MRS: Elvis Presley On Fire in Toledo - 1956

[drjohncarpenter]

For those that actually want a physical copy of this:

On Fire In Toledo - CD Single Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38349

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Green Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38348

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Pink Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38347

It's true: https://www.memphisrecordingservice.com/

Surprised to see you supporting the shady grey market label.

[ForeverElvis]

For those that actually want a physical copy of this:

On Fire In Toledo - CD Single Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38349

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Green Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38348

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Pink Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38347

It's true: https://www.memphisrecordingservice.com/

Surprised to see you supporting the shady grey market label.

ElvisOne?

[elvis-fan]

Definitely should be an official, or at the very least, an FTD release. Rhetorically, why was the official label slow to pounce? Food for thought.

.

Exactly.

Who wants this compared to releasing something recorded 20 years later?

Agreed... Sony/FTD certainly haven't done enough for us poor Elvis fans over the years...

[YDKM]

Definitely should be an official, or at the very least, an FTD release. Rhetorically, why was the official label slow to pounce? Food for thought.

Their might well be more to the story than you read on FECC

[Vegas70]

Already out!

[skabillyrebels]

So what do you think of the sound.?

[Flavor24]

For those that actually want a physical copy of this:

On Fire In Toledo - CD Single Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38349

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Green Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38348

On Fire in Toledo Nov 1956 Pink Vinyl Pre-Order:
https://www.theelvisshoplondon.com/index.php?target=products&product_id=38347

It's true: https://www.memphisrecordingservice.com/

Surprised to see you supporting the shady grey market label.

Not surprised to see that you have changed the link to https://www.memphisrecordingservice.com in elvis4life's original post. Does this look familiar?:

https://budgetslowtravel.com/europe-scams/

At this stage, I don't care who puts out unreleased Elvis Presley recordings, video, or film. If it's Sony Legacy / RCA, that's fine. If it's FTD, that's fine too. If it is Memphis Recording Service (MRS), that's fine too. This especially holds true of pretty much anything that was recorded and remains unreleased from the 1950s and early 1960s. In case you haven't noticed, there hasn't been a whole lot of material come to light from the 1950s and early 1960s lately as far as Elvis Presley unreleased material. And certainly, most of the complete studio outtakes that exist in the Sony / RCA archives have already been released. Not to say that there still can't be material out there, but you definitely don't see it surfacing every day. This is not the 1980s, 1990s, or even the early 2000s any more, where recordings of interest were constantly surfacing. Please keep that in mind when you feel the need to make derogatory remarks about the Memphis Recording Service label or for that matter, any other label. Elvis4life has the perfect user name. He's saying that he's an Elvis fan, first and foremost, much like many others. He doesn't want to get involved in the politics of who found the tape, who put it out, who is now butthurt because they didn't jump at the opportunity to put a recording out.

Finally, to use the weak argument that since it is originally a monaural recording, it is inferior in some way. Last time I checked, nearly all of Elvis' recording output was recorded and released in monaural in the 1950s. Furthermore, Elvis' recordings were issued in monaural commercially all the way up to 1971.

[Alan_K]

So, more theft from MRS. Classy.

No, it’s not theft by MRS and by the date it is in Public Domain anyhow. But Greg1995 clearly states that he gave it to a few people including EJ, and this kind of thing could have happened with other tapes whereby several people have come into possession of various soundboard tapes. But It’s perfectly clear you have a finger pointing agenda against MRS without looking at or considering all the possibilities.

Can someone clarify for me when something becomes PD? Is it based upon the original recording date of the material or the original date it's first released?

[merry77]

I wish it would be possible to remove the narrator's voice. Even though it's historically nice to hear what Elvis does at a particular time. I'd enjoy the songs better if no one keeps blabbing through the song the whole time.

[emjel]

So, more theft from MRS. Classy.

No, it’s not theft by MRS and by the date it is in Public Domain anyhow. But Greg1995 clearly states that he gave it to a few people including EJ, and this kind of thing could have happened with other tapes whereby several people have come into possession of various soundboard tapes. But It’s perfectly clear you have a finger pointing agenda against MRS without looking at or considering all the possibilities.

Can someone clarify for me when something becomes PD? Is it based upon the original recording date of the material or the original date it's first released?

It’s when the original recording was made and that why record companies have been pushing out unreleased recordings to get around the 50 year rule so they retain copyright. In 2013, the new EU ruling also adopted in the U.K. was that any recordings made prior to 1963 went into public domain or was already there.

Anything after 1962 and was already released then got protection for 70 years, but IF the recording was made after 1962 but remained unreleased, it would only get the 50 year protection unless said recording was released prior to the run out time/expired date.

So as an easy explanation for a smallish catalogue, just two Beatles recordings from 1962 are in public domain whilst everything else in their catalogue is protected if already released. Anything not released and if stays unreleased will fall into public domain at the very end of the year, 50 years after it was recorded. So an unreleased recording made on 9th April 1969 will drop into public domain at the end of 2019 and not 9th April 2019.

This is designed to encourage record companies to release product so that the artist can benefit from sales or let the artist take control of their own recordings once in public domain and benefit from sales and there is a specific clause which states "use it or lose it’.

[Alan_K]

So, more theft from MRS. Classy.

No, it’s not theft by MRS and by the date it is in Public Domain anyhow. But Greg1995 clearly states that he gave it to a few people including EJ, and this kind of thing could have happened with other tapes whereby several people have come into possession of various soundboard tapes. But It’s perfectly clear you have a finger pointing agenda against MRS without looking at or considering all the possibilities.

Can someone clarify for me when something becomes PD? Is it based upon the original recording date of the material or the original date it's first released?

It’s when the original recording was made and that why record companies have been pushing out unreleased recordings to get around the 50 year rule so they retain copyright. In 2013, the new EU ruling also adopted in the U.K. was that any recordings made prior to 1963 went into public domain or was already there.

Anything after 1962 and was already released then got protection for 70 years, but IF the recording was made after 1962 but remained unreleased, it would only get the 50 year protection unless said recording was released prior to the run out time/expired date.

So as an easy explanation for a smallish catalogue, just two Beatles recordings from 1962 are in public domain whilst everything else in their catalogue is protected if already released. Anything not released and if stays unreleased will fall into public domain at the very end of the year, 50 years after it was recorded. So an unreleased recording made on 9th April 1969 will drop into public domain at the end of 2019 and not 9th April 2019.

This is designed to encourage record companies to release product so that the artist can benefit from sales or let the artist take control of their own recordings once in public domain and benefit from sales and there is a specific clause which states "use it or lose it’.

Thank you.

[Stevenson]

Can't say much, but I just heard the better presentation of the material might be expected soon...

[ale]

Can't say much, but I just heard the better presentation of the material might be expected soon...

Maybe FTD?...hope it comes with more unreleased live stuff from the 50's

[Greg1995]

Can't say much, but I just heard the better presentation of the material might be expected soon...

Maybe FTD?...hope it comes with more unreleased live stuff from the 50's

Do you have a clue how hard it is to find anything unreleased from the 50s?

[Swedish]

So as an easy explanation for a smallish catalogue, just two Beatles recordings from 1962 are in public domain whilst everything else in their catalogue is protected if already released

Is this 'Reel-To-Reel Music Company Ltd' release then a PD album? Given that MCPS (organisation who collects royalties and protects rights for music) are printed on it

61WtLr0clAL.jpg

[pmp]

So as an easy explanation for a smallish catalogue, just two Beatles recordings from 1962 are in public domain whilst everything else in their catalogue is protected if already released

Is this 'Reel-To-Reel Music Company Ltd' release then a PD album? Given that MCPS (organisation who collects royalties and protects rights for music) are printed on it

The 1962 tracks are public domain. If the other tracks have not had an official release, then they are public domain too, as they are over 50 years old. The other possibility is that they were recorded for broadcast, which is another set of rules.

[MikeTCB]

I am probably going to pass on this particular release.

[emjel]

So as an easy explanation for a smallish catalogue, just two Beatles recordings from 1962 are in public domain whilst everything else in their catalogue is protected if already released

Is this 'Reel-To-Reel Music Company Ltd' release then a PD album? Given that MCPS (organisation who collects royalties and protects rights for music) are printed on it

I believe this bootleg release came out about 20 years ago and those recordings have been bootlegged so many times over the years and it is difficult to know who owns the majority of those recordings if indeed anyone does outside of the BBC recordings. Some of the BBC recordings got picked up by EMI for their releases on The Beatles at the BBC back in 1994, but it’s anyone’s guess as to what the deal was between the BBC and EMI and whether EMI now owns copyright or whether it reverted back to the BBC. Radio Broadcasts still have the 50 year or 70 year protection in the U.K. Of course what we do not know is whether EMI went after those who put this set out.

So some tracks might now be in public domain whilst others might not be or not when that set was released unofficially. But EMI now owned by Universal along with Apple will go after any record label that attempts to put out Beatles material owned by Universal/Apple if they can see it will harm income. As I have previously written, a Canadian company did it and it caught the attention of Universal because of the high number of sales that were being generated and far too many for Universal to ignore. Not only did Universal go after the record company, but the distribution company and the stores which were selling the product in Canada and the USA. All unsold product was recalled and the record company was forced to stop production.

[ale]

Can't say much, but I just heard the better presentation of the material might be expected soon...

Maybe FTD?...hope it comes with more unreleased live stuff from the 50's

Do you have a clue how hard it is to find anything unreleased from the 50s?

Yes I have

[billyblues]

Enjoy!!!

Amazing, thank you so much! I live in Porto Alegre, Brazil, in the state of Rio Grande do Sul, which is going through the worst flood ever recorded here, living with fear everyday the last few days that the water will come to my house, and this is exactly the kind of thing I needed to relax a bit. The last time I visited the forum, this was not shared yet. Amazing. Thank you! May God protect us all.

[skabillyrebels]

Can't say much, but I just heard the better presentation of the material might be expected soon...