Re: Prince (1958-2016)
Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2016 5:44 pm
i don't know that track, but Helene Smith is indeed the real deal.Lemmy Caution wrote:Was listening to some classic soul, and thought Helene Smith's You Got To Be a Man might have served as a template/inspiration for Prince's hit Kiss. It has the repeated "You Don't Have To Be ..." line -- including "You Don't Have To be Rich" -- as well as James Brown-style horns punctuating each line. Plus one excited high-pitched vocal swoop mid-song (around the 1:40 mark).
Helene Smith was a Miami soul singer. You Got To Be a Man was released in 1968, and can be found on Helene Smith comps or the soul compilation I'm a Good Woman, Vol. 1. It's a pretty terrific song, and in my opinion Prince knew it and significantly reworked it for his hit.
Be interested to hear if others agree.
For some context, his cover of Sign O' The Times.Was there a tipping point that made you decide to stream your music?
I’ll tell you what really brought it home to me. When Prince passed away, I was in Vienna that night with my band. We heard he died about a half hour before we went on stage. I was very affected by that, because Prince for most of the ’80s was my number one musical hero. I still maintain he was the most naturally talented individual artist the pop music world has ever produced. That night, I tried to do a little bit of a tribute to Prince. I remember introducing the song and it became obvious to me that about 50% of the audience didn’t really know who Prince was, maybe they heard the name and a couple of hits, but that was about it. I asked myself how could that be?
Well, for most of the last 20 years of his life, Prince went out of his way to have his music removed from YouTube and streaming services. I think that affected his mainstream profile. That’s why a lot of young people didn’t really know too much about who Prince was. If you hadn’t seen a Prince show there wasn’t really any way to see footage of Prince live outside of purchasing a DVD. Most of his videos were removed from YouTube and other video services. Most of his music was unavailable. But as soon as he died, there was a massive surge of people uploading all this incredible material like live shows and live videos. Like many people, I spent a lot of time in the following weeks watching all the stuff. I was blown away by the talent of this guy. But I thought to myself, “If you weren’t someone who was aware of Prince at his peak in the ’80s and early ’90s, then maybe you would be unaware of this musical genius.” Being available on the streaming services is a way to expand your audience and expand awareness of what you do. Conversely, to be absent from them is almost to write yourself out of history.
I'm curious, whaleallright, where you do you teach? I work with late teens/twentysomethings here in NYC everyday, most of whom were only slightly aquainted with Prince's music when I queried them at the time of his passing. And these are kids who claim to be hep when it comes to contemporary pop. Some are even musicians! Most disappointing, but completely typical of a particular generation's (in this age range) response/regard for artists of an earlier era, imo.whaleallright wrote:FWIW I teach 18- and 19-year-olds and almost all of them knew who Prince was and could hum several of his songs.
"Sign O' The Times" actually did hit #3 on the pop charts, but it seems like his singles didn't quite have the same cultural penetration after "Kiss" in 1986. "You Got the Look" was the biggest hit from Sign O' The Times -- my least favorite song on the whole album. Yeah, the song "Sign O' The Times" is great -- yet another slightly different sound for Prince. Don't remember the video for it -- definitely was not in big rotation on MTV/VH1 in the 90s.flyonthewall2983 wrote:Would "Sign O' The Times" be one of those songs? That's not one I've ever really heard on the radio or seen on MTV/VH1 apart from clips. I think that could have something to do with it,
To be honest, this reads to me like a "kids these days!" complaint. Every generation seems to think that younger folks don't have sufficient knowledge of or respect for the culture that preceded them. I don't see any evidence (anecdotal or aggregated) that the situation today is any "worse" (presuming that this is even a problem) than it was in the 1990s, 1960s, or 1920s.completely typical of a particular generation's (in this age range) response/regard for artists of an earlier era, imo.
It's interesting how pop culture experiences change from community to community and country to country. In New Zealand the iconic video for 'Sign O' the Times' was played repeatedly on all the music shows, and was a "hey, did you see that?" phenomenon. The video is simply the song's lyrics, animated in an early CGI meets Sesame Street fashion - nothing else. Nowadays it resembles a mid-90s screen saver, but nobody had seen anything like that as a music video in 1987. (R.E.M. had kind of anticipated the idea with the video for 'Fall on Me' the year before, but that video includes photographic imagery.)Noiradelic wrote:"Sign O' The Times" actually did hit #3 on the pop charts, but it seems like his singles didn't quite have the same cultural penetration after "Kiss" in 1986. "You Got the Look" was the biggest hit from Sign O' The Times -- my least favorite song on the whole album. Yeah, the song "Sign O' The Times" is great -- yet another slightly different sound for Prince. Don't remember the video for it -- definitely was not in big rotation on MTV/VH1 in the 90s.flyonthewall2983 wrote:Would "Sign O' The Times" be one of those songs? That's not one I've ever really heard on the radio or seen on MTV/VH1 apart from clips. I think that could have something to do with it,
I have to confess that I wasn't listening to much 1950s rock and roll when I was a teenager in the 1980s, and I probably couldn't have named five Patti Page hits.whaleallright wrote:To be honest, this reads to me like a "kids these days!" complaint. Every generation seems to think that younger folks don't have sufficient knowledge of or respect for the culture that preceded them. I don't see any evidence (anecdotal or aggregated) that the situation today is any "worse" (presuming that this is even a problem) than it was in the 1990s, 1960s, or 1920s.
Errr, that was just my point at the end of the "complaint". To wit:whaleallright wrote:To be honest, this reads to me like a "kids these days!" complaint. Every generation seems to think that younger folks don't have sufficient knowledge of or respect for the culture that preceded them. I don't see any evidence (anecdotal or aggregated) that the situation today is any "worse" (presuming that this is even a problem) than it was in the 1990s, 1960s, or 1920s.completely typical of a particular generation's (in this age range) response/regard for artists of an earlier era, imo.
Still, any kid who loves music -particularly pop music - will find even Prince of 30 years ago hard to avoid.ando wrote:And these are kids who claim to be hep when it comes to contemporary pop. Some are even musicians! Most disappointing, but completely typical of a particular generation's (in this age range) response/regard for artists of an earlier era, imo.
When you say "received notion," hope you're not solely referring to me because "was comparatively obscure" is stronger than I put it. It might've partly been the phenomenon of my wanting to hear "Sign O' The Times" on the radio more and "I Got the Look" less, and so magnifying the difference. But my point was that none of his singles after "Kiss" had quite the same cultural impact in the U.S. If you didn't buy Prince's albums and didn't play the radio that much, I could see how someone could've heard the Purple Rain singles ad nauseam, but not have heard "SOTT."zedz wrote:Also, the received notion that 'U Got the Look' was the big hit from that album and 'Sign O' the Times' was comparatively obscure doesn't seem to be born out by the evidence.
I don't remember that video! Didn't get cable till '92 -- "Kiss" and other artists' iconic 80s music videos were still in regular rotation, but I either missed it or only saw it once or twice.zedz wrote:It's interesting how pop culture experiences change from community to community and country to country. In New Zealand the iconic video for 'Sign O' the Times' was played repeatedly on all the music shows, and was a "hey, did you see that?" phenomenon. The video is simply the song's lyrics, animated in an early CGI meets Sesame Street fashion - nothing else.
No, this wasn't addressed specifically at you: I've heard this a lot in the past couple of months - specifically that the Sign O' the Times album didn't fare as well as it could have sales-wise because of the 'un-commercial' choice of the first two singles, and that 'U Got the Look' should have been the lead single because it was much more commercial. This does seem to be a prevalent (and specifically American) point of view, and I suspect it has something to do with the rigid radio formats in the US. Some stations had to be playing the hell out of the single for it to top the R&B chart.Noiradelic wrote:When you say "received notion," hope you're not solely referring to me because "was comparatively obscure" is stronger than I put it. It might've partly been the phenomenon of my wanting to hear "Sign O' The Times" on the radio more and "I Got the Look" less, and so magnifying the difference. But my point was that none of his singles after "Kiss" had quite the same cultural impact in the U.S. If you didn't buy Prince's albums and didn't play the radio that much, I could see how someone could've heard the Purple Rain singles ad nauseam, but not have heard "SOTT."zedz wrote:Also, the received notion that 'U Got the Look' was the big hit from that album and 'Sign O' the Times' was comparatively obscure doesn't seem to be born out by the evidence.
They definitely spent time together.hearthesilence wrote:He really liked Bonnie Raitt and tried to sign her to Paisley Park (before she went to Capitol and grew into a platinum-selling superstar). Her early stuff is much more rooted in blues and traditional R&B, especially her best work on WB.
What did he expect? Even "Manic Monday" sounds like a Prince record with the Bangles swapped in for the lead vocal. (Drop it in a playlist next to everything else he did in 1985 and 1986 - fits in pretty well.) Commercially his concerns are valid - if he's trying to revive a flagging career, it would have backfired - but hell, I'd dig a Prince record with Bonnie on vocals and guitar.It was a well-intentioned idea that didn't work. It didn't sound like Bonnie Raitt. It sounded too much like Prince and not enough like Bonnie Raitt. It was too generically Prince and not authentically enough something that would work with Bonnie's voice. It wasn't bad, but it was inconsistent with her natural persona. It was an incredible close call because he was so big and she was struggling to get a deal. It was exciting that he was acknowledging her, and it was a door-opener, in theory. But at the end of the day, just 'cause something looks good on paper, if it doesn't work artistically, it just doesn't work, and it didn't.