands have come from either a jazz background or were familiar with this music. In contrast, a lot of British pop acts can probably barely muster a handful of chords before they are thrust on to the lime light.

So, to return to my earlier comment before I was rudely taken to task, Prince seems to me to be approaching pop music from a genuine musical perspective. This is a musician who functioned both as a song writer and arranger as well as useful improviser on the guitar. As I alluded originally, I don't think that it is too much of a large step to draw parallels with a pop artist who emerged at a time in the 1980's when jazz was again finding it's feet. I would clarify that I am not just talking about Wynton Marsalis but the whole range of jazz that emerged at this time where styles / modes of expression were challenged far more extensively that Richard's suggestion. There was an appetite for more musical pop acts and maybe the 1980's were the apogee of pop music in this respect. I am not a pop fan but even the most aloof and anal of musicians posting on this board should be able to appreciate that Prince is a marked improvement on the kind of "British invasion" acts pf the 1960's or the excrement that often passes for pop music today. I would also add that Prince cannot be so bad if he had received not only the fulsome praise of Miles Davis ( no doubt to enhance his "hipster status") through to the likes of musicians as diverse as John Scofield, Ben Williams, Herbie Hancock, Taylor Ho Bynam, (who led a project entirely dedicated to Prince's music), Bob Belden (ditto) and Steve Bernstein whose MTO has performed his music - as well as Sly & the Family Stones' for that matter too. Maybe "genius" is too strong a word ( and should be reserved for the likes of Bach, Bartok or Ellington?) but I firmly believe that, setting aside the obvious rhythmic and "groove" appeal of his music ( probably not too important in Richard's field of expertise) , Prince was a musician of genuine stature in his field.

If you were only referring to soul music, rather than 'popular' music per se, I'd agree with you. Soul music proceeds directly from gospel, so a soul singer with a background in gospel will certainly have an advantage over a soul singer who hasn't. But has there ever been a soul singer with NO background in gospel? I don't think so.