Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

Anything about Elvis
More than 100 Million visitors can't be wrong

Moderators: Moderator5, Moderator3, FECC-Moderator, Site Mechanic

Post Reply

User avatar

jurasic1968
Posts: 12401
Joined: 11 years 7 months
Has thanked: 13259 times
Been thanked: 2586 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570316

Post by jurasic1968 »

Elvis had many top 5 hits of rock and roll music between 1956 to 1962, many more than Chuck.




Elvis Fan70
Posts: 103
Joined: 11 years 8 months
Has thanked: 91 times
Been thanked: 74 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570317

Post by Elvis Fan70 »

There Is a very simple answer to the original question - No.... Read that Chuck Berry was still selling CD's before his passing - averaging 39 a week.
It's a shame that no one asked Chuck Berry about his opinion of ELVIS before he died... Oh, wait they did back in 1986...his reply was "Elvis Presley? He was the greatest who ever was, Is or ever will be."
Good enough for me and I'm a Church Berry fan... incidentally a new CD from Mr. Berry will be released later this year, his first since 1979.




Topic author
r&b

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570319

Post by r&b »

brian wrote:I don't think many people understand why Elvis was called the King of rock n' roll in the first place. In the fifties he was the most popular rock n' roll singer and the leader of the rock n' roll movement. He sold more records than all his contemparies. If Chuck Berry had done that then the media would have called him the King of Rock n' Roll and he would have been called that for the rest of his life and beyond regardless of what he did the rest of his career. Elvis never called himself that other people did which is a great honor. It's better than tooting your own horn like so many other singers do. Chuck Berry just died so people are saying nice things about him but as I said earlier Elvis has been lauded much more than him. A lot of jealousy from some people regarding Elvis' so they have to take their shots at Elvis to prop someone else up because he's top dog.
Yeah but Elvis himself said he sang rock and roll because thats what sells. How committed is that really? People hear and read things like that and it sticks in their heads. I know upon reading it I was a little taken back. I thought he loved it because he sang it with so much passion, but that was in the 50's and it made me think did he really love it all that much? Why did he sing so little of it after the 50's and when he did , it was not with the same passion. One can blame Hollywood and the films only so much, but where were the great studio albums 63-69? Only in the 68 Comeback did that fire come back because he knew he had to do it that way. It lasted a while, but the 70's were almost rockless with a few exceptions. I get why people call him the King of Rock and Roll and I also get why some others dont. If you want to go by strictly sales and how he led the movement early on, yeah then sure he was. If you want to go by his entire career's output, and his personal feelings about it, there is also a case for maybe no. Chuck and others had very little success compared to Elvis, but in playing with the giants of rock and roll many artists were way ahead of him. The 1972 LP The London Sessions had him playing with British royalty and he was lauded for it. If only Elvis made a similar effort. Just once.



User avatar

TJ
Posts: 7144
Joined: 19 years 9 months
Has thanked: 27 times
Been thanked: 858 times
Contact:

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570326

Post by TJ »

Yes r&b, but Chuck would probably have played Russian folk music if that had been what made him the big bucks. Elvis can be taken too literally sometimes. His comments about performing the music because it sells shouldn't be taken to mean that he didn't like the music or have a natural affinity with it. He simply meant that if another style that he enjoyed performing was big, he'd be happy doing that as well. I think that Elvis would have been happy as a pop balladeer, a gospel singer or a rock 'n' roll singer. The real point is that he didn't need to fake it to do the latter, as some performers very clearly did. Those stage movements were there because he got a real kick out of the material.


Image


brian
Posts: 17407
Joined: 15 years 9 months
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 3828 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570328

Post by brian »

r&b wrote:
brian wrote:I don't think many people understand why Elvis was called the King of rock n' roll in the first place. In the fifties he was the most popular rock n' roll singer and the leader of the rock n' roll movement. He sold more records than all his contemparies. If Chuck Berry had done that then the media would have called him the King of Rock n' Roll and he would have been called that for the rest of his life and beyond regardless of what he did the rest of his career. Elvis never called himself that other people did which is a great honor. It's better than tooting your own horn like so many other singers do. Chuck Berry just died so people are saying nice things about him but as I said earlier Elvis has been lauded much more than him. A lot of jealousy from some people regarding Elvis' so they have to take their shots at Elvis to prop someone else up because he's top dog.
Yeah but Elvis himself said he sang rock and roll because thats what sells. How committed is that really? People hear and read things like that and it sticks in their heads. I know upon reading it I was a little taken back. I thought he loved it because he sang it with so much passion, but that was in the 50's and it made me think did he really love it all that much? Why did he sing so little of it after the 50's and when he did , it was not with the same passion. One can blame Hollywood and the films only so much, but where were the great studio albums 63-69? Only in the 68 Comeback did that fire come back because he knew he had to do it that way. It lasted a while, but the 70's were almost rockless with a few exceptions. I get why people call him the King of Rock and Roll and I also get why some others dont. If you want to go by strictly sales and how he led the movement early on, yeah then sure he was. If you want to go by his entire career's output, and his personal feelings about it, there is also a case for maybe no. Chuck and others had very little success compared to Elvis, but in playing with the giants of rock and roll many artists were way ahead of him. The 1972 LP The London Sessions had him playing with British royalty and he was lauded for it. If only Elvis made a similar effort. Just once.
I think that his statement doesn't mean that he didn't like rock n' roll music. Elvis was a guy that loved all kinds of music. He had tried out for a gospel group and when he first showed up at Sun he recorded ballads. I suppose if he had become popular as a crooner then that's what his recorded output would have been in the fifties because that's what people would have wanted. The rock n' roll material took off and that's why RCA signed him and that's what they wanted him to do. I just think that's honesty but that doesn't mean he hated rock n' roll. The thing is that Chuck Berry, Little Richard, Bo Diddley and Bill Haley etc. weren't coming out with new rock music either so you could hold that against Elvis but I think it's unfair because those guys were in the same boat. Why Elvis didn't do more rock music is for a couple of reasons changing times in the music business when singer-songwriters became a trendy thing all these singer-songwriters were writing rock songs and then keeping it for themselves. Colonel Parker demanding 50% of publishing for anyone wanting to get Elvis to record a new original song. That being said I think you'll find that Elvis did record more rock n' roll and more uptempo material after he got out of the army than you might suspect at first glance. Certainly more than the other 50s rockers.



User avatar

jurasic1968
Posts: 12401
Joined: 11 years 7 months
Has thanked: 13259 times
Been thanked: 2586 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570333

Post by jurasic1968 »

Elvis recorded rock and roll songs in Elvis is Back, Something for Everybody and Pot Luck. After 1962 there were only soundtracks, but here and there he recorded uptempo songs like Bossa Nova, Baby, Viva Las Vegas, C'mon Everybody and What'd I Say, to name a few.




FredAistair
Posts: 1194
Joined: 12 years 4 months
Has thanked: 2 times
Been thanked: 468 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570335

Post by FredAistair »

r&b wrote:
brian wrote:I don't think many people understand why Elvis was called the King of rock n' roll in the first place. In the fifties he was the most popular rock n' roll singer and the leader of the rock n' roll movement. He sold more records than all his contemparies. If Chuck Berry had done that then the media would have called him the King of Rock n' Roll and he would have been called that for the rest of his life and beyond regardless of what he did the rest of his career. Elvis never called himself that other people did which is a great honor. It's better than tooting your own horn like so many other singers do. Chuck Berry just died so people are saying nice things about him but as I said earlier Elvis has been lauded much more than him. A lot of jealousy from some people regarding Elvis' so they have to take their shots at Elvis to prop someone else up because he's top dog.
Yeah but Elvis himself said he sang rock and roll because thats what sells. How committed is that really? People hear and read things like that and it sticks in their heads. I know upon reading it I was a little taken back. I thought he loved it because he sang it with so much passion, but that was in the 50's and it made me think did he really love it all that much? Why did he sing so little of it after the 50's and when he did , it was not with the same passion. One can blame Hollywood and the films only so much, but where were the great studio albums 63-69? Only in the 68 Comeback did that fire come back because he knew he had to do it that way. It lasted a while, but the 70's were almost rockless with a few exceptions. I get why people call him the King of Rock and Roll and I also get why some others dont. If you want to go by strictly sales and how he led the movement early on, yeah then sure he was. If you want to go by his entire career's output, and his personal feelings about it, there is also a case for maybe no. Chuck and others had very little success compared to Elvis, but in playing with the giants of rock and roll many artists were way ahead of him. The 1972 LP The London Sessions had him playing with British royalty and he was lauded for it. If only Elvis made a similar effort. Just once.
Its not the way to see things, I think this King of rock and Roll , its actually insulting to Elvis and many of the other great rock and rollers. To Elvis because it limits him, he was far more than just a rock and roll artist.Just The King is a fitting title. The other rock and rollers can have the more limited title, because they were actually much more limited.



User avatar

jurasic1968
Posts: 12401
Joined: 11 years 7 months
Has thanked: 13259 times
Been thanked: 2586 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570336

Post by jurasic1968 »

Maybe everyone of the singers doing rock and roll in the 50's deserved this title: Bill Haley, Buddy Holly, Little Richard, Bo Didley, Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, Eddie Cochran, Gene Vincent and Elvis.




brian
Posts: 17407
Joined: 15 years 9 months
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 3828 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570337

Post by brian »

GibbersGanfa wrote:No, we understand. And as much as it pains us in 2017 to admit it, the fact that Elvis was white and Chuck was black was unquestionably a factor in why Chuck didn't sell as many records as Elvis. We simply cannot pretend that because today we're post Civil Rights and because we're such big Elvis fans that suddenly the effects of racism on Chuck Berry's success (and Little Richard and Fats Domino and a whole host of black rock and roll artists) did not exist. It's intellectually dishonest.

My argument regarding the King thing is that it's a crappy, arbitrary title that was worse for Elvis in the long run. It shoehorned him creatively and was the result of an awful cult of personality, mostly comprised of low-to-middle class middle-aged women, that started in the 50s, resurged in the 80s, and rages to this day.

I say Chuck deserved the title, arbitrary as it is, because he certainly pioneered rock and roll as a songwriter and perform, had his success undercut by racism, and himself never progressed very far beyond 50s rock and roll creatively.
I wasn't speaking to that in my post I was speaking about something else. But I will now respond to your comment. I will say yes it was a factor but it wasn't the only factor. I will say that saying that Elvis became more popular and sold more records simply because he was white is not accurate. I don't agree with your opinion about Chuck Berry and Elvis but you entitled to it. I would say more but it's become a hot button issue and it could get heated with some people and my comments could become miscontrued by someone so I won't elaborate.




Topic author
r&b

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570339

Post by r&b »

jurasic1968 wrote:Maybe everyone of the singers doing rock and roll in the 50's deserved this title: Bill Haley, Buddy Holly, Little Richard, Bo Didley, Fats Domino, Chuck Berry, Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, Eddie Cochran, Gene Vincent and Elvis.
To the fans of those artists, they think that way. When you like someone, you like them and bestow titles upon them deserving or not. Personally, I think Elvis deserved the title for what he did in leading the movement at its infancy. He certainly wasnt the first, but he was the biggest, the loudest and the most publicized. But I can also see why some dont think he deserves that title as the 70's progressed. One look at his concert set lists in the 70's is why people may not consider him to be. The few rock tunes he did, he rushed like he didnt care for them and his albums were mostly country oriented.




Topic author
Juan Luis

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570340

Post by Juan Luis »

GibbersGanfa wrote:
brian wrote:I don't think many people understand why Elvis was called the King of rock n' roll in the first place. In the fifties he was the most popular rock n' roll singer and the leader of the rock n' roll movement. He sold more records than all his contemparies. If Chuck Berry or someone else had done that then the media would have called him the King of Rock n' Roll and he would have been called that for the rest of his life and beyond regardless of what he did the rest of his career. Elvis never called himself that other people did which is a great honor. It's better than tooting your own horn like so many other singers do. Chuck Berry just died so people are saying nice things about him but as I said earlier Elvis has been lauded much more than him. A lot of jealousy from some people regarding Elvis' so they have to take their shots at Elvis to prop someone else up because he's top dog.
No, we understand. And as much as it pains us in 2017 to admit it, the fact that Elvis was white and Chuck was black was unquestionably a factor in why Chuck didn't sell as many records as Elvis. We simply cannot pretend that because today we're post Civil Rights and because we're such big Elvis fans that suddenly the effects of racism on Chuck Berry's success (and Little Richard and Fats Domino and a whole host of black rock and roll artists) did not exist. It's intellectually dishonest.

My argument regarding the King thing is that it's a crappy, arbitrary title that was worse for Elvis in the long run. It shoehorned him creatively and was the result of an awful cult of personality, mostly comprised of low-to-middle class middle-aged women, that started in the 50s, resurged in the 80s, and rages to this day.

I say Chuck deserved the title, arbitrary as it is, because he certainly pioneered rock and roll as a songwriter and perform, had his success undercut by racism, and himself never progressed very far beyond 50s rock and roll creatively.
With everything the same including voices...Had Chuck been white with the exact material. He would still not be the top dog in rock n roll Elvis was. And had Elvis been black. He would have still outsold them all with everything the same as well. Chuck could have never tackled Hound Dog as Elvis. Not anyone.



User avatar

Tomek
Posts: 1561
Joined: 20 years 6 months
Location: Poland
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 196 times
Contact:

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570341

Post by Tomek »

Elvis was called The King Of Rock and Roll when they were both alive and at top of their game.
That is fair enough I guess.

Not always King is the one who started it all but the one who ruled the world. And that is why it's Elvis :)




Topic author
Juan Luis

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570343

Post by Juan Luis »

The only thing I digress with "The King" thing is the press or whoever wrote that he lost his crown and then gained it back. It stuck for good. Had he died during the shoot of Harum Scarum... it still would not have changed a thing.



User avatar

Fabbe
Posts: 1882
Joined: 20 years 10 months
Has thanked: 1201 times
Been thanked: 718 times

Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570344

Post by Fabbe »




A rock and roll show. His best in video?

Inviato dal mio iPhone utilizzando Tapatalk


"An artist like Elvis is actually pretending, when he’s home, to be normal. And when he goes out on stage at night is who he actually is." — Bruce Springsteen

User avatar

Tomek
Posts: 1561
Joined: 20 years 6 months
Location: Poland
Has thanked: 23 times
Been thanked: 196 times
Contact:

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570345

Post by Tomek »

I think it is.
Great stuff.



User avatar

Domino
Posts: 3815
Joined: 8 years
Has thanked: 1727 times
Been thanked: 1491 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570348

Post by Domino »

The media just love's to play switcheroo with the King and Queen title.
If you were listening to Country Music in the 50's and early 60's you would have heard that Kitty Wells and Roy Acuff were the Queen and King of Country Music.
Now some call Reba McEntire and George Strait the King and Queen.It's all headlines to sell papers.A promotional tool,unless your an Elvis Presley who was given the title by the most important people in his professional career,that being his fans.
So whoever they want to label King doesn't amount to much but the one that did more then anyone else to earn the King title was Elvis.
Changing the King title 60 years after the fact because a pioneer dies doesn't fly with me.


8) "Well sir,to be honest with you,we just stumbled upon it." - 1954
Image
ImageImage

User avatar

LesterB
Posts: 2176
Joined: 17 years 11 months
Location: At the gates of Graceland
Has thanked: 210 times
Been thanked: 406 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570366

Post by LesterB »

memphis slim wrote:According to some music expert on the BBC news channel today , if Chuck Berry had been white and he'd have started his career a little earlier he would have been bigger than Elvis ! Your thoughts please
Getting back to the OP - this sort of statement just doesn't make sense. If being black in 1950s mainstream America wasn't an issue then one could make the statement that Chuck Berry "could have been bigger than Elvis". I guess that's what the commentator meant?

That aside, the statement is myopic as it doesn't take into account that Elvis was clearly a far superior singer to Berry, was an extraordinary good looking human being (Berry was not) and had a demonstrable gravitas in concert that Berry simply could not compete with. Even in the 50s Elvis showed an astonishing versatility that Berry lacked then and later on his career. On top of all this, Elvis was a grass roots artist and in this respect totally earned his standing amongst his peers both white and non-white.

For the record I am a Chuck Berry fan and have his three box sets covering the 50s, 60s and 70s. Chuck Berry was a game changer and surely influenced music in a way that Elvis could not but cannot be seen in the same league as Elvis - surely?


JUST FOR TODAY


brian
Posts: 17407
Joined: 15 years 9 months
Has thanked: 190 times
Been thanked: 3828 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570373

Post by brian »

GibbersGanfa wrote:I never said it was "simply because he was white." I would NEVER say that, because it is not simple at all, nor would I ever say it was the "only factor." It's extremely nuanced. I just said that it was a factor and that we should not pretend it did not have an effect, and I will add to that and say we should not pretend it was a smaller factor than it was.
Who's pretending. I wasn't pretending. There are a lot of things that went into Elvis being the most popular artist during that time. If we are being honest race also has a lot to do with why some people don't give Elvis credit in this day and age for his contributions to rock n' roll.




Topic author
Mister Moon

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570387

Post by Mister Moon »

Let's just enjoy the music. This race thing became a boring and cheap device years ago for those who don't know better.

Many years ago, a guy who fancied himself a music expert (mind you, he was always waving the Van Morrison flag, but when asked about Them, he only owned a cheap compilation CD) asked me, "Is it true that Elvis' first record was a song by a black singer ?", to which I answered, "Well, one side it was a song by a black singer, and the other, a song by a white singer".

Garbage.



User avatar

drjohncarpenter
Posts: 107019
Joined: 20 years 11 months
Location: United States of America
Has thanked: 11700 times
Been thanked: 33635 times
Age: 89

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570414

Post by drjohncarpenter »

Mister Moon wrote:Let's just enjoy the music. This race thing became a boring and cheap device years ago for those who don't know better.

Many years ago, a guy who fancied himself a music expert (mind you, he was always waving the Van Morrison flag, but when asked about Them, he only owned a cheap compilation CD) asked me, "Is it true that Elvis' first record was a song by a black singer ?", to which I answered, "Well, one side it was a song by a black singer, and the other, a song by a white singer".

Garbage.
I don't feel the civil rights struggle in the U.S. should be diminished as a "race thing" just because an occasional misguided critic uses it to craft a silly argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1954-1968)

Elvis' explosion in the mid-fifties, and rock 'n' roll music in general, came out of this shift in the public mind, and both helped to change and shape America in ways we can still feel today. And a lot of intelligent and enlightening writing has been inspired by these events in the middle of the 20th century.


.
Dr. John Carpenter, M.D.
Stop, look and listen, baby <<--->> that's my philosophy!


Topic author
Mister Moon

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570466

Post by Mister Moon »

drjohncarpenter wrote:
Mister Moon wrote:Let's just enjoy the music. This race thing became a boring and cheap device years ago for those who don't know better.

Many years ago, a guy who fancied himself a music expert (mind you, he was always waving the Van Morrison flag, but when asked about Them, he only owned a cheap compilation CD) asked me, "Is it true that Elvis' first record was a song by a black singer ?", to which I answered, "Well, one side it was a song by a black singer, and the other, a song by a white singer".

Garbage.
I don't feel the civil rights struggle in the U.S. should be diminished as a "race thing" just because an occasional misguided critic uses it to craft a silly argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1954-1968)

Elvis' explosion in the mid-fifties, and rock 'n' roll music in general, came out of this shift in the public mind, and both helped to change and shape America in ways we can still feel today. And a lot of intelligent and enlightening writing has been inspired by these events in the middle of the 20th century.
Sure, I know, and I agree with your post.

I just feel it's a matter that's alluded to too often, and often in a superficial way, light years away from the historical facts and the music itself.



User avatar

eligain
Posts: 4117
Joined: 13 years 6 months
Has thanked: 650 times
Been thanked: 1880 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570469

Post by eligain »

Mister Moon wrote:
drjohncarpenter wrote:
Mister Moon wrote:Let's just enjoy the music. This race thing became a boring and cheap device years ago for those who don't know better.

Many years ago, a guy who fancied himself a music expert (mind you, he was always waving the Van Morrison flag, but when asked about Them, he only owned a cheap compilation CD) asked me, "Is it true that Elvis' first record was a song by a black singer ?", to which I answered, "Well, one side it was a song by a black singer, and the other, a song by a white singer".

Garbage.
I don't feel the civil rights struggle in the U.S. should be diminished as a "race thing" just because an occasional misguided critic uses it to craft a silly argument.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/African-American_Civil_Rights_Movement_(1954-1968)

Elvis' explosion in the mid-fifties, and rock 'n' roll music in general, came out of this shift in the public mind, and both helped to change and shape America in ways we can still feel today. And a lot of intelligent and enlightening writing has been inspired by these events in the middle of the 20th century.
Sure, I know, and I agree with your post.

I just feel it's a matter that's alluded to too often, and often in a superficial way, light years away from the historical facts and the music itself.
The ironic thing is, I've seen Chuck live 2 times and both times the audience was all white. There wasn't even one black person in the audience of either show I saw. I've talked to friends who have seen Chuck live in different parts of the country, at different times and their experience has been the same.



User avatar

PEP
Posts: 4602
Joined: 20 years 11 months
Has thanked: 9 times
Been thanked: 205 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570503

Post by PEP »

As we all know even after 40 years of Elvis' passing.
( or we all wouldn't still be here.)

Even if Chuck Berry would have been white, it wouldn't have mattered.

Elvis was everything Rock N Roll needed and wanted for the time.

He is the One that had the true Rock N Roll Looks, Moves, Rebel appeal and of course the Voice all in one package.

Did Elvis live up to his image?? Far from it...especially when One can go through his life leading up to his very young passing age of 42. The majority of the music he was recording leading up to his death, a lot of it certainly isn't memorable in a Rock N Roll sense.
(Thats' a Fact)

Image
(Note:Picture of course is fake, sadly it appears no real pictures of the two together exist)

At age 90 Chuck Berry leaves us with another Rock N Roll classic ! That at least says' something of an amazing career. 8)

..

PEP 8)



User avatar

Joe Car
Posts: 11590
Joined: 20 years 11 months
Location: Canada
Has thanked: 41 times
Been thanked: 499 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570510

Post by Joe Car »

I've always enjoyed Chuck Berry' musically, immensely. The fact is that with Elvis, (as great as his rock & roll was), he was about so much more and then some, as PEP and others have mentioned. The world was never the same after Elvis Presley exploded onto the scene in 1956.




Pete Dube
Posts: 7712
Joined: 20 years 11 months
Location: South Carolina
Has thanked: 82 times
Been thanked: 530 times

Re: Chuck Berry could have been bigger than Elvis

#1570517

Post by Pete Dube »

Lonely Summer wrote: And everyone here probably knows that my all time favorite artist is Rick Nelson, but I don't pretend that his influence is as great as Elvis, Chuck, Richard, or Fats.
Rick was the only 50's rock & roller to rival Elvis in the looks department, which brought the girls into the fandom and is largely what made both artists pop idols . Rick, like Elvis, sold truckloads of records in the 50's, and those girls were buying a lot of those records. But Elvis had the charisma and voice that Rick lacked (although Rick certainly had a natural, pleasant voice). But Rick could rock with the best of them!

But part of Elvis being the King of rock & roll is due to him having been the biggest pop idol of the 50's. Bigger than anything that had come before. In the 50's Elvis had it all: the music; the voice; the looks; the charisma; the gimmick (the gyrations). Because of this he was early rock & roll's focal point and pace-setter and that's why he was the King of rock & roll!
Last edited by Pete Dube on Thu Mar 23, 2017 4:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.


Post Reply