Elvis the greatest live musical act from 1970-1973

[jeanno]

The best live act was Elvis during this time period because he could sing all kinds of songs , from different genres ,not only Rock and roll...

He was the very best when focused on good rock'n'roll music thus between June 1968 and august 1969 (although you could make a case for the first half of 1970.) What an extraordinary powerful singer he was back then!

[eligain]

Because they were singing rock and roll.

What does singing rock and roll have to do with being the greatest live musical act?

[Swedish]

Because they were singing rock and roll.

What does singing rock and roll have to do with being the greatest live musical act?

Some of our friends here have a very narrow focus when it comes to music.

Oh, so my enough wide focus are maybe to short...

cdcdcd.jpg

[jurasic1968]

My mistake. The Rolling Stones sang mainly rock and roll, but also ballads, blues and folk music. By the way, in 1973 they released the very beautiful ballad Angie.

[Yamaguchi.Y]

Just like I said on page one, this thread is . .

spock-fascinating.gif

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

Because they were singing rock and roll.

And theese I mentioned what were they singing?
Jackie, Jerry Lee, Chuck, Richard?
And also Elvis

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

The best live act was Elvis during this time period because he could sing all kinds of songs , from different genres ,not only Rock and roll...

Yes and he did it better than all the others, that I have heard.
He did do for example " Polk Salad Annie" and "Bridge Over Trouble Waters" with the same energy.

[jurasic1968]

Covers. Not his own hits.

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

Covers. Not his own hits.

Who cares if he performed them well?

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

Paul Simon about Bridge Over...
"later noted that Presley’s rendition of his song was a “touch on the dramatic side.” “But so was the song,” he added. “When I first heard Elvis perform ‘Bridge Over Troubled Water’ it was unbelievable. I thought to myself, ‘How the hell can I compete with that?'”

[jurasic1968]

From 1973 onward, both songs were sang by Elvis in shorter versions.

[DEH]

A friend of mine recently saw Janet Jackson in concert and she was singing to backing tracks. Standards for live concerts have really dropped. He couldn't even be sure she was singing live some of the time.

[Strange]

How many iffy rabbit holes is the OP going down in an attempt to prove the thread title - more viewers than the moon landing compared to Elvis TV show, two movies and people travelling across the world to see him etc etc.

I posted the chart links because I knew that they were as irrelevant as some of the things that were being used to support the thread title, because however the lists were compiled, they are all subjective.

And now the Thread OP is telling us Elvis is the best because he could sing various genres.

Oh c'mon, don't make me smile. You did not post those links because you knew they were irrelevant but to make a point that Elvis was not mentioned in them. You said no such thing in your entire post; it was all about trying to justify why Elvis wasn't the greatest performer from another angle. You thought the lists were fine to present as an example of why Elvis probably can't be considered the greatest between 1970-1973, yet on even the merest inspection they were completely incompatible and unsustainable.

On the other hand, the use of 'Aloha' viewership, two well received and acclaimed documentaries that concern his performances from the time period in question are somehow irrelevant? Forget about the viewership faults, that is not important.

[Strange]

Lots of artists can sing all kinds of music. It’s whether they want to is the consideration.

Eh? Whether they want to or not is probably irrelevant to whether they actually have the aptitude to be even halfway authentic.

Someone might convince me The Beatles could sing country because they did a Buck Owens cover, but country it ain't really, is it?

Maybe because Robert Plant did the odd recording with Alison Kraus he gets to be considered 'country'. Not to my ears without her input.

And staying with the recently departed Tina, since when was she referred to as the Queen of Rock 'n' Roll? Sure she rocked up some releases but r&r?

I could go on. The reality, and you should know this as a genuine Elvis fan, is really did convince many with his renditions in country, r&b, Gospel and of course rock and roll. Along with all manner of other variations that were 'pop' before a certain Michael Jackson managed to get himself proclaimed as 'king' of that far too non-specific genre...

It seems that you just like to spike the guns of any post making even the simplest statement in favour of Elvis' ability. I can't for the life of me understand why.

[emjel]

How many iffy rabbit holes is the OP going down in an attempt to prove the thread title - more viewers than the moon landing compared to Elvis TV show, two movies and people travelling across the world to see him etc etc.

I posted the chart links because I knew that they were as irrelevant as some of the things that were being used to support the thread title, because however the lists were compiled, they are all subjective.

And now the Thread OP is telling us Elvis is the best because he could sing various genres.

Oh c'mon, don't make me smile. You did not post those links because you knew they were irrelevant but to make a point that Elvis was not mentioned in them. You said no such thing in your entire post; it was all about trying to justify why Elvis wasn't the greatest performer from another angle. You thought the lists were fine to present as an example of why Elvis probably can't be considered the greatest between 1970-1973, yet on even the merest inspection they were completely incompatible and unsustainable.

On the other hand, the use of 'Aloha' viewership, two well received and acclaimed documentaries that concern his performances from the time period in question are somehow irrelevant? Forget about the viewership faults, that is not important.

Why would I write something with links and then spoil it by writing that i only posted them in an attempt to prove a point. The use of those lists (which from memory included albums from Simon & Garfunkel, Joni Mitchell and The Beatles Radio Shows from the early 60s - not exactly hard classic rock albums) are no different to anyone else trying to give the impression that Elvis was the best live performer because he could sing more genres than another artist or that he had a sense of humour and talked to the audience or that he had a few live albums that sold reasonably well, as if no other artists had successful albums. And we know what the latest try ons were - there were apparently more viewers who watched Aloha than the moon landing thing or that he had two successful concert movies which you mentioned. .

But if you consider viewership numbers as not being important, then why not challenge or question anyone who uses that kind of data to prove their point. But no, you wouldn’t do that because as ridiculous as those comments are, those comments are pro Elvis. It seems you have an agenda following me around - I mean two responses in near quick succession. And then yesterday when I accidentally clicked on your profile name, I realised why. I think we should leave it at that.

[Strange]

Firstly Emjel please don't take a dislike to my posting habits. I am very busy with work, poorly family members and general life to not have any time for much else. So when I manage to catch up on a particular thread I've been following - such as this esoteric thread - and umpteen posts have passed by, I sometimes find a few that I feel strongly about and wish to respond.

I'm sorry that the responses come, like London buses, in batches. I'm sorry that if a couple were yours and it makes you feel persecuted or something. Are you suggesting I should only post infrequently? Or one at a time, with some gaps in-between? Probably not at all I hear you all cry!

As I said a couple of times already Emjel, the Aloha claims on viewership are clearly propaganda, and the point of such is lost on many. It has long been understood by those who think things through and raising it again and again is hardly necessary either.

Let folk believe and say what they want to say; logic be damned, we're among Elvis friends. When all is said and done the Estate and record company say certain things on the matter and, from that standpoint, it is them you should be chastising, not people who love Elvis and like to think he was even bigger/greater than he was - and on a board that most visitors like me generally all feel that way. I have some relatives I've loved with dementia but I don't find it necessary to pick them up on every little thing that they do or say that is boring, repetitive or just plain wrong. It goes by and goes without saying. That's all I'm saying.

I know you accept that it is fair enough on an Elvis board for someone to set up an innocent enough thread question such as 'Elvis the greatest live musical act from 1970-1973' not to have it ridiculed. I know you understand there are extreme versions of fandom too - live and let live is my motto. And I accept you have a right to voice your opinion - which you eventually did the other day, and good points they were too.

As for me having a pro-Elvis agenda on an Elvis board is, I hope, very much to be expected and cherished. There are enough places to go for an opposite viewpoint - did you not do just that by introducing the same daft question on the Hoffman site? Look how that went! I see no purpose in being mean spirited for the umpteenth time about 'Aloha' viewership that is as unknowable as the definitive answer to the thread question. If a pro-Elvis agenda is a crime, please report me.

[drjohncarpenter]

Covers. Not his own hits.

Who cares if he performed them well?

Because a cover of someone else's "signature" song is uncreative, and will never supplant the original in the public mind.

Of course, one has to care about the full arc of a person's life and career to understand and accept that fact.

Paul Simon about Bridge Over...
"later noted that Presley’s rendition of his song was a “touch on the dramatic side.” “But so was the song,” he added. “When I first heard Elvis perform ‘Bridge Over Troubled Water’ it was unbelievable. I thought to myself, ‘How the hell can I compete with that?'”

Speaking of fact, you got yourself a made-up quote there, little buddy. Find better sources next time.

From an earlier post, this is the actual memory from Simon -->

Here is the complete quote:

A LAVENDER SHIRT

I never saw him in the earlier years ... he never played in New York until a few years ago when I saw him at the Garden. He was in good shape, looked real good. The first time I ever heard his music, back in '54 or '55, I was in a car and I heard the announcer say, "Here's a guy who, when he appears on stage in the South, the girls scream and rush the stage." Then he played "That's All Right, Mama." I thought his name was about the weirdest I'd ever heard. I thought for sure he was a black guy.

Later on I grew my hair like him, imitated his stage act -- once I went all over New York looking for a lavender shirt like the one he wore on one of his albums. I did stop liking his music pretty early, though.

I felt wonderful when he sang "Bridge Over Troubled Water," even though it was a touch on the dramatic side -- but so was the song.

- PAUL SIMON

Rolling Stone Issue 248 - September 22, 1977
Their "Elvis Presley Tribute" edition.

'

[drjohncarpenter]

A friend of mine recently saw Janet Jackson in concert and she was singing to backing tracks. Standards for live concerts have really dropped. He couldn't even be sure she was singing live some of the time.

You get what you pay for. Backing tracks are generally used for acts that do a lot of off-mic dancing and showcasing. It is less prevalent when seeing live bands who mostly just sing and play their music. For example, 77 year-old John Fogerty, who I saw in concert two weeks ago.

And let's not forget that towards the end, Elvis sometimes had some of his male backing singers sing some of his challenging vocal finales if he wasn't up to it. To his credit he sometimes let the audience know.

Sometimes.

[drjohncarpenter]

Dispatch from Heaven regarding this topic:

“The goddamn thing is as long as life itself!”

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

Covers. Not his own hits.

Who cares if he performed them well?

Because a cover of someone else's "signature" song is uncreative, and will never supplant the original in the public mind.

Of course, one has to care about the full arc of a person's life and career to understand and accept that fact.

Paul Simon about Bridge Over...
"later noted that Presley’s rendition of his song was a “touch on the dramatic side.” “But so was the song,” he added. “When I first heard Elvis perform ‘Bridge Over Troubled Water’ it was unbelievable. I thought to myself, ‘How the hell can I compete with that?'”

Speaking of fact, you got yourself a made-up quote there, little buddy. Find better sources next time.

From an earlier post, this is the actual memory from Simon -->

Here is the complete quote:

A LAVENDER SHIRT

I never saw him in the earlier years ... he never played in New York until a few years ago when I saw him at the Garden. He was in good shape, looked real good. The first time I ever heard his music, back in '54 or '55, I was in a car and I heard the announcer say, "Here's a guy who, when he appears on stage in the South, the girls scream and rush the stage." Then he played "That's All Right, Mama." I thought his name was about the weirdest I'd ever heard. I thought for sure he was a black guy.

Later on I grew my hair like him, imitated his stage act -- once I went all over New York looking for a lavender shirt like the one he wore on one of his albums. I did stop liking his music pretty early, though.

I felt wonderful when he sang "Bridge Over Troubled Water," even though it was a touch on the dramatic side -- but so was the song.

- PAUL SIMON

Rolling Stone Issue 248 - September 22, 1977
Their "Elvis Presley Tribute" edition.

'

My quote comes from here:
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/flashback-elvis-presley-sings-bridge-over-troubled-water-in-1972-243747/

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

Covers. Not his own hits.

Who cares if he performed them well?

Because a cover of someone else's "signature" song is uncreative, and will never supplant the original in the public mind.

Of course, one has to care about the full arc of a person's life and career to understand and accept that fact.

Paul Simon about Bridge Over...
"later noted that Presley’s rendition of his song was a “touch on the dramatic side.” “But so was the song,” he added. “When I first heard Elvis perform ‘Bridge Over Troubled Water’ it was unbelievable. I thought to myself, ‘How the hell can I compete with that?'”

Speaking of fact, you got yourself a made-up quote there, little buddy. Find better sources next time.

From an earlier post, this is the actual memory from Simon -->

Here is the complete quote:

A LAVENDER SHIRT

I never saw him in the earlier years ... he never played in New York until a few years ago when I saw him at the Garden. He was in good shape, looked real good. The first time I ever heard his music, back in '54 or '55, I was in a car and I heard the announcer say, "Here's a guy who, when he appears on stage in the South, the girls scream and rush the stage." Then he played "That's All Right, Mama." I thought his name was about the weirdest I'd ever heard. I thought for sure he was a black guy.

Later on I grew my hair like him, imitated his stage act -- once I went all over New York looking for a lavender shirt like the one he wore on one of his albums. I did stop liking his music pretty early, though.

I felt wonderful when he sang "Bridge Over Troubled Water," even though it was a touch on the dramatic side -- but so was the song.

- PAUL SIMON

Rolling Stone Issue 248 - September 22, 1977
Their "Elvis Presley Tribute" edition.

'

A cover done by Elvis like this one is done creative, and it brings his feelings and much more power into the song.

[drjohncarpenter]

A cover done by Elvis like this one is done creative, and it brings his feelings and much more power into the song.

Do you know anything about "Bridge Over Troubled Water"?

My quote comes from here:
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/flashback-elvis-presley-sings-bridge-over-troubled-water-in-1972-243747/

Yes, the 2014 online article is incorrect.

Which is why I took the time to both transcribe AND scan the complete quote as it ORIGINALLY appeared back in 1977.

Feel free to write the senior editor who published it, and send him my scans.

https://www.rollingstone.com/author/andy-greene/

[TheKingOfMusicEP]

A cover done by Elvis like this one is done creative, and it brings his feelings and much more power into the song.

Do you know anything about "Bridge Over Troubled Water"?

My quote comes from here:
https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/flashback-elvis-presley-sings-bridge-over-troubled-water-in-1972-243747/

Yes, the 2014 online article is incorrect.

Which is why I took the time to both transcribe AND scan the complete quote as it ORIGINALLY appeared back in 1977.

Feel free to write the senior editor who published it, and send him my scans.

https://www.rollingstone.com/author/andy-greene/

I understand the text of the song, is this not enough to enjoy Elvis version? You can see on film how Elvis creative worked on that song. He directed the whole band at the rehearsals.
Is there a story behind the song, like the one of Eric Clapton
Tears in Heaven?

[Swedish]

Because they were singing rock and roll.

What does singing rock and roll have to do with being the greatest live musical act?

Some of our friends here have a very narrow focus when it comes to music.

Oh, so my enough wide focus are maybe to short...

but you only like Elvis when he sings rock and roll, correct?

Not only, i like his other musical styles & genres also

[Strange]

Do you know anything about "Bridge Over Troubled Water"?

Yes, the 2014 online article is incorrect.

Which is why I took the time to both transcribe AND scan the complete quote as it ORIGINALLY appeared back in 1977.

Feel free to write the senior editor who published it, and send him my scans.

https://www.rollingstone.com/author/andy-greene/

I greatly admire your research and posts Dr. C, and I learn a lot from them continuously. Scans are always the real deal.

So what you appear to be saying is the Rolling Stone magazine (online or otherwise) - of the same parish that has been attracting some lists of limited worth/opinion on here lately - have fabricated some additional words from the great Paul Simon that he never actually said?

And that perhaps they know that is what they did in 2014? Or could it be there was a lengthier original interview that in 1977 they determined they didn't want to use in full (for reasons we can only guess at - perhaps because editorially they wanted to keep Elvis appreciation to the 50s)?

Either way it limits my already limited appreciation of Rolling Stone.