The Majestic "O Come, All Ye Faithful"

[poormadpeter2]

So, now you're saying Ernst probably wrote those liner notes and yet HE has got it wrong too?

No. What I am saying is that members here misquoted the passage they read on the "Elvis On CD" site to support their hyping of the 1971 LP.

You really have trouble with details. Again and again you need to be corrected.

So now you're saying the Christmas chart really was a chart after all. Unbelievable.

No, I am not.

To reiterate, you really have trouble with details. It's pathological, not to mention extremely irritating.

Ah, the internet.


Back on topic:

Has anyone tried giving those Brady Bunch holiday tracks from 1970 a listen? I posted them a few pages back. They are interesting and, ironically, I suspect some of the backing musicians worked with Elvis at studios like Western Recorders in West Hollywood.

I remain both stunned and pleased I was able to completely nail a point in the discussion with my discovery of the YouTube videos. They just so happened to be the same exact three songs some here were trying to claim were not shopworn material.

That is not the topic sir. Get on topic, or visit other threads that haven't been hijacked yet. Thank You.

The mind boggles at how a man thinks talking about a Brady Bunch album is "on topic."

What he quite clearly really wants is a big round of applause from everyone for his hard work finding an off-topic video, and he's just going to keep reminding us that he found it until he gets one.

Clearly, there is a case of dented ego and an absolute, and very desperate, need for being appreciated when someone posts the same three off-topic videos three times over the course of six pages of a topic, and then reminds us he posted them in a further six posts. Unfortunately it seems that this lunacy won't cease until the Doc receives at least one "like" for his efforts. So far he has received none for any of them, demonstrating that even his ever-faithful minions can't support him on this one. The constant desperate requirement for applause is actually rather sad and pitiful.

[fn2drive]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

[Juan Luis]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

LOL.

[Fabbe]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[drjohncarpenter]

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

Thank you. He also is quick to reply to postings he has not fully absorbed. I've made very clear why the shared material on the Brady and Presley discs has relevance. But it's being ignored, because to do otherwise is to acknowledge I hit the nail on the head. And the delicious irony of my discovering and posting those shop-worn tunes after he tried to argue in favor of them has been neatly side-stepped. That is not a surprise.

[Scarre]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

The overdubs are, once again, done nicely.

In the spirit of Jordan's request...can you please stop the name-calling? The man has been dead along time. Criticize if you want, but show some respect...it's not too much to ask for.

[poormadpeter2]

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

Thank you. He also is quick to reply to postings he has not fully absorbed. I've made very clear why the shared material on the Brady and Presley discs has relevance. But it's being ignored, because to do otherwise is to acknowledge I hit the nail on the head. And the delicious irony of my discovering and posting those shop-worn tunes after he tried to argue in favor of them has been neatly side-stepped. That is not a surprise.

The only nail you have hit on the head in this discussion is your thumbnail, with a great big hammer. Sadly, of late there has been little in your posts to "absorb" except self-congratulatory remarks, repostings of your previous efforts, and a rather Scrooge-like reaction to well-loved Christmas carols. Joy to the World in your house? Doesn't sound much like it.

The irony is that when I asked you to find other examples of them being recorded during the late 60s/early 70s, you declined the chance - because they generally weren't. What's more, my point, which you conveniently avoid, was that Silent Night and O Little Town of Bethlehem were just as "shop-worn" in 1957, although that is a ridiculous and rather sad way to refer to traditional religious fare such as a well-loved carol like O Little Town of Bethlehem.

What I am now particularly interested in is this idea of "faux bombast." Either something is bombastic or it's not. You cannot have "fake" bombast. It makes no sense. Not that I should be surprised, given who wrote the post.

[Scarre]

John...why did you have your comment and my reply deleted?

[fn2drive]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

[Fabbe]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

its not wrong because to them it is good of course they -- like you and me -- praise what consider good. How can that be wrong?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[Fabbe]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

its not wrong because to them it is good of course they -- like you and me -- praise what consider good. How can that be wrong?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[Scarre]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

Nothing wrong with recording it. What is wrong is calling majestic. What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance. What is wrong is overwrought overdubs creating faux bombast in post by hack Jarvis. Nothing wrong with comparing it to the Brady Bunch or Partridge Family either. Such was the market when Elvis recorded this disjointed album. At least their outings were cohesively produced and had a market in mind. WWOC was a hodge podge collection of tracks-the sole audience being RCA and Elvis dancing to his masters voice. You are quick to denigrate any contribution simply because you fail to see the relevance. The observations are highly relevant.

The overdubs are, once again, done nicely.

In the spirit of Jordan's request...can you please stop the name-calling? The man has been dead along time. Criticize if you want, but show some respect...it's not too much to ask for.

No comment...nothing?

[poormadpeter2]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

Your comments are, once again, ridiculous.

Firstly, we now have Elvis as a super model, which is a lovely thought. is this what you were thinking of?

girl happy 2.JPG

Naomi Campbell eat your heart out!

Secondly, as pointed out earlier in this thread, it is only a small minority of the people who have posted in this thread who share your view about the track in question - and you also need to remember that many of us praising the track are not praising the album. Therefore your insinuation that people are praising the recording blindly and just for the sake of it is completely unfounded.

Thirdly, and most notably, you are saying that the general public ignored it thus demonstrating the "true value of the mediocre track." Well, let's remind you firstly that the song was a B-side anyway. Let's also remind you that the general public also ignored Merry Christmas Baby - so does that mean that the lack of commercial success of THAT track demonstrates its mediocrity as well? Your suggestion that commercial success is somehow intrinsically linked with artistic success is remarkably naive.

[rlj4ep]

Just an opinion being offered.....
I must be the odd-man on this forum. Because if I like a song I give no thought to what the general public says. Even if a song never charted and I was the only person who purchased that song, it does not influence my like of dislike of that song. I guess I make up my own mind and don't allow the "charts," radio play, or public out cry influence my decision to like or dislike a song. In 1972 for example, many of my classmates were listening to Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," Don MacLean's "American Pie," The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin," and other really great songs. I was listening to Elvis singing "Burning Love," "We Can Make the Morning," "He Touched Me," "An American Trilogy" and others by Elvis. All of them were not doing well on the charts except "Burning Love." It didn't matter to me as I still liked the other songs and listened to Elvis. To my way of thinking, if someone says they don't like a song that I happen to like, no harm no foul. I'm not even embarrassed to say that I still listen to the movie soundtracks.
I often wonder if that is one of the reasons why from the very beginning Elvis sang so many different songs because even he knew not everyone likes all of the same things.

rlj

[TCBell]

Just an opinion being offered.....
I must be the odd-man on this forum. Because if I like a song I give no thought to what the general public says. Even if a song never charted and I was the only person who purchased that song, it does not influence my like of dislike of that song. I guess I make up my own mind and don't allow the "charts," radio play, or public out cry influence my decision to like or dislike a song. In 1972 for example, many of my classmates were listening to Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," Don MacLean's "American Pie," The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin," and other really great songs. I was listening to Elvis singing "Burning Love," "We Can Make the Morning," "He Touched Me," "An American Trilogy" and others by Elvis. All of them were not doing well on the charts except "Burning Love." It didn't matter to me as I still liked the other songs and listened to Elvis. To my way of thinking, if someone says they don't like a song that I happen to like, no harm no foul. I'm not even embarrassed to say that I still listen to the movie soundtracks.
I often wonder if that is one of the reasons why from the very beginning Elvis sang so many different songs because even he knew not everyone likes all of the same things.

rlj

Couldn't agree more. And singing so many types of songs because he was versatile.

[Scarre]

Just an opinion being offered.....
I must be the odd-man on this forum. Because if I like a song I give no thought to what the general public says. Even if a song never charted and I was the only person who purchased that song, it does not influence my like of dislike of that song. I guess I make up my own mind and don't allow the "charts," radio play, or public out cry influence my decision to like or dislike a song. In 1972 for example, many of my classmates were listening to Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," Don MacLean's "American Pie," The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin," and other really great songs. I was listening to Elvis singing "Burning Love," "We Can Make the Morning," "He Touched Me," "An American Trilogy" and others by Elvis. All of them were not doing well on the charts except "Burning Love." It didn't matter to me as I still liked the other songs and listened to Elvis. To my way of thinking, if someone says they don't like a song that I happen to like, no harm no foul. I'm not even embarrassed to say that I still listen to the movie soundtracks.
I often wonder if that is one of the reasons why from the very beginning Elvis sang so many different songs because even he knew not everyone likes all of the same things.

rlj

You are certainly not the only one.
I listen to, and, like songs that are repeatedly ridiculed on this board. To name a few:

My Boy
Life
Padre

and so on. It would be so wrong...not to mention stupid...to go by what others think. Or, to like a certain song, just because it's what critics say.
No, I listen to music that I like...not what some say I s h o u l d like...

One more thing...I won't apologize for the songs I enjoy. Deal with it...

[norrie]

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

Big difference between good and "majestic" though.
It's a very lame performance and in my opinion Elvis sounds half asleep for most of the album.

norrie

[Scarre]

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

Big difference between good and "majestic" though.
It's a very lame performance and in my opinion Elvis sounds half asleep for most of the album.

norrie

Perhaps not asleep...but nowhere near his best.

[drjohncarpenter]

...why did you have your comment and my reply deleted?

I have been offline, and I made no request. And I do not have admin permissions.

Since you interrupted the topic twice with this concern, please immediately ping the active moderators:

1) I keep accusing drjohncarpenter of deleting posts, and he keeps denying it, can you please clarify?
2) Why was his comment and my reply deleted?

Here are PM links, click and ask them:
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/ucp.php?i=pm&mode=compose&u=8714
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/ucp.php?i=pm&mode=compose&u=8713

Thank you.

[Scarre]

...why did you have your comment and my reply deleted?

I have been offline, and I made no request. And I do not have admin permissions.

Since you interrupted the topic twice with this concern, please immediately ping the active moderators:

1) I keep accusing drjohncarpenter of deleting posts, and he keeps denying it, can you please clarify?
2) Why was his comment and my reply deleted?

Here are PM links, click and ask them:
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/ucp.php?i=pm&mode=compose&u=8714
http://www.elvis-collectors.com/forum/ucp.php?i=pm&mode=compose&u=8713

Thank you.

Ok, calm down. So it wasn't you. Any theory why our posts where deleted?

[fn2drive]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

its not wrong because to them it is good of course they -- like you and me -- praise what consider good. How can that be wrong?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

I believe most people are capable of being objective. That is separating their personal taste from their critical assessment except when you are merely a fanboi. I love The Love Machine. It is a pitiful record but i enjoy it-but it is pitiful and i have no problem saying it. If someone where to ask how could i listen to that garbage, i would say i have no idea why i like it but i do. Not embarrassed by it and certainly would never try to convince anyone to do more than hear it once knowing full well it would be a rare soul that would listen twice. Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult. Fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 yr old girls and boys.

[Fabbe]

O Come, All Ye Faithful has a heritage that spans centuries, and a great deal more prestige than novelty stuff such as Jingle Bell Rock that some would rather he had recorded.

It's absolutely correct for a singer of Elvis stature to have recorded a song like O Come, All Ye Faithful, no matter how many artists or TV show casts had recorded it before him. Especially when his version was so well crafted.

Other than 'the doc', it's unlikely anyone found the need to compare it to his new favourite Brady Bunch album, then or now.

I am still trying to work out what is apparently so wrong with O Come All Ye Faithful as material, but not Silent Night or O Little Town of Bethlehem - both recorded just as often. But it was the 50s, so a free pass.

... What is wrong is praising a very mediocre performance...

it's not wrong because they think the performance is good and that is fine. Good or bad depends on the listener.


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

It is wrong to praise and elevate mediocre works imo because in doing so you denigrate great works ie everybody today gets labeled a superstar, a super model etc when they are barely celebrities for more than 15 minutes. Liking it is fine and subjective. In the track that is the title of this thread, we have the additional insight of the record buying public who ignored it when released as a single.It did not resonate with the record buying public demonstrating the true value of this mediocre track overdubbed to monstrous proportions. F stands for Felton and Failure.

its not wrong because to them it is good of course they -- like you and me -- praise what consider good. How can that be wrong?


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

I believe most people are capable of being objective. That is separating their personal taste from their critical assessment except when you are merely a fanboi. I love The Love Machine. It is a pitiful record but i enjoy it-but it is pitiful and i have no problem saying it. If someone where to ask how could i listen to that garbage, i would say i have no idea why i like it but i do. Not embarrassed by it and certainly would never try to convince anyone to do more than hear it once knowing full well it would be a rare soul that would listen twice. Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult. Fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 yr old girls and boys.

what is objective to you is not objective to somebody else. Only measurable facts are objectives , the conclusions you make out of them, are not . Facts have been exposed , now each of us will make its own opinion objectively and that's great if I just wanted to hear my opinions and what I think is objective, I would talk in front of a mirror! Let's be plural inclusive, open minded, and tollerant


Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk

[poormadpeter2]

Just an opinion being offered.....
I must be the odd-man on this forum. Because if I like a song I give no thought to what the general public says. Even if a song never charted and I was the only person who purchased that song, it does not influence my like of dislike of that song. I guess I make up my own mind and don't allow the "charts," radio play, or public out cry influence my decision to like or dislike a song. In 1972 for example, many of my classmates were listening to Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," Don MacLean's "American Pie," The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin," and other really great songs. I was listening to Elvis singing "Burning Love," "We Can Make the Morning," "He Touched Me," "An American Trilogy" and others by Elvis. All of them were not doing well on the charts except "Burning Love." It didn't matter to me as I still liked the other songs and listened to Elvis. To my way of thinking, if someone says they don't like a song that I happen to like, no harm no foul. I'm not even embarrassed to say that I still listen to the movie soundtracks.
I often wonder if that is one of the reasons why from the very beginning Elvis sang so many different songs because even he knew not everyone likes all of the same things.
rlj

I agree with this too. The reason why the commercial success is brought up here is because certain individuals refuse to believe the facts stated near the beginning of this thread by Jetblack that WWOC did rather well in the years following its release. Artistically, the album may be no great shakes, and it's certainly one I don't listen to, but to argue black is white regarding the fact it is was/is successful is ridiculous. The facts are there both in Billboard in the 1970s, Billboard in 2004 who clarify the chart success, and indeed the liner notes of the FTD.

I believe most people are capable of being objective. That is separating their personal taste from their critical assessment except when you are merely a fanboi. I love The Love Machine. It is a pitiful record but i enjoy it-but it is pitiful and i have no problem saying it. If someone where to ask how could i listen to that garbage, i would say i have no idea why i like it but i do. Not embarrassed by it and certainly would never try to convince anyone to do more than hear it once knowing full well it would be a rare soul that would listen twice. Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult. Fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 yr old girls and boys.

Well, let's say you're right. Who is it that decides what is good and what is not? It appears to me that you think that YOU have the right to decide what is good and what isn't, and that everyone else is wrong, no matter how much they can provide evidence as to why they think something is worthy.

"Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult" (sic) sounds like a line written by a self-important Edwardian, with a long beard, smoking a pipe and with his head firmly inserted up his own backside (and note the irony that you talk of "intellectual" and can't even complete that sentence without an obvious spelling/grammar error - so much for being intellectual!)

And if fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 year old girls and boys, then so are playground jokes about My Boy, Padre, and obsessions with pledging. But that doesn't stop you, does it?

[Juan Luis]

Just an opinion being offered.....
I must be the odd-man on this forum. Because if I like a song I give no thought to what the general public says. Even if a song never charted and I was the only person who purchased that song, it does not influence my like of dislike of that song. I guess I make up my own mind and don't allow the "charts," radio play, or public out cry influence my decision to like or dislike a song. In 1972 for example, many of my classmates were listening to Deep Purple's "Smoke on the Water," Don MacLean's "American Pie," The Moody Blues "Nights in White Satin," and other really great songs. I was listening to Elvis singing "Burning Love," "We Can Make the Morning," "He Touched Me," "An American Trilogy" and others by Elvis. All of them were not doing well on the charts except "Burning Love." It didn't matter to me as I still liked the other songs and listened to Elvis. To my way of thinking, if someone says they don't like a song that I happen to like, no harm no foul. I'm not even embarrassed to say that I still listen to the movie soundtracks.
I often wonder if that is one of the reasons why from the very beginning Elvis sang so many different songs because even he knew not everyone likes all of the same things.
rlj

I agree with this too. The reason why the commercial success is brought up here is because certain individuals refuse to believe the facts stated near the beginning of this thread by Jetblack that WWOC did rather well in the years following its release. Artistically, the album may be no great shakes, and it's certainly one I don't listen to, but to argue black is white regarding the fact it is was/is successful is ridiculous. The facts are there both in Billboard in the 1970s, Billboard in 2004 who clarify the chart success, and indeed the liner notes of the FTD.

I believe most people are capable of being objective. That is separating their personal taste from their critical assessment except when you are merely a fanboi. I love The Love Machine. It is a pitiful record but i enjoy it-but it is pitiful and i have no problem saying it. If someone where to ask how could i listen to that garbage, i would say i have no idea why i like it but i do. Not embarrassed by it and certainly would never try to convince anyone to do more than hear it once knowing full well it would be a rare soul that would listen twice. Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult. Fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 yr old girls and boys.

Well, let's say you're right. Who is it that decides what is good and what is not? It appears to me that you think that YOU have the right to decide what is good and what isn't, and that everyone else is wrong, no matter how much they can provide evidence as to why they think something is worthy.

"Possessing intellectual honesty is a most important attribute of adult" (sic) sounds like a line written by a self-important Edwardian, with a long beard, smoking a pipe and with his head firmly inserted up his own backside (and note the irony that you talk of "intellectual" and can't even complete that sentence without an obvious spelling/grammar error - so much for being intellectual!)

And if fanboi-ism is best left to 12 and 13 year old girls and boys, then so are playground jokes about My Boy, Padre, and obsessions with pledging. But that doesn't stop you, does it?

This.

[Scarre]

I'm not pointing fingers...but why haven't John or fn2drive commented regarding my question...