The Penultimate Memphis Press Conference --> 1961

I suggest the September Sony releases should be made a sticky.

It is more of interest being 2011 material on a CD Collectors board than a 40 year old press conference.

Nice post, Doc.

The transcript may not be new, but its poignant to note the time frame of
Feb. '61. Elvis was, as stated, the king of all media, with a bulletproof career which had actually grown through the army years.
Poignant, in that he was staring at the abyss to follow, the quickie movies and
mostly wasted Hollywood soundtracks.

On a side note, I'm always amazed that the Hotel Claridge dragged out a
beaten, chipped wooden lectern for the world's biggest entertainer.
Little did they know we would be viewing pictures of this event 50 years later.

Nice post, Doc.

The transcript may not be new, but its poignant to note the time frame of
Feb. '61. Elvis was, as stated, the king of all media, with a bulletproof career which had actually grown through the army years.
Poignant, in that he was staring at the abyss to follow, the quickie movies and
mostly wasted Hollywood soundtracks.

On a side note, I'm always amazed that the Hotel Claridge dragged out a
beaten, chipped wooden lectern for the world's biggest entertainer.
Little did they know we would be viewing pictures of this event 50 years later.

Indeed. Elvis was on the brink of many things, both good and bad.

As for the lectern, interesting observation! Maybe people still found rock 'n' roll -- and Elvis -- a passing fad in early 1961, not worth any extra attention.

And yet -- how ironic, as you note -- here we are revisiting this press conference 50 years later.

It's nice this topic has become a "sticky," if only because it is a fun topic to read, and the fact that I spent over two and 1/2 hours transcribing the dialogue. Some was very hard to decipher.

drjohncarpenter
two and 1/2 hours transcribing the dialogue

You did one hell of a job nice work and nice post!

Nice post, Doc.

The transcript may not be new, but its poignant to note the time frame of
Feb. '61. Elvis was, as stated, the king of all media, with a bulletproof career which had actually grown through the army years.
Poignant, in that he was staring at the abyss to follow, the quickie movies and
mostly wasted Hollywood soundtracks.

On a side note, I'm always amazed that the Hotel Claridge dragged out a
beaten, chipped wooden lectern for the world's biggest entertainer.
Little did they know we would be viewing pictures of this event 50 years later.

Indeed. Elvis was on the brink of many things, both good and bad.

As for the lectern, interesting observation! Maybe people still found rock 'n' roll -- and Elvis -- a passing fad in early 1961, not worth any extra attention.

And yet -- how ironic, as you note -- here we are revisiting this press conference 50 years later.

It's nice this topic has become a "sticky," if only because it is a fun topic to read, and the fact that I spent over two and 1/2 hours transcribing the dialogue. Some was very hard to decipher.

Just a question.

As stated earlier I assumed that you just paste and cut this transcription from the internet, but you say that you
have actually transcribed this yourself?

Are you sure you didn't just use one of those as a guide and then changed a few things?

You did leave out of a couple of Elvis funniest comments as did the online sources I looked at.

So, my question is then, why do you have the same errors and omissions that a couple of the online transcriptions have?

Perhaps your audio copy is incomplete.

... you say that you have actually transcribed this yourself?

That's what I said.

Are you sure you didn't just use one of those as a guide and then changed a few things?

Yes, I am sure.

You did leave out of a couple of Elvis funniest comments as did the online sources I looked at.

Those sources must be incorrect. Click the link in my post to hear the audio I transcribed.

Great post drjohncarpenter. It made for an interesting read.

The shows he would give in Memphis that day and Honolulu in March would be a stunning overview of his entire career, delivered with all the fire of the 50s, coupled with the maturity of his return from the army

I have the bootleg album for the Honolulu show, are we fortunate enough to have audio for this show and if so has that material been released either bootlegged or officially?

I have the bootleg album for the Honolulu show, are we fortunate enough to have audio for this show and if so has that material been released either bootlegged or officially?

Neither Memphis show (2-25-61) has ever surfaced. Honolulu (3-25-61) was officially released, untampered, in 1980:




Elvis Aron Presley (RCA CLP8-3699, 1980)


This RCA box set got a digital issue 18 years later:





Elvis Aron Presley (RCA/BMG 07863 67455, 1998)

... you say that you have actually transcribed this yourself?

That's what I said.

Are you sure you didn't just use one of those as a guide and then changed a few things?

Yes, I am sure.

You did leave out of a couple of Elvis funniest comments as did the online sources I looked at.

Those sources must be incorrect. Click the link in my post to hear the audio I transcribed.

I have the audio as millions of other fans do.

Forget those other sources, look at your transcription. Like I said, you have left out funny stuff that is clearly on my audio source.

Then I guess your transcription is perfectly accurate, you just took it from an edited source.

MY SOURCE IS BETTER THAN YOURS IS.

I have the bootleg album for the Honolulu show, are we fortunate enough to have audio for this show and if so has that material been released either bootlegged or officially?

Neither Memphis show (2-25-61) has ever surfaced. Honolulu (3-25-61) was officially released, untampered, in 1980:
Elvis Aron Presley (RCA CLP8-3699, 1980)
This RCA box set got a digital issue 18 years later:
Elvis Aron Presley (RCA/BMG 07863 67455, 1998)

Thank you for the reply, it is very much appreciated.

MY SOURCE IS BETTER THAN YOURS IS.

If what you say is true ekenee.
Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form,
be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?
PEP

MY SOURCE IS BETTER THAN YOURS IS.

If what you say is true ekenee.
Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form,
be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?
PEP

I am giving the doctor a chance to correct his transcription before I fill in the blanks.

What is strange here is he claims that the online sources I site with the same errors as his, he claims are inaccurate.

If they are inaccurate, yet they match his, wouldn't that make his inaccurate too?

I realize its not easy transcribing a press conference.
There is alot of over-talk and cross talk, and the audio is not good on that one.
So, if he really did take the time to transcribe it from scratch, I give him props, because
doing that would be tough to do, and still be accurate.
I will post my corrections as soon as the doc concedes there is a possibillity that his
transcriiption is not accurate.
I don't want to step on any toes.

PS. anyone with the un-cut conference can spot at least 3 comments left off.

I don't think anyone could be expected to catch each and every little word spoken...
like I said, there's a lot of cross talk.

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Thank you for the reply, it is very much appreciated.

You are very welcome!

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Tell us, where did you see misheard transcriptions?

Since your transcription is not totally accurate, yours is, in fact, another "misheard" transcription.


This is getting exciting, because if yours is the most accurate to date,
and if I can get off my lazy butt and correct yours, then mine will be the most accurate to date.
Cool.

Let me know when you would like for me to fill you in.

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Tell us, where did you see misheard transcriptions?

Since your transcription is not totally accurate, yours is, in fact, another "misheard" transcription.


This is getting exciting, because if yours is the most accurate to date,
and if I can get off my lazy butt and correct yours, then mine will be the most accurate to date.
Cool.

Let me know when you would like for me to fill you in.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it. If you have comments left off that were so funny, post them. If not, leave it alone. Why not try to make the board better by just posting your supposedly better source material, instead of trying to prove a point. If you have it, the point will be proven anyway. If you don't, it's all just wanking around.

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Tell us, where did you see misheard transcriptions?

Since your transcription is not totally accurate, yours is, in fact, another "misheard" transcription.


This is getting exciting, because if yours is the most accurate to date,
and if I can get off my lazy butt and correct yours, then mine will be the most accurate to date.
Cool.

Let me know when you would like for me to fill you in.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it. If you have comments left off that were so funny, post them. If not, leave it alone. Why not try to make the board better by just posting your supposedly better source material, instead of trying to prove a point. If you have it, the point will be proven anyway. If you don't, it's all just wanking around.

I never said I had better audio. I have better ears.
Have you compared the PC word for word with his transcription? If not, then you need to back off.
"leave it alone"?? I was just responding to the doctors statement.
I am giving the doctor some time to re-check his facts.
Like I said, the audio is poor on this tape, so its a tough task.

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Tell us, where did you see misheard transcriptions?

Since your transcription is not totally accurate, yours is, in fact, another "misheard" transcription.


This is getting exciting, because if yours is the most accurate to date,
and if I can get off my lazy butt and correct yours, then mine will be the most accurate to date.
Cool.

Let me know when you would like for me to fill you in.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it. If you have comments left off that were so funny, post them. If not, leave it alone. Why not try to make the board better by just posting your supposedly better source material, instead of trying to prove a point. If you have it, the point will be proven anyway. If you don't, it's all just wanking around.

I never said I had better audio. I have better ears.
Have you compared the PC word for word with his transcription? If not, then you need to back off.
"leave it alone"?? I was just responding to the doctors statement.
I am giving the doctor some time to re-check his facts.
Like I said, the audio is poor on this tape, so its a tough task.

Well, if your ears are better, put them to use and let us all in on the missing audio. I haven't compared it and neither am I complaining about discrepancies. I read the transcript and enjoyed it. Thanks to the Doc for transcribing it.

Wouldn't sharing that information in either audio form or written form, be the right thing to do for this thread, than anything else?

That would seem to be obvious.

As for now, this FECC topic is the "go-to" source for this interview, if one cares about accuracy.

Since I spent nearly three hours transcribing the source, which anyone may hear on page 1, if this "new" source is shared I'll review it and see if anything is missing. Frankly, I doubt this is the case.

Again, the existing audio is poor, and yet some of my work here actually corrects misheard transcriptions of the press conference, which I saw elsewhere.

Tell us, where did you see misheard transcriptions?

Since your transcription is not totally accurate, yours is, in fact, another "misheard" transcription.


This is getting exciting, because if yours is the most accurate to date,
and if I can get off my lazy butt and correct yours, then mine will be the most accurate to date.
Cool.

Let me know when you would like for me to fill you in.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it. If you have comments left off that were so funny, post them. If not, leave it alone. Why not try to make the board better by just posting your supposedly better source material, instead of trying to prove a point. If you have it, the point will be proven anyway. If you don't, it's all just wanking around.

I never said I had better audio. I have better ears.
Have you compared the PC word for word with his transcription? If not, then you need to back off.
"leave it alone"?? I was just responding to the doctors statement.
I am giving the doctor some time to re-check his facts.
Like I said, the audio is poor on this tape, so its a tough task.

Well, if your ears are better, put them to use and let us all in on the missing audio. I haven't compared it and neither am I complaining about discrepancies. I read the transcript and enjoyed it. Thanks to the Doc for transcribing it.

Ok, then, you haven't compared it, then you have no reason to jump on my ass about anything.
I've read the transcript too.
I was not complaining.
I was just questioning some questionable items that were presented.

My ears are tired . It's very late now.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it.

And, of course, I've already made this request. As may be seen, nothing has been offered.

I would appreciate leaving this be, so we may enjoy the topic at hand.

Crap or get off the pot. If you have better audio, post it.

And, of course, I've already made this request. As may be seen, nothing has been offered.

I would appreciate leaving this be, so we may enjoy the topic at hand.

No, Pep made the request. Not you. I have been watching this very closely.

Once again you make a false claim.

I may post my more accurate findings on a SEPERATE thread.

I am going to have to find 3 hours to transcribe in detail.

I may post my more accurate findings on a SEPERATE thread.

I am going to have to find 3 hours to transcribe in detail.

When your done I'm sure we will all be interested in reading
and seeing the difference....

In the mean time, we have what we have from the Doc, so it is time to stay
on topic....as a friendly reminder.

Thank you all.


PEP

Kindergarten blues.

Ofcourse that remark was made in jest, obviously. It is cool that Elvis fans care so much about Elvis, both Ekenee and the doc. So without any favoritism, i want to thank both for getting the best possible result on this subject.

Thank You, very much Doc, for this transcript. For me it was the first time I read the content of this famous event. Elvis was so at ease to answer these quesstions. But if he knew in the following 7 years that from the top of the World - as he was in 1961- he would rarely reach the top 30 in 1966-1968 years (until If I can Dream single) maybe he insisted much with the Colonel to do more live shows and TV appearances. He was clearly manipulated by Parker saying something like :"Too much TV and concerts will damage the movies".