Anything about Elvis
More than 30 Million visitors can't be wrong

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:23 pm

Rich_TCB wrote:
When In Rome wrote:
Ty@TheFilmFrontier wrote:
Daryl wrote:Amazon.com here in the U.S. just sent me an e-mail stating that since I pre-ordered "Recorded Live On Stage In Memphis" (Legacy Edition), I can download a copy of it via Amazon's AutoRip from Amazon's Cloud Player. I thought some people might want to know this.


Thanks, Daryl. One thing to be aware of regarding this is that on reissued material, Amazon does not always use the same source for its AutoRip version as the physical media version.


Troy


This is true. I pre-ordered the Live in Memphis Legacy Edition and got the auto-rip for the 1994 release. I sent Amazon an email regarding this matter and they are looking into it...


Thanks guys for the info.

When In Rome - let us know if/when you hear back from Amazon.

I've found in the past that if you pre-order a re-issue album, they'll sometimes automatically put an earlier version in your cloud as soon as the order is made. Then, when the new version comes out, they may either replace it or else they'll give you the remastered one as well. For example, I have two versions of Nirvana's 'In Utero' in my cloud, for this very reason. You have to be careful that you don't download the original tracks to your hard drive, because they'll charge you straight away and for all I know they may charge you again when the new disc comes out.

There's a plus side to all of this. I ordered a CD a couple of years ago (not Elvis) which turned out to be deleted so I never received it, but because I got the AutoRip straight away I still have an MP3 copy in my Amazon cloud which I can listen to over WiFi. I've never been billed for it.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:38 pm

Quoting Ernst from A Live In Music page 382:
" The Memphis show was neither good nor bad, but, like everything else that year it was a pale imitation of what had gone before." And Ernst is a huge Elvis fan, but he is more objective than many of the fans here.

Roy Orbison gets a free pass with the public and other musicians in general. More so than Elvis. A casual music lover can like Orbison without fear of being laughed at . And yet, I wonder how many Orbison fans have actually heard any of his original LPs (or CD reissues of these LPS)? Most of them are quite bad. In general people only remember is best Monument singles, which are generally fantastic (well at least half of them are). But when a non-fan thinks of Elvis, they think of the Las Vegas 70s Elvis and just cannot understand his popularity. Had Elvis' career started in 1971, I would have never been a fan at all.
Last edited by skatterbrane on Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:42 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:40 pm

skatterbrane wrote:Quoting Ernst from A Live In Music page 382:
" The Memphis show was neither good nor bad, but, like everything else that year it was a pale imitation of what had gone before." And Ernst is a huge Elvis fan, but he is more objective than many of the fans here.


That's a fine point... I wonder what Ernst has to say about the original recording of 'Hound Dog'? ;)

JEFF d
EP fan

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 6:49 pm

JEFF d wrote:
skatterbrane wrote:Quoting Ernst from A Live In Music page 382:
" The Memphis show was neither good nor bad, but, like everything else that year it was a pale imitation of what had gone before." And Ernst is a huge Elvis fan, but he is more objective than many of the fans here.


That's a fine point... I wonder what Ernst has to say about the original recording of 'Hound Dog'? ;)

JEFF d
EP fan

He likes it, as do I, in SPITE of the Jordanaires (my opinion, not his).
Just because the Jordanaires are present, does not mean they have to be used on every song.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:21 pm

skatterbrane wrote:Quoting Ernst from A Live In Music page 382:
" The Memphis show was neither good nor bad, but, like everything else that year it was a pale imitation of what had gone before." And Ernst is a huge Elvis fan, but he is more objective than many of the fans here.



And this is why people should make up their own minds, and not rely on critics - interesting though their views might be. If anything was a "pale imitation" it was Aloha. MSG and Aloha might have been more important albums because they were bigger events, and the Memphis album often gets bad rap because it is, ultimately, unimportant. However, Elvis sounds more committed in the Memphis concert than on either Aloha or MSG and is, arguably, in better voice than on either. The LP was never going to set the world on fire, but for many it's a much better listening experience (in its original edited form) than the previous two live albums. Love Me aside, the oldies are more committed than usual and How Great Thou Art is stunning. That aside, the original album also featured a very different set list to that which had gone before, and is therefore a fine recording of some of the concert staples that were yet to make it to a live LP (Lawdy Miss Clawdy, I Got a Woman, Trying to get to You, the rock n roll medley). The extra tracks add little to the listening experience (if anything they detract from it).

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 8:35 pm

poormadpeter wrote: If anything was a "pale imitation" it was Aloha. MSG and Aloha might have been more important albums because they were bigger events, and the Memphis album often gets bad rap because it is, ultimately, unimportant. However, Elvis sounds more committed in the Memphis concert than on either Aloha or MSG and is, arguably, in better voice than on either.


I agree with you 100%. His voice is much better on this album than it is on the Aloha album and he's way more committed. Not 1968-1969 quality, obviously, but he's good nonetheless. And that's why I didn't appreciate the canned applause on the original release because it interfered with Elvis' vocals. Now that I've heard sound samples I may purchase this.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:07 pm

I could never defend MSG or Aloha either. The only two original concert albums I like is International Hotel and On Stage. And had they made an album of a TTWII concert originally, I would have liked that too, as the posthumous releases of the TTWII concerts I quite enjoy. I do not like or dislike anything based on critics opinion, but I sometimes use their general consensus to back up my case.

And that he never lived up to the 68-70 quality is my point. I forgave his movie years, but refuse to forgive him twice. He totally screwed the pooch after the high that was the 68-70 period.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Tue Feb 25, 2014 9:20 pm

skatterbrane wrote:
Lonely Summer wrote:
skatterbrane wrote:How could I possibly ruin it for you? Elvis failed music lovers once with the 60s movie years and after an explosive comeback with the 68 TV Special and American sessions and 3 decent Las Vegas engagements, he fails music lovers a second time, and never returned. I guess two comebacks (the fantastic Elvis Is Back and From Elvis In Memphis) a 3rd would be too much to expect. If I were not such a strong fan of his, he could not have disappointed me so much. The added applause on songs like I Just Can't Help Believin' and The Wonder Of You are just plain irritating. And yes, they are much like laugh tracks on sitcoms.

The Jordanaires were very good at what they did, but that Elvis wanted them on almost EVERY song, made them irritating after a while. I mean what in the hell are they doing on Hound Dog (as one of probably 100 examples)? He never got over his desire to be in a gospel quartet.

Okay, I probably should have let your previous comments pass without comment, but now you blaspheme! Hound Dog? Really? The Jords backups are an integral part of the arrangement of that classic rock and roll track. Man, if it annoys you so much, turn the damn thing off! This kind of carping was old eons ago. I know that we're supposed to spout the party line here - the only good Elvis music is 50's Elvis, plus Elvis is Back and FEIM....but seriously, you and some of the others here need to find some hobbies besides analyzing and tearing every Elvis recording to pieces. Do you apply this kind of analysis to the recordings of other artists?


I apply this kind of analysis to everything I care about, not just recording artists. I am not critical of things I do not care about, example Tom Jones is not even on my radar I dislike him so much. How can I criticize something that holds absolutely no interest for me? I like the Beatles but I really hate their early stuff, it drives me crazy. I would rather listen to Elvis's worst soundtrack albums than The Beatles early albums. The Beatles got better with each album, Elvis's last great album was Elvis Country.

If I were on a Beatles forum, I would probably talk about how awful their I Want To Hold Your Hand and She Loves You period was, and what a masterpiece Abbey Road was, and how much I dig The White Album. (including Revolution 9).

I belong to a Oldsmobile Aurora forum, and am critical of their design flaws. I belong to a Les Paul forum and am critical of what is known as Gibson's Norlin period and how their guitars made between 1970 and 1980 pretty much sucked. But I also say that their early 90s period was probably one of their best.

Who in the heck want to gush and only say wonderful things about any subject under the sun? Just because someone is a fan of something does not mean the object of that fandom is immune to critical opinions. In fact the more one studies anything, the more the flaws and shortcomings come to light. To most of the non fans, it is the 70s Elvis which has drawn the most distain and ridicule, and it blocks non-fans from learning more about Elvis and how great his voice and music really was.

70s Elvis has isolated and put fans on the defensive towards the rest of the music loving public and musicologists.

Well at least you are consistent. For me, to hyper analyze every bit of music I listen to would suck all the life out of it.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 11:35 am

Elvis' music has been sliced, diced and over analyzed to the point of absurdity.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 5:50 pm

JerryNodak wrote:Elvis' music has been sliced, diced and over analyzed to the point of absurdity.


Actually that's where you're wrong. It might been treated that way here, but if you're looking for well-written books that analyse the music itself then you are looking at around half a dozen at most - an absurdly small amount for an artist of Presley's stature.

The recent Sinatra threads have mentioned Will Friedwald's book The Song is You, which is a full-length analysis of Sinatra's music from the earliest days to the last concerts. It's a densely-written, opinionated, factually accurate, illuminating book running at over 500 pages.

We have NOTHING like that with regards to Elvis.

Yes, we have Ernst's book, but that is mostly a book of facts rather than discussion. Yes, Ernst does give his opinion on certain songs or sessions, but it's hardly what the book is about or intended to be about. Robert Matthew Walker's book from the late 70s might have attempted to be a detailed discussion of the music, but falls short on nearly every level, with each song getting a sentence each in most cases. Paul Simpson's Rough Guide might come closest, but sadly that had to follow the rules of the series of books in which it was published, and so Simpson isn't allowed to talk at length about the music.

Elvis himself might have been analysed to the point of absurdity, but his recordings and, even more, his films, are often ignored.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:23 pm

poormadpeter wrote:
JerryNodak wrote:Elvis' music has been sliced, diced and over analyzed to the point of absurdity.


Actually that's where you're wrong. It might been treated that way here, but if you're looking for well-written books that analyse the music itself then you are looking at around half a dozen at most - an absurdly small amount for an artist of Presley's stature.

The recent Sinatra threads have mentioned Will Friedwald's book The Song is You, which is a full-length analysis of Sinatra's music from the earliest days to the last concerts. It's a densely-written, opinionated, factually accurate, illuminating book running at over 500 pages.

We have NOTHING like that with regards to Elvis.

Yes, we have Ernst's book, but that is mostly a book of facts rather than discussion. Yes, Ernst does give his opinion on certain songs or sessions, but it's hardly what the book is about or intended to be about. Robert Matthew Walker's book from the late 70s might have attempted to be a detailed discussion of the music, but falls short on nearly every level, with each song getting a sentence each in most cases. Paul Simpson's Rough Guide might come closest, but sadly that had to follow the rules of the series of books in which it was published, and so Simpson isn't allowed to talk at length about the music.

Elvis himself might have been analysed to the point of absurdity, but his recordings and, even more, his films, are often ignored.



Wow Pete ! You're probably the first person in this entire forum who actually pointed this out. I honestly thought his music (well, most of it anyway) has been thoroughly analyzed through the years, as Jerry (and the majority) has suggested. Your opinion is certainly welcomed and should not be overlooked.
Last edited by TCB-FAN on Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:26 pm

InheritTheWind wrote:
poormadpeter wrote: If anything was a "pale imitation" it was Aloha. MSG and Aloha might have been more important albums because they were bigger events, and the Memphis album often gets bad rap because it is, ultimately, unimportant. However, Elvis sounds more committed in the Memphis concert than on either Aloha or MSG and is, arguably, in better voice than on either.


I agree with you 100%. His voice is much better on this album than it is on the Aloha album and he's way more committed. Not 1968-1969 quality, obviously, but he's good nonetheless. And that's why I didn't appreciate the canned applause on the original release because it interfered with Elvis' vocals. Now that I've heard sound samples I may purchase this.


I will get this release even though I have the original album and the FTD of it. I've actually played this album more than Aloha and MSG through the years!

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:39 pm

Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 6:55 pm

Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 9:29 pm

poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Wed Feb 26, 2014 10:04 pm

frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:08 am

poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.

Mike Eder's Elvis FAQ does just that - very well, I might add.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 2:38 am

Lonely Summer wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.

Mike Eder's Elvis FAQ does just that - very well, I might add.


But has multiple errors and problems, apparently?

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 3:19 am

Eder's book is not without its flaws but makes for an interesting reading and as it's been mentioned before, there's not that many books that focus on Elvis' music in particular commenting song by song.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 9:51 am

javilu wrote:Eder's book is not without its flaws but makes for an interesting reading and as it's been mentioned before, there's not that many books that focus on Elvis' music in particular commenting song by song.
There might be a few errors in Eder's book, but they are minor. Those are overshadowed IMHO by his love of (a lot of) the music.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 11:07 am

poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.


Earlier in this thread you strongly criticise this reissue, and for entirely superficial reasons, suggest the reissue shouldn't even happen.

So you want to suppress the reissue of material about which you're now stating stating "Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms".

A complete self-contradiction & wildly, bizarrely inconsistent, in my opinion.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 4:33 pm

King Volcano wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.


Earlier in this thread you strongly criticise this reissue, and for entirely superficial reasons, suggest the reissue shouldn't even happen.

So you want to suppress the reissue of material about which you're now stating stating "Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms".

A complete self-contradiction & wildly, bizarrely inconsistent, in my opinion.


I'm not being contradictory at all. My criticism for the release was the choice of album. I like the album very much - and have made that clear throughout the thread. BUT, the Legacy Edition series is reserved for "important" albums within a performer's legacy. The Memphis live album, fun and enjoyable though it is, is NOT an important work. It is just a straightforward live album that happens to be enjoyable.

Asking for a re-evaluation of Presley's 70s work doesn't mean that such a piece would declare Presley's 70s work as an important piece of pop music history. It would, however, view the music afresh, and critique it on its own terms rather than view the genres Elvis covered during this period as second best to rock music. The Today LP (as an example) wouldn't have necessarily appealed to rock critics back in 1975, but on its own terms as a piece of country/MOR music (and compared to other works in that genre by other people) it is a fine piece of work. That doesn't make it important, but at least we're not in the position of necessarily viewing it as a let down or disappointment because it's not a rock n roll record.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Thu Feb 27, 2014 5:24 pm

poormadpeter wrote:
King Volcano wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.


Earlier in this thread you strongly criticise this reissue, and for entirely superficial reasons, suggest the reissue shouldn't even happen.

So you want to suppress the reissue of material about which you're now stating stating "Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms".

A complete self-contradiction & wildly, bizarrely inconsistent, in my opinion.


I'm not being contradictory at all. My criticism for the release was the choice of album. I like the album very much - and have made that clear throughout the thread. BUT, the Legacy Edition series is reserved for "important" albums within a performer's legacy. The Memphis live album, fun and enjoyable though it is, is NOT an important work. It is just a straightforward live album that happens to be enjoyable.

Asking for a re-evaluation of Presley's 70s work doesn't mean that such a piece would declare Presley's 70s work as an important piece of pop music history. It would, however, view the music afresh, and critique it on its own terms rather than view the genres Elvis covered during this period as second best to rock music. The Today LP (as an example) wouldn't have necessarily appealed to rock critics back in 1975, but on its own terms as a piece of country/MOR music (and compared to other works in that genre by other people) it is a fine piece of work. That doesn't make it important, but at least we're not in the position of necessarily viewing it as a let down or disappointment because it's not a rock n roll record.


You made & make again a v. good point IMO about the "let down" aspect. But you've again stated the album "isn't important", which is fair enough, but then why does it need re-appraisal?

To be liked or disliked, or to become important to a listener or another artist (who both count a million times more than any music critic or professional listmaker), these people have to be able to buy and hear an album, regardless of what silly corporate title it's released under. It isn't 1982, or even 2002, quality releases of quality music are now a minority, dying interest. Whether some critic or media corp deem Memphis '74 an important or Legacy Edition worthy album is the LEAST of our problems as fans of Presley!

One of the biggest tragedies IMO in Elvis fandom is how much people seem concerned with what "rock critics" think or write and say. Or about what umbrella of terminology an artist or album is worthy of. Much of the most innovative and influential music in rock history was slated or rejected at the time, often violently and cruelly, by the "rock critics", it was the public and DJs, who embraced it or looked beyond the moment.

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Fri Feb 28, 2014 5:50 pm

When In Rome wrote:
Ty@TheFilmFrontier wrote:
Thanks, Daryl. One thing to be aware of regarding this is that on reissued material, Amazon does not always use the same source for its AutoRip version as the physical media version.


Troy


This is true. I pre-ordered the Live in Memphis Legacy Edition and got the auto-rip for the 1994 release. I sent Amazon an email regarding this matter and they are looking into it...


Any update on this?

Re: Legacy release coming of Elvis Live In Memphis

Fri Feb 28, 2014 7:51 pm

King Volcano wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
King Volcano wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
frus75 wrote:
poormadpeter wrote:
Keith Richards, Jr. wrote:Poormadpeter is right. I worship Ernst's book, "A Life In Music". I only owned about three Elvis albums when I bought that book, and when I'd read it, I was so fascinated I could barely wait to hear every little damn song the man had ever recorded.

I am not interested in regular biographies anymore, but I do love books about MUSIC - the records, the songs - and like Poormadpeter says, there are VERY few books about Elvis' music. It is very unfortunate. I don't ever want to read another books about Elvis' private life but I would pay a fortune for a new book about his MUSIC, preferably written by Ernst himself.


I'm not sure Ernst is the right person to do it. He has worked for so long with Elvis's legacy that I think it would be like writing about a film you loved - your view is skewed and you can't necessarily distance yourself from the actual thing you're analysing. I think there needs to be a new perspective (or, at least, new in the fact the author hasn't written about Elvis professionally before). They obviously need to be aware of the recordings, but not so deeply invested in it that they can't reconsider the recognised train of thought.


And may I add that he has to be non biased.Too many times an Elvis Presley review has been made from a rock point of view, from a rock'n'roll, or Beatles or 60's point of view. Look how refreshing, surprising (and I confess that if almost matched my views) was the Friedwald Elvis appreciation essay from some years ago. Will Friedwald (on the Song Is You) takes every Sinatra album on its merits, almost totally ignoring what Tony Bennett, Dean Martin, Ella Fitzgerald or whoever was releasing at the time (not to say the Beatles, the Stones, etc.)


Agreed, and this is something I have said in 70s debates before. The 70s material has always been critiqued from the point of view of pi**ed off rock critics who were going through the disappointment of hearing their idol record The Impossible Dream. Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms. There are signs of this happening, especially in the reviews of Elvis at Stax, for example. New writers are coming along with a very different perspective and are approaching this material without the disappointment of the rock critics of the 70s.


Earlier in this thread you strongly criticise this reissue, and for entirely superficial reasons, suggest the reissue shouldn't even happen.

So you want to suppress the reissue of material about which you're now stating stating "Forty years on, it's time for a re-evaluation of that material on its own terms".

A complete self-contradiction & wildly, bizarrely inconsistent, in my opinion.


I'm not being contradictory at all. My criticism for the release was the choice of album. I like the album very much - and have made that clear throughout the thread. BUT, the Legacy Edition series is reserved for "important" albums within a performer's legacy. The Memphis live album, fun and enjoyable though it is, is NOT an important work. It is just a straightforward live album that happens to be enjoyable.

Asking for a re-evaluation of Presley's 70s work doesn't mean that such a piece would declare Presley's 70s work as an important piece of pop music history. It would, however, view the music afresh, and critique it on its own terms rather than view the genres Elvis covered during this period as second best to rock music. The Today LP (as an example) wouldn't have necessarily appealed to rock critics back in 1975, but on its own terms as a piece of country/MOR music (and compared to other works in that genre by other people) it is a fine piece of work. That doesn't make it important, but at least we're not in the position of necessarily viewing it as a let down or disappointment because it's not a rock n roll record.


You made & make again a v. good point IMO about the "let down" aspect. But you've again stated the album "isn't important", which is fair enough, but then why does it need re-appraisal?

To be liked or disliked, or to become important to a listener or another artist (who both count a million times more than any music critic or professional listmaker), these people have to be able to buy and hear an album, regardless of what silly corporate title it's released under. It isn't 1982, or even 2002, quality releases of quality music are now a minority, dying interest. Whether some critic or media corp deem Memphis '74 an important or Legacy Edition worthy album is the LEAST of our problems as fans of Presley!

One of the biggest tragedies IMO in Elvis fandom is how much people seem concerned with what "rock critics" think or write and say. Or about what umbrella of terminology an artist or album is worthy of. Much of the most innovative and influential music in rock history was slated or rejected at the time, often violently and cruelly, by the "rock critics", it was the public and DJs, who embraced it or looked beyond the moment.


All of Presley's work has been viewed through the eyes of rock critics thus far. That is how it has been judged from a critical perspective, and that judgement, by and large, has become engrained in the public consciousness. In other words, people view Elvis as washed out in the 70s because that's how his work was viewed by rock critics at the time. Therefore a re-evaluation from a different viewpoint would be important in attempting to redress the balance and give a somewhat less prejudiced view of this era in particular. Ever since it was released, the Memphis concert (as an example) has been viewed as just another concert album, with Elvis on mediocre form. Of course that was how it was viewed in 1974, when it was a disappointing yet-another-live album from Elvis, and the fifth in five years. The reality is that Elvis is actually on better form than he was at Aloha and, arguably, MSG. We see that now, but it wasn't seen then.

Within the Elvis canon it isn't an important album, but within pop music history, the Elvis story IS important - hence why I have argued in the past that Sony has a duty to make all the masters available at retail level. The 70s studio recordings in particular have been much derided, not as much because they are bad but because of how they were released - the covers alone show Elvis repeating past glories and not moving forward as an artist. But that isn't quite the truth. Within those bland album covers are Elvis attempting folk, a substantial effort at a kind of funk rock, the introverted piano numbers etc. Yes, Elvis made some crap and phoned in some performances in the studio, but the overall acceptance that he only made half a dozen decent recordings during this period is complete crap. That version of events is never going to change of challenged unless someone with the right credentials challenges the status quo.

So many on these boards are interested in making sure that the numbers are correct when it comes to whether Elvis is still king of the charts, or why a gold record hasn’t been awarded, or whether Elvis has or hasn’t been snubbed by the Grammys – and yet they are perfectly happy for only half the story to be told when it comes to the music and how it has been accepted by history. I find that bizarre. Friedwald’s book on Sinatra was mentioned earlier. It is an important book, not least because of Friedwald’s credentials in writing about that field of music, but because he challenges preconceptions and misconceptions about Sinatra’s work after he left Capitol. He re-evaluates albums that were derided or ignored on release (such as Watertown and A Man Alone) and makes a case that they are in fact classics. Watertown is today viewed as a classic album, in no small part to people like Friedwald. But this kind of rethink about the music has never happened with regards to Elvis.

People’s view of art, literature, film and music changes over time. That is a fact. Vertigo had mediocre reviews when released, but now tops lists of the best films of all time. The same goes for North by Northwest. Two pieces of work by a master that were looked down upon on release (or viewed as merely average) that a new way of thinking, a new wave of critics (the auteurists) and the passage of time has helped elevate to classic status.

Elvis’s music beyond the 50s has never had that honour bestowed upon it. We view it the same way now as when those initial reviews were written forty and fifty years ago. If we didn’t reconsider and re-evaluate art over time, we would find ourselves still shunning the work of Beethoven, Wagner and Stravinsky – composers whose works were trashed by the press when first performed. Citizen Kane would still be derided.

Most importantly, Elvis’s work from 1956 would still be viewed as it was by conservative America when it was first released, rather than as some of the greatest music ever recorded. Would you have been happy if Hound Dog and Heartbreak Hotel were viewed in history books as nothing but a racket sung by a gyrating hick? Because that’s how they were reviewed by critics of the period. But that’s nonsense, right? The music was re-evaluated at a later date, and is now viewed very differently. So why shouldn’t we do that with the rest of Elvis’s catalogue? Surely that’s more constructive than books about his hairdresser or finding out if he wore boxers or briefs?

Elvis’s legacy is problematic from the start because he recorded songs not albums – so the release as albums (even in the 50s) was often a case of a “best fit” scenario. As an artist Elvis would probably have loved the idea of itunes, where each song can be downloaded individually rather than as part of a collection – because that was how he worked. So, why do you view it as such a pointless exercise to strip away the structure of the album format, and those biased reviews of forty years ago, and review the work on a song by song basis and attempt to make sense of it and re-evaluate it from a modern perspective. If this has been afforded to every important popular artist of the twentieth century from Hitchcock to Sinatra, why not Elvis?