| Darko 03.03.2006 11:37 |
I have always thought that Elvis were and still is a very overrated artist, and today I found out that "the great Elvis Presley" didn't write his own songs. How can a artist be called the king of rock when he even doesn't write his own lyrics. The respect of Elvis in America is infinite, but even his voice is not that great, he had a good voice but I find it little monotonous. You can imitate Elvis Presley, but you can not imitate Freddie Mercury, the volume, the extent of Freddies voice was something non-human. |
| Serry... 03.03.2006 12:14 |
How can an actor be called the good actor when he even doesn't write script of the movie? How can guitarist be called the good guitarist when sounds came from guitar? |
| The Fairy King 03.03.2006 12:46 |
and Elton? Couldn't agree more Linda...well said! |
| John S Stuart 03.03.2006 12:51 |
People like Elvis, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, Art Garfunkle, Pavarotti and even Montserrat Caballe all BELIEVED they were great singers... but really sh*t song-writers - that's why they left the song eriting to the professionals. Sometimes great song writers like Leiber & Stroller, Oscar Hammerstein, Andrew Lloyd Webber and even Bob Dylan all think they are great writers, but sh*t as singers. The point is that those who live in either group, believe that they are in the best place tehy can be to sell their music. Now, great singer/songwriters only really come along one a lifetime. Freddie perhaps belonged to this elite third group, but that does not really mean that he was a better singer than elvis. As John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing". |
| on my way up 03.03.2006 13:05 |
Elvis is something special. There are few artists I can think of with such charisma and such emotion in their voice.That he didn't write his own songs is his only weakness. I also believe freddie is better:he's a better singer , he's a legendary songwriter ,a unique performer with charisma just not too big for the world to carry:-)That said:I will always pay huge respect to elvis and he isn't overrated.Only:freddie(and Queen) is underrated!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
| deleted user 03.03.2006 13:48 |
So he didn't write his own songs. He wasn't much of a guitarist either. He was a lousy actor in my opinion. But the guy still had talent. He could sing and he made those songs classics. People loved him and still do. He can't be called The King for nothing surely. |
| Darko 03.03.2006 14:24 |
Wise comments, I respect your opinions, but I didn't say that Elvis was bad. You must understand that Elvis is very overrated in America. They call him the King, they say no one can be compared to him, he stands alone. No other artist have had that commercial success of selling most records like Elvis did. But where do you think he has sold the most records, of course in America, and the majority of the American public have several of Elvis records at home. But in Europe, and I come from Sweden, we respect Elvis, but people like Freddie Mercury have higher status in the music world, but people like Elvis have higher status in media, because of selling one billion records (and i'm now talking about the American media, and remember that a great majority of those records were sold in America. People like Freddie Mercury are very underrated in America, but we know that Freddie Mercury is a better artist than Elvis, Mercury has the greatest voice ever and his lyrics are quite good. That means that Freddie Mercury should be the King and Elvis the Queen. |
| Serry... 03.03.2006 14:35 |
America? Serry is from Russia, Linda is from Ireland, The Fairy King is from Netherlands (as I remember), John S Stuart is from Scotland, on my way up is from Belgium, Quonkers is from Ireland... |
| bitesthedust 03.03.2006 15:06 |
John S Stuart wrote: People like Elvis, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, Art Garfunkle, Pavarotti and even Montserrat Caballe all BELIEVED they were great singers... but really sh*t song-writers - that's why they left the song eriting to the professionals. Sometimes great song writers like Leiber & Stroller, Oscar Hammerstein, Andrew Lloyd Webber and even Bob Dylan all think they are great writers, but sh*t as singers. The point is that those who live in either group, believe that they are in the best place tehy can be to sell their music. Now, great singer/songwriters only really come along one a lifetime. Freddie perhaps belonged to this elite third group, but that does not really mean that he was a better singer than elvis. As John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing".another person in the 2nd group - Kris Kristofferson. The man can write a damn good song but he can't sing a lick in my opinion. |
| Darko 03.03.2006 15:12 |
The only thing i'm trying to say is that Mercury sholud be called the king. Elvis has a monotonous voice and he didn't write those great songs, he hasn't even written on little hit. He is being called the King for no reason, like I said before a lot of people can imitate Elvis Presley, especially his voice(in las vegas)and that is the most essential thing for a music artist. |
| Darko 03.03.2006 15:13 |
And that is his voice. |
| Darko 03.03.2006 15:19 |
If the voice is the most essential attribute(and song writing) for a music artist that means that we have only charisma left and Elvis had charisma but does he deserve to be called the king? I think that Mercury should be called the king. |
| brENsKi 03.03.2006 15:47 |
John S Stuart wrote: Sometimes great song writers like Leiber & Stroller, Oscar Hammerstein, Andrew Lloyd Webber and even Bob Dylan all think they are great writers, but sh*t as singers. As John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing".well said John. although i'm sure Caspar will lambast you for the Dylan comment (btw - i agree with yuo 100% about Zimmerman - he was a shit-awful singer) Manfred Mann's Earthband..made Dylan's dirge's come to life |
| magicalfreddiemercury 03.03.2006 15:50 |
<font color=FF0099>Linda Of The Valley wrote: xD actually NO americans have posted in this topic yet!Then let me be the first. Elvis broke the rules. He sang 'soul' songs and made them popular. He moved in a way that made the people swoon and chuckle while the censors cringed and ordered him to be 'filmed from the waist up'. He was a rebel - a bad boy. Yet, he was a gentleman - and a mama's boy. He was something to everyone. Charismatic, polite, quick to smile and a joy to watch. He had staying power because people saw him as a man, not just as an entertainer. Elvis = King Freddie = Queen Musical royalty |
| Darko 03.03.2006 16:10 |
What is this, so you think that Elvis is a better singer than Mercury, this is mad. I'm a Mercury fan but there are lot of people in the music world that say that Mercury is the greatest male singer (vocalist)of all time. You don't have to be a Mercury fan to realize that. This has nothing to do with rock history, this is common sense. This is just outrageous what I'm hearing. I think that Elvis should be grateful that he had a person who wrote those great songs, we should honour that guy and not just "the great" Elvis. Remember people say "Those Elvis songs are great", but you can't call them Elvis songs, because he didn't write them. Why should he get all the credit for them (a lot of ordinary people in the world think that he wrote those songs), he didn't write them, and tell me is that fair? |
| magicalfreddiemercury 03.03.2006 16:14 |
Darko wrote: What is this, so you think that Elvis is a better singer than Mercury, this is mad.Did I say Elvis was a better singer than Freddie? Hmmm. Let me check.... ...Nope. Didn't say that. Didn't think so. |
| Darko 03.03.2006 16:22 |
Be honest know and tell me: Who is the better singer? And who is the better artist (overall)? For me the answers are Answer1: Mercury Answer2: Mercury |
| Darko 03.03.2006 16:23 |
Sorry it should say be honest now |
| magicalfreddiemercury 03.03.2006 16:35 |
Darko wrote: Be honest know and tell me: Who is the better singer? And who is the better artist (overall)? For me the answers are Answer1: Mercury Answer2: MercuryFor me? Easy answer to both - Freddie. HOWEVER - Freddie wouldn't have done very well, IMHO, in Elvis' day. Timing, Darko, does have its place. |
| Mean Mistreater 03.03.2006 19:28 |
No doubt that in his early career (before making movies) he influenced the music world forever, but I must say he was just cheesy and lame after the rock-n-roll explosion ended. I grew up in the south, and yes, Elvis is majorly overrated. Elvis is an icon, but there's no comparison in talent with Freddie. Little Richard deserves more recognition than Elvis. |
| Mean Mistreater 03.03.2006 19:58 |
Since we're on the subject, I always remembered my mom telling me about how embarrassed she was when she was dating my dad back in the late 60's because he loved Elvis. She would tell me that you were the ultimate nerd and was just uncool at that time to like Elvis. My grandmother always told me how her best friend got to go on the Louisiana Hayride the year that Elvis was there too. |
| Mr.Jingles 03.03.2006 20:25 |
ELVIS IS DEFINITELY OVERATED Think about it. Around the time that Elvis came out, we had a handful of extremely talented musicians who were the pioneers of rock n' roll: Bill Haley, Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, Little Richard, Fats Domino, etc. All of them far more talented than Elvis. Elvis had something in his advantage, and it was the fact that he had good looks, something that the other guys I mentioned didn't particularly have. Plus, add to the fact that the 50's was the beginning of the TV era, and media companies had to sell the image of an artist as much as the music. Pretty much Elvis was just about as fabricated as any boy band. The only props I give Elvis is for being a good performer, but other than that I think that the title of "King of Rock N' Roll" was nothing more than media hype. |
| FreeSpirit328 03.03.2006 20:31 |
Darko, Coming from a family who worships the ground Elvis walked on (I like the man, but I think that's going a bit far), I have this to say: Elvis is called the King of Rock n' Roll because he was one of the first people who made it big in the beginning of rock music. As much as I love Freddie Mercury, and I agree with you, he is a bit under-rated here in the U.S, he could never be called the King simply because he came on the scene twenty-three years after the whole rock n' roll era began. But I think you know that, and I just wasted a whole bunch of words, but I had to say it. By the way, Elvis did write the lyrics to a few songs. I'll have to do some research as to which songs they were though. |
| LadyMoonshineDown 03.03.2006 21:13 |
Elvis didn't make generational history or influence by his songwriting; he made history by his innovation and inspiration to rock music. You don't have to like Elvis' music, but you can't deny the influence he had not only over his generation, but many generations, even to this day. Cheers |
| jcrawford79 03.03.2006 22:19 |
Darko wrote: he didn't write those great songs, he hasn't even written on little hit.You should do your research before posting false statements. You are wrong. Elvis was credited or cocredited with writing several of his hits. This has been discussed many times and his songwriting friends have confirmed that he did in fact write songs. |
| LadyMoonshineDown 03.03.2006 22:24 |
jcrawford79 wrote:Heh, I like how you bluntly say "you are wrong." It gives me much enjoyment. :)Darko wrote: he didn't write those great songs, he hasn't even written on little hit.You should do your research before posting false statements. You are wrong. Elvis was credited or cocredited with writing several of his hits. This has been discussed many times and his songwriting friends have confirmed that he did in fact write songs. Cheers |
| jcrawford79 03.03.2006 22:25 |
I love how some people believe that cultural phenomena are a matter of interpretation... If the general population (American, or any other for that matter) feel that Elvis was the king of rock and roll, then to that population he is the king of rock and roll. Regardless of what someone who doesn't appreciate his music thinks. Not liking Elvis' music in no way refutes his position in popular culture. So if someone doesn't appreciate We Will Rock You....well then it probably doesn't deserve its title as the greatest sporting anthem ever? Rediculous..... |
| user name 03.03.2006 23:16 |
In the end, popularity and longevity is the ultimate measure of musical success. The fact is, Elvis has both those things in abundance. Regardless of the means (which you are arguing), he has accomplished the ends. End of story. |
| 4freddie 04.03.2006 02:05 |
Darko stated "Remember people say "Those Elvis songs are great", but you can't call them Elvis songs, because he didn't write them." Right he just brought them to life! |
| Mr Fred 04.03.2006 08:07 |
Hello there guys, As a objective fan of them both, you guys have to remember something. We are on a queen forum, it isn't that uncommon that everybody thinks Freddie is better. Next thing is that Elvis and queen played different kind of music. So it's not so fair to compare them. That Elvis is called the King and not Freddie is cery easy to tell. Elvis was first, he played in nowadays thoughts more familiar music. The music spread to more people. That Elvis didn't wrote his own songs is true, though he co-wrote a few in the 50s. But the fact was that most artists didn't wrote their music themselves. Ok don't say that you can look on perkins and the others who wrote their stuff themselves, I know them. But most artist didn't. That was so the music industy worked before the beatles entered the arena . Beatles changed that, so that more artists wrote their stuff themselves. And if Elvis was used to sing others songs, it isn't that funny that he keept doing it. Overall this is a crazy topic, because we discuss 2 great actors, and they are great in their own ways. Neither side wants to surrender in this question. At last can I say that I think Elvis had a more warm voice then Freddie. Freddie had more raw power in his voice. Elvis was more soul then Freddie, but Freddie was more rock... |
| i'm going slight mad... 04.03.2006 08:28 |
John S Stuart wrote: People like Elvis, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, Art Garfunkle, Pavarotti and even Montserrat Caballe all BELIEVED they were great singers... but really sh*t song-writers - that's why they left the song eriting to the professionals. Sometimes great song writers like Leiber & Stroller, Oscar Hammerstein, Andrew Lloyd Webber and even Bob Dylan all think they are great writers, but sh*t as singers. The point is that those who live in either group, believe that they are in the best place tehy can be to sell their music. Now, great singer/songwriters only really come along one a lifetime. Freddie perhaps belonged to this elite third group, but that does not really mean that he was a better singer than elvis. As John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing".first of all leiber and stoller nicked songs of other fantastic and (usually) black songwriters. one of elvis' biggest hits, hound dog, was performed long before they 'wrote it' by a woman called 'big mama thornton'. so that's a pile of hack. get real here. Elvis was a poor and uneducated southern white boy, who was manipulated by others to make lots of money, of of the backs of poor and uneducated southern black people. in the 1950's all the major record labels eventually saw the money that was to come with rock n roll, and got some people of their own that they made 'stars'. even the small record company that elvis first signed to had been looking for a white 'black' singer for a long time, before they found him. he was good looking, he could sing, or rather imitate other people, cos that's all he was doing imitating arther crudup and the like, and he could move. but most importantly of all, he was white and could be manipulated by higher powers...that's why he was so popular. |
| Mr.Jingles 05.03.2006 11:34 |
i'm going slight mad... wrote:I totally agree with you.John S Stuart wrote: People like Elvis, Frank Sinatra, Dean Martin, Bing Crosby, Art Garfunkle, Pavarotti and even Montserrat Caballe all BELIEVED they were great singers... but really sh*t song-writers - that's why they left the song eriting to the professionals. Sometimes great song writers like Leiber & Stroller, Oscar Hammerstein, Andrew Lloyd Webber and even Bob Dylan all think they are great writers, but sh*t as singers. The point is that those who live in either group, believe that they are in the best place tehy can be to sell their music. Now, great singer/songwriters only really come along one a lifetime. Freddie perhaps belonged to this elite third group, but that does not really mean that he was a better singer than elvis. As John Lennon said, "Before Elvis, there was nothing".first of all leiber and stoller nicked songs of other fantastic and (usually) black songwriters. one of elvis' biggest hits, hound dog, was performed long before they 'wrote it' by a woman called 'big mama thornton'. so that's a pile of hack. get real here. Elvis was a poor and uneducated southern white boy, who was manipulated by others to make lots of money, of of the backs of poor and uneducated southern black people. in the 1950's all the major record labels eventually saw the money that was to come with rock n roll, and got some people of their own that they made 'stars'. even the small record company that elvis first signed to had been looking for a white 'black' singer for a long time, before they found him. he was good looking, he could sing, or rather imitate other people, cos that's all he was doing imitating arther crudup and the like, and he could move. but most importantly of all, he was white and could be manipulated by higher powers...that's why he was so popular. Elvis and RCA Records did indeed steal what black musicians had already done before, and were trying to sell it to a white audience with a white package. Let's be REAL. If Elvis was black, there's no way he would have had the same success he had. At least not in the America of the 50s where black people were seen by most people in a totally different way. |
| magicalfreddiemercury 05.03.2006 12:39 |
Mr.Jingles wrote: Elvis and RCA Records did indeed steal what black musicians had already done before, and were trying to sell it to a white audience with a white package. Let's be REAL. If Elvis was black, there's no way he would have had the same success he had. At least not in the America of the 50s where black people were seen by most people in a totally different way. Absolutely correct. And since this white guy with sway and charisma DID indeed sell this 'new' music to the white audience - and managed to keep interest high - he's considered 'the king'. |
| Forever88 06.03.2006 15:11 |
i like elvis too. |
| Sherwood Forest 06.03.2006 15:36 |
he's over rated but i like him sometimes he had a crazy weird voice |