One Night - Live, June 24' 1977

[mike edwards66]

And this is where the problem lies. The comments from the pro-1976/7 crowd show them as having no quality control whatsoever.

A tad condescending?

No, not at all. It's true.

No. Condescension is not defined by the 'truth' or otherwise of a statement. Condescension is defined by attitude.

You know me better than that, Mike. My point was clear and concise, and set out in very straightforward terms just what the issues are here. There was no condescension - and you already know that.

OK, let me put it another way. Would you agree, that, regardless of how clear and concise one's point may be, referring to a "crowd" as "having no quality control whatsoever" could be construed as a tad condescending?

[poormadpeter]

And this is where the problem lies. The comments from the pro-1976/7 crowd show them as having no quality control whatsoever.

A tad condescending?

No, not at all. It's true.

No. Condescension is not defined by the 'truth' or otherwise of a statement. Condescension is defined by attitude.

You know me better than that, Mike. My point was clear and concise, and set out in very straightforward terms just what the issues are here. There was no condescension - and you already know that.

OK, let me put it another way. Would you agree, that, regardless of how clear and concise one's point may be, referring to a "crowd" as "having no quality control whatsoever" could be construed as a tad condescending?

No.

[jurasic1968]

OK it's a very polite word, to me.

[ICanHelp]

I agree, but i think what lonely summer is trying to say is that everything comes together rather better in the later versions, with the tempo not to much rushed, elvis on acoustic and the backing vocals to kind of give a modern take on the song.

Yes, but the most important element is letting it down, Elvis' vocal delivery.

I have to go with Johnny on this one. There's more to a song than the vocal - and, even then, Elvis's vocals on this particular number don't often betray the wear and tear as much as on others. In most cases it's not thrown away or mumbled, and there is genuine care and attention. Is Elvis in good voice? No. But bizarrely the performances work better than the raucous, high speed renditions from the early 1970s.

My point exactly (but better articulated). Closer to the original vibe of the song than the super speed versions of 1972.

[Captain Marvel Jr]

Fantastic song!!! Wonderful Voice!!!
Greatest Singers of All Time!!!

[Gary1]

Sorry....that is horrible.

I probably should refrain from posting anything about 77.

I think that would be wise......

Yeah lets be like EPE and pretend 1977 never happened.

[TheKingisthething]

It's not a bad version. Sure it's not 1968 but it wasn't 1968 and his approach to hit almost seems more bluesy and almost acoustic. His voice sound good to my ears - on key and I don't hear anything to make it "horrible" as some have suggested. I think it's just the approach is different.

I listened to Elvis in Concert today (for the first time in a while) and enjoyed it. Elvis still had good performances in him in 1977, and there are some good ones on that album. The same is true of and Spring Tours '77. Sure neither are TTWII but they are still enjoyable.

The difference between the '68 and '77 is SHOCKING, to say the least...

[Juan Luis]

It's not a bad version. Sure it's not 1968 but it wasn't 1968 and his approach to hit almost seems more bluesy and almost acoustic. His voice sound good to my ears - on key and I don't hear anything to make it "horrible" as some have suggested. I think it's just the approach is different.

I listened to Elvis in Concert today (for the first time in a while) and enjoyed it. Elvis still had good performances in him in 1977, and there are some good ones on that album. The same is true of and Spring Tours '77. Sure neither are TTWII but they are still enjoyable.

The difference between the '68 and '77 is SHOCKING, to say the least...

He took much of the Blues out of it as early as 1970.

[stedders]

In this 1977 version elvis was at least trying his best, which cannot be said for a lot of his songs then. There is a commitment to the song even if the results are very poor. His voice is completely gone here and it is the result of drugs plain and simple. I am not judging him just stating it as it obviously is. He was a shadow of his real self in 1977.

The sad thing is I asked Ginger on Facebook what happened between New Year's Eve 1976 to Feb 1977 and she said she wasn't aware of any changes, and there was nothing that happened. When you have someone like that with you and you are a drug addict and suffering from depression, you have an indirect enabler as a girlfriend. Even if she could do nothing to help elvis, to claim she saw no difference is pathetic. Put it this way, she was a 21 year old young woman - I think she may have noticed if her fella had put on loads of weight! Let's get real here.

The same applies with the singing. He sang reasonable well on the Dec 1976 tour, but still his voice had lost the genius quality of say 1969/1970. Yes he sang with gusto and some joy, but people love 1976 NYE show because even though we know the ending of elvis' story, it gives us a strange hope that things might have been okay, or at least that he was having a bit of fun so close to the end,

I digress, but this version of One Night sounds like I might sound when trying to talk after about 8 beers. Tongue not really working, whinier tones, not really in control even though I would be trying hard to be. Tragic really.