Michael 3rd Most Legendary

[L.J]

One thing i am shocked about is Frank Sinatras name on there.....i mean sure he was great once but i dont think anyone i know can name 3 songs he ever sang.

Like other's have said... Ol Blue Eyes was the ish! well before Elvis shook his hips.

and as for Tracks, damn aint you ever heard of "The Lady is a Tramp?, I've got a world on a string" :wub:

Frankie was a force of nature baby ^_^

Elvis had rhythm, he had some fluent moves that he learned .. What made his dancing known is that it was provacative for tv back then. That is what got peoples attention

BANG!!! you hear that? KOPV just hit the nail on the head

No, Elvis couldn't dance. If you think he could, then you don't know much about dancing. I said "as far as I know" he couldn't play anything but the guitar. So if he could play other instruemtns, great. And saying that beatboxing is a silly or uncool talent is meaningless and does nothing to help support your argument. Beatboxing is a major component Michael uses in writing music and he's damn good at it. It is a vocal talent totally seperate from singing, and shows great control over both vocal cords, being able to use each seperate from one another. You still haven't provided any kind of answer as to Michael only being able to do one thing more then Elvis. So far we have the ability to write and compose excellent music, the ability to dance (real, natural talent), the ability to beatbox, and depending on whether you tell me what else he could play, then the ability to play more instruments. Michael's own guitarist has said that he can play just about any instrument by ear and he is credited with having played the drums, guitar and keyboard on more then one track.

The point is, Elvis had two major talents. His voie and his charisma. Michael has about 5. His voice, dancing, songwriting, beatboxing and charisma.

damn..... someone just got owned! Killer post unk:

actually sales means alot, especially when u consider who's buying them in which Mj's case is literally people all over from the world in BIG numbers, Elvis' legendry status is limited to western countrys (yeah there might be some exceptions) but he never did and never could and certainly never will conquer the whole world the way MJ did, I dont think MJ fans are obsessed with sales I reckon they bring it up mainly because its a reflection of his diverse appeal and if u you want to talk about "actual talent" Michael still wins over Elvis.

Word!:shades:

 

[suspicious_mind]

Like other's have said... Ol Blue Eyes was the ish! well before Elvis shook his hips.

and as for Tracks, damn aint you ever heard of "The Lady is a Tramp?, I've got a world on a string" :wub:

Frankie was a force of nature baby ^_^

Just dont know why he of all people is considered legendary :lol:


________________


Well i think the numbers and opinions of a whole Country speak for themselves on this subject. Not just a handful of people on this board
Elvis is the most legendary out of them all. End of.

 

[Datsymay]

Just dont know why he of all people is considered legendary :lol:


________________


Well i think the numbers and opinions of a whole Country speak for themselves on this subject. Not just a handful of people on this board
Elvis is the most legendary out of them all. End of.

I have loads more respect for Frankie than I have for Elvis. His music is timeless too. He did it His way babyyy.unk:

 

[KOPV]

I'm sorry but compairing anyone to Michael Jackson is pointless to me.. Michael Jackson is THE only person that has EVER reached worldwide success at that length..

This might supprise some people, but many people do not even know who Elvis or the Beetles are.. I have been to several countries that would not know the first idea of who those two are.. But they would be able to sing melodies from Michael Jackson songs, and do some signature dance moves..

Michael is THE ONLY one that is known primarily by the whole world..

 

[azza]

#3 is really great.elvis never claimed to be anything other than a singer.he had a black voice & was one of the pioneers of rock & roll,was raised on gospel & sang gospel so that appealed to christians all over the world,he also broke into movies,was drafted into the army at a time when sinatra used his connections to get out of being drafted.elvis had graceland long before neverland existed & when he got his first music pay-check he bought his mother a car.the man had his faults but he was extremely humble,was famous for buying his friends cars & died to young with virtually no scandal other then his death.
im not a big elvis fan,but ive got respect for him & if he was voted number one in a music poll (by the public)its not without reason.the man was loved weather you like him or not & had some great human qualities.

i would have liked michael to come 2nd to elvis.as for sinatra (although he was a good singer) the guy was a gangster & used his connections to bully djs into playing his records & getting movie parts.he wouldnt even make my top 20.

 

[suspicious_mind]

#3 is really great.elvis never claimed to be anything other than a singer.he had a black voice & was one of the pioneers of rock & roll,was raised on gospel & sang gospel so that appealed to christians all over the world,he also broke into movies,was drafted into the army at a time when sinatra used his connections to get out of being drafted.elvis had graceland long before neverland existed & when he got his first music pay-check he bought his mother a car.the man had his faults but he was extremely humble,was famous for buying his friends cars & died to young with virtually no scandal other then his death.
im not a big elvis fan,but ive got respect for him & if he was voted number one in a music poll (by the public)its not without reason.the man was loved weather you like him or not & had some great human qualities.

i would have liked michael to come 2nd to elvis.as for sinatra (although he was a good singer) the guy was a gangster & used his connections to bully djs into playing his records & getting movie parts.he wouldnt even make my top 20.

AMAZING post!
Absolutely true

 

[The_Glove]

Lmao @ Some of those lists.

 

[Chaos]

He has a HUGE fanbase and always will, He changed the face of Rock And Roll forever, he continues to sell TONS of albums 30+ years after his death, he never had a bad reputation in this Country or any others.
If Elvis didnt sell do i think anyone would care? What kinda question is that? lol

Michael Jackson changed the industry forever and has influenced heavily how music is made and definently how music is promoted, Michaels fan base in comparison is not only HUGE but strong and damn diverse,nd wasnt Elvis eventually seen as a joke at one point? from what I know while he was alive he wasnt shown much respect until he had died...

As for MJ's rep i would have to say it is pretty bad, but if Elvis had to go through what MJ did he would of had been finnished because the media have never targeted a singer the same way they have against MJ, the only other place where I see them spouting such deep propaganda is in middle eastern politics...

and as for my question, its a very good question actually because if singers cant sell there music then they wont have much of a career, they dont have a career in music they aint gonna make music and because there is no music who is gonna listen to their music when there isnt any they would just end up being just another guy called "bob" who lives down the street who no one really cares about :wacko:

I think it should be noted that what makes Michael Jackson such a legend is his achievements, his sales being one of them also remember that his achievements are many and very impressive...

 

[azza]

Michael Jackson changed the industry forever and has influenced heavily how music is made and definently how music is promoted, Michaels fan base in comparison is not only HUGE but strong and damn diverse,nd wasnt Elvis eventually seen as a joke at one point? from what I know while he was alive he wasnt shown much respect until he had died...

As for MJ's rep i would have to say it is pretty bad, but if Elvis had to go through what MJ did he would of had been finnished because the media have never targeted a singer the same way they have against MJ, the only other place where I see them spouting such deep propaganda is in middle eastern politics...

and as for my question, its a very good question actually because if singers cant sell there music then they wont have much of a career, they dont have a career in music they aint gonna make music and because there is no music who is gonna listen to their music when there isnt any they would just end up being just another guy called "bob" who lives down the street who no one really cares about :wacko:

I think it should be noted that what makes Michael Jackson such a legend is his achievements, his sales being one of them also remember that his achievements are many and very impressive...

elvis presley has had as much influence on music as michael jackson has had.the elvis fan base around the world is as big & diverse as the mj fan base.

elvis was not at all eventually seen as a joke.he gained wight through heavy medication & the music community was very concerned for him.when he passed away,people made fun of him through comedy satire by dressing up as him.people have been doing this to michael jackson for years 'while he's alive'!

elvis was shown massive respect while he was alive by being given the freedom to numerous citys around america.im not at all pro war,but...elvis served his country in the war & was awarded his medal for bravery which earned him huge respect by his peers.

elvis was as respected in the music business as michael is respected.elvis also valued himself as a human being & lived by strong morals & ethics.he was a family man & the death of his mother whom he adored left a void in his life.

it does not make a difference that elvis did not have to go through what michael had to go through.elvis fought a war & died young.so to say he would have been finished if he had gone through what michael has gone through is here say & irelivent.

had michael fought in the army,who's to say he would have survived?! as for selling music? elvis cut & paid for his own record as a gift for his mother & in the beginning was a truck driver & had no intention of becoming famous.so if elvis had not become famous he,like michael would have continued to make music as he was raised as a church goer & used sing gospal songs at home with his mother.

michael has his achievements (absolutely) as did elvis.and just like michael he brought joy into the lives of millions of people around the world (without ever touring outside america).

im not here to defend elvis,but you should be aware of what the man did & what he stood for.it makes me laugh when michael fans speak about other artists (without having a clue about them or what they actually did)because they are so steeped in michael statistics & facts.their were musicians before michael that left their mark & their will be musicians after him that make their mark peace out.

this post wasnt directed at you suspicious_mind,im useing it as a platform to anwser questions.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

Hell no Elvis is not more influential then Michael. Nobody is copying Elvis, but sure as sh*t everyone is copying Michael, both musically and performance wise. He changed the way concerts were staged, the way music videos were done, the expectations of every musical act (notice everyone and their mother has to dance today), the way people sing, etc...

Album sales matter in the sense that it shows how many people are relating to and feeling a connection with the music, just to answer the question of "who cares?" It's based on promotion as well, but an album won't sell squat if the music is horrific all together. Look at Justin's new album. All this promotion, but it ain't exactly sold like hot cacks, now has it? If we're talking about legendary status, that in part is determined by commercial success.

And as far as I know, Elvis didn't engage in actual combat, he performed for the troops. If I'm wrong on that, then I'll admit it.

 

[azza]

Album sales matter in the sense that it shows how many people are relating to and feeling a connection with the music, just to answer the question of "who cares?"

And as far as I know, Elvis didn't engage in actual combat, he performed for the troops. If I'm wrong on that, then I'll admit it.

yep,you are wrong on that.elvis freely of his own will let himself be drafted into the army when others like sinatra used his status to not go

elvis has sold millions upon millions of records during & after his lifetime.he does not have the number 1 album,michael does.but michael has that over everyone.

elvis is one of the biggest icons in the world & never toured outside america.he was not handed first place in a peoples poll for no reason.like michael,elvis worked for everthing he earned including respect.

elvis is as much a huge musical influence today as michael is.perhaps you don't hear his influence in the music 'you' listen to,but its sure there in the music i listen to.

late johnny cash,bob dylan,bruce springsteen,& a whole host of other singers who play the guitar.that for the most part are not a part of the music charts (which IMO is mostly filled with crap anyway)!

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

I didn't say Elvis wasn't inducted in to the army, I said I doubted he saw actual combat.

But anyway, Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and the like were influenced to a degree, I'm sure. Johnny Cash came up right around the same time as Elvis. So I don't see the influence there.

You can point out specific artists, but I'm talking about the entire landscape of the music industry and how it is run, what act's are expected to do, etc... Michael actually changed the way the game was run, both directly and indirectly.

 

[azza]

I didn't say Elvis wasn't inducted in to the army, I said I doubted he saw actual combat.

But anyway, Bob Dylan, Bruce Springsteen and the like were influenced to a degree, I'm sure. Johnny Cash came up right around the same time as Elvis. So I don't see the influence there.

You can point out specific artists, but I'm talking about the entire landscape of the music industry and how it is run, what act's are expected to do, etc... Michael actually changed the way the game was run, both directly and indirectly.

well you certainly made it sound as though you were saying he wasn't inducted by saying he performed for the troops.yeah,he saw combat.so are you admitting you are wrong now,like you said you would?

sinatra chickened out,& 'he' performed for the troops.

johnny cash toured with elvis & said on a number of occasions that he would stand by the side of the stage and watch elvis.why would it be hard to see that some one that was around in the same era was influenced by some one?

little richard was also part of the era & hugely influenced on elvis.as was dylan who didnt speak to anyone for a week when elvis died.

as for the landscape of music,the first time elvis appeared on the ed sullivan show,in the days of black & white tv,when everything was broadcast live,elvis was shown from the waste up as they thought his hip swinging was too offensive for tv.

he only went back on the show with the condition they would film his entire body.in that era that was a huge move and changed the rules of what was seen as offensive on tv.that played its part in how the game was run both directly & indirectly.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

Really? He saw combat? Really?

Oh well, its beside the point. You said Michael wasn't nearly as influential as Elvis, and that is completely untrue. (Oh, I see you edited it to say he's has AS much) Michael is more widely known, he is more widely imitated, both as a vocalist and as a dancer and as a song writer. Everyone from rap artists, to R&B artists, to Country artists are influenced by Michael.

The way people looked at touring, the way people handled stage productions, the things recording artists were expected to do, the scale things were done on, the places one could tour successfully, countires which before had never been seen a viable music markets and then later were, ALL changed because of Michael Jackson. So you can point out what was seen as appropriete on TV after Elvis shook his hips, but Michael changed the way one had to opporate and perform to be considered successful and competitive.

And why do you keep dissing Sinatra by saying he got out of army duty? So what? What's that got to do with his legendary status? He was one of the greatest stylist's of all time and had an amazing, amazing voice. Sammy Davis Jr. looked up to Frank because he was one of the only people who stood by him when racial tensions were so high, and was the one who helped Sammy in achieving the kind of main stream success he deserved. Frank Sinatra was a good person.

 

[Kinga]

Some people think Elvis is the greatest thing since slice bread and

That's exactly what Sammy Davis Jr. said about Michael lol

Michael Jackson changed the industry forever and has influenced heavily how music is made and definently how music is promoted

Yes! I've heard in a documentary that before Thriller nobody would have ever thought that seven singles would do well in charts. Who was the first to perform in front of 4.5 million people in 130 concerts? Who was the first who donated all his money from concert performances to his own-founded charity? Who was the first to make/create/pay the greatest video of all time? Who was the one who created the biggest selling album of all time? Nobody would ever beat his records!

 

[azza]

Really? He saw combat? Really?

Oh well, its beside the point. You said Michael wasn't nearly as influential as Elvis, and that is completely untrue. Michael is more widely known, he is more widely imitated, both as a vocalist and as a dancer and as a song writer. Everyone from rap artists, to R&B artists, to Country artists are influenced by Michael.

The way people looked at touring, the way people handled stage productions, the things recording artists were expected to do, the scale things were done on, the places one could tour successfully, countires which before had never been seen a viable music markets and then later were, ALL changed because of Michael Jackson. So you can point out what was seen as appropriete on TV after Elvis shook his hips, but Michael changed the way one had to opporate and perform to be considered successful and competitive.

And why do you keep dissing Sinatra by saying he got out of army duty? So what? What's that got to do with his legendary status? He was one of the greatest stylist's of all time and had an amazing, amazing voice. Sammy Davis Jr. looked up to Frank because he was one of the only people who stood by him when racial tensions were so high, and was the one who helped Sammy in achieving the kind of main stream success he deserved. Frank Sinatra was a good person.

dude,you make me laugh.you said if you were wrong about elvis seeing combat in the army you would admit it?! then you just pass it off by saying 'oh well,its beside the point?!
can you show me where i said 'michael wasnt nearly as influential as elvis'? have you even read my posts?
michael is more widely known in certain parts of the world perhaps yes.as for michael being the most imitated artist,this simply is not true! most people actually know this but elvis is the most imitated.places like las vegas & china (which has one of the biggest populations in the world),tokyo also

elvis toured america (only) & in his time,they did not have the technology that allows such extravagant productions like we see today.thats just a fact.nobody is saying that any solo artist performed bigger solo tours than michael?!

as for sinatra? he did get out of army duty.he used his "connections" to do so & thats widely known.i have not disrespected sinatra in a musical sense.if you actually read my post i said 'he was a good singer (although the guy was a gangster)which again is widely known.he was involved in the mafia (fact) & he performed drug-runs from the states to cuba for the mafia (fact)! as a person,no i don't like him.never did.never will! :lol:

sinatra stood by sammy davis (whom i adore),but that does'nt make sinatra a nice guy.he was not a nice guy (IMO).

i find it a shame that you didnt actually quote my posts correctly,in other words you missed my points completely.& again we have a fan turning a topic in a 'michael vs x' & a 'defending all things michael' thread for which there is nothing to defend.

my only point,was to point out that elvis happend,mattered,made his mark as an international icon,connected musically with millions around the world & that seems to missed because people are too busy defending michael as if theres a reason.anyways...the poll said elvis #1 & michael #3.of the both,i prefer michael.he's my hero.of the both in terms of respect,i give to both.elvis was a beautiful human being like michael & that has alot more appeal to me than a mafia mob man/drug-runner that could carry a tune.

well thats about the size of i guess:lol:

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

Oh, if you prove to me Elvis actually engaged in combat then yes, I'll admit it. I said it doesn't matter because in terms of legendary status, it doesn't.

You edited your post, but before you had said that Michael isn't nearly as influential as Elvis was, and then changed it to say they are equally influential.

Anyway, I'm not saying Elvis was a nobody, but in arguing for legendary status, one has to look at several factors. Commercial success, talent level, influence, etc...

I've already argued the talent component and the commercial component, and now the influence component.

You bring up Elvis' personality as though it has some impact, but it really does not. If we're talking humanitarianism, that's one thing, but we're talking artistic. If you want to bring that up, I could speak about how Michael has supported more charities then any other celebrity in history, has donated over 300 million dollars to charity, has opened his home to sick and underprivledged children and adults, etc... But it would have nothing to do with his artistry.

Whether Elvis toured outside of the US or not is beside the point. He isn't as well known as Michael nor as commercially successful. If Elvis had come at around the same era as Michael, then I gaurantee that Michael would still come out on top, as Elvis did not provide the visual artistry that Michael does, nor the creative direction. Michael revolutionized both short film features and stage production. He brought his talent to countires which previously had not been thought of as viable music markets, such as Aisa and Russia and he broke numerous records because of it. Michael, if I recall correctly, is also the biggest selling artist in Aisa.

Frank Sinatra could do more then "carry a tune", he was hugely successful, the first real superstar. His personality doesn't matter. I happen to think he was a good person.

 

[azza]

You edited your post, but before you had said that Michael isn't nearly as influential as Elvis was, and then changed it to say they are equally influential.

i am thinking of reporting you because of this because its a total lie & you have offended & insulted me by even suggesting it.
how dare you accuse me of that! i am not to big to apologize if i am wrong & have 'never in my life' re edited a post to that effect.you have crossed a line with me,because you know nothing about elvis & your trying to put words in my mouth WHICH I HAVE NOT SAID!

 

[Chaos]

man I forgot about Mj's charity work too, that is another reason why I admire MJ and see him as one of my heroes, he hasnt been greedy with money and has used his power to help MANY people

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

i am thinking of reporting you because of this because its a total lie & you have offended & insulted me by even suggesting it.
how dare you accuse me of that! i am not to big to apologize if i am wrong & have 'never in my life' re edited a post to that effect.you have crossed a line with me,because you know nothing about elvis & your trying to put words in my mouth WHICH I HAVE NOT SAID!

Well that's what it appeared as to me. When I originally read your post, it said "Michael is not nearly as influential as Elvis", at least, that's what I recall reading. Now, it did appeare to have some gramatical errors, which is perhaps the reason you edited it, and perhaps I read it incorrectly because of those grammatical errors. If so, then I apologize if I offended you, but that is what it appeared as to me. I know enough about Elvis to have this conversation, which everyone seems to be failing in providing good discussion back. They're just getting angry. For one, I looked it up. Elvis refused special treatment, that's honorable. But as I suspected, he didn't see actual combat. So I guess I knew enough to know that.

 

[azza]

You edited your post, but before you had said that Michael isn't nearly as influential as Elvis was, and then changed it to say they are equally influential.

i am waiting on an apology for this remark! its damn out of order & its insulted me!

i am here because i am a michael jackson fan.im a musician & trainee sound engineer & and ive read volumes of books on musical acts.

i gave my honest opinions on elvis & sinatra,said in my opinion michael jackson was my favourite artist & because what you felt was a weak argument on your part you resort to saying i re-edited my post! I AM FUMING!

 

[azza]

Well that's what it appeared as to me. When I originally read your post, it said "Michael is not nearly as influential as Elvis", at least, that's what I recall reading. Now, it did appeare to have some gramatical errors, which is perhaps the reason you edited it, and perhaps I read it incorrectly because of those grammatical errors. If so, then I apologize if I offended you, but that is what it appeared as to me. I know enough about Elvis to have this conversation, which everyone seems to be failing in providing good discussion back. They're just getting angry. For one, I looked it up. Elvis refused special treatment, that's honorable. But as I suspected, he didn't see actual combat. So I guess I knew enough to know that.

thank you.i promise you i would never do that.disregard my last post as i was angry when i wrote it.

i always edit my posts because im such a bad speller.apology accepted & thank you.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

Clearly.

I didn't have a weak argument. What I thought you had originally written was that Michael was not nearly as influential and I didn't make that up or say it because I felt I couldn't argue my point. I responded to you in the first place with "Oh hell no, Elvis is not more influential then Michael" because that's what I truly thought I had read. If you say you didn't write that, then I suppose I have to take your word for it, since it clearly doesn't say that now.

I've provided several points as to why I believe Michael is more influential, points which as of yet have yet to be countered.

That's nice that you're a musician and sound engineer, but it hasn't helped in this conversation.

 

[azza]

Clearly.

I didn't have a weak argument. What I thought you had originally written was that Michael was not nearly as influential and I didn't make that up or say it because I felt I couldn't argue my point. I responded to you in the first place because that's what I truly thought I had read. If you say you didn't write that, then I suppose I have to take your word for it, since it clearly doesn't say that now.

I've provided several points as to why I believe Michael is more influential, points which as of yet have yet to be countered.

That's nice that you're a musician and sound engineer, but it hasn't helped in this conversation.

it clearly doesn't say that now because i never wrote that! & if i did,i wouldnt feel the need to defend it if i wrote it!
can you recap those points because i was under the impression that i answered your qustions on what you feel is a michael vs elvis thread?

 

[Peter_Pan]

This has been said a million times before:

The most Legendary/most Popular IN AMERICA is Elivs...

But world wide its MJ hands down...

I mean people from the US have a habbit of not taking into considering the rest of the world... for god sake there is more to the world than just America and the Europe..

People tend to ignore Asia... dont forget that nearly half of the world's population is in Asia..(thanks to China & India, btw im from India)... We have'nt talked abt Africa yet..

MJ is a Phenom worldwide.. be it Beirut, Iraq, Kenya, Thailand.........anywhere..

If we are talking about the Greatest entertainer in the last 100 years (again talking abt world wide impact.. ) its MJ & Charlie Chaplin .

I mean every country have their own Legends who are not necessarily know worldwide..For example their is this Algerian Singer called KHALED who is the most popular in the middle east, now does that mean he can be a considered a world legend... similarly Elvis is a Ameican Legend and nothing more..

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

man I forgot about Mj's charity work too, that is another reason why I admire MJ and see him as one of my heroes, he hasnt been greedy with money and has used his power to help MANY people

Absolutely. He's someone who truly cares and I always say, if there's anything bigger then Michael's talent, its his heart. I admire him as a person just as strongly, if not stronger, as I do him as an artist.

 

[wannabestartinsomthin21]

it clearly doesn't say that now because i never wrote that! & if i did,i wouldnt feel the need to defend it if i wrote it!
can you recap those points because i was under the impression that i answered your qustions on what you feel is a michael vs elvis thread?

Well you accused me of saying it because I had a weak argument. But you must understand that I would never result to making things up or maliciously leveling false accusations. I said that because that is what I was sure I read and the reason I responded with "Hell no, Elvis isn't more influential".

If you want to read my points, go back and do so. I don't have the energy to write it all down again.

You didn't address all of them, at least, not in a manner which would actually hold credibility. And I don't feel this is a 'Michael vs. Elvis" thread. Another poster said they thought Elvis beat Michael as a legened hands down, and I, as have others, responded to that, that's all. As with any post, it generated this particular conversation.

 

[azza]

#3 is really great.elvis never claimed to be anything other than a singer.he had a black voice & was one of the pioneers of rock & roll,was raised on gospel & sang gospel so that appealed to christians all over the world,he also broke into movies,was drafted into the army at a time when sinatra used his connections to get out of being drafted.elvis had graceland long before neverland existed & when he got his first music pay-check he bought his mother a car.the man had his faults but he was extremely humble,was famous for buying his friends cars & died to young with virtually no scandal other then his death.
im not a big elvis fan,but ive got respect for him & if he was voted number one in a music poll (by the public)its not without reason.the man was loved weather you like him or not & had some great human qualities.

i would have liked michael to come 2nd to elvis.as for sinatra (although he was a good singer) the guy was a gangster & used his connections to bully djs into playing his records & getting movie parts.he wouldnt even make my top 20.

peter_pan,this was my original post.this is what i feel about elvis in a nutshell.

i disagree though that elvis was an 'america only' legend.he's absolutely massive in japan & china & he had a huge affect in europe in the 60's & 70's in the showband era.in my country (ireland) you couldnt get elvis records,so the showbands would dress like him,sing like him & perform his songs in the dance halls.in england cliff richard was marketed as 'englands answer to elvis'.he's changed his image somewhat since.
my point is that elvis is relevant in the 21 century for leaving his mark on modern pop culture .simple as.elvis "is" the most imitated artist in the world,probably 2nd to michael jackson? im not even sure if mj is 2nd?
& in this particular poll elvis was voted (by the people) #1.& i don't have a problem with that,because in my life i see the influence elvis has left on music everyday & im happy michael came in at 3rd place,although i would have loved him in even 2nd.
i cannot say much more than that,other than i don't think i should have to justify or defend the fact that i like elvis.
again michael in my eyes is #1 period.he's been the biggest influence on my life & by far the best.

off topic,i was in india in 2000 and i loved the place:lol:

 

[J5master]

Hell I can't even say in america elvis has that INFLUENCE. Sure, people LOVE LOVE LOVE them some elvis (not me personally ) LOL...but as far as VISUAL influence...I don't see people out there imitating his style of dance too much, his style of preforming, his style of dressing every which way. When it comes to VISUAL in-yo-face influence i think even in america MJ wins hands down. If you turn on the tv and watch a popular artist now, are they wearing a modern take on elvis' clothes, or singing in an 'elvis'-like way? Or any of that? No. You see people taking on MICHAEL'S style, HIS singing and dancing, HIS influence on performance.

 

[azza]

Well you accused me of saying it because I had a weak argument. But you must understand that I would never result to making things up or maliciously leveling false accusations. I said that because that is what I was sure I read and the reason I responded with "Hell no, Elvis isn't more influential".

If you want to read my points, go back and do so. I don't have the energy to write it all down again.

You didn't address all of them, at least, not in a manner which would actually hold credibility. And I don't feel this is a 'Michael vs. Elvis" thread. Another poster said they thought Elvis beat Michael as a legened hands down, and I, as have others, responded to that, that's all. As with any post, it generated this particular conversation.

you clearly have beef with me,& cant seem to accept that you were wrong to accuse me.i have apologized to you & have since moved on & you still hold onto the past!
i addressed each & every one of your points to the best of my ability & ya know what if you cant accept it,understand it,believe it then i really don't mind & feel free to think of me what you like.i would be really happy for you:lol:

you seem to be one of these fans that feels a need to "fight" for michael jackson.as i have said time & time again,michael jackson is my hero!

clearly we are both to stubborn to agree,so we'll have to agree to disagree i guess.if this was a boxing match we would have both went 15 rounds & the ref would have to declare a draw.in that sense i respect dude.my hands are about to drop off now so i'll wish you a goodnight.michael jackson is the king of pop & elvis is the king of rock.