Of course, they were at Prince's mercy on some subjects and it sounds like there was a lot of blather about Janelle Monae and Esperanza Spalding and whatever other up-and-coming pieces of tail that are on Prince's creative and libidinous radar. And Captain's non-sequitir about a Tony M. rap and the hilarious awkward silence in reaction right in the middle of Prince trying to give a pair of Australian boys an American history lesson on Jim Crowe laws in the context of his extremely tired "master and slave" spiel with regard to his old record contracts is absolutely priceless.
It's also nice to know that the 20TEN deluxe edition is most likely coming out around the time he starts this tour(?) in December. And I'm salivating at the confirmation that there are longer versions of stand-out tracks like Laveaux and Laydown. And there will be a new album next year featuring Tal Wilkenfeld on bass and Josh Coleman on the skins.
There is much, much bigger news, though. Most importantly, the rights to "For You," "Prince," and "Dirty Mind" have reverted to Prince after 30 years, not the previously assumed 35. And Prince told them that he's already remastered the first 6(!) albums himself, which would take us up through "Purple Rain."
This news is what prompts me to write.
If he's already got ownership of his first 3 albums and has already remastered them, why are they not available? Is he waiting until he's got a few more under his control so that he can put out several of them in a first wave of remastered releases? That would make sense. However, he also commented to them that everything up through 1987 or 1988 sounds very thin and that there is no bottom end to it, and that with modern technology you just press a button and, voila! you automatically add bottom end to it.
This is troubling to me. Does Prince not realize that one of his greatest unsung contributions to the evolution of funk, r&b, and popular music in general was the economic use of space in his arrangements and productions? He must not realize that that crisp, dry sound is one of the things that are a hallmark of his first decade of work. It's what ISN'T there that is interesting about his sound at that time. The reasons for it may have been a practical result of what he had to work with at the time: no high-tech studio or recording facility at his disposal on a whim, an eclectic group of musicians of varying strengths and skill sets playing with and inspiring him, the fact that he did most of it on his own. He most likely didn't have the time or the means to finish or clean up or fiddle with a lot of his recordings in the way that modern technology and his current recording m.o. allow, because he just didn't have the resources at his disposal: they either hadn't been invented yet or he didn't have access to them.
More likely, at least at that time, he just knew when enough was enough and didn't feel the need to be overly fussy with the production. The music he put out in the early 80's was brilliant how sparingly he used production tricks. He knew where the spaces were needed to create a groove, a feeling, something "Revolutionary." To paraphrase Kurt Loder, he knew when to stop -- usually.
If you compare the music he was making before and after he opened his studios at Paisley Park, you notice a difference in his production and arrangement aesthetic. If you've familiar enough with it and know the chronology, and have access to outtakes, alternate versions, and a good knowledge of when/where songs were recorded, you can hear what is a night and day difference. With a lot of time on his hands and 24 hour access to a brand new studio with the latest and greatest equipment and library stocked with sound effects, his production became more and more cluttered. He had the time to work on a song with no time or technology restrictions. This benefitted some songs. It was detrimental to others. "Lovesexy" and "Batman" are wall-to-wall noise with an everything-but-the-kitchen-sink production style. But this line of analysis is probably best saved for another post altogether. I've written about it a few times elsewhere, but perhaps the pre- and post-Paisley Park production values of Prince's music warrants it's own discussion.
Back to the pending remastered albums at hand.
One of the main worries of Prince fans regarding remasters in the last 10 years is whether he'd allow the raunchier material -- and there is an abundance of raunchy material -- to be released without editing re-recorded lyrics in the same way that he performs those songs now. That question hasn't been answered by the Peach & Black Podcast guys. I don't know if it even came up. I find the comments he gave about the ability to add more bottom to his old recordings just as troubling. Prince is a master of revisionist history. If he's going to apply it to the music he made his name and legend on, that's very disappointing to me. I imagine he would say "This is how I always wanted it to sound." It doesn't really matter, because what he would say he wanted to do and what he did do are different things altogether. I don't want him filling up that crisp, dry, brilliant production with a lot of deep juicy bass lines because it completely misses the point of what made his music different and special at the time it came out.
Despite the ongoing conversation he's had with his fans, the press, and the recording industry for the past 15 years or more about artists' rights and ownership, I've always felt that the legacy of Prince's recorded music is best left in the hands of someone, almost anyone, other than Prince himself. We've seen too many instances of him trying to better his own brilliance or re-write his own past. His conversation with the guys from the Peach & Black Podcast hasn't really changed my mind.
But hey, there's a longer version of Adore out there. So it's not all bad news.
I should note that the P&B guys don't have a recorded interview with Prince. They're just recounting the conversation they had with him in the podcast.
ReplyDelete