Do young people still listen to Elvis?

Didn't someone spot Elvis somewhere last week?

 

Sorry to inject a little reality check into the mix but all music from the 60s sounds "dated," no matter the artist. Hell, music from 2003 sounds somewhat dated. Or better put: of another time.

Its a silly point of contention anyway. Dated music, though obviously meant to have a negative connotation, does not automatically disqualify a music's quality. Stop using it as a reason The Beatles rule and Elvis drools. You're not pushing the conversation forward, you're injecting it with ridiculous arguments.

 

In a way...a sold out, empty sales display at a local Barnes and noble.

 

You may not be a fan, but this is just wildly inaccurate. From 67-72 he was a completely different artist than he was in his early career. I would recommend you listen to the "How Great Thou Art", "From Elvis In Memphis", and "Elvis Country" LP's to hear his artistic growth. And, of course, his '68 Comeback special.

 

You didn't have to be there to appreciate it.
The answer to this thread's question is yes but they are not of the pop or R&B or Hip Hop crowd.
They are the fans of modern Country music.
I'm not a fan of today's Country music but Elvis is still a relevant and significant icon.
Elvis was first a country singer with Sun Records as well with many RCA tracks.
Elvis was Rockabilly which is a country sub genre as much as a rock one.
Elvis was from the south (Mississippi)
He moved to and remained in Tennessee which is the heart of country music.
Elvis was a Gospel artists which remains an important genre in the South and with many country fans.
Elvis material from 69-77 was often contemporary country or country covers.
Add to all this that Rock n Roll or Pop Rock transfered to Modern Country and Elvis is listened to by the country fans and the Pop Country fans.
If you're raised by a family that only listens to country music you are introduced and expected to love Elvis and Johnny Cash for all the above reasons.

 

I was exposed to a lot of country music growing up : Johnny Cash, Buck Owens, Willie Nelson, Waylon Jennings, etc. No Elvis though.

Later on I gave Elvis a shot. I do like his early rockabilly material, but for the most part his post army output does nothing for me. I'm not a huge of his vocals, but I realize this is just personal taste. I liked it when he pushed the upper part of his vocal range in songs like Jailhouse Rock or Hound Dog. As for his crooning and gospel stuff - not so much.

 

The Beatles comparison is only valid as far as the level of fame they each had at their peak. However. Elvis did a lot of things that limited his appeal to a wider audience.
The Beatles didn't take an extended leave of absence to serve in the military at the peak of their fame,
The Beatles didn't put Hollywood ahead of their music career,
The Beatles were already standing on Elvis' shoulders, as far as accomplishments, as well as lessons learned from the above points in Elvis' career by the time they broke big,
The Beatles broke up before their decline, thus...
No Vegas Beatles Era
No Jumpsuit Beatles Era
No fat Beatles Era (only John's hindsight declaration of a phase he went through)

Just highlighting that it's mostly an apples to oranges comparison.

Perhaps if Elvis had a guiding light like a George Martin to provide more consistency over his recording era,
Perhaps if Elvis had a different manager that would have permitted touring beyond the U.S.A. and Canada, and exposure to a wider audience and influences,
Perhaps if Elvis had lived to see a renaissance that many of his peers had enjoyed later in life, then his legacy would differ. Even most of his contemporaries struggled to stay relevant beyond the initial rock and roll/rockabilly demographic of the 50's that became the oldies genre, but many of them had the opportunity to connect to a younger audience.

In a lot of ways, his legacy is too far a generational divide, like expecting the majority of folks to show a genuine interest in Dixieland Jazz, Big Band or Swing, or Robert Johnson blues-era artists alongside what is current.

He left a huge legacy, and influenced many, but I don't hear any of his music on any stations I listen to, and I'm a generation ahead of the millennials.

 

I think he will always have a loyal following in the UK and in the southern USA. It will ebb and flow, but it will never disappear.

 

That's because as a foursome who broke up early, none of their poor solo endeavors counts against the Beatles.
Paul's Wildlife and other extremely uneven or lots of filler solo albums,
John's constant shoving of Yoko down our throats, George's post ATMP career and Ringo's "acting".
Elvis was a solo artist not a group so anything he did after his heyday still counted against the image no matter how many years down the road.

 

My 3-year old likes his 50's stuff... but he calls him Elvin

 

Which to me, is very very sad. All of this above.

 

Same with The Beatles.

 

It's worth noting that there is a difference between liking someones music, and liking their image. I mean, there are countless Marilyn Monroe posters/shorts out there, but I somehow doubt too many people are rushing out to buy the DVD's. There are artists who have crossed the cultural divide, their image elevated to being something other. My guess is Bowie will be another whose image, over time, will become apart from his music.

 

I agree with all of this. Saying The Beatles doesn't sound dated just doesn't ring true - it is so obviously so. But then, as you state, all music ages. In fact, that can often be part of the charm. I was listening to Jethro Tull's This Was and Benefit last night - both are dated sound wise. Both excellent. Neither is diminished by being "of their time".

 

Music in the 50's and early 60's was rather cringey, although I do like some of it. Elvis was part of this cringyness in the 50's and that's why I have a hard time enjoying his songs except for his most classic tunes like Jailhouse Rock. Bands like The Beatles then came around and made music more mature (although they were cringey too in the early 60's) and sadly Elvis was never able to take advantage of this. His music did change in the late 60's and throughout the 70's but it was still cringey.

Now it should be important to note that I like some of this cringyness but i always found it to be a little outdated.

 

With all do respect sir, you do not get to decide that.

 

OK, but I'm not deciding anything for you, I'm just making a comment on a public forum. It's pretty straightforward regarding your comments and attitude towards Elvis (Presley) and I'm quite happy to run through what you wrote if you're unclear about how your comments might be interpreted by others.

For the record I'm no blinkered Elvis fan, as I posted before I don't think he's relevant to today's kids in just the same way as I don't think The Beatles are either.

 

And I'm just making comments on a public forum also but have never attempted to limit or criticize your take on it in any way, or for that matter, on anyone else's. It is also public and clearly visible that you have taken exception to that with me, sad really.

It's my opinion that the relevancy and endurance of any artist, or performer for future generations not caught up in the short term fervor and commercial induced slight-of-hand comes down to their craft, the difference it made at the time, and whether it's relevance and emotion can still translate into a modern listener's current experience. The sound quality and emotion of the early Sun Sessions in this performer's beginnings imho, still translate that energy and passion of the roots and blues they where derivative of, and they exist as simply, beautiful examples of excellently engineered and bare-boned recording. The Rock n' Roll pantheon will be forever in debt to what this stimulated. But is that enough to be deemed King? For some, on perhaps a somewhat simplistic scale, possibly, though I for one, just need something more then that to honor a life's work as art or craft excellence...

 

I love the Vegas era. As for the jumpsuits, I think they are cooler especially in hindsight compared to those Sgt. Pepper outfits.

 

Johnny Cash has replaced Elvis as an icon to young people who appreciate the past. Elvis became a joke after he died because his last few years were spent out of shape and in Vegas. Then, all the imitators sprung up to parody him. Johnny Cash spent his last few years making a critically acclaimed comeback (even though it was artistically inconsistent in my opinion). Young folks I encounter, even ones that are open to music from eras before they were born, just don't think much of Elvis, but almost all of them say they like Johnny Cash even though they rarely know much of his material. I try to correct their thinking, but usually it's in vain. They're missing out. Elvis was a giant and a star the size of which we'll never see again.

 

Enjoyed and find value in your observation and comparison to Johnny Cash's powerful exit and feel future generations could well recognize it, and be moved by the power of his heartfelt accomplishments.

 

Was in Starbucks the other day, they were playing piped music"
It's Now Or Never " came on, one teen said is that the Beatles, the other uninterested was playing Nintendo.

 

Perhaps it was perceived as "fake news"...

 

Johnny Cash being produced by Rick Rubin helped with that, both with association and results.
The other day I showed one of my fake IDs of Elvis to a 19 year old co worker and she said that's not you that's Elvis Presley.
I thought it was kinda cool she didn't just say Elvis but Elvis Presley.
Also it was a 50s photo and not a 70s one.
So she recognized a young Elvis and knew his last name.
I think as rock continues to fall by the wayside, that Elvis and Johnny Cash may have a slight advantage over even The Beatles, Stones, Zeppelin ect.
As Hip Hop and R&B continue to dominate the mainstream, it's the older millennials who still respect Classic Rock, as it was still more popular than today in the 90s as they grew up.
But the Generation Z crowd for the most part don't care for the sounds of Rock in general.
But at least in the Country music and Southern Pride communities, the pop rock sound is alive and well and so are the pop rock/country/rockabilly icons such as Cash and Elvis.
This will continue for generations.
As the the non country crowd ages who knows what may happen to classic rock legacies.

 

Exactly what does "cringey" mean as it pertains to music?