Country Hero In Vegas

To be released shortly (early February) on the VV label will be their second release entitled "Country Hero in Vegas!" featuring the unreleased Las Vegas performances on January 30th 1971, dinner show. After the success of the first release We decided: first to improve the product and second, keeping the same formula to give you more.…..

Here We present Elvis to the begin of the season .. no surprises in the tracklist with the exception of his latest single There Goes My Everything, but the show is extremely solid and good, the sound is good and powerful using a straight copy of the original source tape, We were able to keep Elvis' vocal power central to the mix whilst at the same time giving a new definition to the supporting musicians and singers.

Elvis' performance on these early season nights is superb as he is still performing to the best of his ability. Although he delivers short shows they are delivered in a very intense, crisp and fresh manner that cannot be denied. Elvis was on stage to have fun and demonstrated this during the older, classic numbers, but songs such as 'Polk Salad Annie', 'You've Lost That Loving Feeling' and 'Sweet Caroline' never sounded better. The season will be remembered for the introduction of the new opening composition 'Also Sprach Zarathustra' which although written by Richard Strauss in 1894 was more closely associated with the Stanley Kubrick film '2001 A Space Odyssey', a recent cinema release. As we now know this thunderous opening would be used until the final concert Elvis performed. The season will also be remembered for the beautiful new closing number ‘The Impossible Dream’ which Elvis sang with power and feeling giving us proof that Elvis continued to grow as a performer.

The LP 140 VINYL GRAM is a LIMITED HAND NUMBERED 500 COPIES. It comes with an three fold 300 gram high quality GLOSSY sleeve both sides printed, giving an unique view. The sleeve will be accompanied by relevant liner notes and with many photographs of the Elvis NOW suit from the season.

This vinyl will include a bonus CD and 7” vinyl EP. In the bonus CD you have the possibility to listen the complete concert + a selection of 16 songs (32 min.)soundboard recording, coming for the previous four days shows. From the opening night January 26 you can have the possibility to listen the evolution of Elvis’ performing during the begin of the season, we practically included all the songs no performed in the January 30 DS . In January RCA released what is without doubt the best Elvis album of the 1970’s, Elvis Country. In this season of Elvis performed three songs from the album. From here the EP idea in the matter to give the possibility to use the three songs performed to create a special Elvis Country EP. The EP comes with four songs and two fold sleeve both printed.

We hope you can enjoy this second product in the way to give life to more of his kind in next future.
LP January 30 DS unreleased live audience recording


SIDE A 01.2001 Theme 02.That’s All Right 03.I Got Woman 04. Love Me Tender 05.There Goes My Everything 06.You Don’t Have To Say You Love Me 07.You’ve Lost Than Loving Feeling 08.Polk Salad Annie 09.Introduction
01.2001 Theme 02.Something 03.How Great Thou Art 04.Blue Suede Shoes 05.Little Sister/Get Back 06.Hound Dog 07.Suspicious Minds 08.The Impossible Dream 09.Closing Vamp

Jan.26 opening night* 01.2001 Theme,02.That’s All Right,03. Mystery Train Jan.27, Midnight Show * 04.Only Believe,05. How Great Thou Art 06.Make The world Go Away, Jan. 28 Dinner Show * 07.It’s Now Or Never, Jan, 28 Midnight Show * 08.I Got A Woman 09.You Don’t have To Say You Love Me 10.Sweet Caroline 11.Johnny B.Goode 12.One Night 13. The Wonder Of You 14. Heartbreak Hotel 15. Teddy Bear

Jan. 29 Dinner Show *
16.Snowbird Jan.30 Dinner Show unreleased complete show 17.2001 Theme 18.That’s All Right 19.I Got A Woman 20.Love Me Tender 21.There Goes My Everything 22.You Don’t have To Say You Love Me 23.You’ve Lost That Love Feeling 24.Polk Salad Annie 25.Introductions 26.2001 Theme 27.Something 28.How Great Thou Art 29.Blue Suede Shoes 30.Little Sister/Get Back 31.Hound Dog 32.Suspicious Minds 33.The Impossible Dream 34.Closing Vamp

01A. Make The Wold Gone Away Jan.26 opening night* 02A. There Goes My Everything Jan 27 midnight show* 01B. Snowbird Jan. 29 Dinner Show * 02B. There Goes My Everything Jan.30 dinner show
*Tracks previously released soundboard recording

Source: For CD Collectors Only / Updated: Jan 22, 2013 
Elvis Presley on: eBay, Amazon


Deano1 (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 3, 2013report abuse
I almost forgot...If you have a friend who thinks Chuck Berry was the king of rock and roll, you may want to distance yourself from that person because they are not playing with a full deck. It is personal opinion to say you like Chuck Berry better, but to call him the king when he didn't have a number one hit in the 50's and didn't score his 2nd top 10 hit until Elvis was having his 7th number one is absurd. Yes the charts don't tell the whole story, but you have to be or have been at the top to be the king of something. Talk about a person who never changed. How sad to watch a 60 year old Berry on the Tonight Show trying to duck walk while singing "Johnny B Goode".
Deano1 (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 3, 2013report abuse
Laziness vs complacency, it is a tough line to draw. Was there times, Elvis was just going through the motions rather in movies or in concerts? I would have to say yes. His action performance in "Tickle Me", "Harum Scarum" and a couple of other was far below his performances in other light hearted films such as "G.I. Blues", "It Happened At The World's Fair", "Viva Las Vegas", etc. His vocals, that could be simply perfect even when singing silly songs like "The Walls Have Ears" sound dull, uninspired and even a little lazy on songs from "Harum Scarum", "Paradise, Hawaiian Style", etc. He was as a dynamic performer as there ever was from '69-'72, yet even before his health problems escalted in the mid 70's, he had erratic, uninspired and mediocre shows. I think this is proof that at times, Elvis was bored and when someone is bored, they usually get lazy. It is not an indictment against him, but I think normal human response.

That said, Elvis had seven years ('56-'62), that could only be measured against one other musical acts seven years of success, innovation and inspiration. That act being the Beatles ('64-'70). After '62, it is really unfair to say how Elvis effected or innovated music. He was known, successful act. Other than a couple of singles like "Imagine" and "My Sweet Lord" and "A Little Luck", how many solo efforts by the Fab Four inspired, innovated or effected music? Most of the time their latest records were just more of the same. They were successful (as was Elvis after '62), but they were not changing music. They were singing songs that sounded like they could have come from the Beatles songbook of a decade earlier. I say this as a big fan of the Beatles and a great admirer of John Lennon and Paul McCartney. The Beatles definitely have more influence on todays music than Elvis, but there had to be an Elvis in order for there to be a Beatles. Whether someone today can name five Elvis songs or name the Beatles means nothing concerning either's artistry or influence. Most people couldn't tell you more than one Bing Crosby song or who Rudy Vallee was, but that doesn't mean their greatness or influence on popular music is diminshed.

The one thing that drives me nuts is the constant comparisons to other artists by some posters. Elvis had 22 consecutive years of being in the top 40, never had a movie not make money and never played to an unsold seat. Of course, other artists (Ricky Nelson Tony Bennett, Bobby Darin, Tom Jones, Paul Simon, etc, etc, etc), changed and tried new things. Their records quit selling and they tried something new. What made Elvis change in late 60's? A declining interest in his movies and soundtracks. If the soundtrack "Double Trouble" had hit #4 and spent 45 weeks on the charts, it would have meant more soundtracks like it. When it stalled at #47 something had to change. Almost no one, ever had a successful formula and changed that formula just because they wanted to. TV Shows ("Beverly Hillbillies", "Three's Company", "Happy Days" and the list goes on and on) started off funny and innovative and settled into comfortability then into being dull before fan interest fell off and the shows left the air. Andy Griffith walked away from his show at #1 and he never had the same success again (still remembered by most as Andy Taylor). In movies, we have watched Burt Reynolds become the biggest 70's star making films like "The End" and "Smokey and The Bandit" and soon the formula was producing "Cannonball Run" and "Stroker Ace". Again once fan interest dictated the formula being changed.

Elvis was so popular and so loved by his fans that they kept him succuessful even when he was not doing his best. He was only forced to change once and wasn't in good enough health to have the energy or drive to changed in the mid 70's. No matter what Elvis had done in the mid 60's, he wouldn't have led the way or been the same influence. Those teens and young people needed their own musical heros. In the 70's, he sang more mature songs and ones that he felt appealed an older audience. I love "Solitiare", "My Way", "What Now My Love" and I am happy he sang them. He was basically an adult contemporary/country artist in the 70's. You may not like that sort of music, felt it was beneath him or whatever, you have his first seven years to cherish. I love music period, but Elvis singing anything just does something different to me than all other performers no matter how great they are or others consider them to be.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 2, 2013report abuse
You are so right In-A-Flash, the mid 60' also produced some of my favorite songs; This is my heaven and so close, yet so far (from paradise), and Indescribably Blue (one of Elvis most emotional performances ever IMO ), and two of my favorite movies Girl Happy and Viva Las Vegas (who outdid a hard days night at the box office ). Unfortunately many great songs were overlooked by the general public because they were hidden away in so and so movies, or were released in a period where he was not that hip, but that is one amazing thing about Elvis, he is actually even better and have produced much more great music than he is recognized for, and STILL he is seen as one of the greatest singers of all time, if people just knew !!
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 2, 2013report abuse
Agree that things could have been better in the mid-sixties but have you ever seen ongoing top performance? I have not seen this in business either. People have very good periods and lower periods of motivation and creativity. Even in the mid-sixties there is still quite something to enjoy such as the How Great Thou Art sessions, the Guitar Man sessions, and quite a few enjoyable songs from the movies such as Please Don't Stop Loving Me, Beginner's Luck, Sand Castles, Spinout, All That I Am, Suppose, Let Yourself Go, etc. Actually some movies from the mid-sixties I do even kind of like such as Girl Happy and Spinout.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
"I am past that point", and "I also used to..", it is exactly remarks like that that I find patronizing , like you people are ahead of the rest of us on the road to enlightenment, and we are left behind living in a fanatic world of illusions ! And you have said several times that you don't call people names and that you are a nice guy, but still you come with remarks like "Ernie isn't too smart", how do you know that he is not reading these discussions ? And I have not called you a complainer since my post were erased, and I actually didn't mean any harm with it, but I thought it was fitting because it seemed like you used every discussion to say bad things about FTD. I know from the time that I ran my own business that too many negative remarks (no matter what I did) resulted in me lousing energy and desire to make changes. Look at how many different and opposing views people have to what FTD should do, the only thing people agree on is that their products are to expensive, which means that no matter what they release some people will complain, at least then IMO people could do it in a nicer way. I also think that SONY/Ernst/FTD should communicate with the fans, but maybe they have a reason for not doing it, the same for their prices, I don't have a clue to why the cost what they do, but the Prince box was cheap , so it is not like all there products cost too much, so just maybe there are a good explanation. And everyone can state their views on this site, but that also mean that I can state when I think people are unreasonable in there views on Elvis career , and that's exactly what I think they are when they call him lazy or call every movie/movie tune a waste or his jumpsuits ridiculous or the 70' a bad period, and I try to list reasons for my point of views instead of repeating my self again and again. And I can tell you and Dgirl one thing, and that is that I will never see it as a bad thing to defend/stand up for Elvis ! so just go ahead and call that stupid or whatever, but that is not an argument, it is basically just a way to say that you disagree with me, but we already knew that didn't we ?
mature_elvis_fan75 (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
Alan,all i do is give my view and yet its others who say oh your a complainer,bla bla bla. I was once like you,but just got out of it,i like elvis but he isnt my main focus anymore. I am a big fan of tom petty,and of course some would think thats stupid, but i appreciatte his long shows and dedication to his classics,i have also discovered other great music. I think my interest in ftd is just about gone,im sorry i just dont want any more alternate take. On tour from april 72 i will buy,theres 3 shows,and 2 shows from ttwii,id also buy the june 77 show recorded for elvis in concert. Thats about it,soundboars just dont appeal to me anymore,and high priced book really dont and never have appleaed to me. I get a chuckle when i see unpublished photos,as if thats somehow exciting,i guess for some it is,i just dont get it. If you enjoy all this then go for it,im just past that point,and i for one know of elvis medical problems,but still feel he was lazy at time,the movie contracts he signed no one forced him to do so,kinda like no one is forcing me to buy every ftd. Enjoy!!
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
Natha, that's exactly why your post are among the ones I like (not because I always agree 100 %, but close to), you (together with 80 % of this sites members) can state your views without being patronizing or better knowing . I too have been a fan for some time, although not 40+ years (I "only" have been a fan since 85, when I was 11 years old), and I have been through different phases in that time, sometimes I have listen more to other performers than to Elvis, primary 50' music, Beastie Boys and opera, at other times I have listened almost 95 % to Elvis. I also had a brief period where I bought and listened to Beatles (I wanted to see what the fuzz were about, but as I stated earlier it didn't give me that wow-feeling that I got from Elvis). Now I am in a time where it is mostly Elvis again, partly because of the many box sets with alternative takes and the soundboards from FTD (I never really were into Boots.). When I started to be a fan I didn't really read about his music, I just bought what I could get my hands on (at one time I had 400+ LPs and 100+ singles + many tapes, but unfortunately I sold them all when CDs came around), and I think that this actually was good for me, as I now could make up my own mind instead of being told which of his music was "acceptable" or good music. When I started to read about Elvis on the internet I was very surprised to read how some Elvis fans ? could hate some of his music and how they made fun of people who liked certain parts of legacy that apparently where uncool . What I have learned from that was; that if you want to sound cool, then only praise his rock and blues songs and his music from 54-60 and 68-70, and if you by any chance happens to like any movie songs from the 60' then it is important to apologize yourself by naming at least 2-3 movie songs that you don't like in the same sentence , and NEVER tell anyone if you like the big arranged songs (because a true artist know that less is always better), and most important is never let anyone know if you like Song of the Shrimp or The walls have ears, it can get you banned from the "better" Elvis society before you can say Bad Taste !! Of cause it goes without saying that people who lived through the 50-70' are always right (even better if the have been to a concert),and don't let them fool you when they say that all opinions are equally good, they don't mean it. But it is important that you find something about Elvis that you can hate, else the cool people can not take you serious , because in their eyes you are a fanatic.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
AlanFalk, that's why I stated before that I have been a fan for over 40 years and have a vast collection. Not to say that I know better or that I am more a fan than others. No. Just to show that there are others as 'longstanding' fans who do have other views too. Of course I got a better understanding of ELVIS the person and his personal life as it came to us. Yet the person is one thing and his music another. It never interfered with me liking his music. Why should it. I did not get bored, maybe others did as they need change. For me, I loved the early days and I still do; I liked the later years and I still do. It fits my taste of music. And that is all. The mere fact that I don't like the sixties and that one feels 'sorry' for me is puzzling and sort of patronizing. I like other types of music, apart from ELVIS and that is personal. Who cares for that. This is not the site for that! It is through ELVIS Country that I appreciate country music more that I ever did. So to me he is a Country Hero too.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
Dgirl, are you really drawing the "I have been a fan for many years and therefor know best-card" ?, and just because one changes his/her mind, then it doesn't mean that one has gone from the wrong to the right opinion ! You have still not been able to come up with a persuasive argument that shows that Elvis was lazy. And Elvis doesn't need me defending him, but of cause I will do it anyway because it is something I believe in. And if you believe that the rooftop stunt was innovative, then why wasn't the satellite show, his karate moves on stage, his jumpsuits, innovative ? Elvis reinvented him self at least 2 times ; 60 and 69 and both times with great success (it is actually easy to be innovative, but to do it successfully is another thing). By the way I have 10 Beatles albums (my favorite song is Across the universe ), but Beatles never gave me the feeling that Elvis music did, but this is a matter of taste and not an argument at all !
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Feb 1, 2013report abuse
Don't feel sorry for me Dgirl, about the sixties. It is all a matter of taste. In-a-flash, you have a very good point. ELVIS had a very poor health. And before people start about 'he should have doe something about it'. . . I know out of experience that this is not always 'just done' or easy to do. We don't really know what went on in his heart and mind, lest we should judge that element. Suffice to say that he'was probably not lazy (DGirl), he just didn/t have the mind/vision. Had he had the proper medical care (than nick??) and less the push (parker??) he wouldhave overcome those hardships and maybe like In-a-flash suggests new innovative powers would have been released. I have been thinking about this ever since the mid seventies, so I also have trodden that avenue many a time. Only I came to another conclusion than DGirl, whose view I of course fulle respect.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
BTW I think there were six Beatles excluding Andy White and others that were band member before they were named the Beatles in 1960. Pete Best was discharged in 1962 and Stuart Sutcliffe was pretty influential in the early days but died in 1962. There is actually quite some attention for this in the Beatles museum in Liverpool which is a nice visit if you like their music. A nice detail in the museum is that Elvis his shoes, worn on stage in 56, were portrayed there when I visited the museum being the hero and inspiration for the Beatles. They apparently also liked Buddy Holly and the Crickets very much which inspired them to rename the band to the Beatles. I'm really not deep into the Beatles but agree that the four well known Beatles include Ringo Starr. My favorite five songs of them would be from the top of my head I Want To Hold Your Hand, Ticket to Ride, Norwegian Wood, Fool on the Hill and Let It Be. Really good music but for me still in a different class as One Night, Jailhouse Rock, A Big Hunk of Love, Are You Lonesome Tonight, Suspicious Minds...
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Elvis had serious health issues in the last 2-3 years of his life. It seems somewhat unfair to me stating that he was lazy in his last years. He should have received good care and to me it seems he worked very hard even in his last years given his condition. That being said more than half of the soundboards from 75-77 are not that interesting indeed, but what can you expect in that health situation? Prior to those final years his production has always been high both inside and outside the studio, either on stage or before the camera, and the period from the NBC TV Special to Aloha From Hawaii is one hell of a period. The same goes from the period from Elvis Is Back to Viva Las Vegas. I think dragging on with something for a bit too long is also somewhat natural till a new burst of inspiration unleashes. If Elvis remained healthy I am confident that he would have gotten into exciting new avenues again in the late 70's.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
The 'lazy' thing is matter of opinion and its not just mine. Ive heard many fans state this opinion. The man did not want to go to the studio anymore, period! He had no interest in making new records or exploring new sounds after a while. He made excuses to get out of recording. What major artist do you know does that? Tony Bennett in his 80's continues to explore new ways to record. IMO the Graceland sessions were a disaster for the most part. His last great session was Nashville 1970, 43 yrs ago! Again, my opinion. As for the tours, Ive been down that road too many times. I thought the shows were done mostly on auto-pilot after '72 , in and out in an hour and were more about being there in his presence rather than the musical content for most fans. I'm sorry you dont like the 60's, it was probably the most diverse decade of music ever done, despite Elvis not being a major force 1963-68. The top 40 had many styles and most of it was new & exciting & great. Once again, I am not here to argue with fans who cannot see the picture I have come to realzie after all these years. I just see things differently now, thats all.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
I don't think it is a matter of defending our man. It is all a matter of taste. I have both my early collection, just like Dgirl, and the latest releases. I for one am thrilled up to this day by his music. I never get tired of it. On the other hand most other musical expression do tend to bore me quickly. Also I don't like the sixties (and later music) apart from a few RnR songs. Yet ELVIS always seems to thrill me when he is/was singing in the seventies. I began to appreciate and even like the Country songs he did! Hence for me is sort of country hero! And I take a soundboard of ELVIS over clapton and bb king, both of the would hardly last 1 song for my taste. I don't think ELVIS was lazy at all. Maybe he lost at the end a sense of inspiration to produce new things. He had no co-operation from parker, rca and the whole bunch AND the fans were always thrilled to hear him sing. Only with hind sight we may conclude that he should have taken things more in his own hand musically.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
It seems no matter what you will forver defend the man and make excuses for him. I got over that years ago.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Sorry, shouldn't have cursed.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
I was referring to your previous statement on another post that you could't see why people still discussed a dead entertainer and your very negative remarks about Elvis, not your collection or FTDs, it really seams like you have another agenda all together. Being lazy !! Just because he did not change a routine that drew full house each time (this is hindsight at its worst, just because we now have soundboards and would like to have different songs), and when he did try to change songs in 74 he got a lousy reaction. over 1100 concerts in his last years, many in bad health, 3 movies (and recording the soundtracks) a year during the 60', doing regular military duty instead of the easy "entertainer-duty", touring the south endlessly in 54-56, working as a young man after high school, and in 69 Chip M. said he was one of the hardest working recording artist he ever worked with, put on top of that, that he was depressed (maybe bipolar) and that for him being Elvis often also was work, when he tried to get a little privacy or met with fans ! Lazy, the easy way out WTF. are you for real ?
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
What am I doing here? I probably have a better and more valuable collection than most on here, maybe even you. Its true I dont buy many new prducts or FTDs I will play only once, but I stand by my collection of 1956-1977. But in the last few years I have come to see many of Elvis' career faults more than I did as a young person growing up and it irks me. The way record releases were handled, the way his publishing company denied him access to a lot of good material, the dreadful movies, and the basic tour show which didnt change much the last 5 years. I cant defend a lot of this anymore. He could have been so much more with the talent he had. Sometimes, I must put the blame not only on Parker, but on him (yeah I think he was kind of lazy and took the easy route many times), so I speak my mind. Others made better decisions in their careers, worked with better producers and writers, etc. If he had lived, I hope things would have changed.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
I really didn't provoke me at all, I'm just trying to figure out what you are doing here, you obviously have something against Elvis, and you have stated before that you think it is weird that people discuss an entertainer that has been dead for 35 years. You don't really have any argument so instead you bring your friends and co-workers opinions into play (something no one can verify ) or try to ridicule Elvis, but in my eyes it falls back on yourself . And people not being able to name the four is something everybody knows, and it's a testimony to that their fame should be divided by four. And Elvis being boring, well still he broke the Beatles record as a concert draw in the 70' , so that's even a bigger embarrassment , to be beaten by a "Bad/Lazy" artist !
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Well I kind of think playing a live gig on a rooftop is kind of innovative. Why wouldnt it be? Who's done it before or filmed it? Maybe throwing away scarves while mumbling teddy bear is better in your opinion? As for Clapton, you are either into his guitar playing or not. BB King basically does the same thing. Maybe its a blues thing, but I will tell you I'd rather hear some fine guitar playing then some of the Elvis sounboards I have heard. Desert Storm? Amarillo '77? Talk about boring. You want to get sarcastic with me with my survey? Fine, but I didnt bring up the topic of people not being able to name the four. I just state what I found on a random survey. Thats what happened. Sorry if it hurts. I didnt mean it to provoke, but you obviously feel the need to. Most also couldnt name 5 Beatles songs either if it makes you feel better. I probably couldnt name 5 Clapton songs.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
I was to a E. Clapton concert once in Copenhagen, it was the most boring concert I ever witnessed, most songs sounded the same, and he sat on a chair playing his guitar the entire time it was like having deja vu 15 times in a row. But of course Elvis could also have played a concert ON A ROOFTOP, that's innovation ! But I got to take my hat of to the very scientific office interview, that settled the matter once and for all, Beatles are much more popular than Elvis, now you can go over to the Beatles site and bring them the great news.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
I think ELVIS did care! and not as long as the money poured in.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Yes exactly. I think it may have happened, I mean I cannot see Elvis in the 80's following the same course he was going. Endless tours, MOR country albums, etc. I also think a new producer like a Jeff Lynne or Dave Edmunds would have done wonders with the TCB band. Those guys know how a pop record should sound for radio. But then again, Elvis may have not been interested in an updated sound or cared as long as the money kept coming in. We can only speculate, but one thing for sure, the Col needed to go and so did Felton Jarvis.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
What might have been a nice thing and a challenge is ELVIS playing once or twice with those later artists that were inspired by him. Like what Jerry Lee did from time to time.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Yes that is true, but he was a session musician, much like Glen Campbell was in the 60's . James (solo) is not as well known as either Glen or Eric who are stars on their own. You dont think it would have bolstered Elvis just a little to collaborate with a major rock star? Just a little? I cant believe you would think no. When Orbison teamed with The Travelin Wilburys he helped his career tremendously and he put put a very successful solo album shortly after. Unfort he died soon after, so we will never know what else it could have led to. I remember thinking when that album came out, if only Elvis , if only. No doubt if Elvis was alive , George Harrison would have called him on the project.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Sorry Dgirl, but I was serious about Clapton. James Burton has played with all the great artists of this world.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Natha, cmon now, be serious. You dont think Elvis teaming with Eric Clapton would have bolstered his legacy (not to mention image) and brought about a challenge? Eric is arguably the greatest guitar player in the world and a music God to many. Sure James is great but he was basically there to play the same riffs on the same songs tour after tour. Agan, where is the innovation in that? I bet he also would have loved to work with Elvis and Eric. Can you imagine the dymanics? Sometimes you just have to imagine what could have been. After Aloha, Elvis got lazy & put his career on auto-pilot. A collaboration with any known and revered musician or writer would have done wonders. BTW, I found most people 40 and under can name the 4 Beatles, but cannot name 5 Elvis songs. I did this poll once around my office.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 31, 2013report abuse
Ihaven't the slightest clue why ELVIS should have paired up with clapton and the other mentioned. His TCB band was already outstanding. I take James Burton over Clapton, and what about Ronny Tudd! No way. What really ELVIS needed after Aloha was a new challenge. Also, the Beatles had 8 years and that was it. I doubt whether the ELVIS' influence could be challenged by the Beatles. And shoulder length hair a sign of influence of the Beatles? No way. I rather take the expression Elvis has left the building. And that is a statement or expression and not something comical. In-A-Flash, you gotmy drift and thanks for naming just a few (as I don't always remember these guys names - not being interested in their music, which is also like you stated beside the point).
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
Dgirl, do you misunderstand In-A-Flash on purpose ?, because that normally is a sign of that one has a bad case (which you do here). And having a hard time believing what you read, is that really coming from the same person who called Elvis lazy !? Elvis beat both the Rolling Stones and Beatles records as a concert draw in the 70', and this is actually a big feat when one consider that he was the focus of all the attention (and maybe this was the reason he felt that he had to wear jumpsuits,cape and jewelry on stage, to give people a little more to look at). And it was even a bigger feat if he was such a bad performer in the 70' as some people here claim (that makes TJ [yes I mentioned him again], and Beatles look even worse ). And say about the movies what you want, but they all made profit and some of them a lot, and that is a testimony to his popularity (especially if they were bad !).
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
The Beatles are a group and not an answer to the question to name another person. Michael Jackson was big and innovative, I would consider him a better candidate to contest Elvis as for example John Lennon or Paul McCartney, although Elvis would also win that comparison easily in my opinion. As individual performers after the Beatles broke up, John and Paul, did not come even close to the success that Elvis had. The point is the Beatles did not have the same impact, neither produced as much, neither sold as much, and are a group not an individual performer. The individual performers after the group broke up were not that superstars on their own. You may not like Robbie Williams or other performers, but that was not the question, they were inspired by Elvis in the 70s which was the question. You never know what really facts are in this world but they all seem to be in favor of Elvis. The question what you appreciate or not is entirely subjective and if you prefer listening to the Beatles instead of Elvis albums from the early 70s that is perfectly fine. I personally prefer listening to albums like TTWII or Elvis Country over any Beatles album. This being said, once again, the highlights from Elvis his career are also for me movies like Jailhouse Rock, albums like Elvis Is Back and songs like One Night and Suspicious Minds.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
Sometmes it is very hard to believe what I read here. Yes, The Beatles were a group and that doesnt make them performers? They influenced all the groups that followed. Groups in the 60's and beyond fashioned themselves after the The Beatles much the way singers did after Elvis in the 50's. As The Beatles changed, so did the groups that followed, Hair got longer, etc. To see a musician with shoulder length hair today is a testament more to The Beatles not Elvis. Elvis had a 23 year career, The Beatles had 8. Elvis sold more records, well I damn hope so, he released a lot more. Yet The Beatles had more # 1' s here in the USA. I am even surpised that an Elvis fan would bring up the 3 movies per year as a plus. It made him a laughing stock and damn near ruined his career by early 1968. The Beatles were smart enough to quit after two. Britney Spears? Elvis has left the building? Robin Williams? These are testiments to the 70's? Maybe in a comic way. I wouldnt even mention it. As for Carl Perkins and Jerry Lee ,yeah I wish Elvis would have joined forces with George Harrison. , John Fogerty, Eric Clapton, Paul Simon, etc. It would have been great.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
The Beatles are not a performer but a group and they did not change the music scene in similar fashion as Elvis has done. They were very popular and from that sense got people in music but the same can be said for Michael Jackson for example. The Beatles also did not manage to undertake big concert tours for many years, to make three profitable movies a year, and also not to sell as much records as Elvis did.

Yes Elvis did inspire many performers with his later performances and even not too long ago. Think about Robbie Williams doing his version of the NBC TV special, Britney Spears performing in an Elvis style jumpsuit, the countless references to "Elvis has left the building" in literature and movies, even in Dutch music there are countless examples from singers inspired by the 70s such as Guus Meeuwis, Lee Towers, etc. I am sure this is also true for other countries. This being said, no one is arguing that Elvis was not innovative in the 50s. He was fantastic and changed the face of popular music forever in that period! The discussion is if Elvis was also creative during later parts of his career and I think the answer is definitely yes though not at the same level of innovation as in the 50s. To be honest, I cannot name any other artist that has really distinct eras and styles in his career that are so different as Elvis. Would you really be so happy if Elvis career had followed the same path as those of Little Richard, Jerry Lee Lewis, Chuck Berry, Carl Perkins, etc?
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
Maybe for the same reason that you mention My Way in many posts Steve, I am still baffeld that people who dislikes Elvis in the 70' , are so fond of TJ . And just because most Elvis imp. are silly, then they are still a testimony to the impact the 70' Elvis had on the world. And the Beatles still begged ! Its kind of funny but The Beatles have a similar problem as the 7 dwarfs, there is always at least one people can't name.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
Yes Natha, they came much later, but who do they emulate? The 70's Elvis almost 90% of the time. I saw an impersonator once who actually had the Aloha eagle jumpsuit made up for his act. He was lousy of course. If these are the types that Elvis influenced with the 70's, it wasnt worth it. They are useless and demean his legacy. As for The Beatles begging for a meeting, of course he was thier idol but they shouldn't have had to beg! Elvis was hesitant for that meeting (he actually didnt want to) , because The Beatles were bigger than him at that point, and he was jealous and felt threatened by them. Even the loyal Billy Smith says as much in Revealations of the MM book. Elvis should have wanted to meet with them, maybe collaborate with them and start up a musiclal relationship that would have blown people away, but in his own words he referred to them as 'those sons of bitches' Nice huh? And why the heck does Tom Jones have to crop up in every Alan post? What does he have to do with anything here? Anyway, Im done with this topic for now.
benny scott (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
"Before Elvis there was nothing" dixit John Lennon. So who influenced who ? Elvis was the first and that can never be undone as long as this world exists .The Beatles influenced others to start a group . Just my opinion; Always El.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
It says something about Elvis that if you try to name someone who have had the kind of influence he had, you have to come op with a GROUP, 1=4 :) . Think about how diverse Elvis was: his 50' rebel days, the early to mid 60' the family/silked voiced singer/actor, the late 60' the mature performer, the 70' the showman who created a brand so strong that thousands of people try to look and act like him (even though they know that many ridicule them). People don't be fooled, just because some people write statements on an Elvis site doesn't make them fans (maybe they are, but we don't know), on you tube many people who dislike Elvis, go ind under Elvis videos and put his music/persona/clothes down, while claiming to be fans (often the are MJ or Beeber fans, or people who think that a white man are not worthy of being called the worlds best singer) , and thereby trying to paint a picture of a performer that was so average that even his own fans dislikes a lot of his music. On this site there are quite a few Tom Jones and Beatles fans, that just happens to like some of Elvis' music as well, but that is of course OK , just don't let them fool you- or even better go to their sites and start to promote Elvis, while putting their idols down :), but be careful because Beatles fans are very intellectual and still a little hurt over that it were Beatles who had to beg for the meeting in 65.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
SteveV, after sending my message I also thought of the beatles. They were the innovative factor of the sixties. Exposure had changed too, so they benefitted from that too. It is hard to compare if one needs too, as time (radio, tv etc) changed in the sixties and later. At the same time the exposure was basically for temporal artists mostly. Your 2nd respons is incorrect to my opinion as impersonators came much later.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
From my last post, I just realzied the answer to my question. Aloha influenced the wonderful world of Elvis impersonators.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
Natha - the last question you asked can be answered yes, The Beatles. Whether Elvis fans want to admit it or not, The Beatles influenced as many artists as did Elvis. Yes I know Elvis came first and for that he should be #1, but if you want to go by sheer numbers, The Beatles may have influenced even more. Many artists have said they got into music , started a group, etc., because they saw The Beatles on Ed Sullivan, or the because they discovered music after The Beatles exploded in the 60's While Elvis influenced many singers, I think The BEatles influenced just as many , if not more groups and singers. Its a known fact the 60's belonged to The Beatles and groups in general. There were more TV outlets, more stations playing rock music, more postive media exposure , etc. Elvis was passe by then. As for the TV Specials, I think the 68 special was very innovative, espcially the sit-down segments. We got the Elvis we expected and his career revived. Aloha was more innovative maybe for the TV industry being a satellite broadcast, but for music? Elvis doing My Way? I just dont see that being innovative or influential in any way. Maybe it was innovative for the jumpsiut and cape industry. I would like to know who Elvis influenced with his 70's music. There may be some, but I have never heard it. Anyone know?
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 30, 2013report abuse
AlanFalk, you got my point right as it was meant. And honestly though I associate with mostly non-ELVIS fans people admit that he was the King and that he mastered many other styles too and that made him unique too. Well, about the innovative side of ELVIS. He set the pop(ular music) world on fire in the fifties. In those days he caused a world wide change. It is had to conceive why anybody would not agree on that and him being the King of Rock 'n' Roll. In those days the world was much smaller (way of speech) in perception and he crossed all those narrow boundaries. In those days the youth was not used to such an exposure as it is today. Can you imagine what would happen if he would start now? His selling figures would be unimaginable compared to those days. He changed that culture for the youth forever. So what about the years later? Just think of the NBC Special and the ALoha via Satelite (long before it became easy to broadcast this). I agree that he was not as innovative (in the forefront at least) as in the fifties, but to dismiss his contribution is another thing. Let's just listen/read around how many artists of these days are inspired by him. Not just the fifties, but also the late sixties and the early seventies. So it is also a matter of influence, and one that still lasts - after 35 years of his passing away. Can you name anyone with such a tremendous influence?
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Accept your point dgirl that Elvis was bigger influence in the 50s as in the 70s but that does not imply that Elvis was not an innovative performer in the early 70s. Even the opera style performances with a big orchestra that was introduced in 1972 with focus on songs like An American Trilogy, What Now My Love, You Gave Me A Mountain, etc can be considered innovative. You may not like it personally but that is different. Today the Elvis of the early 70s is as well known as the Elvis of the 50s and loved by many. I personally feel more that the early 60s are somewhat forgotten instead, which is a pity as Elvis was in many ways at his peak in the period 60-63 but not one concert tour. Talking about missed opportunities.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Well Andy_2, I guess you missede the point of my argument as well , I was pointing out that you can be good without being innovative, and Elvis had different periods in his career, some creative and some where he mostly perfected his singing and showcased his great voice. I would rather listen to a good song than an innovative ! And being in the top 20 in any music field is quite something, if you disagree, then I think that that speak for itself.
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Yes In-a-Flash, but the difference is in the 50's it set the world on fire and changed pop culture as we know it. In the 70's the masses didnt really care anymore and it wasnt nearly as exciting, except maybe to Elvis fans. I lived through both times. Sorry, no comparison. Jumpsuits and Vegas cannot compare to Jailhouse Rock and King Creole.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
How about the introduction of Also Sprach Zarathustra in 1971 and going as first worldwide by satellite in 1973? Some of the music was also quite different as prior recordings such as I'm Leaving. I do agree though that Elvis more innovative in the 50s but the early 70s were a very exciting period as well.
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Alan, i think you have missed the point of what this discussion started out as. It was around Elvis being innotative and creative and not about which period you like and how well he could sing someone elses song. Think about the years 71-77 and seriously tell me where he did anything coming close to different or new or took a chance. There simply isn't. Now if you prefer the 70's that's different and is a personal choice but it is a period free from any originality or risk. You can like the 70's more than the 50's but you can't seriously say he was any where nearly as creative and original in his work than he was between 54-58. And being 14th best male on a Country list isn't really that great. Imagine being 14th on a rocknroll male singers list? I'd be struggling to name 14 male rocknroll singers that were any good.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
I 100 % agree with you In-A-Flash.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Good points alanfalk and Natha. The very closed views that only the 50s and 69 were great is something that does not stick with me either as stated below. However it is also somewhat hard for me to believe that anyone really feels the urge to defend Double Trouble or the concert tours in the Summer of 1976 as good work. Even in his low periods there are gems to be found though such as the How Great Thou Art sessions in 1966 and the New Year Eve Show in Pittsburgh.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
well, and I know a guy who in all seriousness think that Mickey Mouse is the worlds greatest actor ! A lot of people try to ridicule Elvis (and sadly some fans are afraid ? to stand their ground against this, and instead tag along), therefor I find Nathas post very reasonable, and if people really want to discuss who is the worlds greatest singer then I like facts instead of people thinking that it is a valid argument to quote their friends prejudice meanings about Elvis. And what is wrong in adoring Elvis' singing, maybe the reason for this is that it is worth adoring. I have noticed that there are 4-5 people on this site who think that they are right about anything Elvis, just because the dare call some of his music crap, or because they have been fans for many years or been to a concert, I don't share that view at all ! I know that these people see many members of Elvis News as fanatics who are incapable of being objective when it comes to Elvis, they think that because they listen to different music (who doesn't) they are the only one who see the big picture, and very often their statements on this site are indirectly rude to the people who comes here to share a common interest. It is very safe just to state that Elvis in the 50' and in 69 is the great Elvis the rest more or less suck, but it actually takes more guts to say that you prefer/like his 70' output (or soundtracks) like Great Dane and Deano1 do, because then you instantly have to defend your taste and listen to people questioning your ear for this overblown music ( often by Tom Jones fan of all people !!), sometimes it seems like some people listen more to The rolling Stone mag. or music critics, than to their own ears (but of course then you have authority on your side).
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
I am not here to provoke and I didnt misunderstand. I know what was meant by the statement and I know this is an all Elvis adoring forum. Im just saying if you are at a party or any social gathering and you comment Elvis is the King of Music you may get a few double takes from folks who are fans of different types of music, thats all. Take it for what it is worth. Hell, I have a friend on Facebook thats doesnt even agree he is the King Of Rock n Roll. Chuck Berry is according to his belief.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
When people want to misunderstand something then it is easy (but it also make them sound a bit silly)! When people call Elvis king of music, then it is because he exelled in more genrers than anybody else ; he was king of rock'n roll, he was named the 14 greastest country (male) singer of all time, he is the white singer with most #1 hits on the rythem and blues hit list (Joe cocker said he was the greatest white blues singer he ever heard), he won 3 Grammys for his gospel music, and his christmas music is the most sold (rolling Stones mag. Just named his 57 chr. Album the second best ever), and he is recogniced as one of the best ballad singers. THAT is why, of course it doesn't mean that he is king of every music style, but that should go without saying (but not for all apparently).
dgirl (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
While Elvis did all musical styles well, calling him The King of music in general is a bit over the top. King of Jazz? King of The Blues? King of Soul? King of Swing? Of course not, he was King of Rock n Roll and that is it. He is not even considered close to being King of Country. Take your pick on that one. Hank Williams, Johnny Cash or George Jones. The fans of the particular genres I mentioned do not consider Elvis king of them.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
We may all have our ideas about how ELVIS should be looked at as an artist. I also have my ideas, but I am very careful in expressing it aloud. ELVIS has been the center piece of so much humiliation, he has been made a ridiculous icon, his last difficult period is every so often highlighted just to make him the laughing stock of the nation/music scene. YET his contribution and on going influence is unique. Something that make people jealous. Some of the ridicule is caused by a very small number of fans who take his stage show to daily life, dressing up and giving rise to 'funny people' to copy that to the extreme. ANd don't give me that story that he dressed up strangely. Just look at the bulk of artists that were popular in those days.

I wonder how fans of other artists look at their musical hero after so many years. Do they also scrutinize, analyse and disect everything their hero did? Or are they happy and content with what IS available? And Elvis was the King, basically of Rock and Roll, but in general a King of Music as he covered all sort of musical styles. He is world wide known as The King in every nich and corner of this world. Anyway I as fan don't feel the need to scrutinize, analyse and disect him. I just enjoy the music he made.
mature_elvis_fan75 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 29, 2013report abuse
Elvis never recorded a bad song,this release is a instant classic!
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Agree that there are more bad choices in the 70s than in the 50s but I do feel somewhat opposed to the idea that Elvis was not innovative during later periods in his career. The return after his army period was great up to Viva Las Vegas. Further, I think the Elvis show developed greatly during the period 1969 - 1972 and I think this was definitely an innovation at the time. People are still referring to these great shows in Hollywood movies and interviews today - "Elvis has left the building". In my opinion, the whole concept was milked for too long though and taken to extremes, similar to what happened in the 60s with the movies. I think Elvis had two periods in which he was struggling with his creativity, from the Summer of 1963 till the Summer of 1968 and from the Summer of 1973 till his death. In both periods, he does not come across to me as being very happy with or excited about his career himself either.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
My Way, Spanish Eyes just appealed to another audience (I remember one of the famous guests interviewed in the movie TTWII, said he came because Elvis "sang those Spanish songs better than anyone"), and My Way was a highlight in many concerts. Still people distinguish between cool/hip and uncool/not hip instead of good/bad . And Elvis covered many great songwriters; Chuck Berry, Tony Joe white, John Fogerty, George Harrison (Something), Jerry Reed, Muddy Waters etc. etc., but he ALSO sang old country and ONJ because he liked them and the spoke to him in one way or another (and try listen to the audience recording from the 9 of june MSG, how happy people sounds when he says that he now will sing The Impossible Dream), and I think it is time that some of those fans who think that the can decide which Elvis is the real Elvis, should realize that he was Elvis because his taste in music was so diverse, as Dave Marsh wrote ;" What's important to understand is that this did not represent an absence of taste, it just represented a different sensibility than most critics would bring to such music" and I agree 100 %.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Yep, it can be said for True Love, maybe the worst song he did in the 50's but it stood alone. By the 70's we had a bunch. My Way, Its Impossible, Solitaire, Take Good Care Of Her, Spanish Eyes, The Last Farewell, ONJ songs, the list goes on and on. I wish Elvis never cut these and many other songs. There were much hipper songs of the day to cover. Bill Withers, George Harrison, Graham Parker, to name a few. He became more of a cover artist of mundane stuff than he ever was before. He even redid Love Letters for goodness sake. Where is the innovation in that?
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
yep agree, True Love was a terrible choice and a terrible song.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Agree that My Way was not a good choice but ain't the same true for True Love? Horrible in my opinion. I think Elvis his best period making his own music and doing really great covers, if any, would be in the early 60s.
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Elvis being one hell of a singer is not in doubt and let's face it with a voice like that you can sing just about anything and it will sound good but that's not my point. Where's the creativity and originality in covering the hits of the day? At least in the 50's the covers were mainly obscure or lesser known songs which bore no resemblence to the original which in turn made them sound fresh and brand new. Unfortunatley throughout his career he had a fondness for singing other peoples songs but the song choiceshe made in the 70's is were often dire. Elvis singing My Way should never have happened.
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Some cover songs of the 70s, I think, were as much owned by Elvis as some of the 50s cover songs, and some weren't for both periods. Tutti frutti or Long tall sally did not outperform the versions of Little Richard by far, neither do I think this is the case for Bridge over troubled water per se. However, other cover songs like Hound dog and That's all right were taken over by Elvis. The same I think can be said for Polk Salad Annie and An American Trilogy.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Hence the little word "Almost" ! My point was that it takes one hell of a singer to cover signature songs like Bridge and My Way in a equally good way, and that is also a part of Elvis greatness. Always on my mind is another example. Many of the "inventive" singers, that critics are so fond of, have made very few #1 songs (Not that that is all that matters), and on top of that they have pretty bad voices IMO, Elvis had it all, granted not always on every number, but throughout his entire career he either put extra emotion in a song(My Way) or he used his amazing voice(It's Over) or used different instruments (Whole lotta shakin' going on), or speeded it up (Promised Land) or he used more singers (How great thou art album), or did several of the above. In my opinion, what it all comes down to is, did he make the songs more enjoyable in one way or another (or just as enjoyable, but different), and in most cases the answer is yes. And when you put all of the above together, then you have the best singer of them all IMO.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
I'm just relaying what Prince said in the article, I dont necessarily agree with him. I have no idea what he thought about TJ covering KISS. Elvis was an interpreter of songs. Nothing wrong with that. So was Sinatra and Ella and other great singers. Im just saying he really didnt seek out new & fresh material to interpret like he did when he started out or take known songs and drastically change them like Blue Moon or Mystery Train. My Way & Bridge were well done by Elvis ,but in my opinion, did nothing to make folks forget the originals. They were already classics in their own right and identified more with their original artists. No one will ever consider Bridge an Elvis song, like they would say, Blue Suede Shoes. Thats my point.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
I wonder if Prince was thinking of Tom Jones' (the great hero for some on this site:)) cover of Prince' Kiss. And I think that the critics and those who agree with them are wrong, music is also about singing well , Elvis proved his greatness as a singer by singing in so many different genres and doing it as a "native", he sang blues, country, rock'n roll and gospel equally well, like he was born to do it. And he succeeded in doing covers so well that he almost took over other artists greatest songs; Blue Suede Shoes, My Way and Bridge Over Troubled Water to name a few. And this is the case with Elvis, his greatness was both in his voice (the control, emotion, softness and rawness) AND in his inventiveness. And most of Elvis songs were covers anyway, but with different phrasing, speed, instuments, but most important a different voice and emotion. I do not consider people better singers just because they wrote their own songs (I consider them great songwriters), and if people will hold it against Elvis that he didn't write his own songs, then they must admit that he NEVER was great.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Interesting. I was reading an article on Prince today in which they asked him what he thought of other people's versions of his songs. He said he doesnt think cover versions bring anything new to the table, the songs had been done once, that should be it. Music is about bringing something new & unheard to the table. This is precisely why as Andy says, critics do not hold Elvis in the same league as some others. He was never a songwriter, but he was innovative as hell between 1954-58 and again in 1960 with the great Elvis Is Back. But it was almost as if the innovative switch was turned off right after that save for a few good tracks here & there. It wasnt until 1968 and 69 where we got the real Elvis again, or the reinvented Elvis. Then once again, the switch was turned off and he was soon singing Its Impossible , My Way, The Impossible Dream and a bunch of country I miss you songs. Songs choices were puzzling and mostly boring. Nothing ever came close to 1954-58 as far as articstic growth. He was a the supreme leader then, not a follower.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 28, 2013report abuse
Actually I think that he was just as good (or better in the years 68-72) . I see Elvis as such a big phenomenon as he was because of the different periods in his career ; in the 50´ he was the incarnation of Rock´n roll who shook Amerika and broke down lots of barriers , in the early 60´he had matured as one of the greatest ballad singers in the world (Kiri Te Kanawas favorite Elvis period), in the late 60´ he came back with a new power full and mature singing style and his stage act here was just as impressive as his early years (also according to critics if you read old reviews), in the early 70´ he made the best music since his sun recordings, according to P Guralnick (writer for the Rolling stones mag.) and behold it was COUNTRY music, and NME-magasine had Elvis as Worlds Male singer 70-72 (he had also won in 60,61,62,65,66,68 ), in the last 5 years of his life he broke one concert record after another (beating both the Beatles and Roling Stones records at different places) and he landed several albums and singles on top of the country hit list. He also recived his three Grammy awards in the years 66-74. I think the above is a testimony to his popularity and skills AFTER the 50' , and I think it is very unjust to Elvis legacy that he is blamed for "only" changing the music scene once in his life, and I think that a lot of the bad press Elvis had gotten after his dead has have a tendency to discredit #1, all of his film music because of the many substandard songs they ALSO had in them #2, the 70' because of the last two years and the lack of number one pop hits in this period (but many of his best songs never made it to #1, throughout his career, but are now among his best known/loved). My point is, if we want Elvis to be more recognized as a singer, then we have to start seeing the cup as half full instead of half empty and pointing out to people all of Elvis great work(as the above), (instead of jumping on the wagon with his critics and helping them ridicule him, or by ending all praise of this or that song with a "that was much better than the crap he sang in that movie/period"). I was lucky that I became a fan at the age of 11 (in 85) before people could tell me which songs that were cool and which weren't, but when my classmates found out about my music taste I took a lot of s... for it, sometimes when I read what people here write about Elvis in the 60' and 70' I get flashback to my schooldays and I realize that one reason why Elvis is seen the way he is today is that his own fans wont even stand op for him !
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Well Alan that's the typical Elvis fans view, i was talking about the music press and whether you like them or not they don't rate him too high anymore. As for covering other peoples songs and bringing something different to them then most of the time i agree although sometimes the choice of songs he covered left a lot to be desired. I was more talking about being innovative which after maybe 1960 he really wasn't. I'm also not buying in to any simplistic view, he never really came close to the artist he was between 54-58 and that is such a shame.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Instead of covering other peoples music ?? such as Fever, It´s over, Any Day now, How´s the world treating you, Suspicius Minds etc. etc.? Elvis always brought something to the table- his voice, different phrasing, another feeling. And I once read a country music encyclopedia who voted Elvis the 14 greatest county singer of all time (I guess those people who wrote that book is heavily into country music). Maybe Elvis didn´t have any top 1 pop hits in the 70´, but many of his songs from that time are among the most loved among fans ; Am Trilogy, What now my love, Seperate ways, Always on my mind, Moody Blue, I´m Leaving, Burning Love, Promosed Land, My Boy etc. etc. The critics have always been harsh on Elvis, non-Elvis fans often almost hate him, and now a lot of fans follow suit (buying into simplistic views) instead of helping his image by pointing out all the great tunes he also made both in his movies and ind the 70´.
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Ok Alanfalk, how often do you hear Elvis name checked these days as a musical influence? People such as Dion, Orbison,Cash and Bobby Darin or held in way greater esteem and that is such a shame. The influence Elvis had is resigned to just his output from the 50's. He could and should have been a major influence throughout his life instead of lazily covering other peoples music. In my opnion he should have grown as a rock artist (which he was clearly head and shoulders above anybody else) and not ventured in to genres such as country music which just by covering other artists songs and not bringing anything new to the table did nothing for him at all. I wonder if people who are heavily in to country music see Elvis as a country artist. I very much doubt it.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Credibility, explain please ?
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
well i wish he'd stayed a rock singer, if that meant missing out on gems such as there goes my everything, if you love me let me know, the last farewell etc then it would only have done his credibiblity no end of good.
Ciscoking (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Friends,..don`t overrate that title...we only have an audience recording out of minor sound quality..
In-A-Flash (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
One can name Elvis the king of no matter what - The King of Rhythm and Blues, The King of Cool, The King of Rock, The King of Music, The King of Country, The King of the People, The King of Gospel, The King of Hollywood, The King of Western Bop, The King of Entertainment, The King of Las Vegas, The King of .... no matter what.

That does not mean he was flawless or did never make any poor record. It only means that Elvis is lots of things to lots of different people. That is the wonder of you.
Tracey Jayne (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 27, 2013report abuse
Summed up beautifully,Elvis crossed all barriers in music and put his stamp on it in his own way so for me I have never considered Elvis to be a one labelled singer.
alanfalk (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 26, 2013report abuse
And we all know that country music is not as cool as blues or rock´n roll, so shame on Elvis for not only making music for the cool people !! Damn I´m glad that Elvis was not as big a musical snob as some "fans", if he had been we would have had an entiere different (and lesser) performer, Elvis was Elvis Because for him there were no barrier in music, he mixed it both IN one song, ON an album and THROUGHOUT his carrer.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 25, 2013report abuse
Quite right Samsca!
samcra (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 25, 2013report abuse
Sure he sang country songs at times. But, he was not a country singer. Last I heard, he is the KING of Rock and Roll... period.
You Dont Know Me (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 25, 2013report abuse
I will be buying next two Straight Arrow release least on THEIR releases you can HEAR the shows decently!~
Ciscoking (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 24, 2013report abuse
I am honest..I won`t buy it..I am not interested in vinyl..someone makes me a copy of the cd and that`s it for me..
Boxcar (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 24, 2013report abuse
Yeah Cisco. I buy it, too. But only in order to get the CD. Give me a parallel "CD only" release and me and all my friends would happily skip the LP. There a quite some comments here. But not a single: Yehaww, finally another audience-vinyl. I hope they stop bombing us with this rubbish soon. If they want to do something special why not invest the money in more senseful stuff. Maybe a 7inch release with a thick booklet (like MRS). Or a LP sized fold-out cover with one CD on each side and a LP sized foto-booklet. All that would excite me more than useless audience LPs.
mature_elvis_fan75 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
Who buys this stuff? Answer-Those who must have everything,make a donation to a food drive or do something worthwhole with your money. You coudnt give me these type of releases,there clutter and uselss!
Tracey Jayne (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
Quality control on the Elvis import side of things has never been it's strong point?. However if you do your homework before you spend your hard earn money you can make the right decisions.But as already stated products like these are produced in small quantities due to poor sales.......some must have everything import wise fans will buy but for me I will save my money for a much better import(s) in the near future.
Ciscoking (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
You are absolutely right..but there are fans out there who buy this vinyl (- junk)..otherwise they wouldn`t produce it..
Boxcar (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
I said it when the first one was released and I say it again: I have 400+ Bootleg LPs in my collection. I paid top-prices for most of them. In the 80s/early 90s you could pay more than 100 Euros for LPs like "April's Fools Day" and 150 Euro for "America's Own" or "Pittsburgh". Today you get 2-10 Euros or no bit at all for these LPs. Nobody need them. Bootleg LPs with audience recordings are like you throw your money out of the window. In a time when even CDs die out and digital downloads take over these import producers drown us with more audience-vinyl trash. I sometimes do understand high quality vinyl re-prints of old classic Elvis LPs but I can not support more audience-vinyl trash.
Jerome (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
Their next release will be Action Hero in Vegas..
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 23, 2013report abuse
Thanks Steve V. So right indeed. To my taste also I wish he had performed more RnR and other fifities songs (he had so many more to choose from) . and above all taken them as serious as he did the country songs.
Andy_2 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
Terrible title, terrible cover. Even if he did sing a few country flavoured songs there's no way he could ever be described as a country artist. Shudder at the thought...
japio (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
Why do compalin Elvis presley fans always. i like countrymusic. And the first records are country. ok combined with gospel an r&b. in the 70's RCA released many albums with newly overdubbed songs from the country hero's. They never complains. and were big hits then.But why only country - maybe they don't want to take a risk Most of the artists of the last few yaers,. can do nothing with pure music.
I like the duets cd. And yes a duet with a male singer was maybe a good choice. But a bad prduct.
This release. i don't know. But when i see this tracklist it's two times 2001 opening??.
And second rate??. I 'll thisnk Cisko has right.
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
KK, good point about Christmas Duets. By pairing him with all those country artists, I guess the label still thinks of him that way and that his main selling audience is still Country fans. I like Country, but again, enough.
Ciscoking (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
The title is definitely related to There Goes My Everthing..he also makes little promo for his new country album before this song....but`s only a title for a second rate product..
NONE000000 (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
I don't like the title either. I suppose since Elvis Country was released around this time, and three of these live tracks were from that release, I understand the reason for the title, but I think of Elvis much more as a rock singer. The thing I absolutely despised about that awful Christmas Duets release a while ago was that it paired Elvis with nothing but country singers. Elvis was bigger and better than that. (I could say similar things about Glen Campbell, but Glen really embraced being a country boy and a rhinestone cowboy. But if you dig into Glen's back catalogue you will also find Mary in the Morning, Impossible Dream, MacArthur Park, My Way.... The early 70's seemed to be the era of the male vocalist who could tackle any genre. Tom Jones, Englebert Humperdink, Neil Diamond, Glen Campbell--prior to Rhinestone Cowboy, ....maybe Don McLean. ) Elvis always encompassed a lot and had been around longer than those other guys. But right from the start, here was this kid who loved Dean Martin, singing blues, bluegrass, country, practically inventing rockabilly and rock and roll, but would later tackle operatic songs like Now or Never and Surrender, jazzy tracks like Fever or City By Night....Hell, he was doing children's songs here and there in the movies. Elvis was so much more than a Country Hero; he was a music God. :-)
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
Natha, I'm just saying what came to my mind first and Elvis in his later career, was considered more a Country artist than anything else. That was his main audience. If it meant something else , perhaps the title should have been America's Hero or USA hero, etc.
Natha (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
Steve V, doesn't Country Hero mean that he was the hero of the country (USA)? Not that I like the title, but just wondering. And like Lefty I'm not interested in the vinyl. My record player broke down years ago so I am only collecting cds. My old lps etc are just for the memory and have strong emotional value to me.
Ciscoking (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
The show is not bad..I gave my cdr a spin..we have a fine set list and Elvis is really committed and we even have
interaction with the audience..a thing he gave up later this season...but I am afraid the sound is not good...their first
release Stronger Than Pride wasn`t a master piece sound wise either..
Steve V (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
Terrible title, but I guess that is what Elvis had become to many people.
Lefty (profilecontact) wrote on Jan 22, 2013report abuse
An unreleased concert makes this an interesting release. I am sure there is a market for vinyl, but I abandoned my record player decades ago, so everything but the CD would be nothing more than eye candy.

CD / Vinyl: 10 most recent news items


Recently Added Shop Items