This is Not a Review of Prince’s ‘Timeless.’ Here’s Why
Until yesterday, this was going to be a pretty standard review of Timeless (NPG/Paisley Park 19958 44929-2), the newest posthumous Prince project, arriving just over a decade after his tragic passing. You would read about how unusual it is at this juncture to release a short compilation of unrelated outtakes from the Minneapolis icon’s storied vault, one not curated by him or guided by his examples, one that reminds you of projects we’d love to have on our shelves – a pre-1999 deep dive, a complete presentation of his final concerts (or any of the many, many tours not represented on record).
And then the horns blew.
As I broke down in a report for Ultimate Classic Rock, horn player Greg Boyer, who performed with Prince’s touring band The New Power Generation during the 2000s, let slip on Facebook that his contributions to one of Timeless‘ tracks, a funk number called “Calabama” that dated to 2003, were in fact recorded “several months ago,” a fact not noted in the package’s liner notes. (The other two brass players, Adrian Crutchfield and Lynn Grissett, didn’t take up with The NPG until the last few years of Prince’s life, the first sign of a fudge in the timeline.) Charles F. Spicer, Jr., one of the co-chairs of The Artist’s estate management company Prince Legacy, took to X to corroborate Boyer’s claim. “I stated that nothing had been edited or added to ‘Calabama,'” his statement read. “I’ve since confirmed that the released version includes additional horns, so that statement was not accurate, and I will take responsibility for what I stated.”
The already uneven presentation of Timeless – succinctly eviscerated for its haphazard sequencing, slight portions, and middling repertoire in Rolling Stone, Minneapolis public radio station The Current, and by former Allmusic senior editor Stephen Thomas Erlewine – suddenly seems like less of an affront to Prince’s output and legacy than the wanton shattering of one of his guiding principles: a centering of his artistic vision, uncompromised by outside ideas. This may sound dramatic, but it’s true. Posthumous knob-twiddling is nothing new, and many Prince outtakes – including all the ones on Timeless – are often newly mixed. But this lack of transparency casts a dark shadow over the current estate administration’s already-questioned ability to tell a story through Prince’s music.
The releases that predate Prince Legacy’s involvement in the estate – titles like Piano & A Microphone 1983 and Originals as well as deluxe editions of 1999, Purple Rain and Sign O’ the Times – were touted as accurate representations of Prince’s theoretical output. There were shaky moments, sure – reportedly, the fan-favorite 1999 outtake “Extraloveable,” later re-recorded for Prince’s final album HITnRUN volume two, was allegedly barred from inclusion on the box due to objectionable lyrics – but there never felt like any doubt that what you were hearing was tracks that Prince himself put together. The misrepresentation of posthumous overdubs – even ones done in ways or with musicians he easily would’ve called to contribute – calls that veracity into question forever. Fans deserve better, and so do we. With the current leadership of the estate at the helm, The Second Disc does not expect to cover future titles pertaining to Prince’s catalogue, unless actual honesty and integrity can mark its every project.
This will no doubt be a challenging bar to clear. The estate’s other co-chair, L. Londell McMillan (the typical “bad cop” in the estate’s external presentation, responsible for much of the pomp around their often headache-inducing decisions), recently gave an interview to Rolling Stone to coincide with this album’s release covering a wide range of topics (including the bizarre challenge that most fans are so disinterested in listening to archival Prince box sets, instead just buying them and never even opening them). When asked about what the Prince estate can learn from recent financial successes from the Michael Jackson estate (including a woefully error-ridden but financially successful biopic), McMillan’s meandering answer suggested that Jackson’s remaining executor could learn from them. Considering Jackson’s team courted controversy over the veracity of songs on the first full posthumous album, perhaps we can call this one a draw.
You Might Also Like
15 thoughts on “This is Not a Review of Prince’s ‘Timeless.’ Here’s Why”
Leave a Comment
I’m starting to think that the fabled vault isn’t full of unreleased masterpieces. If it was good, he put it out. If it wasn’t good, he put it out. Let’s have an expanded Parade SDE with the Family album and be done with it.
I just knew this was going be to a dud. It even looks cheap. When you spend so many years buying reissues you almost get a sixth sense. What a shame. And what a disservice to Prince.
Troy Carter team handled the previous reissues before the current thieves in the temple came aboard. Prince fired londell previously.
It’s somewhat forgotten that McMillan and Spicer bungled a deal to bring parts of the Prince catalog to Universal Music Group: https://variety.com/2017/music/news/its-official-princes-estate-manager-and-universal-music-group-move-to-nullify-recorded-music-deal-1202436842/
Is it any wonder that Stevie Wonder allegedly has directed that his vault tapes be burned upon his death?
As someone who is more a casual Prince fan, I don’t have a dog in this hunt, but I would suggest that instead of refusing to cover these releases, it might be better to cover them with as much depth as possible so that those who ARE the steadfast Prince fans can make more informed decisions about what they’re purchasing. It’s your site, and you have the right to choose what to cover and what not to, but omitting mention of such releases might not be the way to go.
There have been infamous cases of musicians’ contributions to a release being wiped or replaced by those of other musicians, sometimes after the main performer’s death (Jimi Hendrix) or even while they were still alive (Ozzy Osbourne). If the record companies or the production house are the only ones who tell the story, consumers are making their decisions in the dark. Often, many years pass before the true story comes out; this Prince situation is a rare case of it happening in real time.
I agree with Mark. I’m far from a Prince expert, and I’ve found TSD’s past in-depth coverage of the goings-on with the Prince estate (some of which is linked in this non-review) exceptionally informative and clear-eyed. Mike’s obvious personal interest in the treatment of the Prince catalogue has led to some fantastic writing that’s had real value for this consumer, and I’d hate to miss out on more of that, particularly if the lack of coverage makes it harder for me to make informed choices.
TIMELESS looked pretty flimsy from the outset, and I’m not really interested in Prince after SIGN O’ THE TIMES, so I probably wasn’t going to pick this up anyway, but reading this piece today killed any lingering temptation. I appreciate having this information, even if it’s disappointing, upsetting, and alarming.
The songs on this compilation are good, but it doesn’t blow me away. As many have said, the randomness of assembling these tracks from 1979 to 2016 is baffling, and doesn’t look encouraging for future releases.
Super deluxe editions for each album, or a project that focuses on a particular recording session/time period would be more welcome by Prince fans.
I thought that 1999, Sign O’ The Times, and Diamonds and Pearls SDEs were well received by Prince fans overall. Why is the estate abandoning that plan?
This iteration of the estate (“Prince Legacy”) is new management and this is the first real output of ‘new’ music from them. McMillain has gone on record many times saying he thinks fans are ungrateful, entitled and that his predecessors “gave away” too much material with these past SDEs, so this is them course correcting I guess – 3 years in and a barebones 40 minute CD is all we deserve.
McMillain by the way likes to trade on his association with Prince – He helped untangle him from Warners at the turn of the millenium, but Prince fired him and they hadn’t been associated for years until Prince’s death. so McMillain has made his mission ever since to worm his way back and wrap his tentacles around the estate.
We never knew how good we had it until these grubby lawyers took over.
Seeing this on the Prince Reddit yesterday literally made me shudder: McMillan talking about Prince’s quest for artistic freedom — which, as McMillan was his lawyer at the time, he may have made some contribution to — but noting that they credit “the dead man” and not “the movement” (I suppose he’s “the movement”?). Rights ownership disputes like these existed before Prince was signed and will continue to until structural business changes are made. I do not expect the name “L. Londell McMillan” to be a significant part of that history.
One almost wonders if in a way (that maybe McMillan himself can’t even explain) he’s getting his revenge on the guy who fired him by asserting his control over that guy’s legacy? It’s certainly happened before.
Gee whiz: another artist’s estate seemingly just in it for the money.
Who’d a think it?
Should it even be referred to as PRINCE’S “Timeless”?
Thanks for the plain spoken article Mike.
I have 40+ Prince titles on CD – yes I probably need to do a little trimming 🙂 – but hard to see myself adding Timeless. If that is my position then maybe someone needs to re-think their release strategy! What a shame
there has been more things happening since this post — Sandra St Victor saying there are the wrong credits on Stone, a Prince vault expert saying I Wonder is actually a different song entitled “Eye Wonder”, hell McMillian and Spicer are currently being accused (and with good cause) of starting burner accounts to argue!!