Elvis' Christmas Album --> Mystery No More?

No problem, Bruce. We're all working together to solve this mystery. Thanks Doc for starting a great thread.

MT

Great topic!

This could be a plausible explanation.

LOC 1035 original issue 1957.

RCA realises the prefix is wrong and makes change sometime in 1958 to LPM with the directive that all copies of LOC held at wholesale and retail level had to be sold before the new pre-fix was bought into play. These were "sale or return" days so retailers tended to overorder knowing that any unsold could be returned to wholesalers so that there would have been some considerable "old" stock ready for 1959 and again in 1960..

However the "old" LOC stock would vary between wholesalers and locales so for example Texas could have introduced LPM in 1958 wheras California didn't need to untill 1961

The change in cover design is a red herring in that after LPM original version was released and [bnew][/b] photographs became available RCA just decided to freshen up the look to give their promotional arm something to talk about and increase sales.

So a reference to LOC having been "deleted" in 1958 could be technically correct if taken to mean deleted from factory release. Put it this way we all know of titles in retail stores nowadays which are supposedly out of print.

As far as Billboard was concerned I suspect that Albums were counted by titles rather than serial numbers which is the case today.

It would seem that RCA were confused by their own prefix system which was rather complex. Originally LOC was conceived for original cast albums and films. Longplaying Original Cast = LOC. LPM stood for Long Playiing Mainstream. They had other prefix - such as LPT = Long Play Ten (inch)

Sometime in 1958 the LPS prefix was created for stereo use and in time LPM became mono in a defacto way.

The real mystery was why Elvis Christmas album was given LOC in the first place and why Loving You and King Creole never were given LOC.

It's been fun watching this unfold.

Great work you guys!

Perhaps someone will buy this

http://www.mainspringpress.com/victor_discography.html

In Canada---LOC-1035 was issued for christmas 1957, in 1958 it was changed to LPM-1951, with the same front cover as LOC-1035, in 1959, the cover was changed to the standard LPM--1951

Hi Memphis. I purchased LOC-1035 at Woolworths here in Grande Prairie in 1957. RCA Canada imported the jacket with the photos and pressed the record in Canada. I also purchased the LPM--1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover, but with an added Best Wishes Elvis Presley made to look like a little flap at Woolworths in 1958, and the standard LPM-1951 at Woolworths in 1959.

Here is the 1958 version Barry is speaking about.
As Barry has pointed out in his post. For the 1958 Canadian version, Canada chose not to include
the photo booklet the United States offered on their original 1957 version.

PEP

Hi Memphis. I purchased LOC-1035 at Woolworths here in Grande Prairie in 1957. RCA Canada imported the jacket with the photos and pressed the record in Canada. I also purchased the LPM--1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover, but with an added Best Wishes Elvis Presley made to look like a little flap at Woolworths in 1958, and the standard LPM-1951 at Woolworths in 1959.

The only problem with all of this is that another Billboard piece circa 1960 talks about a U.S. holiday customer having the option of buying LOC 1035 OR LPM 1951. This means two albums, and two different covers. It would not be possible if there was only an LPM 1951 to buy.

Also, why is there absolutely NO mention of LPM 1951 anywhere in Billboard -- ads, previews, charts -- until 1960? A new cover for 1959 especially would garner some notice, as EPA 4340 did in the Christmas media I posted on page 1.

Again, I hope to hear from someone who may know a lot more soon.

Thanks everyone for the kind words and great additional input.

PEP --

Neat image, but I have to ask if this is a scan of an LP in your collection or a mock-up taken from the internet.

I ask because the top third of the front and back cover are a completely different shade of red, and in fact close scrutiny of the front cover image of the gold present with the green bow shows that it does not line up from top to bottom.

This strongly indicates it is not genuine, but rather some kind of faked photo.

Hi Doc, the scan is of the album I own in my personal collection, it is original, not a fake.
I was unable to match the color when I had to join the pieces together for display in your thread.
I tried to get it to work a number of times' before posting, to No avail. Sorry about that.

Please take note how poor Canada took interest in Covering up the original American Catalog number.
They didn't even try to match the colour properly. At least I tried... (little joke there )

PEP

In Canada---LOC-1035 was issued for christmas 1957, in 1958 it was changed to LPM-1951, with the same front cover as LOC-1035, in 1959, the cover was changed to the standard LPM--1951

This would fit my speculation.

PEP.
In Canada, as I stated, we got the LOC-1035 in 1957 with the photos and the gold sticker as well.

The LPM-1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover was only issued in Canada in 1958

PEP.
In Canada, as I stated, we got the LOC-1035 in 1957 with the photos and the gold sticker as well.

The LPM-1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover was only issued in Canada in 1958

Hi Barry, Yes, I just noticed you mentioned this when I re read what you wrote.
I have now changed my first post in this thread, to reflect this.
Thank you for the info.

I also purchased the LPM--1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover, but with an added Best Wishes Elvis Presley made to look like a little flap at Woolworths in 1958, and the standard LPM-1951 at Woolworths in 1959.

Barry, also, thanks' for pointing out the other difference between the American 1957 LP version and the Canadian 1958 LP version covers'.





PEP

PEP.
In Canada, as I stated, we got the LOC-1035 in 1957 with the photos and the gold sticker as well.

The LPM-1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover was only issued in Canada in 1958

At the very least this proves that the catalog number was designated in 1958. But all evidence speaks to 1960 as the U.S. debut of the scaled-down reissue.

PEP. You're Welcome.
I'm going to jump ahead here.
As you know RCA--U.S. reissued the LOC-1035 as--AFM1-5486, and they tried to duplicate the front cover, but were not able to.
On the back cover in the lower right hand corner, it states previously released as LPM-1951?

PEP.
In Canada, as I stated, we got the LOC-1035 in 1957 with the photos and the gold sticker as well.

The LPM-1951 with the LOC-1035 front cover was only issued in Canada in 1958

At the very least this proves that the catalog number was designated in 1958. But all evidence speaks to 1960 as the U.S. debut of the scaled-down reissue.

That begs the question - why would RCA Canada use a RCA USA number two years prior?
When Canada changed why not the USA?

Are really sure that the new number did not appear in some areas (not nationally) in the USA in 1958

Are really sure that the new number did not appear in some areas (not nationally) in the USA in 1958

Such a scenario is incredibly unlikely. A new catalog number will ALWAYS appear in the major markets (NY, LA) first.

Are really sure that the new number did not appear in some areas (not nationally) in the USA in 1958

Such a scenario is incredibly unlikely. A new catalog number will ALWAYS appear in the major markets (NY, LA) first.

Not if other markets had ran out of wholesale stock first.

The bigger the market the more returns to be be resold.

I just don't understand why RCA USA would issue a serial number in 1958 that they had no intention of using for two years.

Not if other markets had ran out of wholesale stock first.

That doesn't matter. You really don't know retail or promotions.

PEP. You're Welcome.
I'm going to jump ahead here.
As you know RCA--U.S. reissued the LOC-1035 as--AFM1-5486, and they tried to duplicate the front cover, but were not able to.
On the back cover in the lower right hand corner, it states previously released as LPM-1951?

Yes, your right as can be seen below...also notice the barcode
top right hand corner on the back cover, which of course did not exist in 1957.
The Limited Edition Elvis Christmas Album re-issue, was released in 1985 with a Green mono album too.
I have heard there was a black album version and a red album version, tho I have not seen them myself.
Do you have any idea Barry, if that did happen? As I believe those colors are the rarities from that period.

As you mentioned Barry, as seen here, the front cover of the 1985 was re shot
where One can see all presents' are different right down to the Christmas wappings',
ribbons', and the Christmas ornaments.
RCA obviously made this 1985 re issue album cover from scratch with the intention
of duplicating the overall look of the 1957 album cover.



PEP

Not if other markets had ran out of wholesale stock first.

That doesn't matter. You really don't know retail or promotions.

I guess my 30 years in adverting was a waste then

PEP.
I have the green and black vinyl, also have the red vinyl, but not sure if it is AFM1-5486, it is in a wooden boxset, so will dig it out tomorrow, and let you know.
I'm off to bed.

Should the Wkipedia entry be changed to the view of Doc Carpenter?

[b][/bElvis' Christmas Album was reissued a year after its first release, replacing the iconic cover of the original with a close-up of Elvis' face as he posed against an outdoor, snowy backdrop. The album continued to reach the album charts each year until 1962, eventually selling more than three million units worldwide]

As you know RCA--U.S. reissued the LOC-1035 as--AFM1-5486, and they tried to duplicate the front cover, but were not able to.
On the back cover in the lower right hand corner, it states previously released as LPM-1951?

This would make sense, as the previous release of the album was LPM 1951.

The previous release of LPM 1951 was LOC 1035.

Should the Wkipedia entry be changed to the view of Doc Carpenter?

Given all I've presented on this topic, the answer is clearly yes.

As you know RCA--U.S. reissued the LOC-1035 as--AFM1-5486, and they tried to duplicate the front cover, but were not able to.
On the back cover in the lower right hand corner, it states previously released as LPM-1951?

This would make sense, as the previous release of the album was LPM 1951.

The previous release of LPM 1951 was LOC 1035.

Should the Wkipedia entry be changed to the view of Doc Carpenter?

Given all I've presented on this topic, the answer is clearly yes.

Let's see you do it then!

Doc. I'm sure that you know that what I meant is that LPM-1951 was never issued as a gatefold, and yes I know what you are saying, however perhaps they should have stated previously released as LOC-1035, minor point.