Money in the hobby

[Peter_Spaeth]

Originally Posted by Snapolit1

Elvis' body of work hasn't stood up well over time. I will stick by it. He was revolutionary for his day but his music hasn't stayed prominent.

What does that mean, hasn't stood up well over time? What criteria are you applying? I will go with Rolling Stone's assessment if I need to go beyond my own opinion which is that he remains among the very few greatest rock singers.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by Peter_Spaeth

What does that mean, hasn't stood up well over time? What criteria are you applying? I will go with Rolling Stone's assessment if I need to go beyond my own opinion which is that he remains among the very few greatest rock singers.

Graceland is packed every single day of the week with tourists. He's been dead for 30 years. What other entertainer who has been gone that long has such a following? And Elvis has his own channel on Sirius -- do the Beatles?

I don't see how anyone can state objectively that his music has not stood up over time. His music is timeless, and I'm not even the biggest Elvis fan (though I have been to Graceland).

[1952boyntoncollector]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Graceland is packed every single day of the week with tourists. He's been dead for 30 years. What other entertainer who has been gone that long has such a following? And Elvis has his own channel on Sirius -- do the Beatles?

.

http://www.siriusxm.com/thebeatleschannel

[darwinbulldog]

Well then.

[darwinbulldog]

I think people will recognize the name Elvis for many decades to come, but relatively few of them will enjoy listening to his music, so he's transcended his talents and entered the ranks of famous for being famous.

[calvindog]

Originally Posted by 1952boyntoncollector

http://www.siriusxm.com/thebeatleschannel

Damn. Not sure how I missed that. Has this been on for long?

PS the fact that I was unaware of this channel supports my argument that the Beatles don't resonate today as well as Elvis does.

[ullmandds]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Damn. Not sure how I missed that. Has this been on for long?

PS the fact that I was unaware of this channel supports my argument that the Beatles don't resonate today as well as Elvis does.

Gotta disagree with you here, Jeff...the beatles reasonate 100 x's more than elvis does today!

[Bill77]

Just my two cents but I would rather listen to Elvis than the Beatles as I think most if not all of their music has not age well at all either.

And I definitely would not want to watch any of Elvis or the Beatles movies.

Again just my two cents on the topic.

[Snapolit1]

Everyone's entitled to their opinions. Elvis was a revolutionary musical performer, an actor, and a larger than life persona. As to the movies, they are not watched today really by anyone. The persona part had its day, but I wouldn't want to be looking for work as an Elvis impersonator these days. As to the music, so what that satellite radio has a station. They have a Jimmy Buffett channel too and I'd hardly argue that he's a revolutionary anything. Elvis sold a ton or records in his day and I am sure his estate sells relatively few these days. Graceland? Nowhere close to the tourist pull it was. (Don't believe the hype from Elvis Presley Enterprises, Inc.) Cool place I've been there twice. Planes are gone. Man has his place in rock and roll history.
Last time I was at Sun Studios all my tour guide wanted to talk about was Johnny Cash.

[btcarfagno]

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

[brian1961]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

Tom, very well articulated, bro. Right on, man! --Brian Powell

[Snapolit1]

Originally Posted by btcarfagno

I am not sure that I understand what is being argued here regarding Elvis/The Beatles etc. Of course much of their music would not hold up for today's generation. Music tastes change. Attitudes change. Most importantly, what Elvis and The Beatles did has been either mimicked or at least partially copied so much over the past 50+ years that it has watered down the original.

Like anything else they need to be viewed in the context of their time. Citizen Kane was a landmark film in 1939 for many many reasons. Those reasons soon became standard film making practice. 75 years later my kids watch it and only see the story and it being "just another film". Without the historical context this is what happens.

Just because the music of Elvis or The Beatles may not "hold up" to today's generation doesn't make them any less important. In some ways, the influence of Elvis and The Beatles permiating every corner of the music industry has led to their own music not "holding up". It has been copied and mimicked so often that it has watered down the content of the original. Until you put them in their true historical context. Like a Citizen Kane.

Tom C

Only point I was making was that while Elvis was a huge act (the biggest probably), I can understand why his memorabilia has fallen off a cliff. I don't think his musical has held up for new generations of music fans. Some rare performers, the Beatles for example, will always convert new generations. Go to a McCartney show and watch 10 year singing every song. Doesn't mean they are better or worse. But they continue to resonate. James Dean continues to be know today despite a very limited career. 1000000s of better actors have lapsed into obscurity.

[obcbobd]

Originally Posted by calvindog

Damn. Not sure how I missed that. Has this been on for long?

PS the fact that I was unaware of this channel supports my argument that the Beatles don't resonate today as well as Elvis does.

I think the station is new in the past week or so.