independent and unofficial
Prince fan community site
Mon 25th Mar 2019 4:50am
Welcome! Sign up or enter username and password to remember me
Forum jump
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Has Warner the power to remaster his 78-93 albums?
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
Reply #60 posted 07/01/11 9:18am

Tremolina

electricberet said:

Tremolina said:

Obviously if and when they do it, they should do it worldwide and make a great promotion effort. The CD market is shrinking for sure, but downloads on Itunes for example can balance that out.

Selling digital remasters from one of music´s greatest artists is still a guaranteed cash cow. Especially when they combine it with previously unreleased tracks and live material.

There's no question in my mind that a good Prince digital remaster campaign would make money. The question is how much. Prince may have some outrageously exaggerated idea of how much money his remasters would make. Or WMG may be skeptical due to their prior experiences with Prince as to whether he's going to do his part to make it a success. Judging by Prince's latest interviews, if I were a WMG executive I would be thinking that he's going to be more of an obstacle than a help when it comes to promotion.

I think the deal will be done sooner or later unless Prince goes totally crazy and destroys everything in his vault. In which case we should go there en masse and make a human shield to keep it from happening. lol

Maybe we should go to PP and steal the vault before it's too late. lol

When his rights to his classic albums revert back to him, we may not ever see any remasters emerge.

Or perhabs then we finally will.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #61 posted 07/01/11 10:06am

electricberet

avatar

Tremolina said:

electricberet said:

There's no question in my mind that a good Prince digital remaster campaign would make money. The question is how much. Prince may have some outrageously exaggerated idea of how much money his remasters would make. Or WMG may be skeptical due to their prior experiences with Prince as to whether he's going to do his part to make it a success. Judging by Prince's latest interviews, if I were a WMG executive I would be thinking that he's going to be more of an obstacle than a help when it comes to promotion.

I think the deal will be done sooner or later unless Prince goes totally crazy and destroys everything in his vault. In which case we should go there en masse and make a human shield to keep it from happening. lol

Maybe we should go to PP and steal the vault before it's too late. lol

When his rights to his classic albums revert back to him, we may not ever see any remasters emerge.

Or perhabs then we finally will.

Some orgers are already hatching a plot along those lines:

http://prince.org/msg/7/361565

I think we'll eventually get some kind of digital remasters because Prince changes his mind so much and at some point he'll want to release them. Or his money problems might get serious enough that he really needs the cash. His recent comments about not liking digital music are just a lot of nonsense to justify the fact that he isn't putting anything out at the moment.

The Census Bureau estimates that there are 2,518 American Indians and Alaska Natives currently living in the city of Long Beach.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #62 posted 07/01/11 11:31am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

Pbing said:

BartVanHemelen said:

Because that's the only way they sell. These are 20-30 years old, it would be INSANE to have them priced as brand-new records.

I don't really understand what you're saying here. The CD format is on the way out.

"Old" people still buy plenty of CDs. Especially when it involves music they loved when they were young.

I don't follow the trials and tribulations of the music industry that closely, but my impression is that there just as many "tiny specialized labels" going under these days as there are breaking even.

<sigh> Yes, it must be all those labels going under who're spending good money on promoting re-releases of records that didn't sell any significant numbers when they were first released.

Even so, for a major label (not to mention Prince) to get of its ass and reissue some records would require a guarantee of not just breaking even or making a little money back, but making a LOT of money. They don't get out of bed, so to speak, for small change. Same seems to be true of Prince as well.

Record labels release tremendous amounts of records that come nowhere near recouping their costs. Look at the cover of Mojo or Q or Uncut: each month it's "100+ reviews".

I also don't know what to make of your second point. Newness of music isn't really usually what determines price. I mean the archival-type releases you use in your first point are a great example of this—they are typically full price even though they are "old". From what I understand 5 bucks barely covers the cost of manufacturing and distributing a major-label disc.

Are you for real? Can't you see the difference between a record that has already sold 1+ million copies and has been steadily available on CD for 30+ years, versus a virtually unknown record that sold a couple of hundred copies max and hasn't been available for 50 years? The cost of manufacturing an distributing well-known Prince CDs is negligable.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #63 posted 07/01/11 11:34am

BartVanHemelen

avatar

electricberet said:

There's no question in my mind that a good Prince digital remaster campaign would make money. The question is how much. Prince may have some outrageously exaggerated idea of how much money his remasters would make.

Exactly.

Or WMG may be skeptical due to their prior experiences with Prince as to whether he's going to do his part to make it a success.

The best thing to do would be to pay him to keep out of it -- the same deal as with the 1993 compilation. I'd want everyone involved, except for Prince.

© Bart Van Hemelen
This posting is provided AS IS with no warranties, and confers no rights.
It is not authorized by Prince or the NPG Music Club. You assume all risk for
your use. All rights reserved.
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #64 posted 07/01/11 12:09pm

MickyDolenz

avatar

Tremolina said:

Maybe we should go to PP and steal the vault before it's too late.

How do you know if the original tapes are even in good shape? If they're not stored properly, tape has been known to suffer drop outs or deteriorated sound. When Genesis released their Archives box sets in the 1990's, Peter Gabriel & Steve Hackett (who were no longer in the band) had to overdub new parts into some of the songs because of fade out or tracks not properly recorded in the first place. Digital recordings are worse. In some cases whole instrumental tracks have disappeared.

[Edited 7/1/11 12:11pm]

For 65 years straight, the #1 genre in music, selling wise, was rock n' roll worldwide. Last year (2017) in June, it got de-crowned by hip hop. Hip hop is the #1 genre. It's hip hop - rock - country - pop or pop - country. ~ Pras
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #65 posted 07/01/11 12:39pm

eyewishuheaven

avatar

BartVanHemelen said:

The best thing to do would be to pay him to keep out of it -- the same deal as with the 1993 compilation. I'd want everyone involved, except for Prince.

Exactly - it's the only way to ensure P doesn't go all 'George Lucas' on the material.

PRINCE: the only man who could wear high heels and makeup and STILL steal your woman!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #66 posted 07/01/11 5:39pm

HarleyQ

avatar

Warners can and will for the money...ONLY! Never work them or let them own you!

~ formerly ZsaZsaZsu and Technagirl, living in LaLaLand Ba-bey!!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #67 posted 07/04/11 1:40pm

mydrawers

avatar

Has it OCCURED to anybody that the reason the CD's have not been remastered is because Prince is insisting that any "curse words" be "bleeped out" of the original recordings on the reissues/remasters?

This is just so obvious.

nod

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #68 posted 07/04/11 1:52pm

Tremolina

mydrawers said:

Has it OCCURED to anybody that the reason the CD's have not been remastered is because Prince is insisting that any "curse words" be "bleeped out" of the original recordings on the reissues/remasters?

This is just so obvious.

nod

Why weren´t they bleeped out of the recent vinyl re-issues then?

[Edited 7/4/11 13:53pm]

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #69 posted 07/04/11 1:55pm

Tremolina

MickyDolenz said:

Tremolina said:

Maybe we should go to PP and steal the vault before it's too late.

How do you know if the original tapes are even in good shape?

Nobody really "knows" anything in this debate.

But if they would be in bad shape they could be fixed.

I

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #70 posted 07/04/11 1:57pm

Tremolina

eyewishuheaven said:

BartVanHemelen said:

The best thing to do would be to pay him to keep out of it -- the same deal as with the 1993 compilation. I'd want everyone involved, except for Prince.

Exactly - it's the only way to ensure P doesn't go all 'George Lucas' on the material.

Maybe Prince isn't really that far gone. I definitely wouldn't exclude him wishing to revise some stuff here and there, but I imagine he is still pragmatic enough to realise that his fans would not appreciate and that such a move would hurt his sales.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #71 posted 07/04/11 3:18pm

eyewishuheaven

avatar

Tremolina said:

eyewishuheaven said:

Exactly - it's the only way to ensure P doesn't go all 'George Lucas' on the material.

Maybe Prince isn't really that far gone. I definitely wouldn't exclude him wishing to revise some stuff here and there, but I imagine he is still pragmatic enough to realise that his fans would not appreciate and that such a move would hurt his sales.

I hope you're right. And it's true, he probably could have demanded that, say, 'Sister' was removed from the Dirty Mind vinyl reissue, but he didn't do that. I'll try to remain optimistic!

Of course, assuming the project ever actually happens in the first place... confused

PRINCE: the only man who could wear high heels and makeup and STILL steal your woman!
  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #72 posted 07/04/11 3:34pm

Spinlight

avatar

mydrawers said:

JoeTyler said:

that doesn't answer the OP question, does it?

Actually, it does: AGAIN, they have not been remastered because they don't NEED to be remastered.


Wrong. Bye.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #73 posted 07/06/11 1:28pm

mydrawers

avatar

Spinlight said:

mydrawers said:

Actually, it does: AGAIN, they have not been remastered because they don't NEED to be remastered.


Wrong. Bye.

It is the consensus of a large number of audiophiles that, for the most part, the then entire Prince CD catalog sounds fantastic.

Which CD's do you feel are substandard sonically?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #74 posted 07/08/11 7:25pm

parker

mydrawers said:

Spinlight said:


Wrong. Bye.

It is the consensus of a large number of audiophiles that, for the most part, the then entire Prince CD catalog sounds fantastic.

Which CD's do you feel are substandard sonically?

Then why are the vinyl remaster being welcomed so enthusiastically? They sound many times better than the CDs. The CDs are a problem because the masters used for them were intended for vinyl.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #75 posted 07/08/11 8:48pm

Pbing

I don't think I understand your points, Bart. It seems like you're arguing a few different things at the same time? Also, the rudeness seems unnecessary. Anyway, we all want the same thing here—more/improved Prince material. I guess I'll go back to lurking this thread.

BartVanHemelen said:

Pbing said:

Record labels release tremendous amounts of records that come nowhere near recouping their costs. Look at the cover of Mojo or Q or Uncut: each month it's "100+ reviews".

I also don't know what to make of your second point. Newness of music isn't really usually what determines price. I mean the archival-type releases you use in your first point are a great example of this—they are typically full price even though they are "old". From what I understand 5 bucks barely covers the cost of manufacturing and distributing a major-label disc.

Are you for real? Can't you see the difference between a record that has already sold 1+ million copies and has been steadily available on CD for 30+ years, versus a virtually unknown record that sold a couple of hundred copies max and hasn't been available for 50 years? The cost of manufacturing an distributing well-known Prince CDs is negligable.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #76 posted 07/09/11 7:10am

Tremolina

mydrawers said:

Spinlight said:


Wrong. Bye.

It is the consensus of a large number of audiophiles that, for the most part, the then entire Prince CD catalog sounds fantastic.

Which CD's do you feel are substandard sonically?

I don't think that is the consensus. What do you base that on?

Remastering isn't something that is only done when the original records sound really bad. Most old records could use some sonic improvement and with current technology there is a lot they can do to make old records sound like new again. Not to mention the money they can make with it, especially if they release it in combination with live and previously unreleased material.

In any case. I feel that at least 1999, Purple Rain and SOTT need remastering because of their sound. SOTT is an obvious one; I have several copies of it but they all sound like they were put on CD with a blanket covering the recording device. Little Red Corvette for example on 1999 sounds like it's falling apart from all the cracks on it. PR is less obvious, but suffers from compression of sounds when you put it on really loud, which is what I like to do with that album. And no, it's not my stereo! lol

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #77 posted 07/09/11 7:11am

Tremolina

Pbing said:

I guess I'll go back to lurking this thread.

why? because bart made you to? lol disbelief

come on man smile

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #78 posted 07/09/11 8:00am

NouveauDance

avatar

It's OK saying we wouldn't like Prince involved because of how he might mess it up, but what are the extras going to be like without him? They'd be limited to 12" mixes and b-sides surely? Which is great, but we want all those unreleased tracks too don't we - they're not getting put on the discs without Prince's involvement, no?

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #79 posted 07/09/11 8:03am

NouveauDance

avatar

mydrawers said:

Spinlight said:


Wrong. Bye.

It is the consensus of a large number of audiophiles that, for the most part, the then entire Prince CD catalog sounds fantastic.

No it isn't.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #80 posted 07/09/11 8:09am

Tremolina

NouveauDance said:

It's OK saying we wouldn't like Prince involved because of how he might mess it up, but what are the extras going to be like without him? They'd be limited to 12" mixes and b-sides surely? Which is great, but we want all those unreleased tracks too don't we - they're not getting put on the discs without Prince's involvement, no?

If you ask me, most probaly not, no. neutral

In the big picture tho', which is what we need to keep in mind here, this is about control over his back catalogue, for the long term.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #81 posted 07/27/11 4:29am

MartyMcFly

BartVanHemelen said:

The best thing to do would be to pay him to keep out of it -- the same deal as with the 1993 compilation. I'd want everyone involved, except for Prince.

Exactly. Bring in someone like Alan Leeds to supervise this thing. I know it won't happen but I would trust a guy like him to make the right decisions.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #82 posted 07/27/11 4:48am

jaawwnn

avatar

Parade sounds fantastic.

Sign O the Times does not.

Can we agree on that?

trying to figure out where people stand on this.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #83 posted 07/27/11 4:41pm

Spinlight

avatar

jaawwnn said:

Parade sounds fantastic.

Sign O the Times does not.

Can we agree on that?

trying to figure out where people stand on this.

SOTT is terrible, Lovesexy is thin, Parade is thin, ATWIAD is extremely thin, Batman is slightly tinny and also thin.

Purple Rain and 1999 are fantastic examples of well-done transfers. You can hear and feel the bass, especially on 1999, and the sounds are multi-layered.

ATWIAD suffers from a mix that is so dry it practically crackles and would likely be shrill and unpleasant to the ear if the volume levels were simply bumped up to today's standards. SOTT sounds muffled, like a bootleg almost. Which is great because you could pull CD copies of the SOTT tracks and match them up pretty well with tracks from well known bootlegs and they would sound the same. Lovesexy and Parade have a thin and murky muddiness to them that causes tracks like "Under the Cherry Moon" and "Dance On" to suffer despite them being particularly intricate tracks. "Positivity" sounds distorted and bland, "Mountains" is awful and is completely shown up in every single way by most fanmade vinyl transfers of the 12", and "Sometimes It Snows In April" seems to be the track that benefits most from the muted and muffled atmosphere because its a sparse fucking song and the artifacting adds character.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #84 posted 07/28/11 12:11am

MartyMcFly

jaawwnn said:

Parade sounds fantastic.

Sign O the Times does not.

Can we agree on that?

trying to figure out where people stand on this.

The Black Album is pretty bad as well. You can hardly HEAR the music if you don't turn the volume up to da max!

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #85 posted 07/28/11 1:16am

jaawwnn

avatar

Spinlight said:

jaawwnn said:

Parade sounds fantastic.

Sign O the Times does not.

Can we agree on that?

trying to figure out where people stand on this.

SOTT is terrible, Lovesexy is thin, Parade is thin, ATWIAD is extremely thin, Batman is slightly tinny and also thin.

Purple Rain and 1999 are fantastic examples of well-done transfers. You can hear and feel the bass, especially on 1999, and the sounds are multi-layered.

ATWIAD suffers from a mix that is so dry it practically crackles and would likely be shrill and unpleasant to the ear if the volume levels were simply bumped up to today's standards. SOTT sounds muffled, like a bootleg almost. Which is great because you could pull CD copies of the SOTT tracks and match them up pretty well with tracks from well known bootlegs and they would sound the same. Lovesexy and Parade have a thin and murky muddiness to them that causes tracks like "Under the Cherry Moon" and "Dance On" to suffer despite them being particularly intricate tracks. "Positivity" sounds distorted and bland, "Mountains" is awful and is completely shown up in every single way by most fanmade vinyl transfers of the 12", and "Sometimes It Snows In April" seems to be the track that benefits most from the muted and muffled atmosphere because its a sparse fucking song and the artifacting adds character.

I think the thinness suits most of Parade.

You're right about Mountains though.... I guess I'd be afraid this is one album a remaster would completely ruin trying to maker 'bigger'.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Reply #86 posted 07/28/11 11:29am

Spinlight

avatar

jaawwnn said:

Spinlight said:

SOTT is terrible, Lovesexy is thin, Parade is thin, ATWIAD is extremely thin, Batman is slightly tinny and also thin.

Purple Rain and 1999 are fantastic examples of well-done transfers. You can hear and feel the bass, especially on 1999, and the sounds are multi-layered.

ATWIAD suffers from a mix that is so dry it practically crackles and would likely be shrill and unpleasant to the ear if the volume levels were simply bumped up to today's standards. SOTT sounds muffled, like a bootleg almost. Which is great because you could pull CD copies of the SOTT tracks and match them up pretty well with tracks from well known bootlegs and they would sound the same. Lovesexy and Parade have a thin and murky muddiness to them that causes tracks like "Under the Cherry Moon" and "Dance On" to suffer despite them being particularly intricate tracks. "Positivity" sounds distorted and bland, "Mountains" is awful and is completely shown up in every single way by most fanmade vinyl transfers of the 12", and "Sometimes It Snows In April" seems to be the track that benefits most from the muted and muffled atmosphere because its a sparse fucking song and the artifacting adds character.

I think the thinness suits most of Parade.

You're right about Mountains though.... I guess I'd be afraid this is one album a remaster would completely ruin trying to maker 'bigger'.

That is possible - but the good thing is we still have our original transfers, always. wink

I would not really mind any of the 80s albums getting 2011 mixes done. As in, leave the song in tact but clean it up and bump the levels up to today's standard. It would be my dream to hear the albums in the clarity they deserve with pumping bass, stomping drums, and ripping guitars.

  - E-mail - orgNote - Report post to moderator
Page 3 of 3 <123
  New topic   Printable     (Log in to 'subscribe' to this topic)
« Previous topic  Next topic »
Forums > Prince: Music and More > Has Warner the power to remaster his 78-93 albums?