Elvis Presley vs. Michael Jackson vs the Beatles.

[Sammy-San]

I am comparing the top 3 music artists/groups of all time.

Elvis's voice was the best of all of them. I would argue he was one of the best, if not the best, singer of all time, even surpassing Michael Jackson in his vocal ability. I mean, Michael Jackson had one of the best voices ever but Elvis had a deep powerful voice that cannot be compared to anybody else. Just listen to "my way", and that song, even though written at the end of his career, is the epitome of his singing ability.

He sang many different genres-rock n roll, gospel music, pop, blues, country, R and B, soul, etc. He was one of the most influential people ever. He influence even the Beatles, especially John Lennon.

I love many of the Beatles songs, but you have to admit, many of them were very silly. They were somewhat overrated. Songs like "for the benefit of mr kite", "lucy in the sky with diamonds", "yellow submarine", I like the Beatles, but unlike many of my friends and family, I dont view them as the best, but they still had many nice songs. I cant decide if they were better than Michael Jackson since they were totally different and cant be compared, but overall, I would say they were about the same as him, in terms of song enjoy-ability.

I'd put Elvis as number 1, and MJ and the Beatles on number 2 as equal seconds.

 

[markb77]

Interesting idea for a thread. As for Elvis and the Beatles, there is no way to overstate the influence that they had on the popular music which followed them. In fact, I doubt the Beatles could have ever existed had Elvis not happened when he did. As far as MJ, I don't believe his music was as big an influence as Beatles and Big E. Jackson did however blaze trails in other ways, such as developing music videos into mini-movies, and bringing choreography and dance back into the forefront. His performance on the Motown 25 (or whatever anniversary it was) special was arguably the single greatest performance of the rock era, and sealed his "King of Pop" label for the remainder of his short life. My personal ranking of the would be:
Beatles (mainly because by the time I started buying my own music, Elvis was on the decline)
Elvis
MJ
Again, thanks for the thread.

 

[Goodbook]

I think, from christian pov, elvis was best cos he sang gospel. Beatles did not touch gospel and MJ didnt really sing any gospel.

Although. Beatles did say they were inspired by salvation army bands.
MJ grew up JW but I do think he believed in the end.
Elvis was actually held captive by conflicting beliefs. Sadly he got into divination and numerology. But when he sang gospel, he could really sing.

Elvis actually did not like the Beatles and said things against them. He didnt like them taking drugs and encouraging drug culture. Lucy in the sky with diamonds is actually a veiled reference to LSD. He also, did not like rocknroll in the end and didnt want to perform it, but had to cos of the fans.

Of course MJ connection is his marriage to Lisa Marie.
MJs connection to Beatles is their song catalogue. But many of their songs are questionable...they could NOT sing, I would not call them any great singers. However amongst the dross were some really good ones written that others have also covered, like Help, Ticket to Ride, Lady Madonna.

And then awful ones like Hey Jude, Imagine, Yestrerday (too sad) and Yellow submarine. Lol.

All of them profoundly influenced popular music. I mean how many bands you see nowadays with 4 guys like beatles. They originally copied Buddy Holly and the crickets...and were 5, but there you go. Actually, I think I prefer the Monkees. Or the Wiggles.

 

[markb77]

I think, from christian pov, elvis was best cos he sang gospel. Beatles did not touch gospel and MJ didnt really sing any gospel.

Although. Beatles did say they were inspired by salvation army bands.
MJ grew up JW but I do think he believed in the end.
Elvis was actually held captive by conflicting beliefs. Sadly he got into divination and numerology. But when he sang gospel, he could really sing.

Elvis actually did not like the Beatles and said things against them. He didnt like them taking drugs and encouraging drug culture. Lucy in the sky with diamonds is actually a veiled reference to LSD. He also, did not like rocknroll in the end and didnt want to perform it, but had to cos of the fans.

Of course MJ connection is his marriage to Lisa Marie.
MJs connection to Beatles is their song catalogue. But many of their songs are questionable...they could NOT sing, I would not call them any great singers. However amongst the dross were some really good ones written that others have also covered, like Help, Ticket to Ride, Lady Madonna.

And then awful ones like Hey Jude, Imagine, Yestrerday (too sad) and Yellow submarine. Lol.

All of them profoundly influenced popular music. I mean how many bands you see nowadays with 4 guys like beatles. They originally copied Buddy Holly and the crickets...and were 5, but there you go. Actually, I think I prefer the Monkees. Or the Wiggles.

Umm. Buddy Holly and the Crickets were a trio, if I remember correctly.

 

[Goodbook]

They copied the name and style of music.

 

[Goodbook]

Actually wiki says there were 4 in the band including Buddy.

 

[BookofMatt]

It's really kind of impossible to compare the three:
An American crooner/actor who sang country, gospel and pop from '53-'77 vs. a British band who innovated the development of modern rock and psychedelia from '60-'70 vs. an R&B/pop singer who dominated the 1980s video era.

Not to mention, they all had vastly different cultural impacts:
Elvis served as the commercial breakthrough for rock and roll music and helped break the segregated lines between "white" and "black" music, The Beatles revolutionized the music industry (moving away from soloists and professional songwriters to groups who wrote their own songs) and laid the foundations for many modern styles of rock music, and Michael Jackson made similar strides in popularizing and evolving pop and R&B during the video era.

Really, a question like this will always come down to personal preference.

For me, I guess I'd choose The Beatles for sheer consistency. Elvis and MJ had numerous ups and downs in their career and sometimes produced less-than-stellar material, but The Beatles had a solid and steady (if brief) output which ultimately influenced most of the genres I love, including progressive rock and power-pop. I definitely don't agree with the consensus that they're the "greatest band of all time", but it's hard to dispute their influence on popular music and popular culture, which I think was a much bigger impact than either Elvis or MJ.

 

[Citanul]

I mean how many bands you see nowadays with 4 guys like beatles.

Not too many. In fact, I'm struggling to think of another band that has the same configuration - a 4-piece with two guitarists and two lead singers (and that's discounting the fact that George and Ringo also sang to try to make it easier). I can't believe there's not another band with that setup, but the Beatles certainly didn't match the most common 4-piece line-up of a singer and three instrumentalists.

As for the question the OP asked, Elvis may have been a great singer, but he wasn't a songwriter (Wikipedia only lists 10 songs which he has a writing credit). Jackson may have relied on other writers at times, but he still wrote a lot of his own songs and so I would put him above Elvis due to him being the better musician.

But the Beatles trump both of them as far as I'm concerned. In general, I like their songs more than Jackson's, but I also think they were more innovative and willing to experiment (and those experiments generally worked!).

So even if it seems a little odd comparing a group to two solo artists, my ranking is the Beatles first, then Michael Jackson and then Elvis.

 

[Goodbook]

Oh i mean boy bands.
Most bands are boys of 4 or more. Very rare to have all girl bands. Or there will be one girl and the rest boys.

 

[Goodbook]

In terms of singing, elvis was tops.
He had a rich voice, and often just sang things that were throw-away but he had that musical ability to transform a song and sing from the heart. Witness..The wonder of You..How Great thou art..suscpicious minds and my favourite..always on my mind. When hes singing that one you can hear repentance and remorse in his voice. Thats not often you hear that in a song. Only song comparable would be 'baby can I hold you tonight'

In the ghetto was wonderful as well.

I dont think the OP was comparing song writing ability. Only lennon and mccartney wrote songs. You cant really compare...they were different and unique but...I find they dont have any deeper meaning to their songs. Its all kinds of...60s free love sort of thing.

Michael jackson had that childlike 'magic' about him. Best song might be 'ben' but also 'you are not alone' and 'man in the mirror' as the kind of songs that stir the soul.

 

[Goodbook]

I just like this song. Even though its prolly no consolation for the girl in question!

 

[gordonhooker]

All great artists and ahead of their time in my humble opinion...

 

[Goodbook]

Just wanted to say..Karen Carpenter was THE singer IMHO. She topped them all. Sorry. Even elvis. She had perfect pitch, emotion, richness, warmth, vulnerability, everything.

She had the ability to make you feel like she was singing just for YOU. Like a friend. And it really wasnt about her...its like if an angel came down to earth and sang, the angel would sound like Karen Carpenter.

 

[Citanul]

I dont think the OP was comparing song writing ability.

The OP didn't specify a basis for the comparison, so we're free to choose our own, and for me songwriting ability comes into it. Elvis may have been the best performer, but I would regard the others as better musicians because they also wrote their own songs. If the comparison were between three different artists then I might use other criteria, but songwriting comes into it with these three.

Only lennon and mccartney wrote songs.

George Harrison also wrote songs. Generally only one or two per album, but "Something" and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" (and less often "Here Comes the Sun") are regularly up there in lists of top Beatles songs.

I find they dont have any deeper meaning to their songs. Its all kinds of...60s free love sort of thing.

I'm not sure if they really got into the free love thing, but while their early songs may have been simple pop songs lyricwise, later ones like "In My Life" and "The Long and Winding Road" certainly weren't.

 

[Dave-W]

George Harrison also wrote songs. Generally only one or two per album, but "Something" and "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" (and less often "Here Comes the Sun") are regularly up there in lists of top Beatles songs.

It was Harrison's lyrics that went out on "Get Back." The rest of the band deemed McCartney's original "No More Pakistanis" as not loving enough.

 

[Sammy-San]

Interesting idea for a thread. As for Elvis and the Beatles, there is no way to overstate the influence that they had on the popular music which followed them. In fact, I doubt the Beatles could have ever existed had Elvis not happened when he did. As far as MJ, I don't believe his music was as big an influence as Beatles and Big E. Jackson did however blaze trails in other ways, such as developing music videos into mini-movies, and bringing choreography and dance back into the forefront. His performance on the Motown 25 (or whatever anniversary it was) special was arguably the single greatest performance of the rock era, and sealed his "King of Pop" label for the remainder of his short life. My personal ranking of the would be:
Beatles (mainly because by the time I started buying my own music, Elvis was on the decline)
Elvis
MJ
Again, thanks for the thread.

Thanks, but what do you find interesting about the thread? I'm just comparing a few pop artists. I'm not so impressed by the thread I created.

 

[Sammy-San]

It was Harrison's lyrics that went out on "Get Back." The rest of the band deemed McCartney's original "No More Pakistanis" as not loving enough.

What was the meaning of that song? Was Mccartney against England's multiculturalism? I

 

[Dave-W]

What was the meaning of that song? Was Mccartney against England's multiculturalism? I

LOL. McCartney was protesting people coming in from all over the Commonwealth as cheap labor. It talks about a group of Pakistanis living in an over crowded flat and taking people's jobs. "Get Back to where you once belong" was telling them to go back to Pakistan.

Pretty Ado Lamb, was a Pakistani, living in another land, All the people 'round, don't dig no Pakistanis, taking all the people's jobs.

So get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged. Get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged.

(Instrumental)

Get back, get back, get back, get back. Get back, get back, get back, get back.

Meanwhile back at home, too many Pakistanis, living in a council flat, Candidate for Labour, tell us what your plan is, won't you tell me where it's at?

So get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged. Get back, get back, get back to where you once belonged.

 

[Goodbook]

I did like 'in my life' but again, not the beatles singing it.

The seekers sang it for the 50th

 

[Goodbook]

I think some people are gifted songwriters, and musicians but crappy singers! Eg carole King. (Sorry carole! But she just dont have the chops)
So..i think its voice for me...i cannot listen to a song thats been murdered.