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

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:44 pm

drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:
jeanno on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 am wrote:Yeah, you just have to compare Suspicious Minds on both álbums: at MSG, it's the King of autopilote. In 1969, it's the King of Rock at full blast.
And the cover of "in person" is so much cooler!



The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:58 pm

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:44 am wrote:
drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.



As always, folks, consider the source. :D

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:10 pm

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:44 am wrote:
drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:
jeanno on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 am wrote:Yeah, you just have to compare Suspicious Minds on both álbums: at MSG, it's the King of autopilote. In 1969, it's the King of Rock at full blast.
And the cover of "in person" is so much cooler!



The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.

Years later, Elvis' significant impairment, boredom, reliance on vocal gimmicks, disdain for much of his own material is what ruins the songs. It is unclear why you think you are better off as a listener under those circumstances.

It is also unclear and really quite bizarre why you feel the need to trash some of Elvis' finest live work in order to elevate the mediocrity that came after.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:28 pm

midnightx on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:10 pm wrote:
Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:44 am wrote:
drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:
jeanno on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 am wrote:Yeah, you just have to compare Suspicious Minds on both álbums: at MSG, it's the King of autopilote. In 1969, it's the King of Rock at full blast.
And the cover of "in person" is so much cooler!



The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.

Years later, Elvis' significant impairment, boredom, reliance on vocal gimmicks, disdain for much of his own material is what ruins the songs. It is unclear why you think you are better off as a listener under those circumstances.


If you would have read even a small part of my posts, you would understand (and that is not too much to ask for) that I don't consider the final years as good shows.

If my memory serves me well, I own 1 or 2 FTD 1976 releases. How many do you own?

The "years later" comment was...of course, meant to read "three years later", as it was directed to a comment made by djc. This should be plain to see.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:32 pm

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:28 pm wrote:
midnightx on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:10 pm wrote:
Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:44 am wrote:
drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:
jeanno on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 am wrote:Yeah, you just have to compare Suspicious Minds on both álbums: at MSG, it's the King of autopilote. In 1969, it's the King of Rock at full blast.
And the cover of "in person" is so much cooler!



The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.

Years later, Elvis' significant impairment, boredom, reliance on vocal gimmicks, disdain for much of his own material is what ruins the songs. It is unclear why you think you are better off as a listener under those circumstances.


If you would have read even a small part of my posts, you would understand (and that is not too much to ask for) that I don't consider the final years as good shows.

If my memory serves me well, I own 1 or 2 FTD 1976 releases. How many do you own?

The "years later" comment was...of course, meant to read "three years later", as it was directed to a comment made by djc. This should be plain to see.


For most of us..yes.... :roll:

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:37 pm

midnightx on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:10 pm wrote:It is also unclear and really quite bizarre why you feel the need to trash some of Elvis' finest live work in order to elevate the mediocrity that came after.


For some strange reason, this part from my quote was left out.

Anyway, I don't trash some of Elvis' finest live work...because it's not. From 1969...fast forward one year, and almost everything was better.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:44 pm

One more comment. I don't criticize those who love the 1976 shows. I'm glad that they do...means Elvis' last concert years wasn't all in vain.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:51 pm

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:37 pm wrote:
midnightx on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:10 pm wrote:It is also unclear and really quite bizarre why you feel the need to trash some of Elvis' finest live work in order to elevate the mediocrity that came after.


For some strange reason, this part from my quote was left out.

Anyway, I don't trash some of Elvis' finest live work...because it's not. From 1969...fast forward one year, and almost everything was better.


I'd say....everything was better.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:56 pm

If you like the short versions of "the oldies hit parade" from MSG it's ok for me.

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:10 pm

Is anyone here actually looking for your approval? "right"...

Re: It's Impossible

Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:49 pm

I personally prefer the MSG album over the 1969 portion of the double LP.
as for suspicious minds - That would have been great to see, but it gets kind of tiresome to hear on record especially with versions running over 6 to 7 minutes [I do really like the August 12, 1970 MS performance of the song that runs over 6 minutes.. but again - that's because you got the visuals to keep it exciting). Sure elvis voice was better on the 1969 version - but on a record i prefer the 4 minutes plus version of MSG.

Jurassic1968 says
If you like the short versions of "the oldies hit parade" from MSG it's ok for me.


While something can be said here..Altough it doesn't add much to this topic at hand because the only thing this kind of comment will cause is arguments between people... Elvis already did this with the Jailhouse Rock / Don't Be Cruel medley - skipping lines / cracking jokes/ rushed tempo ... Jailhouse rock for instance gets a better standalone outting in August 1971, in a slower tempo &
near - complete lyrics (Ommitting the Sad sack sitting verse) and Don't Be Cruel... well to be honest that one belongs to the Comeback special for being one of the last times it was sung mostly straight. most live versions following that were either short or included laughing.. jokes.. that's not to say i don't enjoy them.

Hound Dog works better for me again at the MSG show, because of the different arrangement (Slow tempo followed by uptempo), creates a different listening experience and not a monotonous listen.

For I Can't Stop Loving You (for me it's a tie, both versions work well)

Can't help falling in love was performed better in 1969 granted. Blue Suede Shoes while it's short in later versions - at the end of the day all it's missing is the guitar solo really.. vocally better in 1969, but i never really minded it in any given year following it.

Also i like ballads.. ''The Impossible Dream'' for instance.. ''For The Good Times'' and the cool ''Never Been To Spain'' all add more enjoyment to my listening then the live portion of the 1969 double LP.

In the end, it's all objective what our listening preferences are, and what we consider the better version / listen. Facts can't decide what YOU or YOU (i'm looking at you @rob! :lol: ) like , prefer, find the best version.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:15 am

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 10:10 pm wrote:Is anyone here actually looking for your approval? "right"...


Seems that we actually have two...jeanno and midnightx.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:35 am

........
Last edited by Juan Luis on Sat Dec 09, 2017 9:35 am, edited 2 times in total.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:36 am

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:44 pm wrote:
jurasic1968 on Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:56 pm wrote:But what about the quality? Elvis in Person was better than the MSG LP.


What about the quality? In what way was EIP better? Lay out the parameters, and maybe someone will answer...without it, nothing.



Still waiting for those parameters. Do you just talk BS or have you got something to back it all up with?

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:48 am

The Elvis of 68 and 69 was the same Elvis of 54 to 58. Insecure, raw, a bit unharnessed and setting out make it in a new world. A proving of himself all over again. It was never equaled or rivaled again. The only defect in the 69 appearance is the Vegas orchestra weighing in on the end of many songs. The orchestra worked on the ballads but detracted from rest. But Elvis was perfect.

Elvis continued to develop and it can be seen in the Feb 70 Vegas session-more intricate musical charts the early signs of the overly dramatic beginning to appear but still well contained and appropriate. He was in great voice. By August, he had morphed into a far more sophisticated entertainer and his voice peaked between June and August-the raw Elvis was gone and he was a power vocalist. There was nothing he couldn’t sing-One Night was still raw; but the ballads were smooth. He would never be this good again as the drug abuse took deep root. Elvis continued to develop during this period and while some of the changes were less than desirable to me, it would be fair to say that he was still growing as an artist from 68 to 70. But that development all but ended during this Elvis Summer Festival. Elvis spent the next 7 years doing his August 1970 act in one shape or another. Many on this board cite one of the On Tour performances as his best tour concert performance and certainly superior to MSG. But no doubt MSG is a great performance of Elvis as King of Concert Arena. By Aug 1972, Elvis was on a rapid decline trajectory-uninterested, drug dependent, vocal changes even as we saw the orchestral madnesses of Joe Guercio tainting nearly everything. Nonetheless, he still managed to pull off one mostly fine performance in Aloha-though his voice had changed and his heart was no longer in it. 6 months later and he nearly died.

It was an accelerating decline as a live performer after the June 1972 tour. Still beloved, yes. More accessible, absolutely. But what makes MSG so special is it represents Elvis at his last best in front of the toughest audience in the world.
Last edited by fn2drive on Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:39 am, edited 1 time in total.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:07 am

fn2drive on Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:48 am wrote:The Elvis of 68 and 69 was the same Elvis of 54 to 58.


Even as a fan of the later period, this is nonsense. Elvis was an innovator in the 1950s - he was not during 1968 and 1969.
Last edited by poormadpeter2 on Fri Dec 08, 2017 4:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:14 am

fn2drive on Fri Dec 08, 2017 1:48 am wrote:The Elvis of 68 and 69 was the same Elvis of 54 to 58.


:lol:

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 6:26 pm

MSG sounds rushed. The audio on the multi-track Las Vegas recordings have better sound as well. I'll take the 1972 Las Vegas recordings over the MSG recordings and performances. However, I think RCA did the right thing in releasing the MSG LP. And there is NO WAY RCA shouldn't have released Aloha, it was absolutely the right thing to do. The 1969 Vegas recordings as well as the Feb 1970 Las Vegas recordings are the definitive live recordings since the 50s.

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:37 pm

the 69 shows are very focused and full of commitment - and MSG finds a more relaxed and polished performer. I think the MSG show has more variety and emotions. Also the band sounds better to me. So I would pick the MSG. The problem I have with the Elvis’ live shows that focus on the 50s material (like a 69 show) is that the sound that made the songs great and distinctive in the 50s was gone. For example All shook up or jailhouse rock had their distinctive sounds and feel - in the live setting they all sounded the same (yes also in the 69 version). In 72 the focus was different musically and I find it easier to forgive the sound issue on 50s songs (plus at that stage those song became comedy act). I don’t know if I made myself clear. (PS Suspicious minds sounds good at MSG)

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 8:52 pm

They're both very good. No need to diss one just because there's a preference for the other. It's all gravy 8)

Re: It's Impossible

Fri Dec 08, 2017 11:50 pm

kink56 on Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:26 am wrote:MSG sounds rushed. The audio on the multi-track Las Vegas recordings have better sound as well. I'll take the 1972 Las Vegas recordings over the MSG recordings and performances. However, I think RCA did the right thing in releasing the MSG LP. And there is NO WAY RCA shouldn't have released Aloha, it was absolutely the right thing to do. The 1969 Vegas recordings as well as the Feb 1970 Las Vegas recordings are the definitive live recordings since the 50s.


In the 70s, Elvis' live records outsold his studio work by a large margin. With a singer reluctant to go in the studio and his albums not really focused, releasing the live material made the most sense. And Vegas in summer 1969, Feb. 1970 and even the TTWII semi-soundtrack all represented high-caliber performances.

While there is difference between making a great record and giving a great concert, RCA was wise to capitalize on those media events with the albums, even Memphis in 1974. If they hadn't, there'd still be fans like the people on here saying how foolish RCA was not to put them out and cherishing their bootlegs.

Re: It's Impossible

Sat Dec 09, 2017 3:34 am

MRM on Fri Dec 08, 2017 3:50 pm wrote:
kink56 on Fri Dec 08, 2017 10:26 am wrote:MSG sounds rushed. The audio on the multi-track Las Vegas recordings have better sound as well. I'll take the 1972 Las Vegas recordings over the MSG recordings and performances. However, I think RCA did the right thing in releasing the MSG LP. And there is NO WAY RCA shouldn't have released Aloha, it was absolutely the right thing to do. The 1969 Vegas recordings as well as the Feb 1970 Las Vegas recordings are the definitive live recordings since the 50s.


In the 70s, Elvis' live records outsold his studio work by a large margin. With a singer reluctant to go in the studio and his albums not really focused, releasing the live material made the most sense. And Vegas in summer 1969, Feb. 1970 and even the TTWII semi-soundtrack all represented high-caliber performances.

While there is difference between making a great record and giving a great concert, RCA was wise to capitalize on those media events with the albums, even Memphis in 1974. If they hadn't, there'd still be fans like the people on here saying how foolish RCA was not to put them out and cherishing their bootlegs.


What you are really saying is that Elvis’ studio work was substandard in the 70s and the live LPs superior. I really have no beef with that though the margin narrowed markedly as the quality of both declined. The sad reality is that by using live LPs to fulfill contracts and that they were resonan,y commercially viable, there was little incentive for Elvis team to get Elvis into the studio in a fully committed manner.

Re: It's Impossible

Sat Dec 09, 2017 4:15 am

No, that's not what I meant or said at all. I don't think they're better. But RCA couldn't get him to record so they went with what they had and they knew would reasonably sell. RCA could have done better by Elvis, but he was difficult talent by 1972.

Re: It's Impossible

Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:35 am

Scarre on Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:36 am wrote:
Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 6:44 pm wrote:
jurasic1968 on Thu Dec 07, 2017 5:56 pm wrote:But what about the quality? Elvis in Person was better than the MSG LP.


What about the quality? In what way was EIP better? Lay out the parameters, and maybe someone will answer...without it, nothing.



Still waiting for those parameters. Do you just talk BS or have you got something to back it all up with?


jurasic1968...I´m still waiting. Are you just full of BS, or...? Give us your parameters. You often don´t give an answer when confronted...this has been proven several times. What about this time?
Last edited by Scarre on Sun Dec 10, 2017 2:04 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: It's Impossible

Sun Dec 10, 2017 3:40 am

Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:28 pm wrote:
midnightx on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:10 pm wrote:
Scarre on Thu Dec 07, 2017 11:44 am wrote:
drjohncarpenter on Thu Dec 07, 2017 8:06 pm wrote:
jeanno on Thu Dec 07, 2017 9:31 am wrote:Yeah, you just have to compare Suspicious Minds on both álbums: at MSG, it's the King of autopilote. In 1969, it's the King of Rock at full blast.
And the cover of "in person" is so much cooler!



The care, energy and commitment in 1969 is there from start-to-finish. This is not the case three years later.


The overdrive, nervousness, ruining songs with laughter...This is not the case years later. We are all better off because of it.

Years later, Elvis' significant impairment, boredom, reliance on vocal gimmicks, disdain for much of his own material is what ruins the songs. It is unclear why you think you are better off as a listener under those circumstances.


If you would have read even a small part of my posts, you would understand (and that is not too much to ask for) that I don't consider the final years as good shows.

If my memory serves me well, I own 1 or 2 FTD 1976 releases. How many do you own?

The "years later" comment was...of course, meant to read "three years later", as it was directed to a comment made by djc. This should be plain to see.



We are still waiting for an answer...what is that number?