Who Is the Greatest? Elvis Or The Beatles?August 01, 2006 | Book
Due for release August 28, 2006 is a new softcover 232 page book by Mike Stephens and Bill Slater entitled "Who Is the Greatest? Elvis or the Beatles?". This book will be published by the Dorset Group (ISBN: 0976802112).Source:Elvis Information Network
The Memphis Flash wrote on August 01, 2006
No contest, Elvis all the way. The facts speak for themselves.
Steve V wrote on August 01, 2006
Who cares - Its not the 60's anymore, moot point.
benny scott wrote on August 01, 2006
I agree with Steve V. Still, one little remark : remember John Lennon's words " Before Elvis there was nothing" ? Clear enough ?
jessy wrote on August 01, 2006
Elvis was and Is the greatest forever!
My boy, my boy wrote on August 01, 2006
Well, it`s an endless debate I guess...First let me tell ya all that Elvis is my ultimate hero...but I also happen to enjoy the Beatles` music so much too. The two were just right for their time...and don`t forget that Elvis and the Beatles`careers have been managed so differently. It`s unfair to compare them cause Elvis was not writing his own songs so just regarding this, we must agree that the Beatles have brought so much more to this world, creatively I mean...but as a performer and a charismatic figure, Elvis beats them all 4 easily!....The beatles came out at a crucial point in time where Rock`n`roll was sort of dying out and all the baby-bommers in their teenage years were looking for something new. The sixties decade turned the whole planet upside down, just like the cultures too ! Elvis and the beatles were without a doubt the 2 most significant musical events of the history. So they are equal to me....even if I personnaly prefer the King a lot more !
Natha wrote on August 01, 2006
Actually I have never understood the importance of 'having written any song'. Who cares about that,anyway I don't. The performance, the musical vibes of the artist is the heart of everything. Better a superior performance than having written the song and a mediocre performace. Elvis' performance was in almost every case superior to the so-called original. I also grew up in the sixties and was a fan of the Beatles. Listening to Elvis was 'not done' within my environment. But luckily I came across Elvis and became immeadiately a die-hard fan. His music became part and parcel of my daily life. Travelling around the world I realised that Elvis has touched the hearts of people everywhere! His name is known in every nich and corner in this world. Even the very young seem to know him, though mostly by appearance and name. I would say that is pretty unique. So beyond any doubt Elvis is number one.
I am Buffalo-Horn! wrote on August 01, 2006
Why can't people come up with something new? There's probably quite a few of us who already own the Albert Hand EPFC Special magazine from around 1963 with the same title!
Adam wrote on August 01, 2006
Well like it's said before you should not compare Beatles and Elvis, cause it's two different projects, but I'm sorry to say it but songs like "Yesterday" "Let it be" and "Hey Jude" etc are very hard to compete with. And I will say that the Beatles and Elvis are both the biggest in rock and pop music. But The beatles would probably never had started playing without there giant Idol. The Beatles were mad Elvis fans, before he joined the army. They have played several Elvis in the beginning before they got famous. that's allright, I got a woman etc. So let's not try to compare cause there no point. But Elvis he showed the way for all the english, europeen and american groups and artist in the beginning of the sixties. So he might be nr 1, but then again the Beatles showed the way later on......
Sean Ryan wrote on August 01, 2006
What a pointless aticle which will never be solved. As an Elvis fan i am more likely to say Elvis but lets just say that Elvis is the greatest solo recording artist of all time and The Beatles are the greatest band of all time.I dont think anyone can argue about that.
Lovetheboy wrote on August 02, 2006
Elvis is the greatest and always will be....who cares about who wrote the song???? I sure don't and Elvis had that something, love soul well everything that nobody will ever have again and that includes the Beatles. not that I did not like them but one man only for me and this is Elvis nobody can touch him anyway you look at it...The way he sang the song, the charisma, the stage performance and the love real love for his fans... oh well nothing ever to compare, Elvis was is and will always be the KING....
My boy, my boy wrote on August 02, 2006
I see your point guys...but sometimes you have to take a step back and look at it in a larger perspective...when I said Elvis didn`t write any of his hits, I was just being ``objective`` by realizing how creative the Beatles were on this matter. I`m not diminishing Elvis in any way cause he did have the hell of a powerful voice and could sing any kind of music, which is a God given talent that no other entertainer ever had. Just imagine if Elvis would have written all his major hits, wouldn`t it be the icing on the cake ?...But overall, like I said earlier, between the 2 phenomenons of the 20th century, don`t worry folks, my vote goes to the hillbilly cat as the greatest one...with flying colors !
chrisc wrote on August 02, 2006
You can compare other music acts with each other but not with Elvis. He seems to me to be something else, one on his own, and in his stunning array of qualities truly and literally incomparable.
cathyreno wrote on August 02, 2006
Jez is the authors taking their lives in their own hands? why write a book like that? You can't compare Elvis and The Beatles to each other they are so different and unique in their own way. Talk about trying to make a buck or two! I can see a full scale riot at the book store on that one lol only kidding I know who's the greatest in my eyes.. Put a end to this madness people write some decent stuff! T C B everyone
elvistruth wrote on August 02, 2006
Elvis or Beatles? No! Really the greatest are Elvis and Frank Sinatra. We are talking about singers! And no matter about this! Billions miles away from the rest of singers-entertainers!
ta2k wrote on August 02, 2006
Well,i personally do not like The Beatles in the slightest,i see them as nothing more than a boyband.Yes,i know they did this and they did that,but same haircuts,same clothes etc is pure boyband. I don`t think they can even sing.Well done for writing songs,great,but for me it is all about the voice. I am on an Elvis website so there is no need for me to say who i think(who i know) is the greatest of all time. I would like to know the end summary of this book though as i do not believe the writers can be 50-50 in their thoughts, they will probably proclaim(in their opinion) who is better,and if it isn`t The King then you can be sure there will be some media reference to it! TCB
Deke Rivers 6 wrote on August 02, 2006
Elvis / The Beatles / Rolling Stones / Frank Sinatra....who was / is the greatest ? it's all in the ear of the beholder, they all sang great song's and at the same time all sang crap song's. I personnaly didn't like Sinatra, very much over rated, and self loving man. For my money Elvis blew him away, John Lennon had a good voice as well better than Jagger's & McCartney.
sunrecords56 wrote on August 02, 2006
Its all in the time period........elvis flopped in Vegas in 56 and 13 years later was on top.....the Beatles never got that far...but also would have failed there.....its all in "time" i will say that if the beatles had come before elvis the drug culture would have come sooner, and that would have been a BAD thing
Lex wrote on August 02, 2006
Muhammed Ali is The Greatest.
Ronaldv wrote on August 02, 2006
no discussion about it! I like "do the clam" more than any song performed by the Beatles. if elvis had not been in the building there were no Beatles at all.
see see rider wrote on August 02, 2006
being a die hard elvis fan since the age of 6 now 39, I will say elvis. but in contrast there is no comparison simply because..the beatles were a band, elvis was a solo artist. it's kind of foolish to really even try and compare the two, which to me say's this book is foolish. people are gonna be bias anyway because any beatle fan will say the beatles and any elvis fan will say elvis..that's just the way it is (no pun intended). I personally think there is no such thing as far as who's the greatest in any field, it's all just a matter of opinion. now if you look at statistics wise that may be different. RCA has said through the years that elvis has sold more records than any other artist or group as far as that goes. but just like the beatles, people say their the greatest rock n' roll band..then rolling stones fans say their the greatest rock n' roll band..then you got your who fans and so fourth and so fourth and so fourth. in the end, it just boils down to a matter of opinion..they all did great things, but being a die hard elvis fan, i will say elvis.
CD King wrote on August 03, 2006
In the 1963 Elvis VS The Beatles Book, there was a big POLL Who's the greatest? Well, the mega voting resulted The Winner ELVIS PRESLEY. By the way, if you still have a copy of that book (I still have mine) it's worth a quite bit and is a collector's gem.
efan4ever wrote on August 03, 2006
Dimebag Darrell is the greatest.
My boy, my boy wrote on August 03, 2006
Do the clam? better than any Beatles`song ? Geez Ronaldv, I think you`re pushing a little too much. But I must admit you did put a grin on my face...hehehe !
CD King wrote on August 03, 2006
For the record, In 1965 "Do The Clam" was a No.1 Hit on the Charts in Japan, Singapore and Malaysia. The Asian seems to like it.
ta2k wrote on August 03, 2006
Old MacDonald is better than any Beatles song TCB
Pierre@GBG wrote on August 03, 2006
I can’t see any reason about this question, maybe for the young dudes who don’t have been growing up with MUSIC not with computerize noise. I’m born in October 1957 and have growing up with MUSIC! I had the privilege to grow up with an older brother who bought the latest records during the 60’s, after all it was during this time the Music Explodes! Elvis Presley and Frank Sinatra was single performers and they could SING, The Beatles and Rolling Stones where/are Groups and can’t compares with this excellent performers. I was on a Concert with Rolling Stones in 1981 here in Gothenburg but the Opening Band, J. Gail’s Band was the highest point on that Concert. The Beatles did some great songs like Yesterday, those who sings knows how hard it’s to Sing that Song (try to Sing that in acapella). Frank Sinatra was an Entertainer of high class and could sing Jazz like a God but Elvis Presley could sing EVERYTHING and when he did none could do it better , He’s The KING and will always be that!
see see rider wrote on August 03, 2006
obviously by all right's elvis WAS on the scene first. case in point, rock n' roll started in the 50's, so if it wasn't for people like elvis, chuck berry, buddy holly, fat's domino etc..there would have been no beatles, stones, the who etc of the 60's. people of the 60's inspired who we had of the 70's and so fourth..like a chain reaction more or less.
Jerome wrote on August 03, 2006
the Beatles were great songwriters, Elvis (as far as we know) not. Elvis was a great interpreter of songs. There's a great difference between writing(and performing songs) and cover them (in Elvis' case; improve them, vocally and emotionally). Real music lovers should know the difference between these craftmanships..
cathyreno wrote on August 04, 2006
see see rider I liked your input here its right on the nose and its so true and we are considered the young elvis fan generation. I like the odd remixes if done tasteful enough. The Beatles were a great band they did write a few good songs give them their due but EP could sing anything and he did co wrote 'you'll be gone' not a bad song... We could argue this point till the cows come home 'ain't no big thing but its growin' hahaha
John4126 wrote on August 04, 2006
As this is an Elvis fan site, i would not expect there to be too many 'brave' enough to suggest other than Elvis is the greatest. There is a place for both. Both were hugely influential in shaping the youth culture of the 20th century and yes without Elvis there would have never been the Beatles. Arguably, without Mario LAnza there would never have been an Elvis! Like the vast majority of us, i consider myself to be a huge Elvis fan. But, what disappoints is the suggestion that the poorest of Elvis movie material ranks above anything the Beatles have recorded. This narrow minded attitude does the Elvis fan image no favours and is why we continue to be portrayed as a bunch of nutters sitting around in jumpsuits talking in a fake southern drawl.
Pierre@GBG wrote on August 04, 2006
Jerome: Yes The Beatles wrote most of there songs by themselves, Lennon/McCartney most of them. But you can’t say that The Beatles where greater then Elvis even if HE didn’t wrote His songs. Lieber/Stoller wrote plenty of song for just Elvis, Tail made you can say. Don’t compare Beatles with Elvis coz they stands way back in his shadow. Elvis could Sing all kind of Music better then anybody else. Beatles can’t even compares with The Beach Boys, the MAN behind there Music “Brian Wilson” wrote, arranged and produce the greatest Albums in the 60’s. The Beatles needed Three people to made theirs, any music lover knows that Sir George Martin was the fifth member of Beatles. In the 60’s when the music industry exploded a Band in US called Three Dog Night recorded songs from infamous songwriters and did a big success Worldwide. Personally I prefer them more then Beatles and I like Beatles also. It might be in that way coz I LOVE Vocals, but I’m a MUSICLOVER and love almost all kind of Music. PS: The Beach Boys should even exist without Elvis DS.
Ronaldv wrote on August 04, 2006
ok, I'll be nicer then, elvis' versions of "Hey Jude" , "Get Back" and "Yesterday" are much and far better than the ïnterpretations of the Beatles.
Steve V wrote on August 04, 2006
ronaldv - why stop there? Lets not forget Confidence, Barefoot Ballad, Yoga is as Yoga Does, Queenie Wahini's Whatever, & Petunia the Gardners Daughter. All coming out in the midst of Beatlemania and topping anything that the Fab Four had to offer.
My boy, my boy wrote on August 04, 2006
John4126, you pull the words right outta my mouth, I side with U. RonaldV, I agree with you that Elvis`s version of ``Hey Jude`` is quite pathetic compared to McCartney`s. But on the other hand, I really like Elvis`s short attempt of `` Lady Madonna``on the 70ties box set. And for me, ``Yesterday`` on Live 70 by Elvis sounds even better to my ears than the McCartney`s original version...To each his own, I guess !
byebye wrote on August 04, 2006
John 4126- you seem to repeat yourself whenever there is a topic giving fans a chance to put their opinion, claiming they´re narrow minded all the time. Childish questions makes equal answers.. But the beauty is when people are given this opportunity, without having to take consideration to what is an bold or political right answer all the time. In this way I believe John Lennon is greater then the Beatles, when married Yoko, posing nude on his album cover, and frankly did not care what the fans of the Greatest band in the world would think of him. -That is Rock´n Roll.! Elvis on contrary sold out in many ways.. but his many great spontaneous recordings surpass any artist or band in history I think, so I believe he´s the greatest!
Bestoftherest8301 wrote on August 04, 2006
First you have to define the objective of the competition. The greatest at what? Singing, performance, musician, writing, looking, record selling. Who knows what they mean by 'the greatest', they appear not to have told us what the criterian will be. I would add that just because you are first at something doesn't necessarily mean you are the best, if so England just won the world cup and Colin Montergomery won the open golf tournament. However. I think the markers should be: Who has sold the most records, cd's etc, who has had the most no.1's throughout the world. who has spent most weeks in the charts, who has received the most gold / platinum discs awarded - get my drift? There is only one answer, there always has only every been one answer and there will always only be one answer to this question. It's a bit like saying what happened to the Titanic in the film, and then having an argument as to whether it sank or not
Bestoftherest8301 wrote on August 04, 2006
OOOOps, I just told you what happened on the last page of this forthcoming book! don't you just hate it when people do that....LOL
Pierre@GBG wrote on August 04, 2006
I have only one question to all of You: Who else could catch 1 - 1,5 billion people in the WORLD in a Live broadcast show on Television 1973? Remember that the US broadcast wasn’t LIVE! Well I’ll give you a hint, The Beatles couldn’t do it even if it was an Reunion.. I saw it LIVE here in Sweden and it was awsome! :O) TCB
Christy W wrote on August 05, 2006
I can't believe that is even a question. How can you ask a question like that? Elvis is hands down better. Elvis was a good southern gentleman and he had alot of respect for people and his fans. The Beatles respected him alot also. That should have been your answer right there. If they looked up to thim, we also should. Think next time you ask something like that.
Steve V wrote on August 05, 2006
Christy W - that's not a valid answer. Elvis looked up to Dean Martin & Mario Lanza. Should we say hands down they are the greatest? And what the heck does being a Southern gentleman have to do with music?
see see rider wrote on August 05, 2006
let me start off by asking this..who is mario lanza? and i have to kinda disagree with jesper. rock n' roll isn't about someone posing nude on a album cover, or getting up on stage and pulling your pants down & mooning the crowd, or do like jim morrison and pull his penis out..being a guy, i don't wanna spend my money to go watch that nonsense. yeah i expect to get entertained..just not like that. i'm not saying john lenneon did any of the that stuff (on stage), buit he did do the posing nude bit and anyway you look at it, it's the same thing. and while attitude does play a roll (within the music it's self) you have to care what what the fans say to an extent cos' their the one's that buy the records. someone comes up to you and asks for an autograph and you wanna act arrogant and snobbish, that don't fly to well with fan's. going back to john & yoko posing nude..in my opinion they were the last two people that should've done that, especially yoko. rock n' roll music or not, you have to have not only respect for yourself BUT for the fans as well, and that's what elvis had. elvis may have sold out with some of his movies & some of the movie song's he did, but that's the only thing that man ever sold out on.
Pierre@GBG wrote on August 05, 2006
Christy W, did I said that Beatles made a Live broadcast? Of course NOT my dear :O) What I told you’ll is that ONLY ONE Artist could gathering People around the World in front the television for a LIVE Concert by Satellite and everybody who only like Music knows that it was Elvis. The hint I gave you says that NOT EVEN Beatles could get so many people (1 - 1,5 Billion). If USA could see the Concert LIVE, that you didn’t coz after the Live Concert Elvis did January 14, 1973 He and the Band did four songs more with no audiences who was Broadcast April 4, 1973 as a TV Special, should the numbers be 1,5 - 2 Billions instead. The reason of My question is that some people will compares Elvis vs. Beatles and it’s no way to do that, Elvis stands above them miles away!!!
byebye wrote on August 05, 2006
Out of the 4 members of the Beatles, Elvis and John got along very welll acording to a conversation I´ve had with Paul Mc Cartney. John admired Elvis´ early music, and the "rebelliousness" he also had inside. By adapting the music from the black community in the 50`s, Elvis provoked the establishment in the same way John did later on.. They followed their instinct and hearts, not aiming to provoke as first priority. But none of them would have become Rock legends if they had sleepless nights over what other people would think of them. Either you get this, or you dont.(!) I believe John in a way is more of a rebell than Elvis, since he put his entire reputation at jeapordy. Ironically he is the most famous peace icon, and the respectful relationship with the fans in the end took his life... The Beatles never said anything bad about Elvis, but we all know about Elvis´vain badmouthing The fab 4 at the white house... Not one of his "greatest" moments.
John4126 wrote on August 05, 2006
Jesper - always grateful for your observations. Of course the beauty of this site is that all manners of opinion are expressed from the sublime to the ridiculous. But the suggestion that the weakest of Elvis' movie tracks are head and shoulders above anything the Beatles recorded is lamentable. What is needed is reasoned comment rather than plain straight forward dismisal. As to questions like 'Who is Mario Lanza'???!! Aloha from Hawaii - find me anyone other than an Elvis fan who remembers it's transmission in 1973. When was it shown in the UK for instance? Other than in Elvis circles there is never any mention of this world wide spectacular. I look forward to being en-lightened.
ta2k wrote on August 05, 2006
Jesoer,so saying `Elvis died when he went into the army`,is not `badmouthing` then??? TCB.
ta2k wrote on August 05, 2006
byebye wrote on August 05, 2006
No, just insolent. Musically they were quite right at the time.. EP claiming The Beatles to be responsible for the drug culture in the USA, (while self being hooked) is far more barking up the wrong alley. Elvis is allthough a phenomenom out of this world... so dont get confused on were my vote is in this matter goes.
Steve V wrote on August 05, 2006
June - Do The Clam is far above anything The Beatles recorded just because Elvis sang it? I suppose Having Fun On Stage With Elvis ranks above any Beatles LP. Not being disrespectful, but its fans like you who the media focus in on and who the public sees as not being smart enough to get into any kind of debate on topics such as this. Elvis was getting boring in 1964, and I think part of the reason he woke up and gave us such great music starting in late 1967 (Guitar Man, etc) was because The Beatles forced his hand. He knew it was time for a change because of how The Beatles changed music and was making him just a relic from the 50's. I love Elvis but please, cooment like yours make me insane.
see see rider wrote on August 05, 2006
steve v: the topic on here has switched on here so many cotton - pickin' times from the original....it's making me insane
Rob Wanders wrote on August 06, 2006
what a nonsense, this competition!
CD King wrote on August 06, 2006
A great philosopher once said, "A Bell Is Not A Bell Until You Ring it, A Songs Is Not A Song Until ELVIS Sings it."
Annie H wrote on August 06, 2006
Thought I would just mention that here in UK we hear far more of Elvis on the radio than The Beatles. As an artist Elvis sounded just as good on the live recordings as in the studio (my opinion only of course). The ability displayed on some of the live numbers was incredible (American Trilogy always springs to mind and of course the band/backing singers etc all came together). I don't think I have ever heard a live recording by the Beatles played here (I guess there are many). The Who is the Greatest question is difficult as none of the Beatles were ever able to demonstrate their full vocal capacity as individuals whilst being part of the group. Elvis had such a fantastic range when he was in his prime, could any of the Fab 4 have matched it?
Steve V wrote on August 07, 2006
It's not me that needs to get over it. Its fans who think Elvis is God and everything he ever recorded is better than everything else ever recorded by anyone. There are many fans out there that think like this and they make the Elvis fandom seem like worshipping idiots.
see see rider wrote on August 07, 2006
well unlike john lennon who said & i quote "we're (the beatles) bigger than god" or something like that, wether you believe in god or not..that's a pretty bold statement. elvis didn't even like being called the "king of rock n' roll" for the simple fact HE was a religious person. being a elvis fan in this world is kinda like a whole other religion religion of sorts and i personally think that's fine just AS long as people know that elvis was just as human as myself and anyone else on here. in fact elvis himself once said "i put my pants on just everybody else..one leg at a time".
ta2k wrote on August 07, 2006
I agree with you June. I think Steve V has some issues regarding his likes and dislikes and it is best to leave him to sort them out by himself. Fans believing that Elvis is the greatest of all time, thus being far better than anyone else do not deserve to be called `worshipping idiots`. It seems that there are people on this site who constantly put Elvis down and they feel it makes them more `objective`, more `brave` perhaps than the rest of us. They seem to think that pointing out that he didn`t do this well, or didn`t do that well, make them more `respectable` in the `music publics` `life. Well in my humble opinion i think standing up for Elvis, saying `i think he is better at everything than anyone else in the history of music`is pretty `brave`. Not only is it brave,it is 100 percent true! TCB everyone.
Steve V wrote on August 08, 2006
Folks - I have no issues and I apologize for the worshipping idiots remark. But really, again saying that Elvis did everything better than everyone else cannot be teken seriously by anyone with a musical ear. Do you really think his version of Hey Jude was better than The Beatles, or his What I'd Say better than Ray Charles? No one bettered those 2 originals. Do you think Three Corn Patches was sung brilliantly? He sounds half asleep. I'm just being objective. And to keep the record straight, I've been a fan since 1956, and bought every record as it came out. There were lows along with the highs.
see see rider wrote on August 08, 2006
i personally don't think steve v was putting down elvis he was just stating HIS opinion..which is what this message board is about. yes his remark of the "worshiping elvis idiot" was out of line BUT he has apologized for that. the problem here goes back to what i said on aug 2nd..when you're a die-hard fan of someone you're gonna stand by that person or persons no matter what, which is also along the same lines as being bias..it's human nature. i'm not gonna say for the sake of argument that elvis's version of "hey jude" was better than the beatles..yes i think elvis's version is fantastic and don't see anything wrong with it. as far as elvis's version of "what'd i say" yes i feel is better than ray charles just because i'm not a ray charles fan, so quite naturally i'm gonna go with elvis's version on that one. i don't like everything the beatles did even though i own all their albums on CD. i think from revolver on was their better period, but again that's me. and to reply to steve v's opinion on "three corn patches"...i don't think it was so much elvis on that song as the recording it's self...that song to me for years has alway's sounded different than the rest of the album..like it's muffled or something. in closing, it's great to stand up for what or who you believe in..but to say something is better than something else is just a matter of opinion and really again it's only human nature but there's also a little bit of bias in there as well.
CD King wrote on August 08, 2006
Steve V wrote: "There were lows along with the highs.." Yes, BUT there were so much MORE high than the lows. For every sleepy "Three Corn Patches" there a couple of dozen of wide wake "Promised land", "T.R.O.U.B.L.E." '"Talk About The Good Times" etc etc and ELVIS Presley's I GOT A WOMAN (1956 & even 1970) are a million times more superior than the over-rated Ray Charles' original.
byebye wrote on August 08, 2006
See see rider - " Three corn patches" along with "Girl of mine" were made using a very poor microphone for Elvis. (Initially supposed to record drums.(!) However the high grade microphone Elvis used at Stax studios, were stolen after a session the night before. The location for Stax were not in the best of neighbour hoods... (Way out of topic here I know, but just wanted to put some light on the bad sounding matter:)
see see rider wrote on August 08, 2006
thanks jesper for the heads up on "three corn patches and "girl of mine". i remember the first time i heard the "raised on rock" album thinking..these two songs sound funny compared to the rest of the album.
Tony C wrote on August 09, 2006
I think this it an impossible, and pointless, contest. It is like having a contest to find out whether fish & chips are greater than curry, or vice versa. Both are wonderful in different ways, and prefered according to personal taste. I have always found John Lennon's quote rather dubious considering the amount of fantastic pre-Elvis music in existance. Perhaps "Before Elvis, there was nothing for me" would have been more accurate words for him to say. He did also make the absurd statement that Elvis died musically when he went into the army. In my opinion, Elvis was the greatest entertainer ever and The Beatles were they greatest pop group ever, making them both the great in their own fields.
ta2k wrote on August 10, 2006
Kilburn Tony is right when he says this is a pointless contest.Elvis is Manchester United and Celtic,while his `competitors` are Accrington Stanley and East fife!!!
sunrecords56 wrote on August 10, 2006
I think Georgie (UT PARTY 1 & 2) Klein is the greatest....after all he dosent even have any talent,,,just the fact that he is a the KING of the official hangers on is enough to put him there......i think he should go back into the studio and re-record UT part 1 and 2 and release it on cd and DVD.....
John4126 wrote on August 10, 2006
I like to think of Elvis as being Liverpool FC - both being the most succesful and greatest in their field!