Michael Jackson 2nd after the Beatles?

eternitys_child

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
4,709
Points
0
Location
USA
Haha. Got you to look! Only one negative comment that I saw in this article and it was just an honest opinion of his changed looks. The comments I saw on the site were pretty good so far as well.

Once the news thread is up maybe this can be moved there.

http://www.product-reviews.net/2007...-the-beatles-elvis-presley-3rd-thats-reality/

Michael Jackson 2nd after the Beatles; Elvis Presley 3rd that’s reality

December 18th, 2007 by Daniel
In Sections: Music, News

michael-jackson-2nd.jpg

When it comes to Pop and Rock n Roll, you do not get much bigger than the names of Michael Jackson, Elvis Presley and The Beatles but few music goers agree on the biggest of them all.
I have heard a few music fans claim that Michael Jackson is second after The Beatles and Elvis Presley would make third. Is this really reality?
beatles-1st.jpg

elvis-presley-3rd.jpg

One such fan going by the name of “illmatic” makes this claim below in response to “Michael Jackson King Of Pop vs. Elvis Presley King Of Rock” but how true is it.
I can’t believe all the bull that was written in all these comments. I am seriously flabbergasted. Well for one, in response to the person above me, Michael Jackson never whined that he should be called the King of Pop. He never even proclaimed him self as such, it was a title from the fans and his friends.
Elvis fans still think he really sold 1 billion records> If that were true, why isn’t he the number one artist dominate in all the lists? I haven’t seen his name in the Guinness Worlds Records, have you? Thats cause he’s not, sorry bb. Michael is #2 right after the Beatles, Elvis is #3. Let me come out and just bring everyone up to reality — “Before anyone did anything, Elvis did everything” IS BULL. Elvis one of a kind? Perhaps a caricature of many “kinds”. Elvis and the people behind him stole the image, mannerisms, and styles of other artist. Most of Elvis’ music wasn’t even written by him, and the songwriter who did write them died broke.
And that songwriter was Otis Blackwell, one the greatest American songwriters ever wrote Elvis biggest hits (Don’t Be Cruel, All Shook Up, Return to Sender). Not only did he write them - Elvis copied the arrangement, the style, the vocal mannerisms, and claimed he co-wrote the songs along with Blackwell (at least Elvis’ name was on the record as co-writer).
elvis-michael-beatles.jpg

In truth it was Blackwell’s influence that helped put Elvis on the top of the R&B and pop charts (at the same time) yet Elvis never bothered to even meet him. Unfortunately for Blackwell - sold Elvis’ biggest hits for $25 each. He was the ’soul’ of Elvis Presley - and no one ever heard of him, and he died penniless in 2002. Blackwell also wrote “Fever”, “Great Balls of Fire” (Jerry Lee Lewis’ signature tune), “Breathless”, “Let’s Talk About Us” (two more Jerry Lee Lewis hits).
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Otis_Blackwell
Blackwell (nor his family) ever saw a penny of the publishing royalties that helped build his empire; and that Elvis’ wife Priscilla and daughter Lisa Marie Presley are reaping the benefits from to this day. No one would of signed her a record deal if she wasn’t the daughter of The King, nor would her homely looking daughter Riley would become a model if The King wasn’t her grandfather. Luckily for her, she still has a hint of the Elvis resemblance in her face.
Why do you think Colonel Parker (his manager) made sure Elvis’ name was on the records as co-writer? Publishing rights. And publishing rights mean big money $$$. Little Richard was cheated out of a lot of royalties on most of his work. Remember Michael Jackson’s wonderful gesture to Little Richard? He bought the publishing rights to his music and GAVE it to him. It made Little Richard cry tears of joy. That is something to be respected.
Elvis was and is a media creation, and his image and life, has been white washed greatly sense his death. People have been brainwashed, by constant talk of his supposed “greatness”. Today Elvis’ legacy is little more than a pop cultural reference. His face is on mugs, stuffed pigs are made in his image, and various other commercial junk. That is all Elvis deserves, and nothing more. They continually throw him up, in response to the greatness of others, but there is absolutely no comparison. This is not about Elvis, but about a system that attempted to bury the legacy of many artists, and continues, to attempt to pump up something, that never was in the first place.
Michael Jackson was THE innovator by far, and although he was inspired by others (Elvis NOT being one of them, but I’ll get into that later) he didn’t totally take on their image, and make a career off it like Elvis Presley did. So there is no comparison. What did Elvis innovate, other than putting an “acceptable” face on the work of other artists? He was a created talented, a singing puppet, and is severely overrated. He did not invent anything, everything he “did” was already done and better. All of his peers Jackie Wilson, Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Jimi Hendrix, James Brown and so on are vastly superior.
It was never my intention to come here and bash Elvis Presley. But when I read the laughable comments I really feel compelled to give a virtual slap to people who seemingly haven’t had a clue on what they are articulating (or trying to). Elvis Presley was talented in the same way Justin Timberlake is “talented”. Almost like a modern day equivalent, I wonder how Timberlake would of weathered without his black producers and song writers like Pharrell Williams and Timothy “Timbaland” Mosley for example?
1. The majority if not all of Michael Jackson’s classic songs were written, produced and composed by himself. He is not just a “Pop” artist. In fact, that is laughable. In his adolescence, he was on Motown records (with his brothers) singing unmistakable soul/funk music. In his adult solo career, his debut album ‘Off the Wall’ was disco/funk as well. His music did not generally did not be referred to as “Pop” until ‘Thriller’ although he still covers many genres throughout his career. To make the point this Presley sung this and that [style] is ridiculous, as if Jackson did not himself. ‘Dangerous’ for example was a notable New Jack Swing themed album, but with elements of rock (Slash from Guns and Roses working with Jackson on two tracks) as ‘Thriller’. Eddie Van Halen’s famous solo in ‘Beat It’ was composed by Jackson. To turn a blind eye or ignore to all of the versatility Jackson possesses in music is laughable.
2. Michael Jackson was never influenced by Elvis Presley, or had “took” some of his “dance moves” as someone tried their hardest to insinuate. Why not? Because Elvis Presley didn’t have any to speak of. Michael Jackson was influenced by cats like Jackie Wilson, James Brown, Sammy Davis Jr., all of Elvis’ peers whom HE copied off of. So if you think ‘even Jacko copied some Elvis moves’ I assure you, and I don’t mean to disappoint but, a move was watered down from the Elvis filter that was again, originated from a true trendsetter like Brown. Speaking of the Godfather of Soul, Jackson has spoken of him fondly for decades and Mr. Brown has acknowledged him (and Prince) many a times.
3. Actually, this number isn’t really a point I’m just still laughing at people who think Elvis is original.
4. Michael Jackson has a phenomenal voice, he very underrated as a singer. Unique, rich and lovely when you used to sing live in his prime. He had a voice on him even in his adolescence. What Jackson possesses is a rare talent, and has been exuded since practically his birth. Now, admittedly I skimmed through yet another comment that may have you believe that Michael Jackson of all people relied on stage tricks to impress audiences. LOL! Right. Jackson is typically by himself when solo [or accompanied by his brothers in a group of his siblings] with the band. That is all.
Highly practiced dance moves. If that was said to imply that they were to be regarded as “mechanical” that couldn’t be any more wrong. Jackson has a natural talent for dance (and music in general) as well as his brothers, who self taught the instruments they played. In their Motown audition, the Jackson 5 performed ‘I Got That Feeling’ by James Brown and blew Berry Gordy, Diana Ross and the Motown family away and were signed. If you mean he was highly practiced as in hard working? HELL YES. Far from a negative thing. He has been doing this since he was 5 and hasn’t looked back since.
5. Neither Presley or Jackson had any sense of style. Though both have recognizable, iconic and ’signature’ wardrobe.
6. Elvis obviously held what the ideal handsome Caucasian man of his time generation was considered, as Marilyn Monroe did, blonde, even though she herself was truly your Norma Jean; a cute girl with red-brownish hair. Both had their nose reshaped (in both accounts, unnecessary like all of whom go under the knife) where as Elizabeth Taylor held a more natural beauty, although both women were gorgeous. So while I agree that Elvis was good looking and “sexy” I would not go crazy over him either.
When speaking about sex appeal and attraction regarding Michael Jackson it seems unfathomably, for most people if not all no longer associate those words and attributes with Jackson since the 80s (and slightly in the early 90s). I will disregard the way he looks now, given that he has modified his natural looks and ruined his face. Michael Jackson used to be a gorgeous looking man. He was very slim and soft spoken, which is not looked upon as desirable since they are not typical masculine traits, but thats what many young girls and women found him alluring at the time (watch The Making of Thriller ‘the fans’ segment to see what I’m talking about!). He had caramel brown skin, beautiful brown eyes, a nose that need not been modified, at least not approximately 7 times over, the most beautiful smile (that his sister Janet Jackson too has) and even had a jheri curl that was tolerable.
7. In his prime, during tours like “Destiny” “Triumph” “Victory” “Bad” and “Dangerous” he sang live, his vocals rich and clear, he danced with as much energy as his mentor James Brown, fluidity in his smooths dance steps moves that not Elvis or anyone to this day cannot touch as a performer — and he did this all without sounding off key, a single crack or maybe out of breath by the second verse. I have not seen Elvis live, so I won’t comment by default since that is not fair.
Don’t believe me on Jackson? The greats certainly do.
Fred Astaire and Jackson, 1984
elvis-michael-beatles-2.jpg

Jackson dedicated his autobiography ‘Moonwalk’ in 1988 to Astaire.
elvis-michael-beatles-3.jpg

“Oh, God! That boy moves in a very exceptional way. That’s the greatest dancer of the century”.
“I didn’t want to leave this world without knowing who my descendant was. Thank you Michael!”
- Fred Astaire.
Fred Astaire, one of the greatest dancers of all time how much merit and honor. The day after Jackson’s legendary Motown 25 performance when he performed ‘Billie Jean’ for the first time, Astaire phoned him, informed him he had not only taped the show but watched it twice that morning, and he was a HELL of a dancer!
“The only male singer who I’ve seen besides myself and who’s better than me - that is Michael Jackson.”
- Frank Sinatra
Sinatra and Jackson in 1984
elvis-michael-beatles-4.jpg

Jackson impersonating Sinatra at a very young age, during a skit with Diana Ross in 1969.
elvis-michael-beatles-5.jpg

Jackson performs ‘Get Happy’ at The Jacksons Variety Show (1977).
watch the video here
The Jackson 5 audition for Motown and perform ‘I Got That Feeling’
watch the video here
And with that, I am finally finished. I hope you learned a few things!
 
If this is all about recorsd sales, then I am sorry, cause neither the beatles nor elvis can compare. The reason is this, both the beatles and Elvis made way more albums than MJ and have had a longer time doing it. Also, nobody has been working overtime to destroy their career. Evlvis produced over 150 albums before he died. There is untold number of best of and lots of positive articles. Well as I have said before, when you work out the average sale of albums, MJ is wayyyyyy ahead of them by a long shot.
 
Last edited:
If this is all about recorsd sales, then I am sorry, cause neither the beatles nor elvis can compare. The reason is this, both the beatles and Elvis made way more albums than MJ and have had a longer time doing it. Also, nobody has been working overtime to destroy their career. Evlvis produced over 150 albums before he died. There is untold number of best of and lots of positive articles. Well as I have said before, when you work out the average sale of albums, MJ is wayyyyyy ahead of them by a long shot.
Apparently that article was written by a fan in reply to the original statement. I wonder who wrote it and if it is anyone we know. It is very well written.
 
In ratio, Michael has sold more albums then any artist or group/band in history, as his sales of albums alone, around 350 million, was achieved with 7 adult solo records and I suppose 3 or 4 child solo records. The Beatles achieved 400 million album sales with around 40+ records. And Elvis has sold around 300 million albums, with over 100 records released. So...

Michael practices his dance routines, but he has about as much of an innate talent as is possible. Even Fred Astaire trained from the time he was 4 years old. But you cannot teach or practice yourself in to grace, fluidity, speed, coordination or a general understanding and feeling for movement if it is not there to begin with, you cannot create those qualities out of thin air. You can only improve upon those things with practice, but in order to improve upon them, you must first possess them within. All practice or training does is it allow you to reach to your full potential of natural talent, it simply brings out what is already there. Many dancers who practice 10 times as much as Michael aren't half the movers. Why? Because they don't have the kind of massive natural talent that he does.
 
Last edited:
In ratio, Michael has sold more albums then any artist or group/band in history, as his sales of albums alone, around 350 million, was achieved with 7 adult solo records and I suppose 3 or 4 child solo records.

Wait what? What happend to the whole 750 millions records as they said on WMA's.. Was that false?
 
No, that's not false. That includes single releases and other things like that. Including all of that, Michael blows everyone out of the water. I'm speaking solely on full album releases is all.
 
thank you for sharing and MJ did the damn thing bigger and better period. in my lifetime MJ set the standards and everybody else eats off his plate. MJ just made it all look so easy and magical that folks wanted to find fault at any cost,but the truth is he is truly one of a kind.
 
If this is all about recorsd sales, then I am sorry, cause neither the beatles nor elvis can compare. The reason is this, both the beatles and Elvis made way more albums than MJ and have had a longer time doing it. Also, nobody has been working overtime to destroy their career. Evlvis produced over 150 albums before he died. There is untold number of best of and lots of positive articles. Well as I have said before, when you work out the average sale of albums, MJ is wayyyyyy ahead of them by a long shot.

Michael Jackson only has 6 solo albums (adult, not counting the J5) and he is up to their level. You don't find that astounding??
 
Apparently that article was written by a fan in reply to the original statement. I wonder who wrote it and if it is anyone we know. It is very well written.

I was the one who wrote it, lol. I'm so embarrassed. LOL. In Google News when you search 'janet jackson' I saw it, and I was like wtf? (I had mentioned Janet briefly in my comment). I had written it and apparently it caught attention of the blogger [because in it, I had corrected some Elvis myths and explained that Elvis Presley is actually #3, and Michael Jackson is second after The Beatles] because he made a new entry the next day!

Its not an actually article, its just a comment of mine...a blabbering comment. LOL. I can go on and on and on... I actually wanted to write some more but I figure no one is going to read it anyway.
 
Last edited:
I was the one who wrote it, lol. I'm so embarrassed. LOL. In Google News when you search 'janet jackson' I saw it, and I was like wtf? (I had mentioned Janet briefly in my comment). I had written it and apparently it caught attention of the blogger [because in it, I had corrected some Elvis myths and explained that Elvis Presley is actually #3, and Michael Jackson is second after The Beatles] because he made a new entry the next day!

Its not an actually article, its just a comment of mine...a blabbering comment. LOL. I can go on and on and on... I actually wanted to write some more but I figure no one is going to read it anyway.

Wow! You go girl...erm guy?! :lol:Well you go!!!:)
 
There is actually no way of telling who is #1, #2, #3 and so on best selling artists of all-time. For numerous reasons.

1) There is no official worldwide record sales tracking system
2) Album and singles from the 50s and 60s and in some cases the 70s were not officially counted
3) Most record sales numbers come from an artist's record company who is trying to promote their releases

I guess if you were going to estimate, it does seem very likely that The Beatles are #1 in terms of record sales. But it's very hard to say between Michael and Elvis who is #2. Michael's record sales numbers are no very conclusive. There are so many contradicting figures. I know little about Elvis's record sales except that the billion figure released by his record company is completely false. I don't think any artist has or ever will sell that many records.

Bottom line = who cares? It's the music on the records that matter, not the number of copies they sold.
 
Back
Top