Go to main content

Elvis - Original Album Classics

June 04, 2006 | Music
Sony / BMG U.S. has re-released Elvis' second album "Elvis" in their "Original Album Classics" series as a follow up to the "Golden Records Volume 2" which they put out last year.
PTCJones wrote on June 04, 2006
This CD was released as a DSD version last year, then there's the double CD version repackage with Elvis Presley (1956), now this. I also expect there will be a FTD version with a 7" sleeve. So much for the choice I keep hearing about which I think is concentrated on the cover design rather than content.
Steve V wrote on June 04, 2006
Re-package, re-package, re-package! It in my opinion this was Elvis' best album ever, but how much do they want out of us? Can't they let it be?
Rejane wrote on June 06, 2006
I have to say, I agree with the other 2 postings, I'm not sure how many copies we could possibly need of what is essentially the same album.
shaneleebrown wrote on June 06, 2006
But you don't need to buy it! The constant moans about the same albums/songs/compilations being released is getting very dull. It is the same for all artists, not just Elvis. Record companies are there to make money and they will do it in whatever way they see fit. They are a business!
Steve V wrote on June 06, 2006
Yes it's true - we don't have to buy it. But we are Elvis fans and know that this is just another repackage. My gripe is that with all these reissues, the CD buying public gets very confused when browsing the Elvis catalog. They can see the same CD repackaged several times and not know what the difference is, if any. Also with so many choices, I believe the catalog gets watered down and just causes confusion. I dont see this happening with other major artists as mush as it happens with Elvis. RCA has been this way forever.
PTCJones wrote on June 06, 2006
I tell you whats getting very dull. People coming out with the old chestnut "don't buy it if you don't want it"
Greg Nolan wrote on June 07, 2006
And I'll tell you what's getting very dull: Elvis fans who don't realize that once they own the main catalog of original Elvis albums (and don't care for the occasional upgrades in sound, such as the 1999 and '05 Kevan Budd-remastered versions of his first albums - plus deluxe FTD versions) fail to realize that you ought to either collect all the FTDs or bootlegs, or just move on to other artists! The complaint has been recently on how RCA/Sony/BMG fails to keep Elvis' classic original albums in print like his second album "Elvis" or, say, "From Elvis in Memphis" or "Elvis is Back!" If you want something to get mad about, work up some anger about the endless repackagings of Christmas, "love" and country songs, such as "Ultimate Gospel," "Love, Elvis," and the wretched "genre" series. It's a *good* thing for a new fan to come into a store and see racks of the original Elvis albums. If you have them already, move on! Elvis' recorded legacy (especially the masters) are finite. Once you have' em all, that's part of the sad part of being a fan: knowing "that's all there is." His works are being returned to print as so many of us demanded: what is the problem? It's not like we haven't seen a bonanza of rare or unreleased outtakes ("alternates") and previously-unavailable live shows. Hard-core fans have never had it so good, so don't complain about Elvis' gems being put back in regular stores - where they belong.
bray1977 wrote on June 07, 2006
Very well said Greg Nolan. I agree 100%.
Tony C wrote on June 07, 2006
When Elvis' classic albums are kept in the mainsteam catalogue, fans moan because they say that they're being exploited despite the fact that they are not aimed at the hardcore Elvis fans. When Elvis' classic albums, such as "Elvis Is Back", are taken out of the mainstream catalogue, fans moan!
byebye wrote on June 07, 2006
I dont see updated originals as something to get hung up about. New compilations however does. However, if an updated original release on the contrary is "dated" in terms of no sound upgrade, when earlier releases have that. Then theres nothing to justify this kind of release on. So the million dollar question is -Does this product have DSD and the bonus songs that earlier was added into it? Otherwise Steve has a important point here, when stating people get confused on what their options are in a record store. And that may be a deliberate strategy from BMG.
Dixieland Rock wrote on June 07, 2006
According the yellow sticker on the picture above, it shows that "Hound Dog, "Don't Be Cruel" & "Love Me Tender" are included. And it says that it is in DSD format.
byebye wrote on June 07, 2006
Damn! In that case I must buy it... I have a soft spot for DSD with digipack covers. Is this a Us release only? By the way, did you use a magnification glass of some sort to be able to see the sticker Dixeland:)?
byebye wrote on June 07, 2006
...or maybe not. If it turns out to be one of those cheap slipcase covers.?!
Dixieland Rock wrote on June 07, 2006
The sticker in the photo was readible enough without needing a magnifine glass. I hope they release "A Date With Elvis" & "For LP Fans Only" like this and in DSD Format.
Steve V wrote on June 07, 2006
I'm confused. I bought this CD last year (along with the first album) with the extra songs, Hound Dog, etc. in DSD sound and with a yellow sticker. Exactly, what is the difference with this release? The damn slipcover? Is RCA/BMG kidding?
PTCJones wrote on June 07, 2006
It's not the fact that the albums are out that gets me. It's the way they put a cardboard sleeve over the original cover or say it's DSD or package it with another album in the vain hope that people will buy it again. A prime example is Loving You, we already had the DSD remastered version in 2005, then we get the FTD version a year later. I want to support Elvis' music, but I don't wan't to be taken either. Why can't as much attention be put toward albums like Now, Love Letters, Country, Good Times, Raised On Rock and Fool. I would love to see these albums with DSD remastering. I know the Elvis catalog is finite and I know we have it good, but so have the record company with these re-releases.
JerryNodak wrote on June 08, 2006
Steve V: As I understand it this version contains only the original 12 songs in their original running order.
Greg Nolan wrote on June 08, 2006
This isn't a digipak. For whatever reason, they've placed a decent but not fancy "slipcover" (basicallhy cardboard) around these first three albums (plus the classic "50 Million Elvis Fans Can't Be Wrong...")... To my eyes, it's just the '05 reissue with a cover added, probably later but I'm not sure. It's hard to top Kevan Budd's '05 remasters and the obsessive FTD 2-CD sets are for hard-core fans only. If they appeal to you, why look down your nose at the standard versions for John Q. Record-Buyer? But if some of you *must* have every single CD released, then go out there and collect this version! Congratulations when you get home and see there's just a piece of cardboard wrapped around it (however handsome) plus the suitable moniker "classic original albums." I don't see anyone claiming (or BMG) : "you must have this album!" If you bought the upgrade last year, you have it, folks! And to complain about the FTD versions, guys, you must be reallly young. We've never had it so good. There's little or no retail market for deluxe (extended) Elvis albums- save for perhaps his most classic ones. I don't expect any casual fan to savor 30-40 takes in a row of the song "Loving You"... Incidentally, "Loving You" (the '05 remaster) is also part of this "keeping the catalog" alive 2006 reissue series. I saw it today at Tower Records in the US. If any of you sat on your hands and missed any of Budd's remasters, hop to it!
PTCJones wrote on June 08, 2006
Not complaining about FTD and I'm 38.
Greg Nolan wrote on June 11, 2006
Okay, PJones, then you have even less of an excuse. As a hard-core, long-time fan, how can you complain about keeping Elvis' original albums in print? These releases just aren't for you! You *have* Elvis' complete catalog. "Been there and done that, and now onto FTD ... and hopefully imports too! This is a release to be proud of.
PTCJones wrote on June 12, 2006
Greg, you are misinterpreting what I'm saying. I have no problem with these albums in print, I think historically they are very important. My beef is with the way we as fans are duped into buying them again and again. I would love to see hard facts regarding how many new people will purchase this CD, with it's pretty outer sleeve over last years release. Most new or young buyers probably have never heard of DSD or Kevan Budd, so why reinvent the wheel? I would like as much attention lavished on other "classics" like I mentioned earlier. Most of the 70's Cd's have not been reissued since the mid-nineties. Some albums were lumped together and had tracks removed such as Promised Land and Moody Blue, even changing the cover on the latter! The best "classic" releases to me are the Japanese paper sleeve collection. These are several years old now and still out-way the quality of these new releases.
Steve V wrote on June 12, 2006
Interestng! I know a fan who sold all his USA Elvis CD's including the big boxsets, and bought all the Japanese paper sleeve releases. He is now very happy and feels his collection is complete because he has the albums the way they came out when he was collecting the records and also feels these are the best sounding CD's as well!
PTCJones wrote on June 12, 2006
Steve V, I have about 6 of these releases and I personally think they are streets ahead in quality. You can get them pretty easily on Ebay, but are quite expensive. They are packaged just like the original album even with an inner sleeve and are mastered in 24 Bit, so they sound really crisp.
Steve V wrote on June 13, 2006
Thanks PJones. I may go this route. I'm getting turned off by all the re-releases in the USA.
Greg Nolan wrote on June 13, 2006
No, PJones, I hear you but disagree. There's nothing fancy about the outer sleeve and we can safely pass it up. We're always saying that new fans (or "casual" fans) should be able to walk into a store and find Elvis' key original classic albums. The sleeve is nothing for collectors to drool over, although some might want it, as obsession is the name of the game there. This series is part of a Sony/BMG program of classic albums. All of them have that written on the outside of them. What's not to like? And casual fans I know *do* care that the best sound is used. Many folks I know (who are casual Elvis fans) prefer the lastest remasters to say, a 1989 version. People know the difference. And many would beg to differ with you that the Kevan Budd remasters are inferior to the Japanese versions, which you imply. He's considered top-shelf and he (not the Japanese) had access to the original tapes, not the Japanese,as I recall Ernst Jorgensen saying. I agree the Japanese versions have that neat digipak "mini-album" package and the sound I've heard on many of the albums is indeed very nice. I'd like to see "Raised On Rock" (etc.) put back in print but who's to complain over attention to true Elvis classics? The stores in the US are still well-stocked with the 1999 "Moody Blue" remaster, by the way. The "Promised Land" one, however, is not and you're more likely to find the '80s version.
byebye wrote on June 13, 2006
Greg, -The original master tapes have only been used by Steve Hoffman for DCC, (considered to be the "magnum opus" in Elvis remastering), And the 30#1 hits by BMG. Not on these 3 DSD reissues, allthough they sound much better then the 30#1 hit comp I think. The japanese use the earlier realeased masterings but with a 24 bit technology, wich is better than ordinary CD´s but not as good as DSD.
PTCJones wrote on June 13, 2006
Greg, I couldn't disagree more. The 1999 release of Moody Blue is a travesty as I mentioned earlier and I also live in the States and am concerned that stores like FYE and Sam Goody are stocking less and less. You say people can tell the difference, with what comparison? Elvis was re-released last year with the famous DSD, has technology improved in the the last 12 months with DSD 2? No, it's the same album with a cardboard sleeve and maybe you're right in saying it's part of a classic series, so I wait with baited breath for next in the series, but won't be surprised if nothing happens and look forward to next years version with perhaps a red sleeve instead of white. With regards to the Japanese releases, I hear people telling me how fantastic these latest DSD releases are and I dutifully buy them, but I am sad to say I can't tell a big difference especially the mono tracks. I can clearly hear the difference in my Paper Sleeve CD's. I'm sorry if if that makes me a heathen, but that's my choice.
Greg Nolan wrote on June 17, 2006
Jesper, I'm not a *complete* audiophile personally but following the discussion on FECC (still in archives, probably), it seems many felt that the Kevan Budd remasters of 2005 were the best versions ever, surpassing even the sainted Steve Hoffman. (I even detected a loyalty of some to Hoffman that seemed based on the fact that these discs were now on the market for up to $160 or so.) This isn't necessarily my opinion, but I'm conveying the feedback that many Elvis audiophiles stated on FECC: that the Budd remasters were the best *ever*. That these are now re-packaged with a sleeve but still at a mostly- budget price in '06 should be something to cheer: they're keeping them in print, for casual fans. Even non-audiophiles can line up the '99 version compared to the Budd remasters and tell the difference. I don't think fans such as those on FECC would have praised him so heavily if there wasn't an audiable difference, and besides, we do know he poured over them painstakingly - and it does show. For the super-cynical, at leat the running order was restored. No one is calling the '06 versions a new remaster: they're the '05 versions. Why re-do it a year later? They didn't. They're keeping them in stock. And they don't call it "DSD 2." The "classic original album" series is not just for Elvis and may just include these the first three anyway. The point is to support the keeping of such discs in stock. And how did the '99 "Moody Blue" become a "travesty"? That's an overstatement, PJones. For one, the sound is better than the version from ten years or so before and you do get "From Elvis Presley Boulevard" as a bonus as they come from the same session, plus new liner notes and photos. Like many, I miss the '74 track(s?) but you could argue this was a correction. The cover change was unfortunate but you could also flip the boolet over. Neither are on the same stature as Elvis' first three albums anyway. I personally think some of the DSD talk is harder to hear then a dog whistle (and some audiophiles like JLGB on FECC debate whether it is true DSD) but the actual *remastering* (a different subject) done by Budd is almost universally praised, except maybe those who still think that the Japanese somehow did it better... To each his own, but I'm reporting what seems to be the consensus about the Budd remasters. Given how much I loved the fake stereo LP versions I had at first, all of these discs sound great and should be applauded - if not supported by fans who own them already anyway.
byebye wrote on June 18, 2006
With all do respect Greg, I dont think you know what mastering or DSD is all about. I hate to pull rank here, but being guilty to have mastered at least 10 albums myself, I can only say that the mastering process is one thing, and what you choose to put it down on is a nother. Everything comes down to copyright control in terms of how to limit the sound from the master tape. That means sound AND vison deliberately are being reduced. Regardless of WHO has done the mastering. DSD is a way of getting more info on a regular CD without "giving away too much" to the regular consumer. The best format so far in terms of sound is DAT tape, without any compression at all, and about 20 bit. So since Steve H´s work is on a regular "gold cd, and K, Budds´s on a DSD cd, it´s an unfair race, since it´s two different formats. If both masterings went down on a DSD cd it would be fair to compare them.
Greg Nolan wrote on June 18, 2006
Jesper: I freely admitted to being a layman when it comes to audiophilia and defer to the experts. I've merely been following the debate and report here that few have criticized Kevan Budd's remastering work as was implied by PJones. I've also closely followed the DSD debate on FECC and like to think I've learned a little from it. Like many things, I don't think I've literally have to have mastered 10 albums to have at least a listener's perspective. I think I've picked up the spectrum of the debate on DSD and I suspect you were one of the people involved in the threads on the same subject. The point of this main thread is that we should celebrate Elvis' catalog albums being kept in print, whether that means putting new bells and whistles (such as cardboard sleeves) on them or not. "Elvis" from 1956 is a bona fide classic. I don't even think bringing up Steve Hoffman is even worthwhile in the context of the debate over what should be in the racks. Some of the other post implied that releasing this disc was somehow wrong, which is absurd. I do think that most would agree that it would be nice to see RCA/Sony/BMG keeping all of the classics in print with the best possible sound under all circumstances in the best of all worlds. From the raves I heard about Budd's '05 discs (and heard with my layman's ears) and a memory of how much the *music* meant to me when I first heard it in the '70s on vinyl "fake stereo," I don't think we should fret too much about even the non-Steve Hoffman releases. It's far from sub-par, right? A new (casual) fan would come along and probably love this release.
byebye wrote on June 18, 2006
Greg: Every opinion counts, make no mistake about my view there.. And of course it all comes down to personal taste in the end. I have not been part of the FECC board debate ,nor have I visited that site. But I think it´s important to understand what makes the difference soundwise when comparing. I myself prefer to listen to K, Budd´s remasterd DSD isuess from BMG like the "original classics". That´s why I point out that K, Budd´s work has an advantage here when it´s in fact put been down on CD with DSD technology, even though Hoffman actually had acsess to the ORIGINAL TAPES it´s an uneven game.! That you yourself has a higher demand from releases than "whistles and belles" being added, is something more fans should strive for. And when the cost of DSD is neglectible, I think it is poor that FTD do not include that in all their releases.
Steve V wrote on June 18, 2006
Hey I'm learning a lot from you guys! Thanks for all the info.
PTCJones wrote on June 18, 2006
Hey Greg Nolan, I think you have to respect other people's opinions and not treat yours like it was the last word. By the way, thank you for the history lesson regarding Moody Blue. In MY opinion, it is a travesty because 2 albums were lumped together - badly. If they were going to be 2 separate albums on one compilation, fine. But for collector's of "Classic" albums as the title to this article suggests, we have no cover for Elvis Presley Bld even if we do flip the cover round. Ok, maybe late 70's albums didn't have the stature, so what do we do? Certainly not lump them together being that we already had a 70's box set released just a few years prior. Now I realize that I'm not in the Kevan Budd fan club, but I have never criticized him directly or implied, so please don't keep putting words in my mouth. I simply stated that many new listeners to Elvis, have probably never heard of Kevan Budd or know what DSD is. With regards to the matter in hand, I have my opinion which I have stated over and over again and just like a piece of artwork, one persons perspective may not be another's and I am the best judge of what I like and don't need another fan whether or not it's on FECC or here to tell me otherwise. Now I have a feeling we are going to go round in circles with this so have a ball.