They don't sound like The Ramones...The Ramones sound good.

And I did say "as far as I'm aware". Either way, they just helped prove the 'Elvis sucks' point by comparing the two.

Preference wise I'd go with Costello.

Well for one they did and two Elvis didn't. He didn't steal songs, he credited the writers.

Presley was an original musician for his time, he recorded other peoples songs but he put his own spin on them. He did put a white face on rock n roll but you say it like that's a bad thing, he made rock n roll mainstream and paved the way for every white rock n roll musician.

The Sex Pistols were a british New York Dolls. They put a face on punk and got punk into the mainstream so they are important for that. But to call them more original and talented than Elvis is ridiculous.

Absolutely not.

They don't sound even remotely like the Ramones, they copied the New York Dolls. But thats stupid to suggest that every band in a given genre are complete ripoffs of the band that started it.

It's like saying Iron Maiden are a ripoff of Black Sabbath.

:beer:



Nevertheless, I would question why you would necrobump a thread from thirteen years ago to say that. :confused: :whythis:

Weird though that this would be the only one. Surely not? I don't like him either, but then, I don't like, oh, say I don't know, the Fall, and I don't seek out threads about them. But whatever, just wondered. It's a pretty pointless thread, as there is about as much in common between Presley and Costello, I would say, as there is between say Jon Anderson and Richard Dean Anderson.

In 2008? Much as I don't like him personally, I have to admit that he has never gone out of vogue. Everyone knows who he is, and he's always been popular. I doubt you could pick a time period after his rise to fame up to now when he would not be popular.

:laughing:

A classic Elvis blast from MB past.

He is gradually going down in the all-time rankings as time goes on however. Thirty years ago, he would have been considered second only to the Beatles but today, you'd be lucky to see him in the top ten. He doesn't seem to be quite as timeless as the Beatles, Stones, or Led Zeppelin as younger people seem to relate to them a bit better. Still, I imagine he'll always have a place in the music history books.

So there's hope for me yet? ;)

Nope :D

:(