Track Listing Golden Records, Vol. 1 Vinyl Release

Sony/BMG will release the classic album "Elvis' Golden Records, Volume 1" on 12 inch vinyl on October, 8, 2007. This release was originally announced as a 2 disc release. The track listing: Hound Dog/Heartbreak Hotel/Jailhouse Rock/Love Me/Don't Be Cruel/Love Me Tender/Treat Me Nice/Anyway You Want Me/I Want You I Need You I Love You/Loving You/All Shook Up/Too Much/That's When Your Heartaches Begin/Teddy Bear
Source: Elvis Unlimited / Updated: Sep 27, 2007 
Elvis Presley on: eBay, iTunes, Amazon, Sheetmusic

Reactions

Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 28, 2007report abuse
Jesper - thanks for the tip. Will try it.
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 28, 2007report abuse
Steve V, I have a great tip for you, if you have the possibility, -Record one of your vinyls (maybe "On stage" or something) onto a cd and use that instead of remastered nonsens that you buy. In doing so you capture the vinyl sound with it´s dynamics and no compression. Sounds weird, I know... but fact is it works, and that´s the way I listen to cd. You´ll smile when you hear it :)
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 28, 2007report abuse
the old scudder brings up a very valid point. Are the differences (minor they prob are)in sound really even noticeable to the human ear? After all , these are 50 yr old recordings! How much better can they sound? Also how many times are you going to play this LP to even matter? Im old school as well, being raised on vinyl, yet I only play Elvis on CD. I have my original LP from 1958 in near mint condition, bought the 50th anniv edition (on heavy virgin vinyl as they say), and then sold it later on. Once CDs took over the market, thats how I play Elvis. My LPS are for my collection, thats my nostalgia. Was there when they came out, and they are part of my childhood. Not to be played! This reissue campaign maybe only matters to younger folks cause vinyl is unique to them, I dont know. Save up & get an original LP from the 50's if you want real nosatalgia. THAT was Elvis.
Deke Rivers 6 (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 28, 2007report abuse
I have two version's of this, the original open gate version, then later single vynl version.
theoldscudder (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Jesper, I would buy the best condition original vinyl. Then for listening I would purchase a cd. I guess The Old Scudder is old school. The originals mean something reissues like this do not. Best to you.
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Uhh, so what your saying Mofoca is that since you have nothing to add but personal experiences from your childhood about vinyl, we should not have personal opinions about new releases and their quality today? You mean we should stand in line among the"cattle of consumers" and not question what we pay for, is that what you mean?! This site is not one of the brainwashing cheer along ones, it´s called "Elvis news" for a reason. Appreciate the chance you have here to get info from people who has knowledge on different matters instead hitting the breaks.We all benefit from that, and it affects more than you would guess on the positive part since a lot of people watch this site, including the business. Joseph Prizada himself called me up on the phone a few months ago after I gave a few comments about their releases, and we spoke 90 minutes or so about future releases and about best sounding sources etc for MRS. He´s interested on what fans think so he can make best possible products. So if you wanna buy a "Golden records" anno 2007 with digital transfers from either data file or CD and then calling it "nostalgia" that´s fine, Ernst may even call you up for advice next time who knows, he does not know how to make it right anyhow ;) Or listen to people who grew up with vinyl and knows what they should sound like before placing your money. *Finally to Nimy, The reason is because someone at BMG headquarters (guess who?) does not know that the cover your reffering to with light blue letters actually is the 1st original cover pressing for "Elvis golden records". The one with white letters and song titles on front is from the 2nd pressing later on...
Jumpin Jehosaphat (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Again, i feel lke i'm seeing summer tv, nothing but re-runs
Nimy (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Why don't they used the original sleeve cover with Blue letters instead the re-released one (white letters) ?
Mofoca22 (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
i dont know why people are complaining about this. i take it its mostly young people hear whining about it maybe im wrong. im 28 not that it matters to any of you but my first memories of hearing elvis was on lp. in fact the very first time i heard elvis was on the elvis in concert album, the christmas album from 1970 and the number 1 hits. this aint being released for the sake of the buck hell they made billions off of elvis they are releasing for nostaliga and there aint nothing wrong with it im glad they are 50 years after the 1st realese of his greatest 50's hits aint wrong though i aint so big of the 50's elvis as i am post army and post hollywood when he learned how to really sing. but i will buy this becasue of the nostaliga i wasnt alive in 1958, 1968 and not even 1978 and was too young in 1988 to buy anything so people who gripe if you dont want it dont buy it simple as that dont trash the technicians for this dont trash epe dont trash anyone its there business descion top please fans you all expect too much from a guy who died 30 years and songs that were done nearly 50 years ago in some cases calm down chill out and be happy that elvis is still being marketed in any form because other performers aint getting that treatment and there fans have nothing bt there memories
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
theoldscudder. I respect your opinion, but dont you think Elvis original material should be aviable in it´s original form like vinyl, since it is his true legacy? Vinyl is steady going up again and will stay no matter what mumbo jumbo digital remastering is out there. I truly support it as a true reference to all nonsens. Actually I think there should be a law protecting artists work in their original form.
Meaning that any company can make whatever kind of releases they want, but also are obligated to maintain the original product in their catalog. Any artist should put that as a clause in their contract.
theoldscudder (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
All This talk about sound quality. The new releases are so close to sounding alike whats the point? Only a dog with it's superior hearing would be able to tell the diference. How many times will you listen to this for it to make a difference & justify spending additional dollars on this product? William commented unless the original cover (blue lettering) is reproduced , what's the use of this release. It's a repro so even if the cover art has the blue lettering or not what's the point. The point is the $$$$! Hope I made my point.
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
That´s correct loftmanuk. The time for optimal sound quality on vinyl is 12 to max 15 min on each side. And it is precisely due to your observation that vinyl grooves have physical limitations when loosing in quality. Now, we´re talking "audiophile" quality here, and 99% of the vinyl releases earlier in history sure had about 20 min on each side, and that of course worked out fine. But I mean today you have knowledge on making a good product better by splicing a repertoare into 2 discs istead of one for the sake of better sound. But the most important issue is from where, and what kind of material the vinyl is being made from. 1. Is it from old stampers from let´s say 70`s vinyl reissues? 2. straight from digital files made from original tapes/ or with screwed up remastering? 3. From CD´s? -That´s the million dollar question..
loftmanuk (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Jesper,thanks for the info. I tell you what you learn something new every day here. So if a vinyl side goes over 12-15 minutes it loses quality. Why is this. Is it because the grooves are made smaller and cant hold as much information.
RonBaker (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
The original album has 14 songs--7 per side. It sounds pretty good to me...I'm not sure about the new vinyl issue. If you want to visualize what the difference is between an original vinyl record and a cd issue...you can use a computer program (such as Audition) that provides a visual of the sound. The albums have a great dynamic range...the cds are compressed with no dynamic range at all (at least that's the way it LOOKS).
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
I understand you guys, and I agree. I am a 100% vinyl fan myself and these products is what I am interested in rather than FTD outtakes. My concern lies mainly in audiophile listening as most other vinyl lovers, but the trouble is that if you dont manufacture vinyl in a certain way with analog masters, then you could rather buy a cd instead. The fact that BMG decide to cut down on material and by that going back to original layout on this vinyl release is good, dont get me wrong on that point, but you need 2 discs to avoid going over 12-15 minutes on each record side, hence this vinyl contain 14 songs with 17 minutes per side. This is something they should know at BMG, and it´s frustrating to see chances go by all the time due to ignorance or greed on about 1-2 dollars/record. They should also know that vinyl buyers 2007 are fastidious customers who knows what they want. And think about about it, this kind of material is aviable for me or ANYONE in Europe to make their own "Golden records"cd or vinyl if they would like to. Wouldn´t it be better if the original label then made a product so superiour so that new curious buyers wouldn´t have to be confused with crap from obscure people & companies who just wanna make a qick buck?! Trouble is that companies like MRS is good(!) so with the advantage of BMG having access to everything in it´s original form, it´s suprising they dont realize that this competition is not going to go away. This kind of arrogance is exactly the same kind of policy and rethoric wich led to the disaster in record sales today. Record company´s shot themself in the foot by starting to take more money for a cheaper product like the cd. And now they´re making the same mistake again by not lying one step ahead of competitors they´ve never had to deal with before.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Indeed, Greg Nolan, it should be available. Let's not forget there are quite a number of news fans too every year looking for vinyl items as to have a feeling of physically touch the 'originals'. These fans were not as lucky as some of us to be there when everything happened in real time, having 'just' the vinyl and the exitement of them being brand new!
Greg Nolan (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Jesper raises some interesting concerns in his initial post about how the remastering is done (or not done), but to William, this is a classic release that should stay in the catalog and /or be reissued *ad infinitum*. Why do people complain when things like this (or Golden Records Vol. 3 and 4 this year) are reissued? Elvis' catalog is finite - let's celebrate what came out during his career and beyond. I'm glad to see this out.
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 27, 2007report abuse
Unintentionally your right on the money Steve V. Cause the profit for stripping this release down to 1 disc instead of 2, is about 1 dollar extra on each record(!)
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 26, 2007report abuse
William - I can answer you. Whats the use? To make even a 1 dollar profit if they can. Its always about the money and always will be. The record company knows there are enough die hards that would buy a totally non-essential item like this cause they 'have to have everything'. The vinyl idea has been already if you remember for the 50th Golden anniv, then again in 1997 with extra tracks. I guess there are those that need Hound Dog in their collection 532 times.
Bill (BW) (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 26, 2007report abuse
The first pressings of this LP had the words "Elvis' Golden Records" in light blue letting and the songs were not listed on the front cover as in the displayed photo. Unless the original cover is reproduced, what's the use of this release?
byebye (profilecontact) wrote on Sep 26, 2007report abuse
And what is the origin of source on this vinyl edition I may ask? A majority of the major record labels these days are making their vinyl editions straight from the CD edition(!) They actually dont bother sending the digital "files" wich contain more data aviable for the vinyl pressing. So it´s not only vinyl pressed from digital masters instead of analog, but from a CD. I cant speak for this case alone, but demand more detailed info on what it is pressed from. And be aware folks, anything labeled "remastered" on vinyl is bogus. It´s the laquer cutting from the real master that counts. It used to be done by real craftsmen on RCA, but now they got a "wizard" playing around with digital EQ and dynamic compression before it´s going down on CD or Vinyl, calling it "remaaastering" -it´s nothing but sacrilege! And by the way, The fact that this edition is stripped to a 1 disc release instead of 2, that would have twice the room for better sound, makes me decide to skip this.- Amateurs! They simply dont care, and simply dont understand how to make it right. It´s a insane and ironic situation, here we have the original Elvis label with all the access in the world to the best Elvis masters to make perfect products, but they just cant seem to make it right, and by that leaving room for companies like MRS who knows what the fans wants. -I say fire Jorgensen and his staff, and headhunt Joseph Pirzada right away so he can work with real masters and get it right!

CD / Vinyl: 10 most recent news items

12/02/2016
2
11/28/2016
1

Recently Added Shop Items