All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Mon Jun 20, 2005 8:32 pm

Ezz wrote: the 71 stuff like "Winter Wonder Land", with the same kind of flat dead sound.

It has always puzzled me how he sounded in 71, after sounding so fantastic in 70.



I don't think doing a religious album AND a Christmas album helped. They clearly weren't what Elvis really wanted to do, but more what Parker had persuaded him to do, and he sounds bored. Having said that the pop songs were notably of a poorer quality to the 1970 stuff overall. If only he'd stuck to his guns and made a folk/rock album like he'd started to do in March....

Jules

Mon Jun 20, 2005 8:32 pm

Pete / Errol / Andrew / Jules

I always thought Elvis sounds good on the 1971 gospel tracks, not so good on the Christmas tracks and in-between on the secular stuff.

Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:17 pm

jules -

You wrote:
I don't think doing a religious album AND a Christmas album helped. They clearly weren't what Elvis really wanted to do, but more what Parker had persuaded him to do, and he sounds bored.


I read that when told that tracks for a new Christmas album were needed, he replied:

"Can't they re-package the old one ?"

With such a lack of enthusiasm, it's no wonder he sounds kinda bored !

Mon Jun 20, 2005 10:56 pm

A huge part of Elvis's greatness was his diversity. I don't know of another artist who's voice seemed to be so different as Elvis's was over the years. Personally, I thought his best period vocally was the early '60's. But, my favorite period was the late '60's-early '70's.

Mon Jun 20, 2005 11:49 pm

Torben wrote:Pete / Errol / Andrew / Jules

I always thought Elvis sounds good on the 1971 gospel tracks, not so good on the Christmas tracks and in-between on the secular stuff.


I pretty much agree with you Torben. He was consistently good on the gospel material, but the Christmas and secular material was hit and miss.

Tue Jun 21, 2005 4:16 pm

ColinB wrote:jules -

You wrote:
I don't think doing a religious album AND a Christmas album helped. They clearly weren't what Elvis really wanted to do, but more what Parker had persuaded him to do, and he sounds bored.


I read that when told that tracks for a new Christmas album were needed, he replied:

"Can't they re-package the old one ?"

With such a lack of enthusiasm, it's no wonder he sounds kinda bored !


I've read that quote before. Seems like he'd be right at home at RCA/BMG right up to 2005.

Wed Jun 22, 2005 1:22 pm

Pete Dube wrote:
I pretty much agree with you Torben. He was consistently good on the gospel material, but the Christmas and secular material was hit and miss.




I see the point - He Touched Me, for example, is a soaring vocal performance but Elvis was really struggling to control that vibrato on certain recordings.

When truly inspired at these sessions, he was very good, but not majestic. Overall the quality of his vocals pales in comparision to before (and after, at least until 76). He sounds tired and, often, unengaged. Suppose I'd be faced with some of the dross he was laying down after the enormous forward leaps of the previous three years.

Wed Jun 22, 2005 3:05 pm

I think from 71 on, Elvis struggled to have the same control over his vibrato as he had in previous years, and around 72 he started to slighty slur his vocals somewhat. Though that did add a certain different colour and tone to is voice on ballads.

Sat Jun 25, 2005 8:42 am

Ezz wrote:I think from 71 on, Elvis struggled to have the same control over his vibrato as he had in previous years, and around 72 he started to slighty slur his vocals somewhat. Though that did add a certain different colour and tone to is voice on ballads.


IMO, That probably has do with the enormous amounts of downers Elvis was takin' at this time...