I don't think that first necessarily means most important. But in the influence category, it almost has to be. By the criteria of this list, Madonna is a great artist.



These are all examples of musical impact, not influence. We are trying to categorize these into specific subgenres, we're looking at rock music as a whole. And as a whole, the influence that Elvis Presley has had is greater than that of The Beatles (I am not trouncing The Beatles's enormous influence. I am only re-stating what has already been determined in the "Most Influential Artists" thread.)



Again, you are discussing musical impact, not influence. I agree that The Beatles have a greater musical impact. Remember, I agree that The Beatles are the number one rock artist. It's your placement of Dylan that I am disputing, not The Beatles.



I don't think you're being harsh at all. The belief of the majority, however, means nothing. If you are going with what the majority believes, then Justin Bieber is the greatest artist of all time, if you would excuse the generalization. You know that this list is just silly. Led Zeppelin cannot conceivably be above The Rolling Stones. Michael Jackson at number two is just outright silly. When was this poll conducted? If it was in the past year or so we can assume that his undeserved high placement is a result of his untimely death.

I remember Bruce calling out Sampson for this and I had to kind of laugh how Bruce in his own way got his point across.

No from a songwriting, musical, recording and lyrical standpoint Elvis is nowhere near the Beatles in terms of diversity. Elvis was a diverse vocalist but not a diverse musician he wasn't even a songwriter.

Elvis already had a blue-print given to him by having other songwriters writing his music. The Beatles had to start the canvas from the ground up.

Elvis could never come up with the inventive chord progressions, key changes, melodies and harmonies the Beatles were doing

that had classical/rock musicians impressed with. Elvis came from the old school were singers were singers. Some of the overtly sensitive people here will think I am knocking Elvis but I am not these are the facts. Elvis came from a tradition that a vocalist didn't have to write his music. Listen to The Rolling Stones first album it's basically all covers but they realized after some urging from their managers that they had to write their own music.

The Beatles have written some of the greatest albums/songs in pop/rock history. Why on earth do you think so many polls like Rolling Stone Immortals, VHI and Time Magazine have either said the Beatles were the greatest rock artist or it's most influential. It's only here that I even here is this talk.

Elvis popularized rock and roll which was already popular before he made it big.

The Beatles influeced how pop/rock musicians wrote songs, how they were recorded, where it's played, and definitely influenced the experimental aspect of rock and roll. Because of that it is very easy to detect the Beatles influence in way or another. Like many of the musicians said on the VH1 poll said the Beatles has had an influence somewhat on every genre of rock music that has followed.

By 1965 a whole scene had sprung around the success of the Beatles. Their success gave rise to a full-scale British Invasion as groups like the Rolling Stones, Hollies, The Searchers, The Yardrbirds, The Moody Blues, The Animals, The Kinks, Zombies, The Who, The Dave Clark Five and many others came into the charts around the American and the world. American groups like the Byrds, The Lovin Spoonful and the Beu Brummels were quick to respond. This in turned influenced Bob Dylan to go electric. A transatlantic dialog sprung up because of this and the influences went back and forth. This still is happening today.

The Beatles were the primary influences of the Bryds, etc Folk Rock/Jangle Pop, Cheap Trick and numerous other bands Power Pop, Pink Floyd Psychedelic Rock, Yes, Robert Fripp, Genesis etc.. Progressive Rock, Ozzy Osbourne and Lemmy Kilmister Heavy Metal, Nirvana Alternative Rock, Oasis Brit-pop, Gram Parsons Country Rock. The influence extends to musicians like Stevie Wonder, Otis Redding, George Clinton, George Benson, Public Enemy, The Chemical Brothers etc..

I remember laughing at Bruce a lot myself.



For the umpteenth time, being a songwriter has nothing to do with any of this. It's about what you contribute to rock & roll, and how you affect it.
The Beatles were remarkably eclectic, but most of that was mere flirtations with other genres. Presley was releasing WHOLE ALBUMS of non-rock music - country, gospel, etc. That's a diverse artist, songwriter or not.



You jest?
Seriously, I respect your opinions, you seem to be one of the more intelligent posters here, and I admire your love for The Beatles (I love them myself). But here you are just plain wrong.
The Beatles didn't have a "blueprint given to them"? 1950's rock maybe? Remember that they were more of a cover band in their first three or four years.
They didn't really become geniuses until Rubber Soul - and by that time, the psychedelic experimentation thing was pretty widespread, it wasn't just the Beatles.



Inventive chord progressions? He was primarily a vocalist and performer. It's not really fair to punish him just because his style is a little different.



Yes, because the Stones' cover songs never outshined the originals, which Elvis did regularly.



Because most of those people aren't looking at it 100% objectively. They more than likely grew up in that 60's era, so of course they're gonna have that nostalgic bias.



Again, no.
It was popular before he came along, but it wasn't the WORLDWIDE sensation that he made it. It wasn't the controversial dread that parents despised. And finally, rock didn't really have it's bad-boy image...until Elvis.



I agree with that 100%.



Absolutely, but Elvis was stuck in a 10-year contract, being manipulated and robbed of his potential by having to make tons of cheesy movies.





Where have you heard that Public Enemy was influenced by The Beatles?

Btw, that list you posted was an absolute joke. Prince above Elvis Presley on a list of all-time greatest?
C'mon now...

Ok, let's punish the Beatles because they could come up with those inventive chord progressions, harmonies and melodies that influenced the the Byrds, Keith Richards, The Bee Gees, Syd Barrett, etcc.. and give Elvis a break because he couldn't. Sounds like an agenda to me. Yet the same people who want to give Elvis a break on this forum are the same people who criticize the Beatles for not being front-men when they didn't need to.

One of the biggest contributions the Beatles did was songwriting and ignoring that is ridiculous. If it wasn't for their songwriting would the Byrds have formed or the Rolling Stones write their music. But let's give dancing, swiveling your hips or some of the musicians who didn't write their music more credence and I am not signaling only Elvis for that also.

Before the Beatles even got to Rubber Soul you had classical critics comparing them to Schubert and you had folk musicians like Dylan, McGuinn raving about their chord progression and melodies. Howard Goodall puts it The Beatles have "a stunning roll-call of sublime melodies that perhaps only Mozart can match in European musical history" and that "They, more than anyone, saved the western musical tradition from extinction, and gave it a new purpose and a direction

In terms of eclectic music Elvis sang in those styles he didn't write them or played those styles. The Beatles did all three.

Also the Beatles went way beyond their rock and roll and pop roots. Yeh they were well versed in pop, country, R&B, assorted styles in rock and roll, European Folk and Skiffle. But went way beyond that with, bolero, ska, reggae, vaudeville, cabaret, musical hall, modern aleatory, musique concrete, atonality, electronic music, avant garde, jazz, baroque and the extended dissonant sonorities George Harrison would explore on "I Want to Tell You” and "Only a Northern Song". Again people like George Gershwin did nothing of the sort. The Beatles freely added jazz harmonies, unusual time signatures and employed varying styles of vocal harmonies to their music. They composed long songs, short songs to songs with many parts. Any listen to songs like "Blue Jay Way" or "Within You Without You" and they went way beyond the norms of popular music convention.

"Elvis was stuck in a 10-year contract, being manipulated and robbed of his potential by having to make tons of cheesy movies". Like what does this have to with what the Beatles did? It had nothing to do with the Beatles and what they did. The Beatles were on the verge of breaking up and they did the White Album and Abbey Road. As it is by 1963 the British Invasion was more influenced by Motown and blues music that Elvis Presley.

As, for the Vh1 Poll having Prince above Elvis. As for influence Elvis beats him because of being before him but as a musician/songwriter not only does he trash Elvis but he is one greatest all around rock musician’s period. I think the importance of influence for many is not as important than the overall craft of a musicians work

As for Public Enemy Public Enemy they paid homage to the Beatles sampling "Tomorrow Never Knows" for "Psycho of Greed and naming an album after Revolver “Revolverlution” kind of tells you the impact Revolver had on them and Chuck D called Run DMC was the Beatles of hip-hop

Which makes this list a subjective poll. Anyone with an agenda can make some criteria or promote a musician to their liking.

Prog Rock/Folk Rock/Psychedelic/Heavy Metal/Funk/Motown/ World Music influences etc.. the increased usage of studio resources and experimentation, songwriting, stadium rock has jack nothing to do with Elvis.

Biography by Richie Unterberger

I can’t have someone who didn’t write his music, not playing on the majority of his music, look hopelessly dated when the Beatles were recording Revolver or Sgt Pepper, not really a factor on so many fronts over the Beatles who are recognized as the most acclaimed, most covered, most popular and initiated so many recording techniques that you hear in today’s music which of course the later is musical influence not just musical impact.

In terms of your most influential list the Beatles are by far a bigger influence than Elvis especially in the modern sense or in the last 45 years which Elvis influence is hardly detected in the last 20 years.

If you include the puzzling cultural influence aspect and making that an equal parts of say musical influence is pathetic and embarrassing view than makes Elvis closer.

What is the common thread of these polls the Beatles are number one. Elvis is not even second in any of these polls. You think that it's impossible or inconceivable that Elvis can't be lower than second.

Howard Goodall puts it The Beatles have "a stunning roll-call of sublime melodies that perhaps only Mozart can match in European musical history" and that "They, more than anyone, saved the western musical tradition from extinction, and gave it a new purpose and a direction

Bill Haley popularized rock and roll and even Chuck Berry had a top ten hit before Elvis. Elvis popularized it further.

There is a huge difference between interpreting and creating. I am not knocking Elvis but so was Frank Sinatra and even the early Rolling Stones were basically that. I think people should acknowledge the difference here. It takes a lot of talent to write and perform a song in six time signatures, with various vocal styles, melodies and musical styles for example “Happiness Is A Warm Gun” and sound like it seamlessly flows. Very few musicians have that type of versatility of talent. That is just one song.

Well you say diversity is diversity but Elvis only sang the Beatles did all three. Yes take a song like "Taxman" another example raga, funk, rock and r&b elements in this song an they combined it all and made it into one cohesive unit.

As music theory point of view I don't even want to go furhter how they mixed modal musc, 3 different keys, avant tape manipulation and metric modulaton for example on "Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds". From a music theory point and musicial point of a view the Beatles were much more eclectic.

As it is the most eclectic rock artist goes to Zappa IMO with the Beatles running behind him.