sony vs bmg

[Jungleroom76]

BLOWN OUT OF PROPORTION?????????????????
From the day Elvis was big-Parker demanded 50% of the rights to any song Elvis recorded. Word got around quick-so by the Army years the best songwriters just quit sending songs to Elvis with the attitude:
"Why the he!! should I give up half of my livelyhood to Parker and Elvis-this is how I make my living"
So Elvis is left with a few good writers who will do this, but mostly writers of lesser ability.
Then add the contracts for the movies and Parker tells Elvis you have to do this film-with 8-10 songs which fit into the plot (???) and you have no say so on the film-but you can pick the songs from what is submitted
Now Elvis this song will be sung as you are coming in on a fishing ship on the ocean, or Elvis this song will be sung in a helicopter of dogs, or this song will be sung on a merry-go-round etc..................
So he no longer get top songs no matter where he looks-sure he picked his material-of what was allowed into the sessions to be looked at.
How can you honestly say this is blown out of proportion?
It robbed Elvis of the opportunity to record great songs which ended up in someone elses hands.
Just by the established precedent and word of mouth-writers just did not even consider Elvis as a potential singer for great songs.
Jerry Reed told his version of being pressured in the middle of the Guitar Man session and it became very heated with Reed packing up his guitar and leaving-telling them something like..... you want my soul because these songs are mine.
It put a dark cloud over the rest of the session-and Elvis who was enjoying interacting with a hugely talented man-was robbed of that interaction because of business entering the session.
Word of things like this get around to other talented people/songwriters-and it keeps them from Elvis.
I happen to think talented gifted people are the type individuals Elvis needed around him to bring more perspective to him and to give him ideas which he then might act on.
Never had a chance to happen in the Colonels management style.

You put it much better than I would have Ken!!!

TCB!
Mike

[KPM]

http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/kris...offerson.shtml

Kristofferson seemed to know in this interview that Elvis had recorded 3 of his songs-and he said it was a highlight of his life to have had him do so-that as a young writer coming up he never dreamed that Elvis might do so.

[KPM]

No, I'm not sure it is true about Elvis wanting to record it
If the story was true about Elvis wanting to record the song he heard Dolly's hit version on the radio

that's how the publishing worked whether or not she wrote the song and had not had a hit with it- Didn't mean you said Dolly wrote the song for
You were also wondering if Elvis was even aware of the song.


That's not how Colonel Parker operated on the publishing deal and I said a song is a hit song.
It can be published but not be a hit.

Besides Elvis had toyed with the idea of recording Reconsider baby for years before getting around to recording it.
Same thing with After loving you.

Correct-even if she had a hit, even if she didn't but it was already published-her share of the songwriting royaltees which are sent to her by her publisher are hers to do with as she wants-including having a deal with Elvis, or whoever which gives a percentage to them. It matters not if she had the biggest hit in the world-she can do what she wants with her profits from her publishing deal after they have been sent to her.
Parker would have been well aware of this-and I'm sure there were times when they got only a small portion of the songwriters end-in the case of Reeds songs he already had country hits on both-and they were published-yet Parkers men still wanted a portion of his end of the original publishing deal.

[Brian]

She had a "country hit" with it in 1973 there was a huge difference-a huge country hit might sell 150 to 300 thousand which is not much exposure.
Matter of fact country artists use to take huge pop hits and cover them countrified-and it was a brand new song to the country music followers.
I had a big argument in 1973 with my friends dad about Bill Anderson and his female partner recording the Supremes song "Someday Well Be Together" I told him it was the Supremes song first-he just did not believe me.

Like I said no 2 situations are the same-and I see absolutely no reason for Parton to "lie" especially since she today is one of the most recognised country artists in the world and has her own empire-she has always been honest, and open.
You see holes in the story-I see honesty in her confession with no reason to lie.

Well, Elvis' songs were getting regular play again on the country stations and he began to have bigger country hits than pop hits as he wasn't getting played on those stations as much.

So if Elvis did put it out as as single (If it's true about him wanting to even record the song in the first place) it would have just dented the pop top 40 and probably wouldn't of been a big country hit as Dolly Parton had the hit.

Marie Osmond doesn't have any reason to make up stories about Elvis but she does.
Her saying Elvis wanted to hang out with the Osmonds and get to know them and invite the over for dinner at Graceland but died before it happened.
Sounds like B.S. to me and Elvis is conviently not here to say otherwise.

I don't belive Cher that Elvis wanted to date her.
After Cher said Elvis wanted to date her she then mentioned that she had also turned down Marlon Brando.
That sounded like name dropping to me.

Pat Boone's claims that Elvis lip synced live in Clevend sounds like B.S. to me as well.

[Brian]

Correct-even if she had a hit, even if she didn't but it was already published-her share of the songwriting royaltees which are sent to her by her publisher are hers to do with as she wants-including having a deal with Elvis, or whoever which gives a percentage to them. It matters not if she had the biggest hit in the world-she can do what she wants with her profits from her publishing deal after they have been sent to her.
Parker would have been well aware of this-and I'm sure there were times when they got only a small portion of the songwriters end-in the case of Reeds songs he already had country hits on both-and they were published-yet Parkers men still wanted a portion of his end of the original publishing deal.

They were minor country hits for Reed and Elvis was going to and did put both out as singles.
He also recorded both of them regardless.

That brings up another point (if the story is true about the song) how would Colonel Parker even know that Elvis wanted to record the song then to ask Dolly for the publishing?
Unlike Jerry Reed's songs Elvis made no attempt to record the song in the studio

[KPM]

Well, Elvis' songs were getting regular play again on the country stations and he began to have bigger country hits than pop hits as he wasn't getting played on those stations as much.

So if Elvis did put it out as as single (If it's true about him wanting to even record the song in the first place) it would have just dented the pop top 40 and probably wouldn't of been a big country hit as Dolly Parton had the hit.

Marie Osmond doesn't have any reason to make up stories about Elvis but she does.Her saying Elvis wanted to hang out with the Osmonds and get to know them and invite the over for dinner at Graceland but died before it happened.
Sounds like B.S. to me and Elvis is conviently not here to say otherwise.

I don't belive Cher that Elvis wanted to date her.
After Cher said Elvis wanted to date her she then mentioned that she had also turned down Marlon Brando.
That sounded like name dropping to me.

Pat Boone's claims that Elvis lip synced live in Clevend sounds like B.S. to me as well.

How in heavens name can you know-how a song may have charted????
You have never heard how Elvis would have sang it, you do not know how it would have been arranged, you do not know how much feeling the song would have had in it from Elvis?? We do know when it finally got to the pop charts it sold millions later.


We are not talking about Marie, or Cher, or Pat-we are talking about Dolly.
As I have said no 2 situations are the same.

[KPM]

They were minor country hits for Reed and Elvis was going to and did put both out as singles.
He also recorded both of them regardless.
That brings up another point (if the story is true about the song) how would Colonel Parker even know that Elvis wanted to record the song then to ask Dolly for the publishing?
Unlike Jerry Reed's songs Elvis made no attempt to record the song in the studio

Yes he recorded them and just as soon as Bienstock heard he was recording them he began to try and get points from Reed with little tact during the session. I'm sure there were times when they could not get points on songs Elvis had recorded-and they ended up released-the point is it kept songs from Elvis no matter how you look at it.

I would assume The Colonel heard about the song because Elvis mentioned it to him, or Joe, or Marty, or Lamar or perhaps he mentioned he liked the song in front of Freddie Bienstock and he mentioned it to COl. That did happen from time to time.
Parker may have thought "Parton is just a country artist and she'll jump at this chance for the "bigtime"

[Brian]

How in heavens name can you know-how a song may have charted????
You have never heard how Elvis would have sang it, you do not know how it would have been arranged, you do not know how much feeling the song would have had in it from Elvis?? We do know when it finally got to the pop charts it sold millions later.


We are not talking about Marie, or Cher, or Pat-we are talking about Dolly.
As I have said no 2 situations are the same.

I'm making an educated guess as to how it would've charted based on Elvis chart performances and his lack of airplay on top 40 radio at that time.

My points about Cher, Marie Osmond and Pat Boone are just examples of celebs who don't need to make stuff up about Elvis but they do.
So just because Dolly Parton is famous and successful doesn't mean she's not making this story up.

[Brian]

Yes he recorded them and just as soon as Bienstock heard he was recording them he began to try and get points from Reed with little tact during the session. I'm sure there were times when they could not get points on songs Elvis had recorded-and they ended up released-the point is it kept songs from Elvis no matter how you look at it.

I would assume The Colonel heard about the song because Elvis mentioned it to him, or Joe, or Marty, or Lamar or perhaps he mentioned he liked the song in front of Freddie Bienstock and he mentioned it to COl. That did happen from time to time.
Parker may have thought "Parton is just a country artist and she'll jump at this chance for the "bigtime"

I think that's unlikely
I don't think Elvis told Colonel Parker what songs he wanted to do.
I think he could've mentioned it when Joe was in the room and he went and told the Colonel.

But I just don't think Elvis planned on recording it.

Around the time the song came out Elvis was losing interest in recording sessions
he didn't record at all in 74 or 77 and only recorded the minimum amount of songs for an album at the Today sessions.
In 1976 Elvis didn't want to record so RCA sent equipment to Graceland and some nights Elvis didn't even bother coming down to record so RCA was lucky that they got any material out of those sessions.

[Brian]

http://www.elvis.com.au/presley/kris...offerson.shtml

Kristofferson seemed to know in this interview that Elvis had recorded 3 of his songs-and he said it was a highlight of his life to have had him do so-that as a young writer coming up he never dreamed that Elvis might do so.

He became aware of it and i'm sure he was glad Elvis did his songs

The article specifically mentions that he didn't know that Elvis had recorded Why me lord.

[Jungleroom76]

The article specifically mentions that he didn't know that Elvis had recorded Why me lord.

Again, I think this goes back to the whole issue with publishing rights and the fact that there was a difference between recording a song live versus recording the song in the studio.

As I said before, I am certainly not a law scholar, but I believe that the publishing rights weren't an issue when a song was performed live on stage or even if that song wound up being recorded and released.

TCB!
Mike

[KPM]

He became aware of it and i'm sure he was glad Elvis did his songs

The article specifically mentions that he didn't know that Elvis had recorded Why me lord.

But he did know of the others and he was overjoyed that Elvis had recorded them-which shows he was indeed "glad" that Elvis did his songs.
And coincedentily"Why Me Lord" was only a live recording.

[KPM]

Again, I think this goes back to the whole issue with publishing rights and the fact that there was a difference between recording a song live versus recording the song in the studio.

As I said before, I am certainly not a law scholar, but I believe that the publishing rights weren't an issue when a song was performed live on stage or even if that song wound up being recorded and released.

TCB!
Mike

I know enough about it to know that the writers end of the publishing deal is theirs to do with what they wish.... after the publisher gets their agreed percentage.
But the songwriter could not give any portion of the publishers percentage to anyone in a new deal-so to break it down if the publishers deal with the songwriter calls for a 50/50 split the publisher will always get his 50%-and the songwriter can make a deal with an artist to split their 50% with the artist to cut the song-or give any percentage to the artist they want to 10, 20 ,5 etc......it is the writers money to do with as they want after it has been sent to them. (in a way its a legal kickback)

[KPM]

I'm making an educated guess as to how it would've charted based on Elvis chart performances and his lack of airplay on top 40 radio at that time.
My points about Cher, Marie Osmond and Pat Boone are just examples of celebs who don't need to make stuff up about Elvis but they do.
So just because Dolly Parton is famous and successful doesn't mean she's not making this story up.

Well the song is (arguably I'm sure you'll say) one of the greatest love songs of the last 50 years-which is a very high step above many of the songs submitted to Elvis in his career-a top notch quality well written simple love song-this gives a very good indication if would have done much much better than the average Elvis release(and as I pointed out-years later it was a huge smash)

My point is not that because Dolly is famous and successful-those are facts and they add to my opinion-but I am more impressed with her honesty, her frankness to me those are more important factors in addressing the question you raise.
I do not get that feeling from the others (that is not to say I think they lie)
I think they are more........how to express this "jaded" in their own ways.
Pat Boone has always had a slight-envy-of Elvis. I have heard it creep into many of his interviews when Elvis is brought up-He also always brings up the idea that for a "few years" he and Elvis traded back and fourth the #1 spot on differing records. But to me it comes off as trying to compare his career and Elvis's career-and there is truely no comparison(except in Pats mind)
Marie has had a wealth of personal problems well documented and I always think perhaps she is not always seeing things as they truely are or were.
Cher has always seemed honest-but also very narcissistic which has a way of shading your memory.
I do not see Dolly in the fashion I see the others-you obviously do.

[Brian]

Again, I think this goes back to the whole issue with publishing rights and the fact that there was a difference between recording a song live versus recording the song in the studio.

As I said before, I am certainly not a law scholar, but I believe that the publishing rights weren't an issue when a song was performed live on stage or even if that song wound up being recorded and released.

TCB!
Mike

That's my point and has been all along

To cover a song in the studio or release it as a single Elvis didn't need publishing rights to it as he covered a ton of songs on his albums and put several out as singles, but never got any publishing on any of them.
That did not prevent him from recording, performing or RCA releasing them.
Besides the way Dolly Parton tells the story she says Elvis just wanted to record the song but never mentions if he was planning on releasing it as a single.
Since it had already been a recent hit for Dolly I'd say he would either cover the song on one of his albums or just sing it live.
Elvis never sang it live not even a one liner.

[Brian]

But he did know of the others and he was overjoyed that Elvis had recorded them-which shows he was indeed "glad" that Elvis did his songs.
And coincedentily"Why Me Lord" was only a live recording.

Elvis sang it during several of his live shows and it was featured on the live in Memphis album.
I'm surprised Kris wasn't aware of it.
Bob Dylan was aware of the Tomorrow is a long time cover and it was tucked away as a bonus track on the horrid Spinout LP

[Brian]

Well the song is (arguably I'm sure you'll say) one of the greatest love songs of the last 50 years-which is a very high step above many of the songs submitted to Elvis in his career-a top notch quality well written simple love song-this gives a very good indication if would have done much much better than the average Elvis release(and as I pointed out-years later it was a huge smash)

I know Dolly must be very happy with the millions she's made off of the royalties from the success of the Whitney Houston cover, but I bet on a personal level she must not like how everybody thinks it's Whitney Houston's song as most people don't even know she had written the song and had a country hit with it on 3 separate occasions.
That may hurt deep down like Leiber and Stoller being upset that Elvis' version of Hound dog is so well know and Big Momma Thorton's version isn't.
On a sidenote I think Dolly's version is much better and Whitney's is actually quite horrid with all that screaming she does.

I must say that in my opinion the song is better suited to a woman than it would be for a man.

[Jungleroom76]

I know enough about it to know that the writers end of the publishing deal is theirs to do with what they wish.... after the publisher gets their agreed percentage.
But the songwriter could not give any portion of the publishers percentage to anyone in a new deal-so to break it down if the publishers deal with the songwriter calls for a 50/50 split the publisher will always get his 50%-and the songwriter can make a deal with an artist to split their 50% with the artist to cut the song-or give any percentage to the artist they want to 10, 20 ,5 etc......it is the writers money to do with as they want after it has been sent to them. (in a way its a legal kickback)

Thank you so much for the information Ken!!!

TCB!
Mike

[Jungleroom76]

I must say that in my opinion the song is better suited to a woman than it would be for a man.

THAT is true Brian!!! I have a hard time imagining how Elvis would have sang the song...

TCB!
Mike

[Jungleroom76]

Bob Dylan was aware of the Tomorrow is a long time cover and it was tucked away as a bonus track on the horrid Spinout LP

Do I remember correctly that Dylan didn't like Elvis' cover of TOMORROW??

I've always thought that Elvis' version of that song is very laid back and just very, very cool!!!

TCB!
Mike