sony vs bmg

[Brian]

I think the big picture is being overlooked when it comes to those budget lp's.Elvis had came back from pretty much oblivion just a few years prior to their release.He was riding a new wave of popularity and credibility.Great shows,several top notch lp's,back on the charts.He was being taken seriously as an artist.To me that's important.Then he puts out Love Letters.That was the beginning of the end.His regular lp's became very weak.Then the budget lp's with a good song or two but mostly crap.It's like everything he achieved in that burst of rediscovery and creativity was just cast aside.Elvis was back on top.It wasnt the time for crappy cheap lp's.The bottom fell out of Elvis' recording career after a brief resurgance.

I'm not overlooking the big picture

To me it's more like 5 or 6 good songs out of 10 on the budget albums
They weren't crappy to me,

In the 70's I actually think Elvis career went like this On Stage, TTWII, Elvis country, He touched me, Aloha and Today were good albums

Love letters, Raised on Rock, Fool, EP Boulevard, EIC and Moody Blue were bad albums

Good Times, Promised Land and Elvis Now were mediocre albums,
Good Times and Promised Land could've been a good album if RCA had took the best songs from both albums and just released one of them.

[jak]

The big picture is being overlooked IMO.Elvis was on a hot streak right up until Elvis Country.It wasnt the time to release those lp's.Having a couple of goods songs tossed in between Yoga Is As Yoga does among others was stupidity.Elvis needed cohesive lp's.He needed to add to his legacy.Not just chase the almighty dollar.There are lots of reason Elvis will never get the credit he is due on a level with the Beatles when it comes to public perception.It's because it's perceived he sold out so much of the time.Those budget lp's were just a sellout.They didnt add anything to his artistic merit.They detracted from it.His entire 70's output suffered greatly from his lack of artistic vision.He and management both dropped the ball.

[jak]

A good comparison to these budget lp's would be the Spinout lp.You have an absolute terrible soundtrack.It's god awfull.Yet two gems were just cast away in it.I'll Remember You and Tomorrow Is A Long Time.However these two nice tracks cant save the lp from it's reputation.It's a known piece of crap.Far below Elvis' talents.What did the Spinout lp do for Elvis' career and reputation?It reinforced he was recording crap.The budget lp's did the exact same thing.Nice financial return at the expense of Elvis' credibility.They had no merit at all.

[Brian]

A good comparison to these budget lp's would be the Spinout lp.You have an absolute terrible soundtrack.It's god awfull.Yet two gems were just cast away in it.I'll Remember You and Tomorrow Is A Long Time.However these two nice tracks cant save the lp from it's reputation.It's a known piece of crap.Far below Elvis' talents.What did the Spinout lp do for Elvis' career and reputation?It reinforced he was recording crap.The budget lp's did the exact same thing.Nice financial return at the expense of Elvis' credibility.They had no merit at all.

A good majority of the budget albums were better than the Spinout soundtracks.

I won't accept that the budget LP's hurt Elvis' artistic credibility as much as the soundtracks

[Brian]

The big picture is being overlooked IMO.Elvis was on a hot streak right up until Elvis Country.It wasnt the time to release those lp's.Having a couple of goods songs tossed in between Yoga Is As Yoga does among others was stupidity.Elvis needed cohesive lp's.He needed to add to his legacy.Not just chase the almighty dollar.There are lots of reason Elvis will never get the credit he is due on a level with the Beatles when it comes to public perception.It's because it's perceived he sold out so much of the time.Those budget lp's were just a sellout.They didnt add anything to his artistic merit.They detracted from it.His entire 70's output suffered greatly from his lack of artistic vision.He and management both dropped the ball.

Have you ever thought because those albums were priced cheaply and only available in certain stores that a lot people didn't even notice them being on the market.
I think most people would agree with me that the budget albums weren't nearly as damaging as the soundracks.
They contained some good songs that quite a few Elvis fans loved.

Regarding Elvis' LP output
I think Elvis would've dropped the ball anyway regardless
Elvis really wasn't the type of guy to record cohesive LP's aside from Elvis Country, Gospel and Christmas albums.
He also got bored real easy and by the early 70's there were only two things that would probably challenge him
1. An overseas tour
2. A serious dramatic film role

Elvis had already made 2 comebacks by 1970 and he probably felt those 2 things were the only thing left to conquer.

[jak]

"Have you ever thought because those albums were priced cheaply and only available in certain stores that a lot people didn't even notice them being on the market."

No.As you pointed out they sold well.Obviously somebody noticed them.Back where I grew up you couldnt go into a store without seeing those cheap lp's.They were everywhere,not just certain stores.Elvis was a major active artist,music fans and the industry paid attention to his releases back then.Those releases all sucked big time except financially.

"I think Elvis would've dropped the ball anyway regardless
Elvis really wasn't the type of guy to record cohesive LP's aside from Elvis Country, Gospel and Christmas albums."

You are shortchanging my hero.Youre statement illustrates my point about Elvis' reputation as a recording artist.Youre forgetting about Elvis Is Back,From Elvis In Memphis,Back In Memphis.All cohesive lp's.Two of which are masterpieces.Elvis' failure to continue to release good lp's was undermined by the philosophy to make money.The same reason he did those terrible soundtracks.Hence the budget lp's.That's what I've been trying to point out.The big picture.Those lp's were not just harmless lp's quietly tucked away in youre local drugstore waiting to get bought.They are glaring examples of what was wrong with Elvis career.Elvis was the kind of guy to make great lp's.He had more going for him than any entertainer that has ever lived.His failure is due to a bad business philosophy in part.It sucked the life and creativity out of him.We dont need Elvis to go into the studio.Let's just toss some leftover crap on budget lp.They will buy it as long as the cover is pretty.

[Brian]

"Have you ever thought because those albums were priced cheaply and only available in certain stores that a lot people didn't even notice them being on the market."

No.As you pointed out they sold well.Obviously somebody noticed them.Back where I grew up you couldnt go into a store without seeing those cheap lp's.They were everywhere,not just certain stores.Elvis was a major active artist,music fans and the industry paid attention to his releases back then.Those releases all sucked big time except financially.

"I think Elvis would've dropped the ball anyway regardless
Elvis really wasn't the type of guy to record cohesive LP's aside from Elvis Country, Gospel and Christmas albums."

You are shortchanging my hero.Youre statement illustrates my point about Elvis' reputation as a recording artist.Youre forgetting about Elvis Is Back,From Elvis In Memphis,Back In Memphis.All cohesive lp's.Two of which are masterpieces.Elvis' failure to continue to release good lp's was undermined by the philosophy to make money.The same reason he did those terrible soundtracks.Hence the budget lp's.That's what I've been trying to point out.The big picture.Those lp's were not just harmless lp's quietly tucked away in youre local drugstore waiting to get bought.They are glaring examples of what was wrong with Elvis career.Elvis was the kind of guy to make great lp's.He had more going for him than any entertainer that has ever lived.His failure is due to a bad business philosophy in part.It sucked the life and creativity out of him.We dont need Elvis to go into the studio.Let's just toss some leftover crap on budget lp.They will buy it as long as the cover is pretty.

You are short changing my precious budget albums

What i'm saying about the budget albums is this

I thought Elvis sings Flaming Star, Almost in love, You'll never walk alone, Camden 1970 Christmas album were good albums that didn't damage Elvis' reputation as a serious musical artist.
I like almost all of Elvis' songs from 1968-1969 and songs from Follow that Dream and Kid Galahad so that's why i like most of them.
As you know RCA and Colonel Parker thought they could release albums at a low price that would be cheaper than the regular studio Lp's and to include songs that hadn't yet been released on albums.
For that kinda concept they were actually compiled pretty good with a lot of good songs included on them and they were better than the awful mid 60's soundtracks

They sold well but I'd bet you a lot of people weren't even aware of them
In my opinion the only budget LP that hurt Elvis' artistic credibility a little was Burning love because it contained a new hit single and surrounded it with 8 of the worst possible movie songs.
I would've either released Burning love with 8 new studio tracks or released it on something like Elvis golden records vol. 5

I know Elvis made 2 good LP's during the Memphis sessions but he got bored
he could've recorded a blues LP but chose not to.
He was going to record a folk album as a follow up to Elvis country but he lost interest.
I know Elvis was fully capable of continuing to release quality studio albums it's a shame he didn't.

It's news to me that people paid close attention to Elvis new releases back in the 70's.
The budget albums were not available everywhere where I lived.

[jak]

"It's news to me that people paid close attention to Elvis new releases back in the 70's"

Elvis began the decade on top of the whole world.Revitalized and full steam ahead.His lp's and 45's were back in the charts.Several gold singles and lp's plus the success of the tv special only 2 years prior.Elvis was relevant again.It made all the difference.The statement you made is Elvis' curse that I dont think he will ever escape.People were paying attention to Elvis as the decade began.He was on fire.The reason was he was putting out quality product.Material that went beyond his normal fan base and grabbed the attention of joe public.Songs like Burning Love and Wonder Of You sold well because they were good songs that appealed to many people.The same goes for his early 70 lp's.Then you get Love Letters and Elvis Now.They hit with a thud.Then the budget lp's.They were all momentum killers.Elvis lousy rep in the 70's is a result of what happened in the latter and mid part of the decade.Every poor official release,every crappy budget lp,they were all nails in the coffin from an artistic standpoint.

[Brian]

"It's news to me that people paid close attention to Elvis new releases back in the 70's"

Elvis began the decade on top of the whole world.Revitalized and full steam ahead.His lp's and 45's were back in the charts.Several gold singles and lp's plus the success of the tv special only 2 years prior.Elvis was relevant again.It made all the difference.The statement you made is Elvis' curse that I dont think he will ever escape.People were paying attention to Elvis as the decade began.He was on fire.The reason was he was putting out quality product.Material that went beyond his normal fan base and grabbed the attention of joe public.Songs like Burning Love and Wonder Of You sold well because they were good songs that appealed to many people.The same goes for his early 70 lp's.Then you get Love Letters and Elvis Now.They hit with a thud.Then the budget lp's.They were all momentum killers.Elvis lousy rep in the 70's is a result of what happened in the latter and mid part of the decade.Every poor official release,every crappy budget lp,they were all nails in the coffin from an artistic standpoint.

I was speaking of Elvis not being relevant in the 70's to non fans despite the quality releases that you have mentioned and the 68 t.v. special.
and as you've pointed out Elvis was releasing so many things back then some of them went under the radar as far as the general public were concerned

Sure he was putting out quality material at the begining of the decade.
I don't think you can put all his artistic reputation down to the releases of Love letters, Elvis Now and Burning Love LP and the rest of the budget releases. Elvis should've recorded more in the mid and late 70's than he did and those releases could've been good but he didn't.
If Elvis came out with a Blues LP in the 70's of him singing his renditions of blues songs that would've got him some critical praise and it would've sold well but he never made one.
So it at least partially comes down to Elvis.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

that's my point some real good songs were released first on those budget albums
most everyone is acting like they had nothing but horrible songs on them equivalent to the movie soundtracks.

I agree, they may have had some awful compilations like "Elvis Sings Hits From His Movies" but it would be disingenuous to say that all albums by camden were that bad.

I'll be honest here, I don't get hung up on album sales, if I like the track listing and it brings something new to the table, it doesn't matter who releases it

[jak]

I agree, they may have had some awful compilations like "Elvis Sings Hits From His Movies" but it would be disingenuous to say that all albums by camden were that bad.

I'll be honest here, I don't get hung up on album sales, if I like the track listing and it brings something new to the table, it doesn't matter who releases it

The good releases were the xmas and gospel lp's.That's only because the quality of his gospel and xmas recordings was so high.There werent any real turkeys to include.

"So it at least partially comes down to Elvis."

Most of the blame belongs to Elvis.He's the one who didnt want to record anymore.When he did try he was unprofessional and it yielded mixed results.Once Elvis threw in the towel it was over.He became essentially a live act in the 70's.

[Jumpsuit Junkie]

Most of the blame belongs to Elvis. He's the one who didn't want to record anymore. When he did try he was unprofessional and it yielded mixed results. Once Elvis threw in the towel it was over. He became essentially a live act in the 70's.

I agree that Elvis threw in the towel in the early 70's, his commitment was mediocre at best, that said wouldn't that indicate the record companies would have to do the best of a bad job. Record companies have little or no respect for any artist whatever the size of the act! A lot of artists have resorted to creating their own labels to manage their back catalogue.

Elvis was just as bad as the Colonel when it came to income streams, the Colonel would just tell Elvis about what numbers it would bring to him and Elvis just seemed to agree for the most part.

Elvis lost his drive and enthusiasm for recording for many reasons, prescribed drugs being a large part of that!

[Albert]

I'm not overlooking the big picture

To me it's more like 5 or 6 good songs out of 10 on the budget albums
They weren't crappy to me,

In the 70's I actually think Elvis career went like this On Stage, TTWII, Elvis country, He touched me, Aloha and Today were good albums

Love letters, Raised on Rock, Fool, EP Boulevard, EIC and Moody Blue were bad albums

Good Times, Promised Land and Elvis Now were mediocre albums,
Good Times and Promised Land could've been a good album if RCA had took the best songs from both albums and just released one of them.

Exactly! That's where RCA made a big mistake: they released ALL material. Now all material may be nice for the Elvisfans, but in the 70s the albums should not only have targeted the Elvisfans (who bought -and buy- pretty much everything RCA/BMG/Sony release), but should also give Elvis stage to a younger, newer, more contemporary audience. I can't imagine most of the 70s albums would have received good reviews after their release (and the salesnumbers proof me right).

[jak]

I agree that Elvis threw in the towel in the early 70's, his commitment was mediocre at best, that said wouldn't that indicate the record companies would have to do the best of a bad job. Record companies have little or no respect for any artist whatever the size of the act! A lot of artists have resorted to creating their own labels to manage their back catalogue.

Elvis was just as bad as the Colonel when it came to income streams, the Colonel would just tell Elvis about what numbers it would bring to him and Elvis just seemed to agree for the most part.

Elvis lost his drive and enthusiasm for recording for many reasons, prescribed drugs being a large part of that!

Agree completely

[jak]

Exactly! That's where RCA made a big mistake: they released ALL material. Now all material may be nice for the Elvisfans, but in the 70s the albums should not only have targeted the Elvisfans (who bought -and buy- pretty much everything RCA/BMG/Sony release), but should also give Elvis stage to a younger, newer, more contemporary audience. I can't imagine most of the 70s albums would have received good reviews after their release (and the salesnumbers proof me right).

Youre right about this.The big problem was that elvis just didnt have the motivation to further his recording career.He's the one who picked out the demo's and decided what to record.He got hung up on those melancoly ballads.That's why I keep bringing up Burning Love.He finally cuts a classic rocker and it's wasted.RCA just couldnt get new material out of Elvis.Look at Way Down.Great track.I've always liked the Moody Blue lp.Yet it's just a thrown together mess with leftovers with a stellar performance tucked in there.

[KPM]

You are short changing my precious budget albums

What i'm saying about the budget albums is this

I thought Elvis sings Flaming Star, Almost in love, You'll never walk alone, Camden 1970 Christmas album were good albums that didn't damage Elvis' reputation as a serious musical artist.
I like almost all of Elvis' songs from 1968-1969 and songs from Follow that Dream and Kid Galahad so that's why i like most of them.
As you know RCA and Colonel Parker thought they could release albums at a low price that would be cheaper than the regular studio Lp's and to include songs that hadn't yet been released on albums.
For that kinda concept they were actually compiled pretty good with a lot of good songs included on them and they were better than the awful mid 60's soundtracks

They sold well but I'd bet you a lot of people weren't even aware of them
In my opinion the only budget LP that hurt Elvis' artistic credibility a little was Burning love because it contained a new hit single and surrounded it with 8 of the worst possible movie songs.
I would've either released Burning love with 8 new studio tracks or released it on something like Elvis golden records vol. 5

I know Elvis made 2 good LP's during the Memphis sessions but he got bored
he could've recorded a blues LP but chose not to.
He was going to record a folk album as a follow up to Elvis country but he lost interest.
I know Elvis was fully capable of continuing to release quality studio albums it's a shame he didn't.

It's news to me that people paid close attention to Elvis new releases back in the 70's.
The budget albums were not available everywhere where I lived.

[KPM]

I agree that Elvis threw in the towel in the early 70's, his commitment was mediocre at best, that said wouldn't that indicate the record companies would have to do the best of a bad job. Record companies have little or no respect for any artist whatever the size of the act! A lot of artists have resorted to creating their own labels to manage their back catalogue.

Elvis was just as bad as the Colonel when it came to income streams, the Colonel would just tell Elvis about what numbers it would bring to him and Elvis just seemed to agree for the most part.

Elvis lost his drive and enthusiasm for recording for many reasons, prescribed drugs being a large part of that!

I agree he threw in the towel on recording-he did not want to do it-but the question is why.
I know his reliance on meds is a part-but I think its much deeper than that.
I know most don't look at it that way-its easy to say he was just lazy and goofed off too much. But he use to love making records, he use to enjoy the process,
Creative drive is like the sex drive-it has to be encouraged, has to be open and honest, with no worries, I don't see the creative drive in Elvis ever being encouraged nor was his career open and honest-too many hoops to jump thru.

[KPM]

Youre right about this.The big problem was that elvis just didnt have the motivation to further his recording career.He's the one who picked out the demo's and decided what to record.He got hung up on those melancoly ballads.That's why I keep bringing up Burning Love.He finally cuts a classic rocker and it's wasted.RCA just couldnt get new material out of Elvis.Look at Way Down.Great track.I've always liked the Moody Blue lp.Yet it's just a thrown together mess with leftovers with a stellar performance tucked in there.

Yes he did love the ballads-they had to convince him to record Burning Love.
Could it be that being 37 in 1972 (which at the time was considered over the hill for rock in many corners) Elvis may have felt a little funny trying to compete with the up and coming 20 year old rockers? I think also the ballads were where his true heart was-(Dean Martin)
He had hinted in interviews in the late 50s that he was unsure of how long rock would be in style which is why I think he went the route of "Its Now or Never" out of the army-he wanted to be ready to make the transition from young rocker to a more Dean Martin/Crosby mold.

I also think the years of recording soundtracks may have helped to burn him out on recording-sure he picked the songs-the best of the demos-which fit into the script-he knew some of these were horrid-but had to do them.

He had to realize that he had not been offered top songs by top writers for years because of "the piece of the pie" deal which songwriters had to agree to. And the Col. may have eased up on that idea in the 70s but he still scared away many top notch writers because of the reputation of wanting a "piece of the pie"
Then there is the divorce-and some will say he should have got over it by the mid 70s-and on the surface maybe it appeared he had-but his choice of songs does not show it. He wanted to sing what my brother calls "weepers"
He wanted to sink his teeth into them and IMO to feel them (maybe he wanted Priscilla to feel them who knows) but he wanted those "weepers"

I think you add all this together and it comes out a lack of motivation and direction in the 70s...........burnt out.

[Jungleroom76]

I agree he threw in the towel on recording-he did not want to do it-but the question is why.
I know his reliance on meds is a part-but I think its much deeper than that.
I know most don't look at it that way-its easy to say he was just lazy and goofed off too much. But he use to love making records, he use to enjoy the process...

Good question!

Well as was already mentioned, I'm sure the medications Elvis was taking had a big part in his lack of creative drive for recording. Elvis' personal life surely was another big reason as evidenced by the songs he did choose to record in the later 70's. (PIECES OF MY LIFE, HURT, SOLITAIRE, LOVE COMING DOWN, I'LL NEVER FALL IN LOVE AGAIN, etc.)

There was also no encouragement from The Colonel (or anyone else in the Presley camp most likely) given to Elvis to get him to record....it was simply a matter of fulfilling the contractual agreements to RCA and correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe that Elvis' contract with RCA paid him royalties on his albums in advance (or at least a portion of it was paid in advance) so there was no real need for the albums to sell well....as long as Elvis obligated the contracted number of recordings outlined in the catalog, the money would keep coming in regardless of the sales numbers!

Another factor in Elvis' lack of enthusiasm for recording new material could also be traced to The Colonel's system for getting new material to Elvis. Even in the 70's, The Colonel would only allow Elvis to receive songs from songwriters that he knew they could get the publishing rights to. If the songwriter wasn't willing to give up the publishing rights to their song (Dolly Parton, for example), then The Colonel wouldn't allow Elvis to record the song. So given that whole situation, there was certainly stunting of Elvis' potential continued artistic growth by severely limiting the catalog of songs that Elvis could record.

Then of course, there was the simple fact that an Elvis concert could double as a recording session and if that was the case, then why should Elvis have to go through all the trouble of booking a recording studio, picking out songs to record and record them when he could just step on stage and perform for his fans AND record a new album at the same time!

Just a few other theories to ponder...

TCB!
Mike

[Brian]

Another factor in Elvis' lack of enthusiasm for recording new material could also be traced to The Colonel's system for getting new material to Elvis. Even in the 70's, The Colonel would only allow Elvis to receive songs from songwriters that he knew they could get the publishing rights to. If the songwriter wasn't willing to give up the publishing rights to their song (Dolly Parton, for example), then The Colonel wouldn't allow Elvis to record the song. So given that whole situation, there was certainly stunting of Elvis' potential continued artistic growth by severely limiting the catalog of songs that Elvis could record.


TCB!
Mike

I would say this was the main reason.
Though I think the song publishing situtation has been blown out of proportion over the years.

For example I always thought 2 songs that Elvis should've got first crack at were ''I just can't help believing'' and ''Never Been to Spain''. He covered these songs on stage but I would've loved it if Elvis had gotten these 2 songs first and had hits with them instead of B.J. Thomas and Three Dog Night. I did some research and found out that B.J. Thomas recorded IJCHB at American Studios in either late 1969 or early 1970 so even if Elvis had went back to American Studios he wouldn't of gotten the opportunity to record the song first because he didn't have another recording session until June 1970.
I found out that Hoyt Axton wrote Never Been to Spain for himself and was performing as an opening act for Three Dog Night it was during that time that they heard him singing it on stage and they decided to record it.
So even without the publishing issues he wouldn't of got first crack at either of those songs.

Jerry Schilling was once talking and explaining how the publishing situation worked and how it would frustrate Elvis as he went on to explain that when he (Elvis) heard Green Green Grass of home or My Way on the radio and would wonder why he hadn't been asked to record those songs first.
Jerry Schilling gave some bad examples Elvis was offered the opportunity to record Green Green Grass of home before Tom Jones and My Way was written specifically by Paul Anka for Sinatra so even without the publishing situation Elvis wouldn't of gotten My Way.

I do not believe the I will Always love you story.