Tens of thousands of impersonators, his music is timeless, documentaries still done about him, countless CDs released post death.
I realize there are other more commercially successful acts/groups (e.g Beatles, Rolling Stones, MJ etc), but in terms of overall legacy and mainstream success, would it be Elvis?
>>64177300
Possibly.
The most influential artist is woody Guthrie though.
He lived on through bob Dylan and every subsequent inspiration from the pair. From The Boss to Tom waits
>>64177300
Elvis honestly didn't do that much compared to other musicians
He just had such a recognizable persona that he gets impersonators to this day
>>64177300
Hard to say, but I feel like the largest lasting legacies as of now belong to the 'big four' classic rock staples: The Beatles, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, and the Rolling Stones. Those bands are still extremely popular today and with people of all ages, and Elvis really isn't. As of now, Elvis is the second-best selling artist of all time behind the Beatles, but I think he'll be overtaken by the bands I listed.
>>64177365
I agree but the big 4 you listed don't necessarily have the same legacy and following Elvis does.
>>64177404
Well what do you mean by legacy? Going off of what was listed in the OP (timeless music, documentaries, post-death CD's), it sounds like the other bands would have him beat. The big four are all hugely popular with both the older and younger generation, whereas I don't know anyone who listens to Elvis. I would certainly say they already have a larger following than Elvis.
>>64177482
There are festivals with 10s of thousands in attendance just centered around Elvis. I think there definitely would be more Elvis documentaries/post death CD's than any of the big 4, definitely more than Pink Floyd or Led Zeppelin.
>>64177540
I don't know man I just don't see it. The thing about festivals could be said about the other bands; there are tons of cover bands and shit dedicated to them. I'm aware that there are Elvis fans out there but I just see him as more of a niche artist these days (no radio airplay ever, never mentioned on any forums or by music friends IRL, etc.). I honestly have no idea where his apparently massive fanbase is hiding.
And you're right about PF and LZ not having larger discographies than him, but check out The Beatles.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elvis_Presley_albums_discography
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles_discography
The Beatles certainly have a larger legacy, even if the other bands don't.
Nah, The Beatles have all that along with actually being critically acclaimed and well liked by both casual and serious music listeners alike.
>>64177300
I unironically like Elvis' music. He was sexy as fuck back in the day.
>>64177632
A lot of serious music listeners actually like/liked Elvis.
Not even remotely. He's not as infuential as the (largely) black musicians that introduced the styles he succeeded with.
If we're talking outside the sphere of pop/youth culture, Bach is still influencing culture today. I'm not sure but I think the riff on 'Plug in Baby' is lifted out of one of his tracks, Bowie claims to have studied Bach around the Berlin trilogy, for example.
Elvis is just a meme. Classical composers like Beethoven are still known and relevant after centuries. This is what I call legacy.
>>64177300
Elvis isn't important as a musician, he's important as a performer and popularizer- he had a huge impact in his time and place, influencing and setting the mold for what came after. His music may be timeless, but it's mainly not "his", he excellently interpreted whatever happened to be floating around that people presented to him. He didn't write much and didn't care to.
