Jump to content

Nile Rodgers would love to work with Madonna again


realityisalways

Recommended Posts

... But how she will never pay him what he feels he deserves from it...

Niles on Madonna, Rolling Stone interview:

On why he hasn't worked with Madonna since Like a Virgin in 1984:

There were two things going on at the time that she would probably deny, but it's absolutely the truth. She didn't want to go out [on tour] without me as her musical director. Which is impossible, because I make records. So maybe in some strange way, she felt a little bit slighted or betrayed. That was a little bit of it.

Also, she had just married Sean [Penn], and Sean had a huge problem with my girlfriend at the time, even though, when they got engaged, they [sean & Madonna] did it at her apartment. They were living at her apartment, all that sort of stuff. But sometimes that can backfire on you, and that's what happened. So that had a little bit to do with it. She was incredibly loyal to Sean at the time. Of course, I'm going to be loyal to my girlfriend. So this is all stuff that nobody would think about, nobody would admit to. But it really is the absolute truth.

And then, probably, the biggest impediment was my deal, which was a massive deal, and it guaranteed that the next record would absolutely be the same. If you think about it from my point of view, I earned that. And I certainly had no reason to back down. "I just gave you a 20-something-million-selling record! Why should I take less?" But why should she pay more, now that she's got a 20-something-million-record? That doesn't make any sense.

So you put all of those things together. She and I have never talked about it, because I know I would stick to my guns. I've spoken to many people who were involved in the deal, and they said, "Oh, Nile, just be a bigger person." And I'm saying, "Guys, it's just technical. You have to put in context." At the time, no one believed in her but me and a couple other people. I would love to work with Madonna again, but I certainly would absolutely say, "Here's the contract, it's already done. Let's do this." And she would probably say no, and I would understand that. I guarantee you she's not paid anything like that ever since. But we never had a falling out, and we're totally great friends. I don't lament not working with Madonna at all. I don't even think about it, until other people mention it.

Full: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/nile-rodgers-on-working-with-michael-jackson-were-weird-guys-20131003

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, it seems written by a 15 year old girl. Ok, what does he mean when he sys that "it guaranteed that the next record would absolutely be the same "?????????

And is this person really still thinking about what happened like 30 years ago and feeling that Madonna owes him anything? Really!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ugh, it seems written by a 15 year old girl. Ok, what does he mean when he sys that "it guaranteed that the next record would absolutely be the same "?????????

And is this person really still thinking about what happened like 30 years ago and feeling that Madonna owes him anything? Really!

He means in terms of the financial terms, not the music.

That since the record was so successful, he thinks he should be payed at least as much as he was payed on LAV for the next record, but he says that since Madonna blew up she would never pay someone as much as she did when she got him for LAV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it would be "as much as Warner payed him". And Warner payed A LOT in LAV to have the biggest hits ever and made Madonna the biggest star ever. They hired producer, they bought the biggest songs (LAV, MG)... they did the same more or less with TB (Papa Don't Preach), but Madonna was more powerful back then and made a great team with Pat and Steph so they didn't need to spend so much on her.

So Nile should understand that this is not 1983 anymore and Madonna is not going to pay so much because she's is ALREADY the biggest star!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

if they're totally great friends, it seems strange that this argument has never popped out in some ways or another and they never discussed it...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pretty arrogant he said "I just gave you a 20 something million record." You contributed dude, Madonna made that album sell. Like he was handing out 20 million something records to everyone he worked with. He must of liked Madonna unless someone else he worked with sold over 20 million albums with one album. I wouldn't work with him if he said that to me.

I appreciate that he believed in her but I'm sorry Madonna would have been a success no matter what.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does he mean by this: "I guarantee you she's not paid anything like that ever since"? That he is Madonna's most expensive producer ever? Why would Sire/Warner invest so much money into the production of an album for a then not-so-big star? Seems pretty risky to me

Link to comment
Share on other sites

However you all read into it, Nile seriously rocks and is a brilliant and underrated musician who BETTER get into the R&R Hall Of Fame this year. He's produced some of the most iconic, best selling albums from legends (not just Madonna). He seems like an awesome, cool guy who has nothing but admiration for M. I dont sense any shade from him in any way here. As amazing as he is, his track record in the 80s was spotty (after LAV) in the late 80s and esp. 90s. Madonna made a home run decision moving onto Pat and Stephen (who I def. prefer anyway). She HAD to change her sound and mature which she did with True Blue was total perfection. If she worked with Nile again we may have had a weaker LAV 2.0 (no progression) He was perfect for LAV...thats it. If she stuck with him she 'may' have ended up in CaCa/Cyndi Lauper territory musically and success wise and there wouldnt have been True Blue and LAP 8^o.! We all know how their careers turned out (or are currently turning out lol) since they played it 'safe' and the music just get shittier and shittier (unlike M, where the music just got more and more epic)! I think this is def. more than just about money :/ etc lol. I think it was ALL about Ms legendary savvy, flawless and instinctive knack of raising the bar, changing her sound, moving on etc etc...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True Blue was the album that made Madonna a start, precisely because she showed just how CLEVER she is. She changed her image, she launched the daring Live To Tell, and latter the controversial Papa Don't Preach, but played with the public with True Blue and La Isla Bonita (older people favourites) and became a icon with Open Your Heart.

Most artist would have been lazy or too complacient (Michael Jackson, hello?) and had released LAV II with Neil again. Not Madonna. That's why she's still around and nobody from the 80s is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True Blue was the album that made Madonna a start, precisely because she showed just how CLEVER she is. She changed her image, she launched the daring Live To Tell, and latter the controversial Papa Don't Preach, but played with the public with True Blue and La Isla Bonita (older people favourites) and became a icon with Open Your Heart.

Most artist would have been lazy or too complacient (Michael Jackson, hello?) and had released LAV II with Neil again. Not Madonna. That's why she's still around and nobody from the 80s is.

Agree.

LAV was just a generic album that made her world famous with weak catchy songs. TB presented her as a musician who is able to make serious pop music.

Edited by mangapop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, NOT. LAV was a incredible album. And calling generic LAV the song or MG or ITG... sorry, but i think you were cheated and there was another CD inside the case, or maybe you downloaded the wrong torrent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, NOT. LAV was a incredible album. And calling generic LAV the song or MG or ITG... sorry, but i think you were cheated and there was another CD inside the case, or maybe you downloaded the wrong torrent.

The album is not bad, but it is one of her weakest. If it was released today it wouldn't work.

ITG - I don't see it as a part of the album. It appeared later, when ITG was a huge hit.

LAV offered only MG, LAV and DU. Other song worth mentioning is LDLHA.

The song LAV isn't mature or some strong pop track. Reinvented versions are far better than the original.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, it would be "as much as Warner payed him". And Warner payed A LOT in LAV to have the biggest hits ever and made Madonna the biggest star ever. They hired producer, they bought the biggest songs (LAV, MG)... they did the same more or less with TB (Papa Don't Preach), but Madonna was more powerful back then and made a great team with Pat and Steph so they didn't need to spend so much on her.

So Nile should understand that this is not 1983 anymore and Madonna is not going to pay so much because she's is ALREADY the biggest star!

But that's the thing, he is saying Madonna won't compromise and he ain't willing to lower his fees for her, since 'he was one of the few people that believed in her when no one did' and he sounds like he feels he was a big reason of why Madonna became who she is now, so he feels she owes him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What does he mean by this: "I guarantee you she's not paid anything like that ever since"? That he is Madonna's most expensive producer ever? Why would Sire/Warner invest so much money into the production of an album for a then not-so-big star? Seems pretty risky to me

I think he's implying she had no name when they did LAV and that they invested in her hiring the 'best' producer (HIM) to give her a name. And that now that she has a name she probably pays producers less since they will benefit of working with her, but that he doesn't need that benefit (cus he's a legend in his own right) so he wants a great amount of $$$ to work again with her and that she will probably not agree to pay him that much. At least that's what I get from the last part where he says ' I never think of working with Madonna until someone (like the interviewer in this case) brings it up. (Implying that he doesn't NEED her, cus he feels like a legend himself).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nile is fantastic & very sweet, I really have no idea why u fags r so butthurt about his comments.

Nile was a huge fucking producer, & he negociated a great fucking deal...I don't rememeber exactly

what the deal was, but he took a massive royalty percentage instead of a producer's fee...the gamble

payed off & the rest is history.

Oh & it is his album as much as it is Madonna's...it's his fucking band, arrangements etc...It's basically

Madonna & Chic.

M should have brought in Nile 4 She's Not Me & beat Goes On.

THE END.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Pud Whacker

There were two things going on at the time that she would probably deny, but it's absolutely the truth. She didn't want to go out [on tour] without me as her musical director. Which is impossible, because I make records. So maybe in some strange way, she felt a little bit slighted or betrayed. That was a little bit of it.

she had him on LIVE AID post virgin tour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nile is fantastic & very sweet, I really have no idea why u fags r so butthurt about his comments.

Nile was a huge fucking producer, & he negociated a great fucking deal...I don't rememeber exactly

what the deal was, but he took a massive royalty percentage instead of a producer's fee...the gamble

payed off & the rest is history.

Oh & it is his album as much as it is Madonna's...it's his fucking band, arrangements etc...It's basically

Madonna & Chic.

M should have brought in Nile 4 She's Not Me & beat Goes On.

THE END.

I hope that was not directed at me cus I'm not butthurt, I was only explaining what I understood from his words since it's easy to get confused with his answers.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Acko, it's not about being butthurt, but please. Nile Rodgers is a GREAT musician and has produced bombastic albums. But I wonder if he has got so much money from the record company for being with Daft Punk, I guess NOT.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The album is not bad, but it is one of her weakest. If it was released today it wouldn't work.

ITG - I don't see it as a part of the album. It appeared later, when ITG was a huge hit.

LAV offered only MG, LAV and DU. Other song worth mentioning is LDLHA.

The song LAV isn't mature or some strong pop track. Reinvented versions are far better than the original.

Only people who were born long after the album was released can think like that, sorry. At the time it was simply brilliant.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Only people who were born long after the album was released can think like that, sorry. At the time it was simply brilliant.

Brilliant is such a big word for it. I think it is a decent mainstream album.

I don't think the age has to do something with the opinion about it.

If it is so brilliant then it seems it is better than LAP, E, BS, ROL, Music, AL, TB, COADF. Even her first album is stronger than LAV.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, because many people judge the album because it may be dated. And thinking LAV isn't a strong track when maybe 2.000 million people still remember it a bit wrong, i think.

But it's weird, because you are not the only fan here who thinks that about LAV. And sometimes I wonder how on Earth somebody can think that. I mean, it's the ultimate Madonna album, together with TB. At least for me. The same that BAT is her ultimate tour. Of course that's my opinion.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Agree.

LAV was just a generic album that made her world famous with weak catchy songs. TB presented her as a musician who is able to make serious pop music.

Like a Virgin is a classis pop album. It made her a superstar and I never think of it as a generic album with weak catchy songs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like a Virgin is a classis pop album. It made her a superstar and I never think of it as a generic album with weak catchy songs.

Me neither, but it's common with younger people to do that: on atrl monsters were saying LAV equates to a Katy Perry album, bubble gum radio-friendly music

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes, because many people judge the album because it may be dated. And thinking LAV isn't a strong track when maybe 2.000 million people still remember it a bit wrong, i think.

But it's weird, because you are not the only fan here who thinks that about LAV. And sometimes I wonder how on Earth somebody can think that. I mean, it's the ultimate Madonna album, together with TB. At least for me. The same that BAT is her ultimate tour. Of course that's my opinion.

Actually I have nothing against dated sound. A good album is good album, no matter how dated it sounds.

I like LAV, I think it is very listenable. It is a good mainstream album, a nice collection of pop songs.

I guess many people who follow her from her beginning see LAV as one of her best. I think LAP, E and ROL are her ultimate albums, because she showed how much pop artistic and mature can be.

Edited by mangapop
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Rachelle of London

I personally prefer LAV over TB album wise, it all flows, whereas TB is a selection of songs......saying that I dont see any shade coming from Nile at all....he still gets on with M so whats the big deal, he's one of very few people in the spotlight that always have lovely things to say about her and LAV, hes a legend in his own right and he doesn't boast about producing LAV....most people haveno clue that LAV was a chic/Nile album. With all due respect to William Orbit, Patrick Leonard, Steve Bray, Mirwais etc everyone sees them and sees Madonna

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Me neither, but it's common with younger people to do that: on atrl monsters were saying LAV equates to a Katy Perry album, bubble gum radio-friendly music

That is a bad comparing. Maybe Katy Perry would be appriciated more if she did make music in the 80s.

LAV is a good pop record, but if it was released in 21th century it would be seen as a cheap Katy Perry album.

Anyway, LAV has charm, while modern bubble pop albums don't have.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...