Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:02 pm

MB280E wrote:Elvis said something like; "It´s a new audience (or crowd) every time, and I´ve got to please them." No question the concerts may have sounded very similar to people attending every single one. (Especially from 1974-77) But for those that didn´t it was probably a very nice touch of Elvis to play all the songs we all feel that we know only too well...: Hound Dog, Don´t Be Cruel, Heartbreak Hotel and so forth...all other bands do the exact same thing but nobody seems to give them any bad credit for this...even though the songs too sounds exactly like they did on the last tour, or during last week´s concert...

People tend to judge Elvis harder than other top of the line artists...well, at least a few visistors at this forum tend to.

No one judges Elvis for playing his "classics," Elvis is justifiably criticized for throwing away his hits in reckless fashion. That is where the difference lies and that is the point you seem to be missing. Elvis is not held to a different standard than any other artist. If The Eagles were mumbling their vocals while tossing away "Take It Easy" in a rushed tempo with a maximum playing time of 45 seconds, they wouldn't get a free pass either.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 7:18 pm

midnightx wrote:
MB280E wrote:Elvis said something like; "It´s a new audience (or crowd) every time, and I´ve got to please them." No question the concerts may have sounded very similar to people attending every single one. (Especially from 1974-77) But for those that didn´t it was probably a very nice touch of Elvis to play all the songs we all feel that we know only too well...: Hound Dog, Don´t Be Cruel, Heartbreak Hotel and so forth...all other bands do the exact same thing but nobody seems to give them any bad credit for this...even though the songs too sounds exactly like they did on the last tour, or during last week´s concert...

People tend to judge Elvis harder than other top of the line artists...well, at least a few visistors at this forum tend to.

No one judges Elvis for playing his "classics," Elvis is justifiably criticized for throwing away his hits in reckless fashion. That is where the difference lies and that is the point you seem to be missing. Elvis is not held to a different standard than any other artist. If The Eagles were mumbling their vocals while tossing away "Take It Easy" in a rushed tempo with a maximum playing time of 45 seconds, they wouldn't get a free pass either.



Elvis was justifiably bored with his classics. He played them too much because he toured too much.
If he had only toured once a year and did vegas once a year for a week from 1969 on, perhaps he could
have kept it fresh.
A group like the Eagles or any other star that can't rely on charisma and must do thier classics songs,
just like the records, or people wouldn't bother going to their shows.
Elvis could get away with alot. True.
An article I just read along with another quote from long ago says,
"People didn't to hear Elvis, they came to see him."
And "People came to see Elvis like he was some sort of National monument" .

I think the reason Elvis was not held to that same standard was because he had already proven himself
as a legend, by making all of those legendary 1950's and 60's hits.

But also, given the fact that Elvis ruined his health, was he actually capable of doing the same show
in 1977 as he did in 1956? Even if he was healthy?
Even the 1969 shows could have been thought of as dissappointing had they expected the
bump and grind routine of 1957.
He even admitted he didn't prepare much for his 1961 shows.
And what about the 1968 shows. Half of them were sitdown shows.
Who wants to see Elvis sitting down and not moving and leg twitching?
It's all too confining.
Do you think they would have accepting him doing his show sitting down in 1957?
They certainly got alittle antsy with him sitting for the shows in vegas in '76 because he sprained his ankle.

I don't think you can criticize him for mumbling.
He had done that all his career.
I still can't understand what he says on some songs.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:29 pm

Dear, sweet Dwight Hemion ...

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:45 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:Dear, sweet Dwight Hemion ...



I dare you to pick apart my post.

You usually cave when confronted with my logic.

OK, GO!

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:47 pm

ekenee wrote:I dare you to pick apart my post.

You usually cave when confronted with my logic.

OK, GO!

Ha ha ha ha ha! Go bait someone else, I have to go watch the grass grow.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:52 pm

drjohncarpenter wrote:
ekenee wrote:I dare you to pick apart my post.

You usually cave when confronted with my logic.

OK, GO!

Ha ha ha ha ha! Go bait someone else, I have to go watch the grass grow.



And he caves once again under pressure.

I will watch the grass too. It's fun.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 10:58 pm

ekenee wrote:And he caves once again under pressure.

Move on.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:12 pm

bquick wrote:I would love to have been able to see Elvis at any stage in his career just to see him...but thinking his 1977 concerts could compete quality-wise with any other top act is just ludicrous! Some people here would claim Elvis mumbling through Teddy Bear, spending 1/3 of the show on introductions, asking Kathy or the Stamps to sing songs and hardly being able to move would be a better experience than a Springsteen-type putting their soul on the line for three hours of true rock and roll. INSANE! Elvis AT HIS BEST was untouchable...but Elvis at his worst was not still better than other artists' best. Gosh, if Elvis in 1969 could have looked at a crystal ball and watched a 77 show he would have puked in disgust. c'mon people.


I wish someone would puke on you.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Sun Feb 06, 2011 11:16 pm

ian wrote:I wish someone would puke on you.

Your crude, aggressive comment is uncalled for, ian.

bquick's opinion is fair, and doesn't deserve such a reply.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:21 am

ian wrote:
bquick wrote:I would love to have been able to see Elvis at any stage in his career just to see him...but thinking his 1977 concerts could compete quality-wise with any other top act is just ludicrous! Some people here would claim Elvis mumbling through Teddy Bear, spending 1/3 of the show on introductions, asking Kathy or the Stamps to sing songs and hardly being able to move would be a better experience than a Springsteen-type putting their soul on the line for three hours of true rock and roll. INSANE! Elvis AT HIS BEST was untouchable...but Elvis at his worst was not still better than other artists' best. Gosh, if Elvis in 1969 could have looked at a crystal ball and watched a 77 show he would have puked in disgust. c'mon people.


I wish someone would puke on you.


I second that Ian. Well said. And for someone who's profile name is "bquick", that comment was long as hell! (Love the Family Guy thing.....LOL!)
Apparently bquick wants to focus on "what if's" when the reality is that Elvis '77 packed in more people than the so-called great acts of the time. That says A LOT for our man & is a real reality check.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:24 am

Phoenix78 wrote:I second that Ian. Well said. And for someone who's profile name is "bquick", that comment was long as hell! (Love the Family Guy thing.....LOL!)
Apparently bquick wants to focus on "what if's" when the reality is that Elvis '77 packed in more people than the so-called great acts of the time. That says A LOT for our man & is a real reality check.

Tuesday, August 16, 1977 was "a real reality check" too!

::rocks

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:30 am

Phoenix78 wrote:
ian wrote:
bquick wrote:I would love to have been able to see Elvis at any stage in his career just to see him...but thinking his 1977 concerts could compete quality-wise with any other top act is just ludicrous! Some people here would claim Elvis mumbling through Teddy Bear, spending 1/3 of the show on introductions, asking Kathy or the Stamps to sing songs and hardly being able to move would be a better experience than a Springsteen-type putting their soul on the line for three hours of true rock and roll. INSANE! Elvis AT HIS BEST was untouchable...but Elvis at his worst was not still better than other artists' best. Gosh, if Elvis in 1969 could have looked at a crystal ball and watched a 77 show he would have puked in disgust. c'mon people.


I wish someone would puke on you.


I second that Ian. Well said. And for someone who's profile name is "bquick", that comment was long as hell! (Love the Family Guy thing.....LOL!)
Apparently bquick wants to focus on "what if's" when the reality is that Elvis '77 packed in more people than the so-called great acts of the time. That says A LOT for our man & is a real reality check.

Elvis wasn't playing stadium dates in 1977. He was playing a mixture of primary and secondary markets in arenas and auditoriums. He was doing solid business and was still a significant box office draw. The Eagles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Fleetwood Mac, ELP were playing stadiums and arenas. To suggest he "packed in more people" is erroneous.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:31 am

There should be a separate For 1977 Lovers Only board.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:36 am

Frankie Teardrop wrote:There should be a separate For 1977 Lovers Only board.

No doubt about it.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:36 am

midnightx wrote:
Phoenix78 wrote:
ian wrote:
bquick wrote:I would love to have been able to see Elvis at any stage in his career just to see him...but thinking his 1977 concerts could compete quality-wise with any other top act is just ludicrous! Some people here would claim Elvis mumbling through Teddy Bear, spending 1/3 of the show on introductions, asking Kathy or the Stamps to sing songs and hardly being able to move would be a better experience than a Springsteen-type putting their soul on the line for three hours of true rock and roll. INSANE! Elvis AT HIS BEST was untouchable...but Elvis at his worst was not still better than other artists' best. Gosh, if Elvis in 1969 could have looked at a crystal ball and watched a 77 show he would have puked in disgust. c'mon people.


I wish someone would puke on you.


I second that Ian. Well said. And for someone who's profile name is "bquick", that comment was long as hell! (Love the Family Guy thing.....LOL!)
Apparently bquick wants to focus on "what if's" when the reality is that Elvis '77 packed in more people than the so-called great acts of the time. That says A LOT for our man & is a real reality check.

Elvis wasn't playing stadium dates in 1977. He was playing a mixture of primary and secondary markets in arenas and auditoriums. He was doing solid business and was still a significant box office draw. The Eagles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Fleetwood Mac, ELP were playing stadiums and arenas. To suggest he "packed in more people" is erroneous.


But wasn't the colonel offered a million bucks for some huge arena in Australia or the UK?

So, he could have been packing them in.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:43 am

ekenee wrote:But wasn't the colonel offered a million bucks for some huge arena in Australia or the UK?

So, he could have been packing them in.

In 1977, the only place he was consistently "packing them in" was his jumpsuit.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 12:46 am

midnightx wrote:
MB280E wrote:That is where the difference lies and that is the point you seem to be missing.


Well, how nice it is then that you, midnighx seem to be getting every point around here...that you seem to understand just about everything and seem to think that you have the final saying in all threads that surrounds Elvis 1976-77!


Sincerely MB280E

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:10 am

ekenee wrote:But wasn't the colonel offered a million bucks for some huge arena in Australia or the UK?

So, he could have been packing them in.

Well, perhaps a few stadiums would have been filled in countries never performed in, but in the United States, where all of Presley's live work was produced, he rarely played stadiums - and in 1977 (which is the focus of this discussion), he was playing a lot of secondary markets. Other "so-called great acts" of the era were selling out multiple nights at MSG, LA Forum, and playing various stadiums around the United States while Elvis was filling up the Omaha Civic Auditorium and playing other stellar markets like Madison, Abilene and Johnson City.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:29 am

Did Elvis ever go on record about his personal venue preferences when it came to giving concerts?

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:30 am

Matthew wrote:Did Elvis ever go on record about his personal venue preferences when it came to giving concerts?

He hated Pontiac Stadium. And he grew to hate the "dead" Vegas audiences.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 1:54 am

Wasn´t there a security issue as well...perhaps that was one of the reasons why they choose to play smaller venues and not big stadiums? There were probably sound issues as well. And of course, perhaps the Colonel was afraid Elvis wouldn´t sell out the bigger venues...perhaps he had started to doubt the man who put "bread on his table".

Sincerely MB280E

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 2:09 am

I don't have to defend my comments...they were well thought out and I stand by them. I won't stoop to anyone's level who wants me to be vomited on. But stay classy.

I love Elvis' music and most of his career. I wish it never came down to the lows of 77. Does anyone think if Elvis has gotten himself back into shape (had he survived 77) he wouldn't have been embarrassed by how he looked and performed during the last months? I think 77 seems so bad because he set the bar so high before he took the stage 80 lbs overweight and barely able to speak in a comprehensible manner. It is sad...don't believe me? Watch the EIC footage. The proof is right in front of your eyes.

I think Elvis at his best was the greatest performer ever...but at his worst, he truly was bad and needed help to turn his life around. Help he either never got or would never accept.

And my screen name is first initial last name...though I hope you can breeze through my posts as quickly as you want...and if you want to puke on me? Well it would bquick-er to just skip my post.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:19 am

The thing is when it comes to elvis in 1977, its a fact, he had become such a parody of himself.

He was only doing it for the money, his professional life and personal life were like a train going loosing its wheels. There was no inspiration hardly the last year or 2 of his life. No matter what excuses people make, one song in a concert that is good for that time does not make something great.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:40 am

drjohncarpenter wrote:
ian wrote:I wish someone would puke on you.

Your crude, aggressive comment is uncalled for, ian.

bquick's opinion is fair, and doesn't deserve such a reply.


When so many ignorant and insulting things are said about Elvis like they are on this board,well there is only so much that one can take! The picture is from ebay.
You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

Re: Elvis Was Still #1 In 1977

Mon Feb 07, 2011 3:47 am

midnightx wrote:
ekenee wrote:But wasn't the colonel offered a million bucks for some huge arena in Australia or the UK?

So, he could have been packing them in.

Well, perhaps a few stadiums would have been filled in countries never performed in, but in the United States, where all of Presley's live work was produced, he rarely played stadiums - and in 1977 (which is the focus of this discussion), he was playing a lot of secondary markets. Other "so-called great acts" of the era were selling out multiple nights at MSG, LA Forum, and playing various stadiums around the United States while Elvis was filling up the Omaha Civic Auditorium and playing other stellar markets like Madison, Abilene and Johnson City.



I have said this before and I'll say it again, I don't think an artist really needs to play large stadiums to prove themselves.

Secondary markets and college towns aren't a bad idea as long as its not overdoen.

Elvis also in later years could have even stepped down even more by playing to very smaller indoor theater type venues once in a while. It give the singer a much more intimate repoire with the audience.

Of course with this and or an international gig he would have to have been prepared, in that Elvis would have gotten himself into
fighting wieght. Get healthy.
Cut out the orchestra.
Did some serious rehearsals.
And changed his set list.
He needed new show after 1976.