The Majestic "O Come, All Ye Faithful"

[drjohncarpenter]

Jingle Bell Rock is timeless and one doesnt need to be a young person to perform the song. Is Bruce Springsteen less mature because he did Santa Claus Is Coming To Town as a grown up? How about the aforementioned Hall & Oates. or Dion doing Rockin Around The Christmas tree as an older man? Cmon. Really Im surprised at you PMP for suggesting this notion. its a fun, feel-good Christmas song for goodness sake. Thats all that should matter. I wish he did it in 1971 instead of say Winter Wonderland which did no one any favors. Oh and by the way, the man did perform the less mature and more silly Little Darlin the last year of his life. Food for thought. Just because you dont like the song , I think you should know others would have liked to hear a version by Elvis including me!

Little Darlin' was pure silliness and appealed to the sometimes very silly humour that Elvis is known to have had and used. Jingle Bell Rock is bland and dull as a song, and you can think all you like of it, but here in the UK, it isn't and never has been particularly popular. And 99% of the population have no idea who Bobby Helms even is. And while you can shout from the rooftops that it's a "fun, feel-good Christmas song," the rest of us are shouting that O Come all Ye Faithful is a beloved Christmas carol, but the Doc is quite happy to ignore that fact and thinks it should never have bene recorded by Elvis.

I never made that statement, so please do not put words in my mouth. It is very poor rhetoric.

Your point about "Jingle Bell Rock" is moot. Unlike Elvis' "majestic" recording of "O Come, All Ye Faithful," the 1957 single "Jingle Bell Rock" has been an American holiday staple for the past 59 years. Most may not know who Bobby Helms is, but the song endures, despite your claim that it is not as well-regarded overseas. That's a secondary point, at best.

This topic well proves that many of us ain't "shouting that O Come all Ye Faithful is a beloved Christmas carol."

[Juan Luis]

Jingle Bell Rock is timeless and one doesnt need to be a young person to perform the song. Is Bruce Springsteen less mature because he did Santa Claus Is Coming To Town as a grown up? How about the aforementioned Hall & Oates. or Dion doing Rockin Around The Christmas tree as an older man? Cmon. Really Im surprised at you PMP for suggesting this notion. its a fun, feel-good Christmas song for goodness sake. Thats all that should matter. I wish he did it in 1971 instead of say Winter Wonderland which did no one any favors. Oh and by the way, the man did perform the less mature and more silly Little Darlin the last year of his life. Food for thought. Just because you dont like the song , I think you should know others would have liked to hear a version by Elvis including me!

Little Darlin' was pure silliness and appealed to the sometimes very silly humour that Elvis is known to have had and used. Jingle Bell Rock is bland and dull as a song, and you can think all you like of it, but here in the UK, it isn't and never has been particularly popular. And 99% of the population have no idea who Bobby Helms even is. And while you can shout from the rooftops that it's a "fun, feel-good Christmas song," the rest of us are shouting that O Come all Ye Faithful is a beloved Christmas carol, but the Doc is quite happy to ignore that fact and thinks it should never have bene recorded by Elvis.

I never made that statement, so please do not put words in my mouth. It is very poor rhetoric.

Your point about "Jingle Bell Rock" is moot. Unlike Elvis' "majestic" recording of "O Come, All Ye Faithful," the 1957 single "Jingle Bell Rock" has been an American holiday staple for the past 59 years. Most may not know who Bobby Helms is, but the song endures, despite your claim that it is not as well-regarded overseas. That's a secondary point, at best.

This topic well proves that many of us ain't "shouting that O Come all Ye Faithful is a beloved Christmas carol."

Three is many of us? The math doesn't work out.

[r&b]

Jingle Bell Rock is timeless and one doesnt need to be a young person to perform the song. Is Bruce Springsteen less mature because he did Santa Claus Is Coming To Town as a grown up? How about the aforementioned Hall & Oates. or Dion doing Rockin Around The Christmas tree as an older man? Cmon. Really Im surprised at you PMP for suggesting this notion. its a fun, feel-good Christmas song for goodness sake. Thats all that should matter. I wish he did it in 1971 instead of say Winter Wonderland which did no one any favors. Oh and by the way, the man did perform the less mature and more silly Little Darlin the last year of his life. Food for thought. Just because you dont like the song , I think you should know others would have liked to hear a version by Elvis including me!

Little Darlin' was pure silliness and appealed to the sometimes very silly humour that Elvis is known to have had and used. Jingle Bell Rock is bland and dull as a song, and you can think all you like of it, but here in the UK, it isn't and never has been particularly popular. And 99% of the population have no idea who Bobby Helms even is. And while you can shout from the rooftops that it's a "fun, feel-good Christmas song," the rest of us are shouting that O Come all Ye Faithful is a beloved Christmas carol, but the Doc is quite happy to ignore that fact and thinks it should never have bene recorded by Elvis.

The suggestion that Elvis should have sung Jingle Bell Rock in 1971 is simply indicative of those who think he should never have grown up and put rock n roll on the back burner. It's even more ironic that many here state that the 2nd side of the 1971 Christmas album is the better of the two thanks to its rather sombre nature and Elvis's more committed performances (on the whole), and so how does Jingle Bell Rock fit into that. Dion, as an older man, was an artist relying on the past. In 1971, Elvis was still trying to be current and contemporary. There is a vast difference between the two. Santa Claus is Coming to Town is at least a song intended to be sung to kids - as was Here Comes Santa Claus. Jingle Bell Rock sits in no-mans land - thankfully. But hey, is Chips was producing the album (as some think he should have done), I'm sure he'd have just LOVED to get his hands into such childish nonsense.

I dont think that matters one bit. its the song that is known , loved, and endures, not Helms, altho he had a very distinctive voice and owns the definitive version. I dont believe it sits in no-mans land when it consistently lands in the top 10 Christmas songs here in the USA anyway. Im glad it does and still enjoy it. its happy

[Juan Luis]

"O come, All Ye Faithful" has always been performed and sung in church since I was a kid. It shows as much reverence to Christ, as any Gospel number. A Holy song, especially for those of the Roman Catholic faith. Priscilla Presley surely sang it while attending Catholic school in Memphis.

"The original four verses of the hymn were extended to a total of eight, and these have been translated into many languages. The English translation of "O Come, All Ye Faithful" by the English Catholic priest Frederick Oakeley, written in 1841, is widespread in most English speaking countries. The present harmonisation is from the English Hymnal (1906)."

[ICanHelp]

One of my favorite Christmas songs, but not one Elvis performs particularly well. I am not a fan of Elvis' 1971 recordings. His voice just sounds too weak. The definitive version of this classic tune was done by the great Mario Lanza.

[poormadpeter2]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly ...

FYI: "Best Bets For Christmas" isn't a chart, it's a recommendations listing. I knew this already, but thanks for sharing.

And no #1 there in 1971 for Elvis, as I suspected.

All the comments are indeed moot, false information cut-and-pasted into the the topic.

Thanks for confirming that.

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:

Billboard 18 Sep 2004.JPG

Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

And just to confirm that still further, here's a snip from the same edition's list of Elvis's #1 singles.

billboard 18 sep 2004 (2).JPG

If BILLBOARD itself classes these Christmas singles and album charts as legitimate charts, then that is what they are - whether you like it or not.

[Juan Luis]

Anything 70's Elvis will have attempts with the same few of cutting it down. They don't want to know the good news that the album and therefore Elvis succeeded. The only good news that they want to hear is that it was a "failure". Only thinking of themselves, and their always "correct" opinions that will never be successfully challenged in their mind(s).

[poormadpeter2]

Anything 70's Elvis will have attempts with the same few of cutting it down. They don't want to know the good news that the album and therefore Elvis succeeded. The only good news that they want to hear is that it was a "failure". Only thinking of themselves, and their always "correct" opinions that will never be successfully challenged in their mind(s).

Well, I don't disagree with them that the album was a failure artistically, but that is still only an opinion of course. But with regards to chart positions and it faring well in the years immediately after release, the facts have been made clear that it was indeed successful in comparison to other Christmas albums in the years 1971-1973.

[fn2drive]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly ...

FYI: "Best Bets For Christmas" isn't a chart, it's a recommendations listing. I knew this already, but thanks for sharing.

And no #1 there in 1971 for Elvis, as I suspected.

All the comments are indeed moot, false information cut-and-pasted into the the topic.

Thanks for confirming that.

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:

Billboard 18 Sep 2004.JPG

Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

And just to confirm that still further, here's a snip from the same edition's list of Elvis's #1 singles.

billboard 18 sep 2004 (2).JPG

If BILLBOARD itself classes these Christmas singles and album charts as legitimate charts, then that is what they are - whether you like it or not.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Sinatra's Mistletoe and Holly is an exceptional rendering of a mediocre tune-it is what he does with it that makes it great. Like what Elvis rarely did post 1970.

On the topic of definitions. Majestic-having or displaying majesty or great dignity; grand; lofty. Elvis' OCAYF is as i have noted anything but majestic but rather a mediocre vocal which is then juiced up in post production to produce little more than an incoherent and disjointed mess. Nope not grand; not lofty; not majestic. And if it were majestic that is to avoid confusion, moved by it grandeur and purpose, record buyers would have bought it driving it up the charts and it would have become the defacto go to standard of this time honored hymn. As we know it barely charted and is another footnote in failed post 1970 recordings. Only in this thread do we find anyone think this is majestic. In the real world, nope.

A monstrosity of Jarvis conceived overdubs proving once again Jarvis was the King Of Subtraction By Addition. Had more energy been devoted to planning for these sessions and learning his trade perhaps we could have produced an exceptional seasonal LP.

[poormadpeter2]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly ...

FYI: "Best Bets For Christmas" isn't a chart, it's a recommendations listing. I knew this already, but thanks for sharing.

And no #1 there in 1971 for Elvis, as I suspected.

All the comments are indeed moot, false information cut-and-pasted into the the topic.

Thanks for confirming that.

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:

Billboard 18 Sep 2004.JPG

Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

And just to confirm that still further, here's a snip from the same edition's list of Elvis's #1 singles.

billboard 18 sep 2004 (2).JPG

If BILLBOARD itself classes these Christmas singles and album charts as legitimate charts, then that is what they are - whether you like it or not.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Sinatra's Mistletoe and Holly is an exceptional rendering of a mediocre tune-it is what he does with it that makes it great. Like what Elvis rarely did post 1970.

On the topic of definitions. Majestic-having or displaying majesty or great dignity; grand; lofty. Elvis' OCAYF is as i have noted anything but majestic but rather a mediocre vocal which is then juiced up in post production to produce little more than an incoherent and disjointed mess. Nope not grand; not lofty; not majestic. And if it were majestic that is to avoid confusion, moved by it grandeur and purpose, record buyers would have bought it driving it up the charts and it would have become the defacto go to standard of this time honored hymn. As we know it barely charted and is another footnote in failed post 1970 recordings. Only in this thread do we find anyone think this is majestic. In the real world, nope.

Oh you mean like the majestic American Trilogy? How the buyers drove that up the charts in the US?

[Juan Luis]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly ...

FYI: "Best Bets For Christmas" isn't a chart, it's a recommendations listing. I knew this already, but thanks for sharing.

And no #1 there in 1971 for Elvis, as I suspected.

All the comments are indeed moot, false information cut-and-pasted into the the topic.

Thanks for confirming that.

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:

Billboard 18 Sep 2004.JPG

Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

And just to confirm that still further, here's a snip from the same edition's list of Elvis's #1 singles.

billboard 18 sep 2004 (2).JPG

If BILLBOARD itself classes these Christmas singles and album charts as legitimate charts, then that is what they are - whether you like it or not.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Sinatra's Mistletoe and Holly is an exceptional rendering of a mediocre tune-it is what he does with it that makes it great. Like what Elvis rarely did post 1970.

On the topic of definitions. Majestic-having or displaying majesty or great dignity; grand; lofty. Elvis' OCAYF is as i have noted anything but majestic but rather a mediocre vocal which is then juiced up in post production to produce little more than an incoherent and disjointed mess. Nope not grand; not lofty; not majestic. And if it were majestic that is to avoid confusion, moved by it grandeur and purpose, record buyers would have bought it driving it up the charts and it would have become the defacto go to standard of this time honored hymn. As we know it barely charted and is another footnote in failed post 1970 recordings. Only in this thread do we find anyone think this is majestic. In the real world, nope.

A monstrosity of Jarvis conceived overdubs proving once again Jarvis was the King Of Subtraction By Addition. Had more energy been devoted to planning for these sessions and learning his trade perhaps we could have produced an exceptional seasonal LP.

Glen Spreen of American recordings, did not arrange an incoherent anything.

[fn2drive]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly ...

FYI: "Best Bets For Christmas" isn't a chart, it's a recommendations listing. I knew this already, but thanks for sharing.

And no #1 there in 1971 for Elvis, as I suspected.

All the comments are indeed moot, false information cut-and-pasted into the the topic.

Thanks for confirming that.

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:

Billboard 18 Sep 2004.JPG

Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

And just to confirm that still further, here's a snip from the same edition's list of Elvis's #1 singles.

billboard 18 sep 2004 (2).JPG

If BILLBOARD itself classes these Christmas singles and album charts as legitimate charts, then that is what they are - whether you like it or not.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Sinatra's Mistletoe and Holly is an exceptional rendering of a mediocre tune-it is what he does with it that makes it great. Like what Elvis rarely did post 1970.

On the topic of definitions. Majestic-having or displaying majesty or great dignity; grand; lofty. Elvis' OCAYF is as i have noted anything but majestic but rather a mediocre vocal which is then juiced up in post production to produce little more than an incoherent and disjointed mess. Nope not grand; not lofty; not majestic. And if it were majestic that is to avoid confusion, moved by it grandeur and purpose, record buyers would have bought it driving it up the charts and it would have become the defacto go to standard of this time honored hymn. As we know it barely charted and is another footnote in failed post 1970 recordings. Only in this thread do we find anyone think this is majestic. In the real world, nope.

Oh you mean like the majestic American Trilogy? How the buyers drove that up the charts in the US?

As usual, an apples to pears comparison. One is a mediocre studio recording juiced up by the vision of failed hack producer who as typical fell wide of the mark with his post production; the other was the completed vision of the artist himself as a live performance set piece. OCAYF is not majestic but if someone thinks of Trilogy as majestic, i wouldn't take exception to that pov. As a choice of a single, a foolish decision by the artist whose decision making had begun being corrupted by drug abuse. The track had zero chart potential.

[goldbelt]

Majestic - having or showing impressive beauty or scale.

This guy is going on page after page, getting outraged because people find impressive beauty or scale in Elvis' 'O Come, All Ye Faithful'.

Really?!

[drjohncarpenter]

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:




Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

No one likes to see a smug, sarcastic post, with all-caps and enlarged font sizes, designed to put someone down. And although you have countless times made fun of my use of the Google search tool, I will not return the favor, as I prefer to respond like an adult.

What you miss is that whoever put together the 2004 Billboard issue you found, in particular "the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums," got it wrong. How do we know this?

Because if you look at the ORIGINAL December 4, 1971 "Christmas Best Bets" list, Elvis' LP is actually sitting at ... #4:

Billboard Dec 4 1971 p46.jpg

Billboard - December 4, 1971



Do note that my scan is larger, enabling everyone to see that Billboard makes clear "Best Bets For Christmas" is a "special buying and stocking guide," not a chart, and that "many new releases" are not reflected. Exactly as I noted in a previous post.

All of this sub-discussion is because you challenged my statement about other members incorrectly hyping the 1971 Christmas album, saying when it was released it hit #1, and other such silliness. The historical record supports what I said. All it takes is a little bit of research.

Thanks.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Well, in the case of the December 4, 1971 "Best Bets For Christmas" shopping guide in Billboard, Elvis' LP was number four on an island of 10 people.

[fn2drive]

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:




Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

No one likes to see a smug, sarcastic post, with all-caps and enlarged font sizes, designed to put someone down. And although you have countless times made fun of my use of the Google search tool, I will not return the favor, as I prefer to respond like an adult.

What you miss is that whoever put together the 2004 Billboard issue you found, in particular "the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums," got it wrong. How do we know this?

Because if you look at the ORIGINAL December 4, 1971 "Christmas Best Bets" list, Elvis' LP is actually sitting at ... #4:

Billboard Dec 4 1971 p46.jpg

Billboard - December 4, 1971



Do note that my scan is larger, enabling everyone to see that Billboard makes clear "Best Bets For Christmas" is a "special buying and stocking guide," not a chart, and that "many new releases" are not reflected. Exactly as I noted in a previous post.

All of this sub-discussion is because you challenged my statement about other members incorrectly hyping the 1971 Christmas album, saying when it was released it hit #1, and other such silliness. The historical record supports what I said. All it takes is a little bit of research.

Thanks.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Well, in the case of the December 4, 1971 "Best Bets For Christmas" shopping guide in Billboard, Elvis' LP was number four on an island of 10 people.

Ouch-using facts to shine a light. How novel around here. Always great to see your posts from The Billboard, etc. Real time capsules.

[drjohncarpenter]

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Well, in the case of the December 4, 1971 "Best Bets For Christmas" shopping guide in Billboard, Elvis' LP was number four on an island of 10 people.

Ouch-using facts to shine a light. How novel around here. Always great to see your posts from The Billboard, etc. Real time capsules.

Heh.

It's fun to share these pieces of history, and facts are always important in making a credible argument.

[Fabbe]

On a side note, has anyone managed to actually find a "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" or any similar which shows it zooming to #1 after release?

I cannot, and this lack of verification renders all the grandiose statements about the 1971 holiday album moot.

That's clearly because you were "researching" the Brady Bunch instead, but we all understand your desire to share your favourite albums with us, nonetheless. Perhaps you could add it to the "Last non-Elvis album you listened to" thread in Chat-Talk?

Meanwhile, some of us went beyond a simple google search for "Billboard Holiday Albums Chart" and went back to Billboard magazines themselves (shocker, right?) and found what people were looking for. I would say leave the research to the researchers, but it's Christmas so I won't.

So, what did we find out? Well, we found out that Jetblack was exactly right in what he said. Quite why this was questioned given the detail given, I'm not sure there, but there we go.

The Wonderful World Of Christmas' album was a top seller reaching Number 2 in 1971 on the Billboard Holiday Albums Chart and topping it in 1972 and 1973. It would have charted high on the Billboard 200 but from 1963 to 1973 Holiday albums were not allowed to chart.

Wonderful World of Christmas did indeed reach #2 in 1971 on December 18th.

dec 18 1971.JPG

If we look at 1972, the album did reach #1 on December 9th.

1972.JPG

And it did so again on December 8th 1973.

billboard top.JPG

It was, I should add, #2 on two other occasions in that year, and in the top 3 on every week of the chart in 1971 and top 5 every week in 1972. It's also worth mentioning that Blue Christmas was the top selling Christmas single for a week in 1973 as well.

billboard 3.JPG

Hope that quietens down the "naysayers" regarding the album's chart history, as well as the notion that the album did not sell in significant quantities until after Elvis's death. Quite the contrary, it shows that for three year in a row, the album was one of, if not THE, best-selling Christmas album according to Billboard.

interesting -- I didn't know it was considered a successful release at the time within the Christmas category


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[drjohncarpenter]

Interesting -- I didn't know it was considered a successful release at the time within the Christmas category

Yes, a shocking revelation!

[Steve Morse]

"No one likes to see a smug, sarcastic post, with all-caps and enlarged font sizes, designed to put someone down."

Hmmm . . . that's a bit like the Gestapo becoming indignant at others' displays of ruthlessness and cruelty.

[poormadpeter2]

Once again, a little bit of RESEARCH can prove you INCORRECT.

Fast forward to an issue of Billboard from 2004, and we find this:




Now, what does it say in the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums?

"Note: Elvis also reached No. 1 with Elvis Sings the Wonderful World of Christmas, which debuted on the Christmas album chart Dec 4, 1971."

Thus, once more proving that the chart information given throughout has been correct, and that Billboard viewed the charts I posted as legitimate album charts.

No one likes to see a smug, sarcastic post, with all-caps and enlarged font sizes, designed to put someone down. And although you have countless times made fun of my use of the Google search tool, I will not return the favor, as I prefer to respond like an adult.

What you miss is that whoever put together the 2004 Billboard issue you found, in particular "the print at the bottom of this list of Elvis #1 albums," got it wrong. How do we know this?

Because if you look at the ORIGINAL December 4, 1971 "Christmas Best Bets" list, Elvis' LP is actually sitting at ... #4:

Billboard Dec 4 1971 p46.jpg

Billboard - December 4, 1971



Do note that my scan is larger, enabling everyone to see that Billboard makes clear "Best Bets For Christmas" is a "special buying and stocking guide," not a chart, and that "many new releases" are not reflected. Exactly as I noted in a previous post.

All of this sub-discussion is because you challenged my statement about other members incorrectly hyping the 1971 Christmas album, saying when it was released it hit #1, and other such silliness. The historical record supports what I said. All it takes is a little bit of research.

Thanks.

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Well, in the case of the December 4, 1971 "Best Bets For Christmas" shopping guide in Billboard, Elvis' LP was number four on an island of 10 people.

That's lovely. But no one said it was anything but number 4 when it debuted on the chart. What it said was Elvis scored a #1 album with the album WHICH debuted on December 4 1971, not WHEN it debuted on Dec 4. No date is given for the two dates it reached #1.

Read carefully. You keep making this same error over and over, despite me pointing it out.

[TeddyGirl]

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Well, in the case of the December 4, 1971 "Best Bets For Christmas" shopping guide in Billboard, Elvis' LP was number four on an island of 10 people.

Ouch-using facts to shine a light. How novel around here. Always great to see your posts from The Billboard, etc. Real time capsules.

Heh.

It's fun to share these pieces of history, and facts are always important in making a credible argument.

Get a room, already... that would be neat!

[Scarre]

One of my favorite Christmas songs, but not one Elvis performs particularly well. I am not a fan of Elvis' 1971 recordings. His voice just sounds too weak. The definitive version of this classic tune was done by the great Mario Lanza.

I can agree with this. That being said, I have alot of favourite Christmas songs. Sadly, the comment about his voice goes for just about every song on that album.

[Scarre]

One of my favorite Christmas songs, but not one Elvis performs particularly well. I am not a fan of Elvis' 1971 recordings. His voice just sounds too weak. The definitive version of this classic tune was done by the great Mario Lanza.

Lanza`s version of O Come, All Ye Faithful is sublime. It's one of my favourite recordings of this carol. And Lanza Sings Christmas Carols is easily one of my favourite Christmas albums.

Frank Sinatra`s 1946 recording is another favourite of mine. His singing is exquisite and boasts everything Elvis`s recording is unfortunately lacking with regards to his vocal. And Axel Stordahl`s arrangement is first class.

Tony Bennett has recorded a couple of fine versions of this carol, too. His Christmas albums and Sinatra`s are always close by at this time of year.

From 1948`s Christmas Songs by Sinatra.

..

From 1968`s Snowfall: The Tony Bennett Christmas Album.

..

I like Sinatras 1946 recording, but I prefer the 1957 (?) one...perhaps because I´m more used to it.

[jetblack]

The Christmas chart is like being number one on an island of 10 people. RCA was disappointed with the performance of this weak LP.

Please can you post proof of this statement.

Andy

[r&b]

Interesting -- I didn't know it was considered a successful release at the time within the Christmas category

Yes, a shocking revelation!

I can tell you the album came and went without much fanfare in 1971. The reviews were ok, with Merry Christmas baby being the track given the most acclaim (much like Mojo earlier in the year. Yes Elvis always does treat us at least once per LP.) But reviewers also liked Holly Leaves and I'll Be Home On Christmas Day. Now I cannot recall hearing MCB on the radio at all. I thought this single would become the second Presley Christmas standard in airplay after Blue Christmas. It failed to click with buyers and DJs which was surprising.