Off Topic Messages

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Mon Jul 22, 2013 11:20 pm

Which is the best Beatles forum to join?

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Mon Jul 22, 2013 11:30 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:Which is the best Beatles forum to join?


I don't know, there are many of them out there, one assumes. If you find one that's like FECC, let us know!

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 23, 2013 1:51 am

This one is excellent: http://www.beatlesbible.com/

And they love Elvis very, very much! :wink:

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 23, 2013 2:43 am

I'm pretty sure I have this if anyone is up for am old fashioned trade?

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 23, 2013 3:30 am

HoneyTalkNelson wrote:This one is excellent: http://www.beatlesbible.com/


What is being asked for is a forum similar to FECC. That site does not appear to be a discussion forum.

But it is excellent, as anyone may see by the many posts I make where I offer links to the site for further information on the Beatles.

For example, page 1 of this topic. ;-)

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:57 am

HoneyTalkNelson wrote:You're welcome.

Yes, it needed a LOT of work. Fine Recording were the top people in the business so it had nothing to do with technical problems on their end, their playing was a bit sloppy that night.


Yes, they were a bit sloppy and purely musically speaking the gig isn't that great. One of the reasons why they stopped touring as they stated themselfs was because they were getting sloppy musically. They couldn't hear themselfs because of the screaming and neither could the audience so why bother.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Wed Jul 24, 2013 10:00 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
HoneyTalkNelson wrote:This one is excellent: http://www.beatlesbible.com/


What is being asked for is a forum similar to FECC. That site does not appear to be a discussion forum.

But it is excellent, as anyone may see by the many posts I make where I offer links to the site for further information on the Beatles.

For example, page 1 of this topic. ;-)


I'd love to find a Beatles discussion board similar to FECC. I haven't come across one yet.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Wed Jul 24, 2013 9:24 pm

Try out these two beatle forums i've just found. They are disscussion boards like FECC.

www.dmbeatles.com
www.beatleforum.com

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Thu Jul 25, 2013 5:19 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:Try out these two beatle forums i've just found. They are disscussion boards like FECC.

http://www.dmbeatles.com
http://www.beatleforum.com


The dmbeatles is the best one!

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Thu Jul 25, 2013 9:55 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:
mysterytrainrideson wrote:Try out these two beatle forums i've just found. They are disscussion boards like FECC.

http://www.dmbeatles.com
http://www.beatleforum.com


The dmbeatles is the best one!


If HoneyTalkNelson signs up, so will I!

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:34 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
mysterytrainrideson wrote:
mysterytrainrideson wrote:Try out these two beatle forums i've just found. They are disscussion boards like FECC.

http://www.dmbeatles.com
http://www.beatleforum.com


The dmbeatles is the best one!


If HoneyTalkNelson signs up, so will I!

Actually, Doc i thought you would have been a member of a Beatles forum long ago or even started up one yourself. Is FECC the only forum your a member of?

Oh, that beatlesbible site you posted is cool. Just added it to my book marks.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Thu Jul 25, 2013 10:41 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
mysterytrainrideson wrote:
mysterytrainrideson wrote:Try out these two beatle forums i've just found. They are disscussion boards like FECC.

http://www.dmbeatles.com
http://www.beatleforum.com


The dmbeatles is the best one!


If HoneyTalkNelson signs up, so will I!

Actually, Doc i thought you would have been a member of a Beatles forum long ago or even started up one yourself. Is FECC the only forum your a member of?

Oh, that beatlesbible site you posted is cool. Just added it to my book marks.


FECC is the only home for me.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 2:57 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Fairchild1171 wrote:Same hysteria at this concert...maybe even more so...the crowd NEVER lets up!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VXtwh9_7PuI


Actually, Elvis' concert craziness came 7 years before the Beatles, so the Shea Stadium show is similar to the clip you provide from the 4-02-1957 ES in Toronto (NOT from either 3-31-1957 Detroit show, despite what is written on the video).

However, Toronto's Maple Leaf Gardens has a capacity of 15,700, while the 8-15-1965 Shea Stadium gig was sold out to the tune of 55,700 people, more than triple the audience. The hysteria, just by sheer numbers, is clearly greater in New York, and a clear-cut reason why it is still seen today as a benchmark.


It wasn't a benchmark according to Red Robinson, emcee for Elvis' show at Empire Stadium... 'That was the first time there was ever a performer in front of 26,000 people in a rented stadium'.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 4:16 am

jungleroombear wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Actually, Elvis' concert craziness came 7 years before the Beatles, so the Shea Stadium show is similar to the clip you provide from the 4-02-1957 ES in Toronto (NOT from either 3-31-1957 Detroit show, despite what is written on the video).

However, Toronto's Maple Leaf Gardens has a capacity of 15,700, while the 8-15-1965 Shea Stadium gig was sold out to the tune of 55,700 people, more than triple the audience. The hysteria, just by sheer numbers, is clearly greater in New York, and a clear-cut reason why it is still seen today as a benchmark.


It wasn't a benchmark according to Red Robinson, emcee for Elvis' show at Empire Stadium... 'That was the first time there was ever a performer in front of 26,000 people in a rented stadium'.


Robinson is not speaking of Shea Stadium in that quote, it hadn't happened yet, but only of the 1957 Presley show. Certainly if asked now about Shea he would agree with historians about the significance of the Beatles landmark appearance in New York.

And his facts from back then are incorrect, as Elvis played to about 16,500 that night in Vancouver. From 1957 Elvis concert scholar Alan Hanson's blog:

In 1957 Elvis performed 28 live stage shows in 18 cities and on one military post. It broke down like this: one show each in Chicago, St. Louis, Fort Wayne, Buffalo, Spokane, Vancouver B.C., Tacoma, Seattle, Portland, Tupelo, Oakland, and Schofield Barracks (Hawaii); two shows each in Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu; and four shows in Philadelphia. The biggest crowd he played to that year was in Vancouver, B.C., (16,500) and the smallest was in Philadelphia (3,200). The combined paid attendance for the 28 concerts was a little over 250,000. Although that represented unparalleled drawing power for those days, it didn’t satisfy Colonel Parker, who repeatedly exaggerated the crowd sizes in each city. His phony numbers are still being quoted today, but I tried to set the record straight in my book.

http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/interview.html



Hope this helps.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 6:39 am

Fairchild1171 wrote:Hanson's book seems a little negative towards Elvis, but is still a good read about his 1957 shows.


Good read? It's an essential look at that year of touring, with more accurate information than anything I have ever seen in years of being a fan.

A little negative? Do you have his book? I do, I read it, and I detected not a note of negativity.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 7:03 am

Fairchild1171 wrote:Well...if I said it was a good read...of course I would have to own it...wouldn't I? Yeah...good read...I don't think it's the greatest...what do you want me to say....it's the greatest thing since sliced bread?


Some members here rant and rave about products they have never owned.

Fairchild1171 wrote:Well, yes...I do get a feel that there is a touch of negative about Elvis...


Do explain, since I perceive none at all, and consider Hanson a deeply devoted, very intelligent and measured Elvis fan.

Fairchild1171 wrote:... on another Elvis site, they feel the same as I do.


That may not be a good thing. ;-)

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 8:52 am

Fairchild1171 wrote:Sure it's a good thing...I don't agree with you and kiss your ass! 8)


You also don't answer direct questions, nor do you engage in civil discussions.

Keep reading my posts, you might learn something!

::rocks

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:35 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Actually, Elvis' concert craziness came 7 years before the Beatles, so the Shea Stadium show is similar to the clip you provide from the 4-02-1957 ES in Toronto (NOT from either 3-31-1957 Detroit show, despite what is written on the video).

However, Toronto's Maple Leaf Gardens has a capacity of 15,700, while the 8-15-1965 Shea Stadium gig was sold out to the tune of 55,700 people, more than triple the audience. The hysteria, just by sheer numbers, is clearly greater in New York, and a clear-cut reason why it is still seen today as a benchmark.


It wasn't a benchmark according to Red Robinson, emcee for Elvis' show at Empire Stadium... 'That was the first time there was ever a performer in front of 26,000 people in a rented stadium'.


Robinson is not speaking of Shea Stadium in that quote, it hadn't happened yet, but only of the 1957 Presley show. Certainly if asked now about Shea he would agree with historians about the significance of the Beatles landmark appearance in New York.

And his facts from back then are incorrect, as Elvis played to about 16,500 that night in Vancouver. From 1957 Elvis concert scholar Alan Hanson's blog:

In 1957 Elvis performed 28 live stage shows in 18 cities and on one military post. It broke down like this: one show each in Chicago, St. Louis, Fort Wayne, Buffalo, Spokane, Vancouver B.C., Tacoma, Seattle, Portland, Tupelo, Oakland, and Schofield Barracks (Hawaii); two shows each in Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu; and four shows in Philadelphia. The biggest crowd he played to that year was in Vancouver, B.C., (16,500) and the smallest was in Philadelphia (3,200). The combined paid attendance for the 28 concerts was a little over 250,000. Although that represented unparalleled drawing power for those days, it didn’t satisfy Colonel Parker, who repeatedly exaggerated the crowd sizes in each city. His phony numbers are still being quoted today, but I tried to set the record straight in my book.

http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/interview.html



Hope this helps.

Surely, Elvis could've filled the Shea Stadium up in '57. The Colonel always booked him into relatively small venues, apart from some exceptions. You make more money from a 55/60 thousand audience than a 10/15 thousand. It's quite bizzare he didn't book him in more larger stadiums, the USA certainly had bigger venues. The recently discovered color footage from Hawaii, that's been doing the rounds at Graceland from the collection of Ken Moore. If you look at that footage more closely, you can see a hell of a lot of empty seats at the back. Though there were 15,000 people there, but they were actually on the football pitch and not in the actual seats of the stadium.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:51 pm

Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 1:20 pm

rjm wrote:Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Tue Jul 30, 2013 10:06 pm

mysterytrainrideson wrote:I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.


Definitely maybe on that. But the point is that such grand ambition was considered and achieved in 1965, by the Beatles and their management team.

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Wed Jul 31, 2013 9:01 am

mysterytrainrideson wrote:
rjm wrote:Elvis DEFINITELY could NOT have filled up Shea in the fifties. There was no such stadium, yet. (The AFL football Titans, later known as The Jets, played the Polo Grounds in the early days.)


Who knows if he'd have filled up such a stadium several years earlier; it's silly to compare it like like this because of one essential factor: by the mid-sixties, the baby boom had come of (teen)age. There were more a lot more boomers than war babies, and they had more money.

But Parker didn't really make all the right moves, especially coordinated moves, using radio, Sullivan, and all of that in perfect synergy. He didn't have that kind of imagination.

So, Elvis did very well for himself, I think, under the circumstances, especially when many parents were actively against letting their kids go out to see him. And we get to see and HEAR almost none of what he did, because it wasn't filmed. And that non-filming would continue in the future, especially if an event was worth filming.

rjm


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

I WAS NOT comparing, just stating that Elvis could have pkayed a lot larger venues. Ok, so the Shea Studium hadn't been built, yet, that was a silly thing to say, but there were similar venues like it, that's what i was saying.

I agree with most of your post, rjm. I don't think parents not letting there kids going would be a factor...mojarity of the time kids will rebel against there parents and will go regardless.

As for The Colonel, i agree, he didn't have that imagination. He was an out dated manager and his way of thinking was always a bit bizzare.
If the Colonel had've booked a 50,000 seat venue in '57, i'm sure it would have been filled or nearly filled. Elvis in 1957 was the biggest thing in America.


I'm sorry, Mystery; that was kind of a cheap shot 'cause I'm a MAJOR Jets fan (or I have been . . .), so it hit me right away. My apologies. @mysterytrainrideson :sosorry:

As for a 50,000 seat stadium show, I would say that only in NY would it have even been possible, but for the reasons stated above, not probable. Elvis was the biggest thing in America, but America was about to get a lot bigger. And the kids were about to start calling the shots in that bigger America.

And it wasn't just Shea that was part of the initial synergy you see on stage, but a fully realized vision as to how to present such an act with maximum positive impact. It was so well-executed that the band had to feel almost obliged to live up to it! When you think about it, it had to be very exciting for them at the time. With Ed up there and the whole series of events.

Elvis was never presented quite that way, especially in the early days. I don't think he ever got the feeling, then, that everybody was rooting for him, and that he was part of something that both excited and delighted the nation. It was only at the end of the three Sullivan shows that Ed gave his stamp of approval. Elvis may have been an American, but he was an outsider.

Maybe it's better that way, when you think about it.

rjm

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Fri Aug 02, 2013 1:39 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:Actually, Elvis' concert craziness came 7 years before the Beatles, so the Shea Stadium show is similar to the clip you provide from the 4-02-1957 ES in Toronto (NOT from either 3-31-1957 Detroit show, despite what is written on the video).

However, Toronto's Maple Leaf Gardens has a capacity of 15,700, while the 8-15-1965 Shea Stadium gig was sold out to the tune of 55,700 people, more than triple the audience. The hysteria, just by sheer numbers, is clearly greater in New York, and a clear-cut reason why it is still seen today as a benchmark.


It wasn't a benchmark according to Red Robinson, emcee for Elvis' show at Empire Stadium... 'That was the first time there was ever a performer in front of 26,000 people in a rented stadium'.


Robinson is not speaking of Shea Stadium in that quote, it hadn't happened yet, but only of the 1957 Presley show. Certainly if asked now about Shea he would agree with historians about the significance of the Beatles landmark appearance in New York.

And his facts from back then are incorrect, as Elvis played to about 16,500 that night in Vancouver. From 1957 Elvis concert scholar Alan Hanson's blog:

In 1957 Elvis performed 28 live stage shows in 18 cities and on one military post. It broke down like this: one show each in Chicago, St. Louis, Fort Wayne, Buffalo, Spokane, Vancouver B.C., Tacoma, Seattle, Portland, Tupelo, Oakland, and Schofield Barracks (Hawaii); two shows each in Detroit, Toronto, Ottawa, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and Honolulu; and four shows in Philadelphia. The biggest crowd he played to that year was in Vancouver, B.C., (16,500) and the smallest was in Philadelphia (3,200). The combined paid attendance for the 28 concerts was a little over 250,000. Although that represented unparalleled drawing power for those days, it didn’t satisfy Colonel Parker, who repeatedly exaggerated the crowd sizes in each city. His phony numbers are still being quoted today, but I tried to set the record straight in my book.

http://www.elvis-history-blog.com/interview.html



Hope this helps.


I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Fri Aug 02, 2013 7:31 am

jungleroombear wrote:I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006


You can follow and appreciate the historical record I have presented in detail on this topic, or you can believe the stuff you just wrote.

I've done my part. The choice is yours. ;-)

Re: The Beatles--Shea Stadium.

Sat Aug 03, 2013 1:24 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
jungleroombear wrote:I know Red Robinson didn't say that, i was simply stating that he was saying the Elvis show was a benchmark which it obviously was. Now Doc you been a little naughty by this-time using the term landmark instead! The Beatles Shea stadium show certainly was... but it wasn't a benchmark. :smt002

Re the attendance figure.. according to a respected web-site, Red Robinson was at Empire Stadium, and he was given records by the promoter Hugh Picket which showed 25,898 paid admissions, grossing $61,099.86. Should we believe it as fact, of course not. Alan Hanson was a little boy when Elvis played Vancover and no matter where he got his information it's open to as much scrutiny as Red Robinsons account. At the end of the day it was still a stadium show, just like the one in Dallas was and that certainly wasn't a sellout.
That's All Right Mama wasn't a huge hit but it was still a benchmark as far as most people are concerned. :smt006


You can follow and appreciate the historical record I have presented in detail on this topic, or you can believe the stuff you just wrote.

I've done my part. The choice is yours. ;-)


So we agree Elvis' was the benchmark.