On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 18:08:55 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:

>On 4/23/2016 5:11 PM, wrote:
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 14:07:08 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>>
>>> On 2016-04-23 10:08:29 +0000, said:
>>>
>>>> Prince could have been a great rock guitarist.
>>>
>>> He *could* have been a great rock guitarist when he was 13. So in his
>>> early 30's, he was a great rock guitarist.
>>
>> If I think great guitarist, I think Segovia or John Williams - they
>> really had to play, no electrics making it easy for them!
>>
>
>
>You have too think of the acoustic and electrics as different
>instruments, despite the common name. Some people play both well, but a
>few really excel on one version or the other. I'd not think of the
>electric as easier aside from the fact it can make louder volume easier
>through an amp.
>
>Segovia would not play the music of the modern electric guitarist anyway
>so you cannot compare them head on. I find this interesting:
>
>His teaching style is a source of controversy among some of his former
>students, who considered it to be dogmatically authoritarian.[40] One of
>Segovia's most celebrated former students of the classical guitar, John
>Williams, has said that Segovia bullied students into playing only his
>style, stifling the development of their own styles.[41][42] Williams
>has also said that Segovia was dismissive of music that did not have
>what Segovia considered the right classical origins, such as South
>American music with popular roots.[41]
>https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andr%C3%A9s_Segovia

I simply enjoy listening to both

On 4/23/2016 7:27 PM, jmcquown wrote:

>>
>> Yep. The fact that it is almost 40 years and they are still upset over
>> his death is clear evidence that they have a a few loose screws.
>>
> I'm sure some of the people who visit Graceland never actually saw Elvis
> perform. I see no reason to idolize Elvis, much less make an annual
> pilgrimage all these years later.
>
> Jill

No doubt Elvis was talented and his music will live on for a very long
time. If I was driving through i may even stop at Graceland just to see
what it is all about. I have no desire to make a special trip though.
I see no reason the way some others do. He was a talented entertainer,
not a god.

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 20:06:25 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 4/23/2016 7:45 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> He was quite an asshole too, if you factor in his hypocritical
>> personal views.
>>
>I never paid much attention to Elvis or his personal views. Celebrities
>hold very little interest for me. Elvis was a bloated, drug-addicted
>fool at the time of his death.

And was already a drug addict when he forced his way into a meeting
with Nixon, so he could become an honorary member of the DEA (was
called something else back then). Plus a DEA badge... the badge was
important to him, apparently. He got it too.

He didn't like John Lennon or the 'counter culture' either.

>I didn't see much to admire there, much
>less hero worship.

Well, he was something of a rock and roll pioneer and he did produce
some great music IMO... but not enough for me to go out of my way to
listen to it. He also produced plenty of crap, too.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 08:45:26 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 18:32:25 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>
>
>>Yes, we can. Since we have a choice though, mine is going to be a steak
>>tomorrow. A 1 1/4" thick rib eye. Baked potato, salad, bottle of wine.
>
>I love a good steak, but I have never liked thick steaks like that.
>IMO they cannot be cooked how I like a steak due to the thickness.

If you like your steak very rare, it should be thick.

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 21:25:31 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 07:19:04 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>>On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 07:27:40 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>Ditto. I recall all the fuss at the time of Purple Rain and his
>>>announcement that in future he would be known just as 'Prince'
>>
>>I think his various names throughout his career went something like:
>>
>>Prince Rogers
>>Prince
>>Symbol
>>The Artist Formerly Known as Prince
>>Prince
>>
>Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
>least

At least he didn't change his face as often - or if at all - like a
certain somebody else I can think of.

On 4/23/2016 8:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
>
> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>
I can only begin to list the number of celebrities (musical or not) who
were convinced to change their names by their managers/agents over the
years. Archibald Leach became Cary Grant. John Wayne's name was Marion
Morrison. Marilyn Monroe was Norma Jean Baker.

It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.

Jill

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 21:35:07 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 08:45:26 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 18:32:25 -0400, Ed Pawlowski > wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Yes, we can. Since we have a choice though, mine is going to be a steak
>>>tomorrow. A 1 1/4" thick rib eye. Baked potato, salad, bottle of wine.
>>
>>I love a good steak, but I have never liked thick steaks like that.
>>IMO they cannot be cooked how I like a steak due to the thickness.
>
>If you like your steak very rare, it should be thick.

True. Or even a thinner one (but not too thin) seared and cooked
quickly. I used to like really rare steaks but now prefer medium rare
(I still like steak tartare though).

On 2016-04-23, Dave Smith > wrote:

> Baalderdash. As a guitar player I can tell you that it can be more
> difficult to play an electric guitar well than an acoustic.

I play both.

I played a steel string acoustic most of my life, and now mostly play
an electric. They both have their pros and cons. The main
difference, I find, is an acoustic is more percussive. It requires
one to continually finger/strum the strings to generate notes. The
electric guitar gives one unlimited sustain, a entirely different
style of playing. Play a single note and sustain it, bend it, and jes
generally raise Hell with it, practically forever. It's harder to
learn than one might think.

nb

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 20:39:23 -0400, jmcquown >
wrote:

>On 4/23/2016 8:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>
>I can only begin to list the number of celebrities (musical or not) who
>were convinced to change their names by their managers/agents over the
>years. Archibald Leach became Cary Grant. John Wayne's name was Marion
>Morrison. Marilyn Monroe was Norma Jean Baker.
>
>It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
>him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.

They may well have and possibly they chose those names for him?

I'd do some googling but my connection is painfully slow, as usual...
My gut feeling is that Prince chose those names himself, I don't think
anyone could have dictated something like that to him.

On 4/23/2016 8:32 PM, Ed Pawlowski wrote:
> On 4/23/2016 7:27 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Yep. The fact that it is almost 40 years and they are still upset over
>>> his death is clear evidence that they have a a few loose screws.
>>>
>> I'm sure some of the people who visit Graceland never actually saw Elvis
>> perform. I see no reason to idolize Elvis, much less make an annual
>> pilgrimage all these years later.
>>
>> Jill
>
> No doubt Elvis was talented and his music will live on for a very long
> time. If I was driving through i may even stop at Graceland just to see
> what it is all about. I have no desire to make a special trip though. I
> see no reason the way some others do. He was a talented entertainer,
> not a god.

I'm not at all convinced Elvis was that much of a musician or a singer.
Of course he did that swivelling hips thing which really created a
stir on early television. "WHOA! We can't let our young people see that!"

Was Elvis that great a singer and guitar player? Let's don't even talk
about his movies. Sorry, I'll never be convinced he was all that talented.

Graceland mansion is located in what wound up as a really bad part of
town. I sure hope the people who worship at the gate have some place
safe to go when the sun sets.

Jill

On 2016-04-24 00:15:59 +0000, Jeßus said:

> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?

No he didn't, but he didn't chang his name as a show of how silly,
flamboyant, pretentious and self-indulgent he is.

On 4/23/2016 8:46 PM, Je�us wrote:
>> It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
>> him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.
>
> They may well have and possibly they chose those names for him?
>
I wouldn't know. Don't really care.

Jill

On 2016-04-24 00:25:31 +0000, said:

> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 07:19:04 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 07:27:40 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>> Ditto. I recall all the fuss at the time of Purple Rain and his
>>> announcement that in future he would be known just as 'Prince'
>>
>> I think his various names throughout his career went something like:
>>
>> Prince Rogers
>> Prince
>> Symbol
>> The Artist Formerly Known as Prince
>> Prince
>>
> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
> least

Yeah. It was called a company that owned the name "Prince", as
reported upstream, but Jesus and others already know it.

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 17:54:58 -0700, gtr > wrote:

>On 2016-04-24 00:15:59 +0000, Jeßus said:
>
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>
>No he didn't, but he didn't chang his name as a show of how silly,
>flamboyant, pretentious and self-indulgent he is.

Well thanks for that, I (and possibly others here) might never have
figured that out.

On 2016-04-23 7:52 PM, gtr wrote:
> On 2016-04-23 23:02:32 +0000, Dave Smith said:
> otherwise care for.
>>>
>>> So when they die, these people they felt they knew, it provides this
>>> feeling of sadness and of grief. It's difficult to explain sadness and
>>> grief for people who don't understand it, but it can be a painful thing.
>>
>>
>> Or... they have just invested too much of themselves into an image
>> they associate with.
>
> "Too much" is a matter of personal psychology. I would be devastated if
> I lost any of those closest to me; I've invested too much of myself in
> them all.
>


We are talking about hordes of people who never actually met their idols
or who never really had any real person contact with them, perhaps
having met them once. They acting as if they had loved a family member
or a close personal friend.

On 2016-04-23 8:15 PM, Je�us wrote:

>
> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>


I think it was because his record company managed to get the rights to
the name Prince and they would not release a bunch of his music, so he
made up the new name in order to be able to get it released.

On 2016-04-23 8:52 PM, jmcquown wrote:

> I'm not at all convinced Elvis was that much of a musician or a singer.
> Of course he did that swivelling hips thing which really created a
> stir on early television. "WHOA! We can't let our young people see that!"
>
> Was Elvis that great a singer and guitar player? Let's don't even talk
> about his movies. Sorry, I'll never be convinced he was all that talented.

He was a talented singer but I think the guitar was more of a prop than
an instrument, and he ended up performing without it. Add him to the
list of teen idols I never cared much for,

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 21:22:50 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:

>On 2016-04-23 8:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>
>I think it was because his record company managed to get the rights to
>the name Prince and they would not release a bunch of his music, so he
>made up the new name in order to be able to get it released.

Yeah, but not sure how that forced him to choose such pretentious
name(s).

jmcquown > wrote:
> On 4/23/2016 8:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>
> I can only begin to list the number of celebrities (musical or not) who
> were convinced to change their names by their managers/agents over the
> years. Archibald Leach became Cary Grant. John Wayne's name was Marion
> Morrison. Marilyn Monroe was Norma Jean Baker.
>
> It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
> him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.
>
> Jill
>

Except that's not why he did it.

--
jinx the minx

On 2016-04-23 9:35 PM, Je�us wrote:
> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 21:22:50 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-23 8:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>
>> I think it was because his record company managed to get the rights to
>> the name Prince and they would not release a bunch of his music, so he
>> made up the new name in order to be able to get it released.
>
> Yeah, but not sure how that forced him to choose such pretentious
> name(s).
>


I can't say that it didn't reinforce is flamboyant image.

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 09:14:17 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 19:11:45 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>>On 2016-04-23 5:19 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 07:27:40 -0300, wrote:
>>>> Ditto. I recall all the fuss at the time of Purple Rain and his
>>>> announcement that in future he would be known just as 'Prince'
>>>
>>> I think his various names throughout his career went something like:
>>>
>>> Prince Rogers
>>> Prince
>>> Symbol
>>> The Artist Formerly Known as Prince
>>> Prince
>>
>>That sequence of name changes seems to indicate more of a flamboyant
>>need for attention than talent and popularity.
>
>I always thought it was silly, self indulgent and pretentious... but
>whatever. Mainstream popular music is full of that, especially these
>days. He was still very talented, regardless.

I was impressed when it was reported what a musician he was and how
many instruments he could play. Truthfully, I paid no attention to
him because of his appearance and name changing. I thought he was
another one-note wonder. I seems that music was a real , demanding
part of him.
Janet US

On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 19:45:40 -0600, Janet B >
wrote:

>I was impressed when it was reported what a musician he was and how
>many instruments he could play. Truthfully, I paid no attention to
>him because of his appearance and name changing. I thought he was
>another one-note wonder. I seems that music was a real , demanding
>part of him.

Yes, he was a genuine artist who knew what he wanted musically and
wrote his own material. That right there separates him and others like
him from the dross that dominates mainstream media.

.... Unlike many famous pop culture icons whose only real connection to
music is as a vehicle to become... a pop culture icon. I could make
quite a long list of the latter...

On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 11:52:50 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:

>On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 19:45:40 -0600, Janet B >
>wrote:
>
>>I was impressed when it was reported what a musician he was and how
>>many instruments he could play. Truthfully, I paid no attention to
>>him because of his appearance and name changing. I thought he was
>>another one-note wonder. I seems that music was a real , demanding
>>part of him.
>
>Yes, he was a genuine artist who knew what he wanted musically and
>wrote his own material. That right there separates him and others like
>him from the dross that dominates mainstream media.
>
>... Unlike many famous pop culture icons whose only real connection to
>music is as a vehicle to become... a pop culture icon. I could make
>quite a long list of the latter...

I was on my way to an appointment the other day and had the radio on.
For most of the trip of 3 miles one song was on. The lyrics consisted
of 4 words and the accompanying 'music' was the same simple chord over
and over. The chord gave a definite beat and I'm guessing that was
the attraction for the piece otherwise, why would anyone record such a
thing?
Janet US

On 2016-04-24 00:58:18 +0000, Jeßus said:

> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 17:54:58 -0700, gtr > wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-24 00:15:59 +0000, Jeßus said:
>>
>>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>
>> No he didn't, but he didn't chang his name as a show of how silly,
>> flamboyant, pretentious and self-indulgent he is.
>
> Well thanks for that, I (and possibly others here) might never have
> figured that out.

Possibly others here wouldn't have "figured out" that his legal
entanglements were *the reason he changed his name repeatedly*, had
they not been told. Of course you knew it already, as you said, but
you didn't share it.

On 2016-04-24 01:03:19 +0000, Dave Smith said:

> On 2016-04-23 7:52 PM, gtr wrote:
>> On 2016-04-23 23:02:32 +0000, Dave Smith said:
>> otherwise care for.
>>>>
>>>> So when they die, these people they felt they knew, it provides this
>>>> feeling of sadness and of grief. It's difficult to explain sadness and
>>>> grief for people who don't understand it, but it can be a painful thing.
>>>
>>>
>>> Or... they have just invested too much of themselves into an image
>>> they associate with.
>>
>> "Too much" is a matter of personal psychology. I would be devastated if
>> I lost any of those closest to me; I've invested too much of myself in
>> them all.
>
> We are talking about hordes of people who never actually met their
> idols or who never really had any real person contact with them,
> perhaps having met them once.

Sharing their young lives with their music, and other arts, constitutes
a significant kind of contact for them. You may not think so, but a
lot of people do.

> They acting as if they had loved a family member or a close personal friend.

That's right; that's exactly how they feel about it, so I certainly
they should be punished, or at least reprimanded severely. Stay the
course!

On 2016-04-24 01:22:50 +0000, Dave Smith said:

> On 2016-04-23 8:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
>
>>
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>
> I think it was because his record company managed to get the rights to
> the name Prince and they would not release a bunch of his music, so he
> made up the new name in order to be able to get it released.

As he mentions upstream, every one who doesn't know that will
eventually "figure that out" without being told.

On 2016-04-24 01:35:06 +0000, Jeßus said:

> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 21:22:50 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
>
>> On 2016-04-23 8:15 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>
>> I think it was because his record company managed to get the rights to
>> the name Prince and they would not release a bunch of his music, so he
>> made up the new name in order to be able to get it released.
>
> Yeah, but not sure how that forced him to choose such pretentious
> name(s).

You would have recommended something sturdy like "Joe Doakes" for a
different incarnation of Prince? Actually it would have been a very
poor branding consideration for him to simply rename himself Doug
Robinson, or Sammy Dubois. The course he took ensured everybody that
knew a damn thing about it, or listened to 20 minutes of snipe-radio
during that time period, would have known before he released 2 or 3
records that they didn't realize was his. There was a lot of
bellyaching and chiding, with no explanation forthcoming for *years*
after.

So I guess "silly, flamboyant, pretentious and self-indulgent" is a
pretty good business rationale in this case. But *shameful* no doubt...

On 2016-04-24 01:35:15 +0000, jinx the minx said:

> jmcquown > wrote:
>> On 4/23/2016 8:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>>
>>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>>>
>> I can only begin to list the number of celebrities (musical or not) who
>> were convinced to change their names by their managers/agents over the
>> years. Archibald Leach became Cary Grant. John Wayne's name was Marion
>> Morrison. Marilyn Monroe was Norma Jean Baker.
>>
>> It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
>> him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.
>>
>> Jill
>>
>
> Except that's not why he did it.

Don't worry she'll "figure out" the history without being unnecessarily
educated about the realities of the situation.

On 2016-04-24 02:21:31 +0000, Janet B said:

> I was on my way to an appointment the other day and had the radio on.
> For most of the trip of 3 miles one song was on. The lyrics consisted
> of 4 words and the accompanying 'music' was the same simple chord over
> and over. The chord gave a definite beat and I'm guessing that was
> the attraction for the piece otherwise, why would anyone record such a
> thing?

Because that's really the full scope of the artist in question, likely.
Additionally it was getting airplay, as you mentioned, so apparently
somebody thinks it's worthwhile.

It seems most 20-something singer/songwriters have an astounding lack
of familiarity with the big, wide world of songwriting that precedes
them. They write their song of first love and first hearbreak, like it
never happened to anyone before. Sometimes it's surprisingly good.
But in my experience that is a very rare thing indeed.

On 4/23/2016 8:25 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 07:19:04 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 07:27:40 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>> Ditto. I recall all the fuss at the time of Purple Rain and his
>>> announcement that in future he would be known just as 'Prince'
>>
>> I think his various names throughout his career went something like:
>>
>> Prince Rogers
>> Prince
>> Symbol
>> The Artist Formerly Known as Prince
>> Prince
>>
> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
> least

Three of those are his actual name, and when he changed it to an
unpronounceable symbol to protest his record labels treatment, the
media called him The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.

Not exactly an identity crisis.

nancy

On 2016-04-23 10:43 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
> On 4/23/2016 8:25 PM, wrote:

>> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
>> least
>
> Three of those are his actual name, and when he changed it to an
> unpronounceable symbol to protest his record labels treatment, the
> media called him The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.
>
> Not exactly an identity crisis.
>
>

I can understand the name change to avoid problems with his record
company. However.....an unpronounceable symbol??? I suppose there were
a lot more people interested in figuring that out than I was.

On 23/04/2016 8:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-04-23 10:43 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> On 4/23/2016 8:25 PM, wrote:
>
>>> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
>>> least
>>
>> Three of those are his actual name, and when he changed it to an
>> unpronounceable symbol to protest his record labels treatment, the
>> media called him The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.
>>
>> Not exactly an identity crisis.
>>
>>
>
> I can understand the name change to avoid problems with his record
> company. However.....an unpronounceable symbol??? I suppose there were
> a lot more people interested in figuring that out than I was.
>
People are already wondering about who gets his fortune, forgetting that
he became a JW a few years ago, so I bet Watchtower is rubbing its hands
expectantly.

On 4/23/2016 10:54 PM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2016-04-23 10:43 PM, Nancy Young wrote:
>> On 4/23/2016 8:25 PM, wrote:
>
>>> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
>>> least
>>
>> Three of those are his actual name, and when he changed it to an
>> unpronounceable symbol to protest his record labels treatment, the
>> media called him The Artist Formerly Known as Prince.
>>
>> Not exactly an identity crisis.

> I can understand the name change to avoid problems with his record
> company. However.....an unpronounceable symbol???

(shrug) Why not. People do horrible things every day, he
changed his name to something no one could say. Didn't hurt
anyone. So what.

> I suppose there were
> a lot more people interested in figuring that out than I was.

I'm sure he wasn't worry about that.

nancy

On 4/23/2016 6:15 PM, Je�us wrote:
> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?

You don't follow the narrative too well, do you?

Start with Warners Brothers and work your way through.

On 4/23/2016 6:25 PM, wrote:
> On Sun, 24 Apr 2016 07:19:04 +1000, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Sat, 23 Apr 2016 07:27:40 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>> Ditto. I recall all the fuss at the time of Purple Rain and his
>>> announcement that in future he would be known just as 'Prince'
>>
>> I think his various names throughout his career went something like:
>>
>> Prince Rogers
>> Prince
>> Symbol
>> The Artist Formerly Known as Prince
>> Prince
>>
> Lol, didn't know that, he must have had an identity crisis to say the
> least
>

No you dumb BIOTCH!

He had a copyright lawsuit to win.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590

So why did he do it?
The symbol was a rebellion against Prince's record label, Warner Bros.
He first signed with the company back in 1977 when he was still a
teenager, and together they produced some of his most famous titles,
including Purple Rain and Sign O the Times.
But after inking a new deal in the early 1990s, Prince chafed under the
company's rigid production schedule. A prolific songwriter, he wanted to
release material as soon as it was ready - he had 500 unreleased songs
in his famous studio vault. But Warner Bros refused, believing it would
saturate the market and dilute demand for the artist's music.
"He felt the contracts at the time were onerous and burdensome," says
John Kellogg, assistant chair of the music business management
department at Berklee College of Music. "He rebelled against that."
Prince compared his contractual obligations to slavery, and began
performing with the word "SLAVE" on his cheek. He saw his own name as a
part of his contractual entrapment.
"Warner Bros took the name, trademarked it, and used it as the main
marketing took to promote all of the music I wrote," Prince once said in
a press release. "The company owns the name Prince and all related music
marketed under Prince. I became merely a pawn used to produce more money
for Warner Bros."
In 2000, after the contract expired, Prince went back to using his old
name, which Kellogg says also freed him to innovate new ways of making
money as an independent artist.
"What a lot of people don't understand is that Prince was not only one
of the greatest creative musical talents of the 20th Century, but he was
also one of the greatest music business innovators of the last century,"
he says.
Prince produced music on his own independent label, he bundled exclusive
LPs with concert tickets and newspapers. He became one of the first
artists to sell an album online, and won a Webby Lifetime Achievement
award for "visionary use of the Internet to distribute music".
In 2015, when he announced that he would be releasing new music
exclusively with Jay Z's streaming service Tidal, he repeated the same
"slavery" comparison that he'd used back in the early 1990s.
"Record contracts are just like - I'm gonna say the word - slavery," he
said, according to Rolling Stone. "I would tell any young artist...don't
sign."

On 4/23/2016 6:34 PM, Je�us wrote:
> He didn't like John Lennon or the 'counter culture' either.

Can you blame him?

On 4/23/2016 6:39 PM, jmcquown wrote:
>
> It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
> him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.
>
> Jill

You are as ****ing stupid as the Canuck Biotch!

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590

So why did he do it?
The symbol was a rebellion against Prince's record label, Warner Bros.
He first signed with the company back in 1977 when he was still a
teenager, and together they produced some of his most famous titles,
including Purple Rain and Sign O the Times.
But after inking a new deal in the early 1990s, Prince chafed under the
company's rigid production schedule. A prolific songwriter, he wanted to
release material as soon as it was ready - he had 500 unreleased songs
in his famous studio vault. But Warner Bros refused, believing it would
saturate the market and dilute demand for the artist's music.
"He felt the contracts at the time were onerous and burdensome," says
John Kellogg, assistant chair of the music business management
department at Berklee College of Music. "He rebelled against that."
Prince compared his contractual obligations to slavery, and began
performing with the word "SLAVE" on his cheek. He saw his own name as a
part of his contractual entrapment.
"Warner Bros took the name, trademarked it, and used it as the main
marketing took to promote all of the music I wrote," Prince once said in
a press release. "The company owns the name Prince and all related music
marketed under Prince. I became merely a pawn used to produce more money
for Warner Bros."
In 2000, after the contract expired, Prince went back to using his old
name, which Kellogg says also freed him to innovate new ways of making
money as an independent artist.
"What a lot of people don't understand is that Prince was not only one
of the greatest creative musical talents of the 20th Century, but he was
also one of the greatest music business innovators of the last century,"
he says.
Prince produced music on his own independent label, he bundled exclusive
LPs with concert tickets and newspapers. He became one of the first
artists to sell an album online, and won a Webby Lifetime Achievement
award for "visionary use of the Internet to distribute music".
In 2015, when he announced that he would be releasing new music
exclusively with Jay Z's streaming service Tidal, he repeated the same
"slavery" comparison that he'd used back in the early 1990s.
"Record contracts are just like - I'm gonna say the word - slavery," he
said, according to Rolling Stone. "I would tell any young artist...don't
sign."

On 4/23/2016 6:46 PM, Je�us wrote:
> My gut feeling is that Prince chose those names himself, I don't think
> anyone could have dictated something like that to him.

Wow, good guess, Sherlock:

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590

On 4/23/2016 6:54 PM, gtr wrote:
> On 2016-04-24 00:15:59 +0000, Jeßus said:
>
>> So he just *had* to choose a name such as 'symbol' and/or 'Artist
>> Formerly Known as Prince', did he?
>
> No he didn't, but he didn't chang his name as a show of how silly,
> flamboyant, pretentious and self-indulgent he is.
>
http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590

On 4/23/2016 6:55 PM, jmcquown wrote:
> On 4/23/2016 8:46 PM, Je�us wrote:
>>> It's not such a stretch to believe Prince's studio/managers convinced
>>> him to be called some odd name to try to boost/maintain his popularity.
>>
>> They may well have and possibly they chose those names for him?
>>
> I wouldn't know. Don't really care.
>
> Jill

Then shut your cakehole.

http://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-36107590