You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Who's The Better Elvis?
- Thread starter dilly2007
- Start date
brown_eyed_beauty
New member
Costello is better. Singer/songwriter/collaborator.
Presley was just a figure. He could sing and dance and look pretty, that was all. He gave a non-threatening voice to a music the labels wanted to capitalize on. They can call him the "King" all they want. He invented nothing. He was on ok singer who couldn't write his own material.
Presley was just a figure. He could sing and dance and look pretty, that was all. He gave a non-threatening voice to a music the labels wanted to capitalize on. They can call him the "King" all they want. He invented nothing. He was on ok singer who couldn't write his own material.
Mr.Wise Guy
New member
Elvis Presley is kind of the Joe DiMaggio of music. His iconic status is out of proportion with his greatness, but both were definitely great.
Early Elvis music is still pretty fantastic, in my opinion. I don't think it's the best music ever, but it's easy to see why he took the nation by storm with it.
And he wasn't just a copyist. He may have owed a greater debt to bluesmen then was ever recognized at the time, but he he gave that music a rock energy and backbeat.
Other artists, like Little Richard, did also, but they were contemporaries (who deserved more credit than they got). Elvis was doing it at virtually the same time and deserves the same "innovation" credit.
I like Elvis Costello's music, but I'll take Presley over Costello any day. At least, his earlier stuff.
Early Elvis music is still pretty fantastic, in my opinion. I don't think it's the best music ever, but it's easy to see why he took the nation by storm with it.
And he wasn't just a copyist. He may have owed a greater debt to bluesmen then was ever recognized at the time, but he he gave that music a rock energy and backbeat.
Other artists, like Little Richard, did also, but they were contemporaries (who deserved more credit than they got). Elvis was doing it at virtually the same time and deserves the same "innovation" credit.
I like Elvis Costello's music, but I'll take Presley over Costello any day. At least, his earlier stuff.
The Ocelot
New member
its so damn nice to hear other people say Presley is incredible over-rated. Costello is a great artist and i feel he may be slightly under-rated.
ThE uLtImAtE cHeEz BuRgEr
New member
Before having read this I had just voted "Elvis Presley" and I was about to give a whole spiel about how even though to the displeasure of many people present, without Elvis having popularized rock music (and music to the general public as commercialism hit the record industry) we would have never erabraced it as though we did. Now you went and took all my worRAB and I dont got much to say.
Ryan Schaefer
New member
Elvis Presley is the most overrated artist of all time.
It's rather fitting that he died on the toilet, seeing as how he was nothing but a piece of ****.
It's rather fitting that he died on the toilet, seeing as how he was nothing but a piece of ****.
Using a British colloquialism your comment about "non-threatening" is a load of Bollocks. For a start he began his career on a small label called Sun and typical of those times as it is now anyone with any popularity is signed by a major label. Dylan went to CBS at the time.
So what if Presley signed to a major label eventually. I have read a few books on his cultural impact and we, that is me and you and many others would not have a clue unless we have lived around that time, the mid fifties or bothered, as in my case, to read about it.
I will quote wiki as it is a readily available source.
And he could not write his own music? So what! There are plenty of singers that did not then or now write their own music. They are singers.
And as we are comparing him to Elvis Costello (a ridiculous idea IMO but carry regardless) what did Costello "invent"? To quote wiki again because it is readily available
Note the word "novel". Also Note the word "first". Wether you or I or any other individual likes it or not in the years to come Presley will be remerabered for one of the hugest contributors to music in all of music's history. Costello will be but a footnote in comparison. And Elvis Costello is a smart enough individual to know that I suspect.
Those are all facts that I have presented and are excepted as historically true by just about all sources if you care to educate yourself on the subject. Do so as there are countless books that discuss the Presley cultural phenomenon of the mid to late 50's and they are great reading.
So what if Presley signed to a major label eventually. I have read a few books on his cultural impact and we, that is me and you and many others would not have a clue unless we have lived around that time, the mid fifties or bothered, as in my case, to read about it.
I will quote wiki as it is a readily available source.
And he could not write his own music? So what! There are plenty of singers that did not then or now write their own music. They are singers.
And as we are comparing him to Elvis Costello (a ridiculous idea IMO but carry regardless) what did Costello "invent"? To quote wiki again because it is readily available
Note the word "novel". Also Note the word "first". Wether you or I or any other individual likes it or not in the years to come Presley will be remerabered for one of the hugest contributors to music in all of music's history. Costello will be but a footnote in comparison. And Elvis Costello is a smart enough individual to know that I suspect.
Those are all facts that I have presented and are excepted as historically true by just about all sources if you care to educate yourself on the subject. Do so as there are countless books that discuss the Presley cultural phenomenon of the mid to late 50's and they are great reading.
Allitrya Hallows
New member
Preference wise I'd go with Costello.
Well for one they did and two Elvis didn't. He didn't steal songs, he credited the writers.
Presley was an original musician for his time, he recorded other peoples songs but he put his own spin on them. He did put a white face on rock n roll but you say it like that's a bad thing, he made rock n roll mainstream and paved the way for every white rock n roll musician.
The Sex Pistols were a british New York Dolls. They put a face on punk and got punk into the mainstream so they are important for that. But to call them more original and talented than Elvis is ridiculous.
Absolutely not.
They don't sound even remotely like the Ramones, they copied the New York Dolls. But thats stupid to suggest that every band in a given genre are complete ripoRAB of the band that started it.
It's like saying Iron Maiden are a ripoff of Black Sabbath.
Well for one they did and two Elvis didn't. He didn't steal songs, he credited the writers.
Presley was an original musician for his time, he recorded other peoples songs but he put his own spin on them. He did put a white face on rock n roll but you say it like that's a bad thing, he made rock n roll mainstream and paved the way for every white rock n roll musician.
The Sex Pistols were a british New York Dolls. They put a face on punk and got punk into the mainstream so they are important for that. But to call them more original and talented than Elvis is ridiculous.
Absolutely not.
They don't sound even remotely like the Ramones, they copied the New York Dolls. But thats stupid to suggest that every band in a given genre are complete ripoRAB of the band that started it.
It's like saying Iron Maiden are a ripoff of Black Sabbath.