Quote:
Originally posted by Dilettante
Forgive me if you're talking of another Elvis, but I really hate posthumous albums, especially where they **** with the original recordings and/or add another artist, a la Michael.
Let sleeping dogs lie. |
I don't see the harm in it. Sure, it's probably greedy if we look at it from the standpoint of his estate, but it doesn't hurt to add fresh life to timeless music by artists that are no longer able to create new material. Especially when it's an artist as old as Elvis, who has a lot of "mastered" songs that still sound scratchy and reminiscent of his days.
This album that Michael is featured on is a collaboration with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, and they'll be playing his music with his original vocal tracks laid out. There's one song that will also include Michael, who sang directly with the orchestra (obviously).
His wife has fully backed the project, and was actually the one that came up with the idea, because she knew that Elvis enjoyed music like this, full orchestras and whatnot. It's not really a disgrace to his legacy at all, but rather paid respects.
Quote:
|
"Elvis was a risk-taker. If we kept everything status quo, how do we bring him into the future? How do we bring him current with this generation? How do we move on and continue the legacy? We're not going to let that happen."
|
To me, this type of posthumous release is a lot more respectable than say, releasing old demos that Elvis personally rejected. Like what happened with Michael.
)
