Elvis has left the building

[Nowhere Man]

If nothing else, Elvis is one of the first things that comes to mind when you think of the 1950s. That in itself is pretty incredible, and leads to much easier discovery of his music for newer generations than just about any other musical artist of that time period.

At least he's not been regulated to just a Christmas singer like Bing, (far and away the most successful music artist of the early 20th century, music fact fans.) or almost completely forgotten like Paul Whiteman or Al Jolson. (Pretty obvious reason as to why for the latter though)

[hewantstolurkatad]

If nothing else, Elvis is one of the first things that comes to mind when you think of the 1950s. That in itself is pretty incredible, and leads to much easier discovery of his music for newer generations than just about any other musical artist of that time period.

I'd say Miles Davis could challenge him at least in people who are taking the search seriously. Anyone who ever googles "best jazz album" will be immediately confronted with A Kind of Blue and will likely give it a good bit of attention compared to stumbling through several Elvis songs.

At least he's not been regulated to just a Christmas singer like Bing, (far and away the most successful music artist of the early 20th century, music fact fans.)

Exactly how much of that success is down to a Christmas single, mind.



But yeah, that Elvis basically IS the 50s is a huge thing that can't be undone.

[Nowhere Man]

What's really hurt Elvis in the long run is the inconsistency of his albums and songs from entire periods of his recording span. He actually recorded 100's of great pop tunes, but RCA back in the day would release just about anything to make a cash grab. Which means that you often have to separate the wheat from the chaff. Despite the huge number of great songs he recorded between 1954-1961 and 1968-1972 he spent much of the other time recording endless soundtrack dreck.

How Great Thou Art aside, I could possibly count the number of decent Elvis songs inbetween 1964 and 1967 on my hands, not to mention how many diminishing returns his recordings were getting as the 70s wore on. Maybe he could have reinvented himself Rick Rubin style later on, but we might have missed a very dodgy 80s period!

Despite how incredible the comeback era is, 1954 to 1962/3 or thereabouts is where his legacy lies, and for some people, thats just too far in the past I guess.

[SavageHedgehog]

Had he pumped out even one more album as good as From Elvis in Memphis after that, he wouldn't be facing this risk of being forgotten now, he may've stood a better chance of keeping some control over his legacy.  Like, there's an album that feels like even at the time it was really pretty strongly enhanced by his status as an icon, reminding people that it wasn't totally manufactured.

Elvis Country (I'm 10,000 Years Old) is pretty wonderful, and certainly feels like a cohesive "statement".

[Dr Rock]

But the 'comeback' part of the Elvis story is essential to his appeal. He had to do the shit movies and rubbish songs so he could come back in that leather suit to cement his status as a true Legend. We talk of Bowie's periods, Elvis had about four main periods, the early hillbilly cat stuff, which was scandalous and exciting, the post-war safe years where he slowly lost any relevance (though those movies made a lot of money), then the Comeback Special, then Aloha From Hawaii leading to the rest of his seventies white jumpsuit phase. Three of those are hugely iconic, the 60s fallow period is not unusual, many big legends had their wilderness years.

He was voted Artist Of The Century and I think that's fair. I don't think history will forget him, I think his stature will grow as the 20th century becomes a thing of wonder, not something from recent memory as it is today. And Elvis is dead centre of it as far as popular culture goes. What the kids today think of him won't matter in the long term.

[jobotic]

Not a huge fan, more into Eddie Cochran (down to my dad, see?). It's the early stuff that counts.

He could bloody well sing.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-SRRRhdtzY8

[armful]

But the 'comeback' part of the Elvis story is essential to his appeal. He had to do the shit movies and rubbish songs so he could come back in that leather suit to cement his status as a true Legend. We talk of Bowie's periods, Elvis had about four main periods, the early hillbilly cat stuff, which was scandalous and exciting, the post-war safe years where he slowly lost any relevance (though those movies made a lot of money), then the Comeback Special, then Aloha From Hawaii leading to the rest of his seventies white jumpsuit phase. Three of those are hugely iconic, the 60s fallow period is not unusual, many big legends had their wilderness years.

He was voted Artist Of The Century and I think that's fair. I don't think history will forget him, I think his stature will grow as the 20th century becomes a thing of wonder, not something from recent memory as it is today. And Elvis is dead centre of it as far as popular culture goes. What the kids today think of him won't matter in the long term.

I  love the comeback special, it's a great gig

[Sebastian Cobb]

I'd say Miles Davis could challenge him at least in people who are taking the search seriously. Anyone who ever googles "best jazz album" will be immediately confronted with A Kind of Blue and will likely give it a good bit of attention compared to stumbling through several Elvis songs.

I wonder how many people that has put off jazz though, given Jazz's breadth; personally I find Davis a bit difficult to enjoy.

[NoSleep]

A Kind Of Blue is a great album, regardless of being jazz album. Who do you think would be a less difficult experience for a first time listener? The only other jazz album that challenges A Kind Of Blue in terms of popularity is A Love Supreme which is comparitively a much denser experience.

To be honest, the term jazz is of no use, considering that people like Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, or Charles Mingus weren't happy that it was the label used to describe their music.

[greenman]

A Kind Of Blue is a great album, regardless of being jazz album. Who do you think would be a less difficult experience for a first time listener? The only other jazz album that challenges A Kind Of Blue in terms of popularity is A Love Supreme which is comparitively a much denser experience.

To be honest, the term jazz is of no use, considering that people like Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, or Charles Mingus weren't happy that it was the label used to describe their music.

You could I spose argue that Coltrane on A Kind of Blue is still reasonably challenging listening wise even if he's more accessible than most of his 60's stuff, its not say as accessible as something like Take Five.

[hewantstolurkatad]

I wonder how many people that has put off jazz though, given Jazz's breadth; personally I find Davis a bit difficult to enjoy.

I dunno, I think it's pretty accessible.

What would be a jazz album that would be a better introduction point in terms of being a pleasant experience? There's loads of singles collections and whatnot of pre-Davis acts that might be an easier entry point, but the problem is there's nothing close to a definitive one.

[SteveDave]

If Elvis started now, he'd be covered in fucking tattoos by LP number two.

[NoSleep]

You could I spose argue that Coltrane on A Kind of Blue is still reasonably challenging listening wise even if he's more accessible than most of his 60's stuff, its not say as accessible as something like Take Five.

Take Five's the first thing that come to my mind as an alternative "lighter" jazz introduction, but that's a single track (on an album called Time Out). The only other track that Brubeck did that gets similar coverage is Square Dance.

Just checked Rate Your Music, the only jazz artists that manage their top 100 (all genres/all time) are Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Charles Mingus (all who have been ousted from the top ten now). Narrow it down to "jazz, all-time" and Time Out appears at number 16 behind Miles Davis, John Coltrane Charles Mingus, Eric Dolphy, Ornette Coleman, Pharoah Sanders, Frank Zappa (with Hot Rats[?!]) & Angelo Badalamenti (Twin Peaks OST[?!]).

[Wet Blanket]

Probably, even the more curious younger people I know aren't really interested in anything released before pop music was really shaken up in 1965/66. It's a shame though, because Elvis isn't really trying to do the same thing as Hendrix, Cream, Black Sabbath etc. He's got his own style which is closer to amped up country music than what would become known as rock. Viewing him as merely an embryonic form of louder, more guitar-driven things to come is a real folly. If young people were into The Band or Gram Parsons they might key into Elvis a little more easily.

These young people need to get their lugs around a bit of Bo Diddley.

I can see how he could be easily dismissed by people who only think of jump suits and quiffs, but the pared down songs on the Comeback Special show who's boss.

I reckon if he hadn't shat himself to death aged 40 he'd have managed a Johnny-cash style reinvention in his old age.

[greenman]

Take Five's the first thing that come to my mind as an alternative "lighter" jazz introduction, but that's a single track (on an album called Time Out). The only other track that Brubeck did that gets similar coverage is Square Dance.

Just checked Rate Your Music, the only jazz artists that manage their top 100 (all genres/all time) are Miles Davis, John Coltrane and Charles Mingus (all who have been ousted from the top ten now). Narrow it down to "jazz, all-time" and Time Out appears at number 16 behind Miles Davis, John Coltrane Charles Mingus, Eric Dolphy, Ornette Coleman, Pharoah Sanders, Frank Zappa (with Hot Rats[?!]) & Angelo Badalamenti (Twin Peaks OST[?!]).

More melodic piano lead stuff in general is probably an easier first listen, Bill Evans, Ahmad Jamal, etc

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZmvwCTMO1Lg

[Howj Begg]

A Kind Of Blue is a great album, regardless of being jazz album. Who do you think would be a less difficult experience for a first time listener? The only other jazz album that challenges A Kind Of Blue in terms of popularity is A Love Supreme which is comparitively a much denser experience.

To be honest, the term jazz is of no use, considering that people like Duke Ellington, Miles Davis, or Charles Mingus weren't happy that it was the label used to describe their music.

I want to quote this because Charles Mingus is fucking great. I've got all his albums on my mp3 player, and when I put it to shuffle , his stuff will frequently come up, and it's the most joyful, beautiful, poised noise I will hear on that day. I love Mingus, his band completely destroys most rock bands for sheer energy and joy.

[Goldentony]

I guess if you're arsed about credibility, he ranks towards the bottom of all the big lads. He hasn't got a Pet Sounds or a Sgt Peppers, he hasn't got the druggy credibility of The Rolling Stones. Same when you put him up against Cash, Bo Diddley, Duane Eddy, Chet Atkins and all the other guitar heroes, and the country and rock n' roll lads. Nothing like the furious, heavy danger of Hendrix either recorded or live. When Woodstock came around, how much R&R was on the bill? It was basically reduced to Sha Na Na (who were fucking amazing though!)  and you had Elvis the year before with his comeback special - trim, groomed and looking like a fucking sex machine in his leather and a generation of hairy, fucked up lunatics out of their minds on fuck knows what listening to music made by the same fucked up people. Nothing at Monterey either. I'm not an expert but it seems like he'd gone his whole career balancing massive success with lack of credibility.

That said, I personally don't give much of a toss about any of that, and i'm having a hard time thinking about anybody outside of the Experience and Bo Diddley that i'd listen to as much as Elvis. The guy was just fucking magnetic. As much as I can understand why he'd get the pop star tag and the comparisons to yer modern day lads, not one of them and very few i've mentioned above could pull off something as hot as this, IMO -

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfKPoHb6pJ8

It's what makes pop work. He didn't need to write his own shit because he had the charisma and the ability to stomp on anything they put in front of him. He's just fucking great lads, sorry.

[greenman]

Credibility wise I do think a lot of the early Sun stuff stands up to anything his RnR rivals of the era were doing, seems rather unfair to compare him with artists a generation later.

[Goldentony]

It's more that he's obviously part of that big collection of often mentioned artists from that period between the 50's and 70's where people were churning out the sort of records music spods bang on about a lot. Beatles, Beach Boys, Stones and all the other Q magazine style stuff and trying to figure out where he fits, rather than comparing. I agree about the Sun material, aye, but it always seems like it's secondary to him and his personality which seems to set him apart from everyone else in that sort of 'classic' grouping.

[Phil_A]

As others have mentioned on here before, Elvis's recording of Blue Moon is an eerie, wonderful thing. It sounds like something Joe Meek would've knocked out a decade later.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MzUhfYAxDTY

[Howj Begg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FfKPoHb6pJ8

Wearin' is one of his best tracks. If I Can Dream is another great one. A lot from that period.

[Brundle-Fly]

If Elvis started now, he'd be covered in fucking tattoos by LP number two.

I liked his comeback in the mid-nineties though
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=agDkgOGo3Fs