I love Elvis, but......

ahawkman · Post by **ahawkman** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 4:32 pm

I find him at his best when he makes, for lack of a better term, "British-sounding" records. I've tried to love TDM, but it sounds (to me) like he's trying to be an American country-rocker.

I thought of this because of a quote from the Miami Herald article in a thread below:

''I'm not proposing I'm Hank Williams . . .'' Costello says. ``Obviously a lot of British groups have absorbed American forms like R&B and fed them back to America with some sort of weird spin or edge. That's the Rolling Stones, that's the Who, that's me and the Attractions in different times, and it's me and the Imposters now.''

My problem with this record is that I don't feel the "weird spin" at all, it's too straightforward. Don't get me wrong; even a mediocre Elvis is better than 95% of what's out there, but I do long for the days when he made those quirky, weird, yet brilliant recordings with the Attractions. And I know I sound like the typical "Play the Detectives!!!" guy at a concert. I'm not that, but I do contend that his stuff with the Attractions is tough to beat.

In any case, looking forward to seeing him in San Diego in 2 weeks! I am taking my wife, who's a semi-convert but has not succumbed completely.
Tony

King Hoarse · Post by **King Hoarse** » Tue Mar 08, 2005 6:44 pm

I like most of Elvis' stuff and am very happy that he's so versatile, but he hasn't released a thoroughly pop-ish record in the seven or so years I've been a fan, and I wish he would.

verbal gymnastics · Post by **verbal gymnastics** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 12:21 pm

What do you mean by a thoroughly pop-ish record KH?

King Hoarse · Post by **King Hoarse** » Thu Mar 10, 2005 5:18 pm

I really don't know how to express it well. Smart but often playful. Infectious melodies that don't owe as much to country and blues as to folk and classic soul, maybe. Easy on the 7's. Energetic uptempo numbers that are not necessarily raunchy mixed in with the ballads. The Sweetest Punch without the tux (I wish the Imposters would play that).

Of course there are "pop" sprinkles on his latest albums too, but it's not as dominant after 1996 as it used to be, to my ears. Tear Off Your Own Head, She's Pulling Out The Pin, When I Was Cruel #1 and (especially the chorus of) Episode Of Blonde are the Elvis pop moments of this century. (not his best songs of the period but I would still like to hear stuff like that)

Imperial Bedroom and Brutal Youth I consider pop-ish, for example. Not to mention Get Happy!!

Gillibeanz · Post by **Gillibeanz** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:32 am

Me too KH! me too!

verbal gymnastics · Post by **verbal gymnastics** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:41 am

I wouldn't consider She's Pulling Out The Pin as poppish.

It's pretty evident that Elvis wanted to do a bluesy/country album this time round - just as he's written/recorded different types of album in the past. Your own preference is the "British sounding" type of record. That's fine - each to our own.

Post by **spooky girlfriend** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 11:53 am

Not only did he want to do that sound on this TDM album, he was in love with doing it at the Ryman, and I was so lucky to see it. Although he was having some voice difficulties, he wasn't going to give up, especially with Emmylou there. You had to admire how much he loves that type of music and how much he was moved to perform it at a place like the Ryman, given the history of the venue and the musical background of Nashville itself. There's nothing more attractive in a performer than when they are doing what they feel most passionate about. You may not like what he's doing, but you almost still have to enjoy watching him do it.

Jackson Monk · Post by **Jackson Monk** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 1:13 pm

I'd like to see him moving into sprialling trad jazz with plenty of flugelhorn.

There's no future in pop or rock'n'roll. Get with the in-crowd, Elvis daddy-o.

Mr. Average · Post by **Mr. Average** » Fri Mar 11, 2005 5:25 pm

spooky girlfriend wrote:There's nothing more attractive in a performer than when they are doing what they feel most passionate about. You may not like what he's doing, but you almost still have to enjoy watching him do it.

Spooky, I completely agree, as this statement is one of the best single descriptors of the artists that I love the most. Pat Metheny has completely, and I mean completely, avoided labels by constantly reinventing himself, his band, and even playing pure improvisational free-form jazz in the spirit of Don Cherry, in spite of the fact that it hurts him commercially. The body of work of Metheny is so impressive, but the ultimate danger of this is that if an unsuspecting and uneducated buyer simply picks a Metheny album they can really be shocked if they pick the wrong one(s). Consider David Byrne and Miles Davis as well, and to a lesser degree, Peter Gabriel. Of course, Elvis Costello. You don't nned to like where they are at any given time, but you sure as hell should be able to appreciate the COURAGE (real courage...not 'Dan Rather' Courage) that they possess to go against the formula that feeds them. Great comment. Sorry to swing off topic, now back to our regularly scheduled thread...

ahawkman · Post by **ahawkman** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 2:34 am

I do admire and respect his versatility and his ability to play vastly different styles. I can't exacly put my finger on what makes his earlier albums better (IMO). Is it the lyrics? Is it the "snake charmer" organ? Is it (god forbid) Bruce Thomas? If I have to pin it down, maybe it's MELODY,something that seems lacking in many of his more recent efforts. Maybe I'm just a simpleton who can't grasp the complexity of higher-lvel musicianship, but give me Oliver's Army, Hand in Hand, hell even Lipstick Vogue seems less disjointed than 90% of the recent stuff. I can admire his versatility, but doesn't becoming a "jack of all parades" lead to being a master of none?

Post by **spooky girlfriend** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 4:02 pm

I think what makes you like his earlier albums better is that apparently you like that style of music better. That's fine. But Elvis is a thorough musician and he enjoys experimenting with many different types of music. He is a lover of all music and enjoys performing all music.

What you like to see him or hear him perform is a matter of opinion. But just because he loves to bounce around between various genres doesn't make him a master of none, but rather a connoisseur of all.

LittleFoole · Post by **LittleFoole** » Sat Mar 12, 2005 4:07 pm

Mr. Average wrote: .....Consider David Byrne and Miles Davis as well, and to a lesser degree, Peter Gabriel. Of course, Elvis Costello. You don't nned to like where they are at any given time, but you sure as hell should be able to appreciate the COURAGE (real courage...not 'Dan Rather' Courage) that they possess to go against the formula that feeds them....

Yes - excellent point, and thanks for bringing Mr. Byrne into the "mix" - T Heads and Byrne are another mainstay of my musical collection