Controversial opinion: drop The Jordanaires

[Thats_all_right]

I'd be interested to know your opinions on whether you think Elvis should have stopped using The Jordanaires at any point before that last session together.

[luke1]

They sound great on his 50’s and 60’s recordings so why should he have stopped earlier? Also like his work with the Imperials and The Stamps. They all had their quality in their own right.

[emjel]

I think he should have stopped using the format by the mid 60s rather than specifically homing in stopping the use of The Jordanaires - I often felt it made the records sound rather dated by then and that’s why the female backing overdubs he had in ‘69 sounded so refreshing and more in tune with the times.

[colonel snow]

Elvis learned a lot of singing technique from members of the group in the 50's and 60's. So there was no reason to drop The Jordanaires.


colonel snow

[ale]

They were essential for Elvis music....their work is sooo great and profesional...they really were very important to define Elvis music imo.... and this is Elvis merit.....before offering them the job, he knew they were good enough to add an special sound to his material.
By end of the 60's Elvis intention was to keep them for his return but as he says on the Huston press conference..."I can't get them out of Nashville, they make so much money there..." This also means that a lot of artists wanted to work with them and I think this was as a result for their work with him.
Imperials and The Stamps are not as good as them IMO

[Walter Hale 4]

I'd be interested to know your opinions on whether you think Elvis should have stopped using The Jordanaires at any point before that last session together.

NO.

[Christopher Brown]

There are many songs they sound good on -- and necessary -- with Elvis. However, many would be much better without them - it really dates Elvis' music, and I'd love to have more of Elvis and less of them -- but he liked to be covered up, unfortunately.

[drjohncarpenter]

I'd be interested to know your opinions on whether you think Elvis should have stopped using The Jordanaires at any point before that last session together.

Nope.

[eligain]

There are many songs they sound good on -- and necessary -- with Elvis. However, many would be much better without them - it really dates Elvis' music, and I'd love to have more of Elvis and less of them -- but he liked to be covered up, unfortunately.

Now with the new technology of being able to remove things from the mono recordings, we will soon (maybe already) be hearing the classic recordings like Hound Dog without the Jords.

[DakotaKid]

The Jords were there because Elvis wanted them there. Simple as that.

[Lee Wood]

I'd be interested to know your opinions on whether you think Elvis should have stopped using The Jordanaires at any point before that last session together.

Yup.

They sounded fine on the gospel material, but other than that they should not have been used, with the very odd exception. They were too intrusive, and it sounded old fashioned.

Listen to any tracks without them, and they sound refreshing in comparison.

[frus75]

I think that not liking the tambourine sound on the 74 shows, or the sherrill solos is one thing, but dropping the Jordanaires is almost like dropping the orchestra out of the Sinatra recordings. Or asking Tom Jones not to sing over the top. It’s not dropping a casual or extra element, is dropping Elvis himself. I go as far as to tell that it’s very difficult to enjoy Elvis if the Jordanaires annoy you. I’m not saying that it could be better or not for you, but that maybe you’re in for the wrong artist, because they’re like melted together.

[Fabbe]

Elvis deicdes what Elvis music sounds like. Not the fans.

[Fabbe]

I think that not liking the tambourine sound on the 74 shows, or the sherrill solos is one thing, but dropping the Jordanaires is almost like dropping the orchestra out of the Sinatra recordings. Or asking Tom Jones not to sing over the top. It’s not dropping a casual or extra element, is dropping Elvis himself. I go as far as to tell that it’s very difficult to enjoy Elvis if the Jordanaires annoy you. I’m not saying that it could be better or not for you, but that maybe you’re in for the wrong artist, because they’re like melted together.

Agree - choir, voices and singers are a qualifying aspect of Elvis music and sound - during his entire career.

[tinseltown]

There are many songs they sound good on -- and necessary -- with Elvis. However, many would be much better without them - it really dates Elvis' music, and I'd love to have more of Elvis and less of them -- but he liked to be covered up, unfortunately.

Case in point:"In your arms".
Way too intrusive and they were ruining the song.

[frus75]

There are many songs they sound good on -- and necessary -- with Elvis. However, many would be much better without them - it really dates Elvis' music, and I'd love to have more of Elvis and less of them -- but he liked to be covered up, unfortunately.

Case in point:"In your arms".
Way too intrusive and they were ruining the song.

Yes, but one thing would be to pick 1-2-3-4 songs and prefer that they were done without back up voices and the other would be to (mostly) drop them altogether. By doing that, Elvis would be deprived of an essential element of who he was and how he understood his music.

[tinseltown]

But i can say that on some (!) songs that they annoy me.
Still i am a fan. Don't have to make me a slave of Elvis' opinion on every song.
If I don't like some choices Elvis made on some songs concerning background singer, that doesn't make one a lesser fan.
This is not religion and we are not in a church.

And even on those few songs that they annoy me it is more that they are way too prominent, not that they are there itself.
On those few songs less audible would be nicer on my ear.

[jurasic1968]

Well, Heartbreak Hotel was without them and it was a great song.

[tinseltown]

When I was young I detested their work on a hard rocking song like "Hound Dog". I thought it was ridiculous...their "Aaaaahhhhh's" and "ooooohhhhh''s"while those two sensational guitar breaks.
Now it's ok for me to have them there on that song. Would sound maybe even odd without them.

On a song like "There's Always Me" they are great , especially their soft contribution on the beginning of the second verse (gives a better dark feeling of loneliness). If they had to be that loud on the closing....well, debatable. But it doesn't disturb me.

Just on "In Your arms" a bit more in the background would have saved the song from sounding utter ridiculous to me.

[Ciscoking]

The Jords were there because Elvis wanted them there. Simple as that.

Yup.

[tinseltown]

Yes, but that is not the point or the question the OT asked.

[MikeTCB]

The Jords were there because Elvis wanted them there. Simple as that.

Very true. I personally liked hearing them on Elvis' records. If they were good enough for Elvis, they are good enough for me.

[DakotaKid]

I'd be interested to know your opinions on whether you think Elvis should have stopped using The Jordanaires at any point before that last session together.

No!

[DakotaKid]

Yes, but that is not the point or the question the OT asked.

Let me clear up the confusion. No!

[drjohncarpenter]

There are many songs they sound good on -- and necessary -- with Elvis. However, many would be much better without them - it really dates Elvis' music, and I'd love to have more of Elvis and less of them -- but he liked to be covered up, unfortunately.

Case in point:"In your arms".
Way too intrusive and they were ruining the song.

Who do you think did the vocal arrangement at the session for that album track?

And for those who express concern that these "dated" his music . . . these songs were taped over SIXTY YEARS AGO.

People, get a grip.