All posts with more than 3000 Hits, prior to 2008

Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:23 pm

I am late to this discussion. Anyhow I can speak for the younger generation, because I am 23, female and collect Elvis music. So I happen to know what FTD is. I didn't, when I bought ELV1S, which started my collection. But I found out, because I cared. Don't be so quick to say that us youngsters are not collecting FTD releases. It's aimed at the people in the know. Those CD's are not being advertised outside the fan base. So why do you expect all music lovers to suddenly know about it? Even the Elvis fans are devided and some will never know about FTD or imports. So what about the general public, who doesn't care? To them Elvis is "the king". That's what I hear most often. But besides one compilation of the greatest hits most don't think about his legacy or dig deeper, because they aren't collectors. I usually get positive feedback from people around my age, when I screen TTWII or the Comeback Special or even a film. And they aren't just being nice, hiding their real opinion. Their jaws usually drop down to the floor, because they had no idea about the Elvis all of us on this board know. And that's where BMG and EPE might be at fault in wrongly advertising, but who it to say.

When you read some of the "Walk The Line" reviews, most of the younger kids, girls aged 12-15 in particular, only went to see the movie, because they have a crush on Joaquin Phoenix. And if he is portraying Johnny Cash, that musician and all of his songs have got to be cool. That is their way of thinking. And they are very forgiving in their judgement regarding his addiction, because nowadays it's just not shocking anymore, when a star openly admits he is hooked on something and needs rehab, Betty Ford clinic. And as has been mentioned, there is a happy end. But ask them about "CashBash" and they are lost. They have no clue. I'd say right now it's a tie between Elvis and JC, because in Europe people my age and younger have no idea about Garth Brooks or Campbell or the other singers, who have been mentioned. Only those who are moving in those circles. Another example would be the Trekkies. If you aren't that, you most likely have no idea when the newest collectible hits the market. So I'd much rather have people telling me "Elvis Is The King", than giving me a blank, clueless stare.

Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:28 pm

You know what?? I'm glad Elvis recorded the songs that he did (all of them). Even the weaker(est) of them. Because at any given time on any given day I can enjoy any one of them. It's a massive body of work and I'm thankful for ALL of it.

I enjoy all the albums. I'm glad all songs were released. I didn't care what the critics/scholars/whoever thought then and I don't care now.

Thanks, Elvis, for all the listening enjoyment you've given me throughout my lifetime.

Wed Nov 22, 2006 3:53 pm

Jerry, I second that. But I still can't really put into words the joy to be able to listen that the music, the voice day after day. So happy I found him. Wandering to other artists like Dean Martin, country music, Johnny Cash, usually satellite radio, but I always have to roam back to Elvis, every day. It's a mysterious, but beautiful thing. It's like an invisible force, that pulls me back. The critics and public opinion doesn't give me headaches, because it doesn't matter. While they are still fighting and churning out endless arguments, I enjoy Elvis and his wide range of songs, films and photos. Not wearing rose-colored glasses or anything, I too can be critical and discuss every aspect of his career in depth, but I get much more out of the positive. Even paying attention to the lyrics. By the way I only just recently read, that he apparently was on a small plane that almost crashed in the 50's. Also we shouldn't underestimate the mixed crowd on this board. Because I am not kidding, when I say that forums, that feature other artists are quite boring.

Wed Nov 22, 2006 7:43 pm

I guess most conumers would prefer to go the "best of" route anyway.For people just discovering Elvis who were not around when Elvis was, I suppose his original lp's dont have the sentimentality factor attached to them either.The casual fan or buyer wouldnt approach their purchase with the mindset that us collector's might have.

Well, that could be said about many legacy artists, but most other labels keep vital and important catalogue albums in print. Casual fans who are intrigued by the artist, usually look for a compilation of some sort as a starting point. If the music really inspires the consumer, they usually want more. That is where the catalogue then comes into play. The consumer doesn't have the chance to explore some of Elvis' greatest works, all they are left with is more compilations. It is a real problem and very damaging to the Elvis Presley recording legacy.

Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:13 am

JerryNodak wrote:You know what?? I'm glad Elvis recorded the songs that he did (all of them). Even the weaker(est) of them. Because at any given time on any given day I can enjoy any one of them. It's a massive body of work and I'm thankful for ALL of it.

I enjoy all the albums. I'm glad all songs were released. I didn't care what the critics/scholars/whoever thought then and I don't care now.

Thanks, Elvis, for all the listening enjoyment you've given me throughout my lifetime.
I feel the same. My point of view is/was trying to explain reasons for decline. and someone shelling out 5 to 6 bucks in 1970-72 and getting Elvis Now etc..does not really care this artist was capable of doing Long Black Limousine in 1969 or Faded Love in 70..if anything why???????
Last edited by Juan Luis on Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:16 am, edited 1 time in total.

Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:14 am

shanebrown wrote:Well, from the point of view of Hitchcock Rope was an experiment with the long shots and all and The Trouble With Harry is now considered a classic. I'm not really up enough on Dylan to comment.

However is you excise the leftover albums from the Presley catalogue of the 1970s then Elvis would come over as a much more consistent performer. The artistic achievement of each album would have remained high and therefore would have been treated with more respect. We all know the the Stax sessions in December 73 should have sold like hot cakes but didnt. They had commercial success stamped all over them - a good mix of good songs, from different genres, sung well, coherently released. BUT any new fans or interested parties that picked up TTWII or Elvis Country would have seen a decline in standard through Now, The 71 Christmas album, Fool, Love Letters and Raised On Rock to the point where they probably decided that Elvis had obviously let it go again. Whereas he hadn't and was putting out enough songs to come up with good albums but the quanity of them meant left-overs and half-finished songs to be released. Without the release of those albums, yes, some great numbers would have remained unreleased. But thats the way it is for all artists whether it is Elvis, Sinatra, Cash, Bobby darin and so on.
I wish I could have said it like you! Thanks!!! :)

Thu Nov 23, 2006 4:57 am

Claus wrote:I think Sony/BMG should release Elvis' albums as two-fers with bonus tracks (singles). Capitol released the Beach Boys catalog as two-fers in the early 90's and they have been in print ever since.


Hey! That's an original idea!

Why don't we start with the soundtrack albums?

They could couple together Harum Scarum/Girl Happy or perhaps Viva Las Vegas/Roustabout.


Should sell heaps and heaps!

Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:07 am

:lol: ..Happened and did not work out Claus!

Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:46 am

shanebrown wrote:Thanks for the compliment JLGB :o)
Big help for me! :)

Thu Nov 23, 2006 11:31 am

JLGB wrote::lol: ..Happened and did not work out Claus!


When did it happen? The only two-fers I can think of are the Double Features series (missing the bonus tracks), the Promised Land and FEPB remasters (which were missing 1 or 2 tracks) and the new Elvis Christmas cd.

As Shane pointed out, the double features series didn't sell because they were full-priced cd's and the material was below average for the most part.
How well do you honestly expect Frankie and Johnny/Paradise Hawaiian Style or Spinout/Double Trouble to sell?

Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:06 pm

Fact is they already upgraded the original abums in the 90s and early 00s. No need to have pulled them from circulation. Instead they could have promoted them! Every hits compilation at least should have had one of the those printed inserts detailing the original album collection. No no, BMG would rather just dump them into the market and expect people to know what they are.

Thu Nov 23, 2006 12:20 pm

I would point out that the movie doubles were poorly promoted. The liner notes were poor. The sound was often poor especially on the first batch of releases. When Capitol did its great Beach Boys' reissues, they added not subtracted bonus songs making a decent CD length. They also had terrific liner notes that took you longer than 30 seconds to finish. And they also had unbelievable sound (for the time). I was flabbergasted when I got Viva Las Vegas/Roustabout at the poor sound. It was echoey and flat. Even the covers were shoddy.

What's more the series was thrown indiscriminately together. For instance Viva Las Vegas deserved its own release similar to the one we have on FTD today. The title song has one of the heaviest name recognitions of any Elvis song. The movie, which was reviewed positively at least twice in Entertainment Weekly in the early 1990s as well as being listed in the magazine's list of essential home movie, was one of the most popular and well known Elvis vehicles. Fans of general 60s pop culture who enjoy AM as much as Elvis enjoy the movie. Plus, it's a very fine record with some of the best music in any Elvis movie including the eye opening duet with A/M on "You're the Boss", "What'd I Say", "C'mon Everybody" and the title track. Granted it was never an album back in the day but BMG could have offered a corrective.

I would also ask what does not sell mean in BMG's universe? Most of these albums stayed in print for almost ten years. If they moved 15,000 copies that wasn't too bad. If BMG means that they didn't move 200,000 copies I think they're expecting too much. From comments in the media and from BMG executives, BMG seems to want to near contemporary artist numbers from Elvis which to me is wrongheaded. You want to expand the market and you don't have to undervalue but you can't expect an artist who has not recorded in decades to carry your label.

Thu Nov 23, 2006 5:23 pm

Claus wrote:
JLGB wrote::lol: ..Happened and did not work out Claus!


When did it happen? The only two-fers I can think of are the Double Features series
Same here. It was all thrown in at once to complete the catalog...but then pulled as fast.. :? Ernst made up for that blunder with FTD label which BTW was an original idea (very similar) with PD from WWE...Believe IT or NOT!!!

Thu Nov 23, 2006 6:43 pm

Shane:

That's why I do all my music shopping on the Net. Shops (such as they are) are preety worthless here.

Sat Nov 25, 2006 7:20 am

Every hits compilation at least should have had one of the those printed inserts detailing the original album collection.

Seems logical. And there are plenty of other easy and affordable ways for BMG to promote catalogue material.

I would also ask what does not sell mean in BMG's universe? Most of these albums stayed in print for almost ten years. If they moved 15,000 copies that wasn't too bad. If BMG means that they didn't move 200,000 copies I think they're expecting too much. From comments in the media and from BMG executives, BMG seems to want to near contemporary artist numbers from Elvis which to me is wrongheaded. You want to expand the market and you don't have to undervalue but you can't expect an artist who has not recorded in decades to carry your label.

All one has to do is look at other legacy artists that recorded for major labels and the state of their catalogues. Miles Davis (part of Sony/BMG) recorded from the 1950's thru the 1980's on Columbia and the vast majority of his titles are available and certainly a handful do not move over 5000 units a year. Even a huge band such as The Who, does anyone think their early studio albums "A Quick One" and "Sell Out" sell large numbers? Nope, but they remain in print. You think David Bowie's "Space Oddity" moves big numbers? No way. Sony, Universal and EMI aren't in the business of losing money for the sake of keeping a catalogue appropriately represented. They have models that work and a lot of their legacy artists have catalogues that are represented almost fully. In today's music climate, the labels are losing money in many areas, not catalogue. BMG has dropped the ball so badly with their handling of the Elvis catalogue. No one is saying they need every title in print, but there are a solid 15-20 catalogue albums (ranging from studio, live and soundtrack) from Elvis that should be in print with fantastic sound, artwork and liner notes in addition to the boat-load of compilations and hits packages currently flooding the market. Not an unreasonable idea for one of music's greatest and most important talents.