Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:12 am
Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:18 am
Sun Mar 14, 2010 5:43 am
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:09 am
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:23 am
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:29 am
KiwiAlan wrote:Does Billboard routinely mention all reissues.....for example have
Elvis
Loving You
Elvis Now
Good Times
And the eight sountrack albums
all released in the last 12 months been mentioned, let alone reviewed..
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:35 am
jbnva58 wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Does Billboard routinely mention all reissues.....for example have
Elvis
Loving You
Elvis Now
Good Times
And the eight sountrack albums
all released in the last 12 months been mentioned, let alone reviewed..
A good point,but we are taliking about about a hot as a pistol rock star at that time and place,not someone who has been dead 32 years and has a virtual plethora of releases on the marketplace...
to put in in perspective,do you not think that BB would not note a re-issue of Emeniems with a new cover and Cat. #?
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:43 am
KiwiAlan wrote:jbnva58 wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Does Billboard routinely mention all reissues.....for example have
Elvis
Loving You
Elvis Now
Good Times
And the eight sountrack albums
all released in the last 12 months been mentioned, let alone reviewed..
A good point,but we are taliking about about a hot as a pistol rock star at that time and place,not someone who has been dead 32 years and has a virtual plethora of releases on the marketplace...
to put in in perspective,do you not think that BB would not note a re-issue of Emeniems with a new cover and Cat. #?
With Elvis Christmas Album we are only talking about a change of catalogue number. Who would care.
Why on earth would that make news for Billboard worth reporting.
Sun Mar 14, 2010 6:52 am
jbnva58 wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:jbnva58 wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Does Billboard routinely mention all reissues.....for example have
Elvis
Loving You
Elvis Now
Good Times
And the eight sountrack albums
all released in the last 12 months been mentioned, let alone reviewed..
A good point,but we are taliking about about a hot as a pistol rock star at that time and place,not someone who has been dead 32 years and has a virtual plethora of releases on the marketplace...
to put in in perspective,do you not think that BB would not note a re-issue of Emeniems with a new cover and Cat. #?
With Elvis Christmas Album we are only talking about a change of catalogue number. Who would care.
Why on earth would that make news for Billboard worth reporting.
Well,it wouldnt with an artrist with less of Elvis' importance-but why then,would this not make the LP charts in 1958,or 1959,but then make an apperance in the 1960 chart?
It would seem to affirm the fact that 1951 was not released to the public until 1960.
Paul Dowling has weighed in on this,I would be interested in Neal Umphreads opinion...
Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:16 am
KiwiAlan wrote:With Elvis Christmas Album we are only talking about a change of catalogue number.
Sun Mar 14, 2010 1:40 pm
wwelvis wrote:Maybe one day I'll come out with my gigantic WORLDWIDE ELVIS PRESLEY DISCOGRAPHY but it's now way over 4000 pages and I need a year easily just to revise and update it! Anyone know a publisher willing to pay me to complete it? Or actually I should say - would anyone out these want a huge book like this??
Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:02 pm
Sun Mar 14, 2010 9:41 pm
drjohncarpenter wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:With Elvis Christmas Album we are only talking about a change of catalogue number.
Wrong.
It has been made repeatedly clear on this topic that the re-release bore a brand-new front and back cover, in addition to a change in catalog number.
If you have anything of value to add to this topic, one that encompasses the time span 1957 to 1960 ONLY, please do so AFTER having read and absorbed all the work that went into creating it.
Sun Mar 14, 2010 11:53 pm
Mon Mar 15, 2010 12:28 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 4:56 am
KiwiAlan wrote:You are ignoring the real possibility that yhe first issue of LPM 1951 was firstrerleased with the same cover as the LOC issue in 1959 and at a later date was replaced with a new cover.
painterboy wrote:Having looked at this subject over the seven pages available again,I have to agree with the Doc.How can LPM-1951 have been released in 1958, when the front cover photo was taken by the Teldec company in May 1959?.
I still stick by what I said on page 2 of this topic,that it first appeared in November 1959.
Mon Mar 15, 2010 5:37 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:01 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:24 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 6:35 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:14 am
KiwiAlan wrote:Can we stop dragging the EP into this and concentrate on the LP
I am surprised that anyone can dismiss Joel Whitburn so easily.
Thr disparity in serial numbers has yet to be explained.
Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:24 am
Frankie Teardrop wrote:KiwiAlan wrote:Can we stop dragging the EP into this and concentrate on the LP
I am surprised that anyone can dismiss Joel Whitburn so easily.
Thr disparity in serial numbers has yet to be explained.
I don't understand why a disparity in serial numbers would even be an issue considering how many examples there are of serial numbers not matching up with chronological release dates. The fact that there are few examples in Elvis' career of that happening means nothing, he wasn't a special case where RCA said to themselves "we better make sure ELVIS' serial numbers match with the chronological discography!".
Mon Mar 15, 2010 7:32 am
Mon Mar 15, 2010 9:09 am
Moderator1 wrote:A FYI. This topic is generating a lot of interest from outside as well as in. Lets all be cordial in our replies etc and hope it comes to the correct conclusion.
Mon Mar 15, 2010 10:19 am
Barry wrote:In Canada---LOC-1035 was issued for christmas 1957, in 1958 it was changed to LPM-1951, with the same front cover as LOC-1035, in 1959, the cover was changed to the standard LPM--1951
Hosted by ElviCities