[QUOTE=Crafter Man]
I think of “genius” and prolific I think of Zappa.
So Prince is in the same league as Zappa?
[/QUOTE]
If you can (I will later if I have time) search out a track (I hesitate to call it a “song”) Tamborine. If you didn’t know better you might think it was uncle Frank.
If Frank was capable of “funky”, which I don’t know is even up for debate…
Sorry, I can’t get the quote to work Crafter Man (nor bold font it seems). Out of time (ha!) back later.
This is good. It’s long, but here is a video of the full 07 superbowl halftime show. Prince shows off what an astounding performer he is,and what a brilliant guitar player, in actual pouring rain.
I don’t get the hype around Prince either. He’s far from the star Michael Jackson was. Not even close actually. RIP Prince but honestly, I think we’ll all survive.
O please. Genius isn’t so sensitive.
Prince in no way is black pop?
No, he wasn’t the star Jackson was. I’m not sure he wanted to be. He certainly didn’t go out of his way to write mainstream hits after his WB contract was up.
But Jackson never mastered instruments the way Prince did - when he died, you didn’t have people showing off his guitar solos. Jackson’s vocal range wasn’t Prince’s. He didn’t cross the number of musical styles Prince did (I’d bet that if we ever hear what is in the vault, there are a lot of things that are just pure jazz - and maybe things that sound classical or country - he was interested in music - not funk or rock or R&B.)
He did dance better than Prince. Prince could dance, but Jackson was amazing.
Since you claim that you haven’t listened to “black pop” since sometime in the last century, how could you know?
Is it the “black” thing that bothers you?
CBS’s Sunday Morning had a segment on Prince today; it may turn up online & you might find it educational.
Otherwise, just accept that quite a few people of all descriptions considered him a genius. And go back to listen to folk-rock from the 60’s. (Hey, I’m an older boomer who loves that soft-centered stuff. But my musical tastes did not stop evolving in 1969.)
I’m not following. What is wrong in saying he is black pop?
By implying that he might only be that, you’re showing that you’re pretty ignorant of his oeuvre. Even if you aren’t ignorant of his other work, you’ve implied that you’re not really qualified to judge his work in that area, since you aren’t familiar with the form.
Well, it depends:
If he IS “black pop” then you haven’t been listening to it for 40 years, and therefore should try to listen to what current artists - many you likely do respect - have to say about him.
If is IS NOT “black pop” - and in fact, simply a great musician, whose work covers Pop, Rock, Funk, Jazz, Gospel (listen to The Cross some time), etc. - then you are putting him in a silly box, and, again, there is an opportunity for you to listen to the music and what artists of the highest regard have to say about him.
Morgenstern - if you have ANY musical training or deep experience to speak of, it would be great - I mean that sincerely - to hear what you don’t like. But a random drive-by saying Meh isn’t really part of a thoughtful discussion.
As for Prince vs. Michael Jackson - Dangerosa sums things up nicely. There was a thread years ago about that; I think at the time I said that MJ was an entertainer who made music; Prince was a musician who entertains. They featured different aspects of their artistry.
Michael’s performance were tightly, tightly scripted productions. Everything planned to the Nth degree and no variation allowed.
Prince was a bandleader and improviser. Like James Brown, he used code words and specific stage moves to cue the band that he was taking the song someplace.
And yes, MJ was a better Dancer, as defined by a person who studied forms of dance like jazz, modern, tap, breakdancing/pop-locking and innovating his own graceful way. Truly amazing.
But if you’ve never seen Prince do his funk moves and microphone tricks and other James Brown moves - he ain’t no slouch. There is a clip put out by the New Yorker of a James Brown party at a club. JB introduced MJ, who sings a couple of lines in a cute JB imitation - seriously, MJ looks positively happy and adorable as he honors Brown. Then he whispers to JB, and Brown says “hey, Prince is here!” and gets him on stage. Prince fucking owns it for the minute or two he is up there. the video is schlocky, he barely sings, but man, he exudes the moves and pure sex that JB championed and you can tell Brown is loving it.
I will see if I can find a link…ETA: here you go. Second of the clips listed: Prince Live | The New Yorker
Holy Crap! The Cross!
I’m an atheist and that makes me tear up*
Here goes…why is Prince regarded as a musical genius?
Sign ‘O’ the Times
For what it’s worth. I had a girlfriend** who admired his dress sense. I’m not sure what that means, but has to be another tick in the box?
I was just listening to 1999. Starts off: bah-bahhh, bah bah. Bah-bahhh, bah bah.
Then the drums kick in - dicka-dun, dicka-dun dun.
Then the drums keep going, holding a groove, adding fills.
But wait: those are NOT drums. That is a drum machine. More specifically, it is a LinnDrum - at the time, considered a very difficult “drum synthesizer” to manage. You had to invest hours, hours, hours, learning how to set it up, program it, figure out how to produce music with it - how many tracks to take up in the mix; how to blend it with real drums, let alone all the other instruments. This is like Pete Townshend figuring out synthesizers and sequencing on his own and coming up with Baba O’Reilly and Won’t Get Fooled Again.
Now - listen to 1999 again. It just sounds like “good drumming.” Think about that. That is why songs like Tainted Love - a fun song I love - could not sound more 80’s and Prince’s stuff sounds fresh.
The OP for this thread wanted technical insight into Prince’s genius - it doesn’t get much more technical than this.
In an era of Hamilton - black pop seems like a anachronism.
Yes, Sign o’ The Times is my favorite album of his and in my Top 5. The Cross is one of many reasons why - and yeah, I am not a believer and yet it moves me to near-tears, too*. A slow build, adding layers and layers, going from a whisper to an ecstatic gospel-chorus scream. It is the anti-Closer - i.e., the Nine Inch Nails song that wants to fuck you like an animal. It is also a slow-build, adding layers and layers through the end. But Closer is about primal carnality; The Cross is about spiritual uplift. Now I gotta go listen to those back to back. 
*Clanger, old bean, you don’t have me fooled for a minute. The Cross, Dumbo - we both know that when The Boss says “That’ll do, Pig. That’ll do.” you are a sobbing mess!! 
I don’t even know what “black pop” is. Is it pop music that black people like? Or is it music that is done by black entertainers, regardless of what it sounds like or whom it appeals to?
Was MJ “black pop”? Every nationality was into his music, and most of his hits featured mainstream rock elements, like guitar riffs. Does it make sense to reduce him to one genre based on his skin color?
Prince was heavily influenced by African American musical subgenres. For instance, listen to “America” and it sounds like it came straight of a black pentacostal church. Some of his later albums feature songs that fit squarely in jazz and R&B categories. It’s undeniable that he was very much a rock musician, as well. The Purple Rain album isn’t the only example of this, but it’s the clearest.
So in sum, if a musical artist who does jazz, funk, RnB, and rock is doing “black pop”, then that means “black pop” is such a broad category it’s completely meaningless way of describing an artist. That is, unless the aim is to diminish them by slapping a reductive label on them based on their race. Then it’s not such much meaningless as it is ignorant and offensive.
Right, he was flamboyant, giving cultural subversives reason to want to overrate him, like I said.
Whatever. If calling a black person who plays the guitar a “black guitarist” is offensive, then I guess I’m doomed to be offensive.
Like I said, I tried listening to his big hits and didn’t see what all the fuss was about.
This thread is like an online version of the Seinfeld episode “The English Patient,” with those of us who don’t particularly care for Prince’s music in the place of Elaine.
I’m not a professional musician, but I was a music major as an undergrad.
That’s pretty much meaningless. For one thing, Rolling Stone, like all rock critics, tends to overrate blacks. Just look at the list. Seven out of the top ten are black. And Bob Marley is at #19, higher than Prince! (Prince was a great singer, I’ll give him that.) You really believe Bob Marley was a better singer than Prince? Not to mention a bunch of other ridiculous choices. John Lennon, a mediocre singer, is their #5, and Bob Dylan, who half-talks his vocals, is #7.
And all of them (except Tom Waits, whom I can’t comment on because I’ve never heard his work) had better songs than Prince’s, IMO.
[QUOTE=WordManYes, Sign o’ The Times
*Clanger, old bean, you don’t have me fooled for a minute. The Cross, Dumbo - we both know that when The Boss says “That’ll do, Pig. That’ll do.” you are a sobbing mess!! 
:D[/QUOTE]
I might have to - clear my throat - a little.
“Why is Prince considered to be a genius?”
Because he was weird and eccentric.
No it isn’t like Seinfeld - you are welcome to not liked Prince, but the OP asked why Prince is considered a genius and folks are offering specific, technical examples as to why.
To which you reply: meh, I don’t think he’s good. And then offer nothing other than “I prefer other folks” Well, goody for you - YMMV and all - but you aren’t even speaking to the OP.
And including the phrase “John Lennon was a mediocre singer” is clearly going to frame your comments as your POV, with no connection to his or Prince’s reputation at large.
You were a music major, dude. Say something musical and insightful that adds to the discussion. It can be against Prince, but at least let it be interesting fercrissake.
Did you read the rest of my post or did you stop with the list of songs I was planning on talking about? I wrote a lot in that post.
And yall are doing a swell job of making us laugh at you, just like Elaine did. So hats off.
Again, no one is saying you have to lurve Prince. But putting forth your subjective opinion about his songs not being catchy as if this opinion is sufficient to counter the musical tastes of millions of people around the world–including leading American artists who have studied his work since his first album–disqualifies you from being taken seriously. Its a position that needs not even be challenged rationally because it is so silly.