Elvis 30 #1 Hits "remaster info"

$$$$$$$$$

We like to think that new reissues are done for our benefit. That the companies are just tickled pink to please the audiophile crowd. Maybe that's how it starts with some projects. But sooner or later some kid in accounting sees that the money spent on any particular project hasn't been returned ten-fold and down goes another great try. I remember reading years ago, around the time that Rhino was doing their own series of doo-wop artists like The Cleftones, The Teenagers and so on. They seemed quite amazed at just how few copies they actually sold. Where were the legions of buyers who were shouting "we need these discs, build them and we will buy!". Now Collectables does all the doo-wop comps and I'm sure they're comfortable enough to sell a few thousand.

Now along comes a left field hit of a remixed Elvis tune. Corporate ears perk up as they hear the registers ring at your local superstore. "How do we sell it to the Wal-Mart and late night tv crowd?". Repackage, mix it to today's standards and push it like crazy. My 15 year old stepdaughter just loves Elvis, buys anything. Had all the box sets on cassette when she was a kid, wore them out and now has the same sets on disc. Me, I stopped buying Elvis even before the cd came along, I was happy with what vinyl I had.

Keep the dollar legacy going at all costs, anyway you can. The old Starday and King label thinking here. Package it seven ways to Sunday and then package the same goods again another seven ways. Profit kids, the "remastered sound" is a smoke screen courtesy of the ad department.


Best!

 

And, sadly guys, most average listeners ARE listening to music on boomboxes and "bookshelf" stereos. That is what the CDs of today are being mastered for, NOT high-end gear, or even the stuff I have!

 

I wonder if the CD will be clearly labeled as remixes, or if it will be like the "new" Ozzy cds which don't mention the re-recording of the bass and drum tracks on the cover??

 

In Entertainment Weekly, the producer was quoted as saying he didn't like the term "remix" because he thought it would make people think that they "added drums or something."

So, if he's truly in charge, I doubt the word "remix" will be used.

Ryan

 

Okay, here's a "name" suggestion to save any comusmer confusion, how about "crap!" or even "krap!"...

 

The "target" customer

Most of the outstanding members of this board are not what would be considered "target" consumers. There aren't enough of us to go around to make anything we say really matter to the folks running the big machines these days. Anything we buy is gravy, not the main meal. BMG and Abkco and EMI primarily care about what I said before, how do we sell to the guy with the all-in-one rent-a-center special? Again I use my stepdaughter as an example, a lady that loves Elvis no matter how dead he stays or for how long. Her player of choice? One of those big Walmart layaway specials with the zillion lights that flash to the music. The kind that has tone control buttons like "pop", "country" and so on. She'll plunk down her money and crank it to the max and Elvis will sound fine to her, just like BMG wants. Bring Steve in? Why spend the money? Save it and put it toward the cost of the "remastered" stickers for the front cover.

I have a weekend disc jockey, Elvis freak to beyond the nth degree. Has a wide variety of releases in all formats. He enjoys the dickens out of his old Elvis albums. Has them on cd too. Not once has he ever said a word about the sound quality. It all sounds the same on his player. There you have it, the average consumer that freely spends. The "target" customer!

Best!

 

Re: The "target" customer

I'm laughing so much it's hard to type! LOL!!!!
I agree with all you wrote. It's so funny.....and so true.
It's time for a LENNONFAN prediction. The new elvis comp will hit #1 on Billboard but will do nowhere near as good as the Beatles 1.
Reason? IMO, elvis just isn't weird enough to capture the youth market. Original elvis fans are too much like their grandparents
Imagine if the 60's generation at the time thought, hey, these rock an roll dudes are boring....GLENN MILLER IS WHERE IT'S AT, MAN!
LOL.
There will always be a subsect of elvis fans, but those are rarely what one would also call 'audiophiles'.

 

Did you ever think that the day would come when the average Joe six-pack would guide the direction of sound quality? All the blood, sweat and tears put into the quest for better sound, only to be squashed (along with the dynamics) by a teenage girl with a boombox that flashes to the beat?

 

We're with you all the way Steve!

 

Personally, I'm not terribly upset that RCA is remixing a bunch of Elvis's hits for a compilation CD. I have the 50's box set, and the 60's box set, and the 70's box set, and the 1968 comeback special sets. And of course I've got the DCC Elvis CD as well. And I'll still have those after this new collection comes out. Sure, I'd rather have RCA spend all that money on having Steve Hoffman remaster all of the original mixes for SACD instead, but that was never really in the cards now, was it?

 

Why is "Burning Love" on the compilation anyway? I thought the idea was to compile all of Elvis' #1 singles in the US and the UK. As far as I can determine, "Burning Love" was #2 in the US and #7 in the UK.

 

I only use a bookshelf stereo but the extra speakers do sort of make up for that though and I can tell sound quality on 1 CD vs. another and I can tell if a CD has been overly compressed.

 

I'm just thankful to have DCC's "24 Karat Hits!" and "Elvis Is Back!"...thanks Steve! To me, historical accuracy should be the top priority when remastering. That is, preserving the character of the original mixes. Excessively tampering with original mixes is like trying to rewrite history...and if the engineer is a bad "author", the artist's work is compromised. I realize record companies must turn a profit, but just don't agree with this approach. Elvis isn't contemporary, he's classic...trying to manipulate his work to have a modern "sound" (which to me means hyper-compressed) is kinda tacky. I love the original RCA mixes...especially that super rich-sounding early '60s material (Little Sister, (You're The) Devil In Disguise, etc). Why would anybody feel the need to tamper with any of that?! They shouldn't have to "pretty up" these great tracks like they did "A Little Less Conversation" in order to capitalize on that song's success.


Relive history...don't rewrite it!

 

"Elvis.....the ORIGINAL MONO Mixes in 5.1 surround"

 

I'm not sure if I agree with the previous posts regarding these new CDs being mastered for crappy bookshelf systems. You don't need a high-end system to appreciate a well-mastered CD; a properly mastered CD should always sound better than a poorly mastered one, even on a low-grade system.

I think the problem stems from misguided marketing. As someone observed in another thread, the trend of remixing or remastering to "modernize" old recordings is somewhat analogous to the colorizing of old black & white films back in the 80s.

The public ultimately rejected colorized movies. And today, DVDs that are marketed as faithful restorations do quite well.

It seems to me the labels could have taken a similar approach and done proper remasters. Heck, a well-done remastering has a lot of marketing potential. With the proper marketing, I think these would appeal to both the average consumer as well as audiophiles.

Unfortunately, the labels have taken the "let's modernize it" approach. Hopefully, this will go the way of colorized movies.

 

I think many people are getting upset...that DON"T even buy Elvis CDs!!!

I am NOT a huge Elvis collector, but there is stuff out there that you need to purchase, beside the "obvious" Steve masters of Elvis Is Back and 24K!

Is this just a "crutch" (referring to the above sentiments), so that we all can feel that there isn't anything out there worth purchasing? If you haven't bought Elvis since the Top 10 Hits or Number 1 Hits CDs from the 80s...there are still some newer things "worth a spin".

Before they go out of print...for those who want original, great sounding Elvis compilations...seek out the RCA Time/Life releases done by Dennis Drake. There's: "Country", "Gospel", "Love Songs", etc. All 2 CD sets, no less!

They may NOT be TUBE MASTERED, but they sound awesome! Buy now or CRY later!

 

Maybe I shouldn't be saying this, since I've already posted in this thread, but...

Elvis just doesn't do it for me. While Steve's CDs *sound* good, I just have no interest in the material. I think his style has just always turned me off. I've *tried* to like him at various points, but it never happens. I don't like most of the songs, and that vocal style just wears on me.

Well, I kind of like Suspicious Minds. I think that's about it, though.

Let the flames roll in...

 

I don't think that's surprising Luke after all you are much younger than most Elvis devotees, and that is NOT a criticism of course.

A good deal of Elvis' appeal was his image (it certainly wasn't his songwriting or musicianship!) and I guess you sort of had to be there at the time to really get into that.

 

No flames necessary, Luke. I'm sure we all have at least one of the "greats" that just doesn't do it for us.

Having said that, have you tried any of Elvis's early Sun material (e.g. Mystery Train, Good Rockin Tonight)? Sometimes this stuff appeals to those that don't care for Elvis's slicker RCA sides. I like Elvis in limited doses, but whenever I listen to him it's usually Disc 1 of the 50s box set.

 

True, but then again, I love Buddy Holly, The Beatles, Stones, Who, etc, etc...

 

I'm sure I've heard some of the Sun stuff before, although, I'm not *terribly* familar with it. I would tend to say that if given a choice, I'd listen to that very early stuff rather than some of his later "hits"...

 

Consider yourself flamed, SAVING PRIVATE RYAN German-bunker-on-Omaha-Beach style! [Insert disarming smilie here].

Actually, there's so much dross and variety in Elvis's catalog, it can be hard to get a handle on it. There's over a hundred CDs out, including a lot of awful soundtracks, gospel that's not to everyone's taste, a bunch of live albums, not to mention serious overlap between comps.

I recommend for beginners (in order): ELVIS '56; TIGER MAN; SUNRISE; and SUSPICIOUS MINDS, none of which are "real" albums from the vinyl days. These are dross-free, never far from my CD player. They emphasize Elvis as the greatest rock singer of them all, and less the polished pop icon. (TIGER MAN is the amazing unplugged session from his '68 Comeback Special.)

I'd also recommend the out-of-print comps A HUNDRED YEARS FROM NOW and RHYTHM & COUNTRY, if you can find them. These feature alternate takes of latter-day Elvis, and the looser feel seems more enjoyable to me than the official takes. (A big thank you to Forum members for clueing me in to the Essentials series!)

Oh, and read the "Presliad" chapter in Greil Marcus's MYSTERY TRAIN. It's one of the greatest pieces of rock writing ever set to paper, and does a good job of capturing the enduring vitality and importance of Elvis' music.

 

Exactly, that's why I made the distinction between songwriters/musicians and image.