What's new
  • Happy Birthday ICMag! Been 20 years since Gypsy Nirvana created the forum! We are celebrating with a 4/20 Giveaway and by launching a new Patreon tier called "420club". You can read more here.
  • Important notice: ICMag's T.O.U. has been updated. Please review it here. For your convenience, it is also available in the main forum menu, under 'Quick Links"!

Elvis vs the Beatles

BlueBlazer

What were we talking about?
Veteran
The King was the f*cking man. Maybe you guys are too young, too old, or just plain rewriting history. Talk to any chick in her 20s when Elvis was big and you'll see he was a Man, no boy. Perhaps he is a pop icon, but thats only because he was one of the first big stars.

I remember Elvis in his prime and he did have a tremendous impact, later he pretty much became a parody of himself IMO.

I'd even agree that Elvis blazed the trail for mainstream rock & roll.

But, in my mind, no one had the kind of effect and influence that the Beatles did.

Early in their careers, they were very simplistic and the mindless teenage girl following they accumulated eclipsed anything Beiber could hope for. Their mania forced the Beatles to live like prisoners and their non-stop screaming made live performances unlistenable.

But beginning with Rubber Soul and onward, they evolved into something you will never see again. It's hard to imagine anyone ever duplicating their impact on music and society.

But I must confess that when I saw Viva Las Vegas, I did want to be Elvis. :biggrin:
 

watts

ohms
Veteran
im kin to carl perkins (blue suede shoes) but elvis got most credit for that song because he was mainstream and a good entertainer.
 

Gascanastan

Gone but NOT forgotten...
Veteran
T

trem0lo

I was not around for either of them, but here's my professional post-mortem analysis.

Elvis was the better singer/performer, by a longshot.

The Beatles' greatest strength was always in their songwriting, specifically Lennon and McCartney. Their singing/playing was pretty bad at the beginning, although it improved with time.

It's difficult to compare the two, as Elvis was a camera-friendly performer and talented singer. The Beatles were a bad teeny rock band with two very talented songwriters that went on to much more success.
 

rives

Inveterate Tinkerer
Mentor
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Elvis wanted to help president Nixon clean up America from the drug taking followers of the Beatles,for those pesky LSD taking Beatles were destroying all the children.....

I think that there was some tongue-in-cheek pranking going on here. Elvis was reportedly higher than a kite when he met with Tricky Dick.
 

Crusader Rabbit

Active member
Veteran
Richard Nixon meets Elvis


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
picture.php
[/FONT]
 
The Beatles by a country mile imo i suppose it comes down to personal taste but i only like a few Elvis songs and i would never dream of listening to his stuff , but he was good for his time where as i like a lot of Beatles tunes and i would still listen to them now :)
 

Tudo

Troublemaker
Moderator
ICMag Donor
Veteran
Beatles crushed Elvis,

But then Phil Spector crushed EVERYBODY and has the most listened to song in history ( You've lost that loving feeling: Righteos Bros )
 
They both took their styles from blues singers from the south at that time who couldn't get record deals or radio airplay Little Richard being the most prominent, the Beatles tried to get him to sign them which to this day he still says is the biggest business mistake he ever made,Elvis grew up in a black pentacostal church thats where that movement came from.
 

WelderDan

Well-known member
Veteran
The Beatles were all good musicians (well, Ringo could hold a beat anyway) in their own right. Elvis, while a strong personality and great singer, was hardly a match in terms of ability. Besides, two different genres. Apples and oranges.

Elvis (Colonel Tom actually) tried to force other artist that Elvis covered to share writing credits. That's why you'll never hear any Elvis cover tunes of Dolly Parton songs.
 
Top