Michael Jackson vs Elvis Presley vs The Beatles

[Marvelgirl]

One of the few bright spots of staying at home is to catch up on things. I have been watching and listening to a lot of Beatles music, so far its been gold. The Beatles were not overrated. They were as talented as any musicians from the past that has been adored before my birth that I had to learn about.The 3 artists I mentioned are the biggest things to ever grace the music scene. They left a huge mark on tv and films too.

Michael for me was the most compete of the 3, though I like Elvis's voice a lot better than Michael's and I like Beatles songwriting better than Michael's but Michael had no strong weaknesses.

The Beatles did everything but dance

Elvis did not write any songs or compose any music

Micheal could sing, dance, write and compose music.

I love the Beatles, they are the greatest musicians, Elvis was a talented singer and performer but Michael is the most complete entertainer of all time.

[Username taken]

As a child of the 80s, Michael Jackson has a special place in my heart so I'm kind of biased on the subject.

Michael could do everything, sing, dance and write. He was the complete package and the greatest entertainer i have ever seen.

[WillieMorgan]

The Beatles win that three-way contest hands down as far as i'm concerned. Whether they can dance or not is of zero interest to me.

I've only started to really, truly appreciate their immense contribution to popular culture over the past year though. Their music wasn't new to me prior to that but I'd never really delved 'below the surface' of it. I was always more of a Rolling Stones fan until recently. I'm thankful that I've been able to give The Beatles the time and consideration to properly appreciate just how awesome and ground-breaking they really were.

I don't normally bother with compilation albums but the '1' album is an hour and a half of some of the finest music produced in the 20th century. Brilliant.

[CliffHanger2]

I agree Michael was the most complete Artist. Talent and skill that was otherworldly and definitely the most repeat listen worthy of the three.

[Jim Kelly]

There are four lads from Liverpool. Elvis might be able to take on George and Ringo, but John and Paul would absolutely demolish Michael. A quartet of Scouses are not to be trifled with.

[Starter Set]

It's extremely rare to find someone as talented as Jackson was. Music, dance, amazing stage performance, writing...If Elvis was a king, Jackson was a god. A weird one, granted, but a god.

Time is going to be the nicest to the beatles i think though. Jackson and Elvis are extremely linked to their respective eras when the beatles music has aged the best.

[Marvelgirl]

The Beatles win that three-way contest hands down as far as i'm concerned. Whether they can dance or not is of zero interest to me.

I've only started to really, truly appreciate their immense contribution to popular culture over the past year though. Their music wasn't new to me prior to that but I'd never really delved 'below the surface' of it. I was always more of a Rolling Stones fan until recently. I'm thankful that I've been able to give The Beatles the time and consideration to properly appreciate just how awesome and ground-breaking they really were.

I don't normally bother with compilation albums but the '1' album is an hour and a half of some of the finest music produced in the 20th century. Brilliant.

Dancing is part of the music package.

The Beatles evolved a lot as musicians, Michael never could really evolve, he did thriller and tried and tried to replicate the success of thriller. Beatles constantly changed. The White Album, Revolver, Abbey Road and Sgt Pepper to name some of the Beatles Albums that displayed how the Fab Four were changing for the better as musicians.

The beatles to me are better artists but Michael is still more complete. He was not only a great dancer, he changed the dance genre forever with Thriller and Bad. Zero interest to you or not, Dance is still part of the topic that has to be greatly considered objectively.

[Jim Kelly]

What songs did Michael Jackson write on his own? All of the ones I can think of were written by other people--or were co-written with someone else.

If you're talking about entertainers, I personally like Bobby Darin best. He could write music, sing, dance, act, play multiple instruments, do comedic impressions, tell jokes, his music spanned several different genres and styles--and he had to do it all as fast as he could, because he didn't know how much longer he might live. He had a heart condition, because he contracted rheumatic fever as a child. The doctor said he'd be lucky if he made it to twenty-five. He died at thirty-seven while undergoing yet another operation to repair his heart. He might not be as famous as Elvis, MJ, or the four Beatles--but he was a mighty mighty man and a superb entertainer.

[WillieMorgan]

Dancing is part of the music package.

The Beatles evolved a lot as musicians, Michael never could really evolve, he did thriller and tried and tried to replicate the success of thriller. Beatles constantly changed. The White Album, Revolver, Abbey Road and Sgt Pepper to name some of the Beatles Albums that displayed how the Fab Four were changing for the better as musicians.

The beatles to me are better artists but Michael is still more complete. He was not only a great dancer, he changed the dance genre forever with Thriller and Bad. Zero interest to you or not, Dance is still part of the topic that has to be greatly considered objectively.

Dance is only an important part of the package if you are focusing mainly on the visual element of music. Last time I checked, music was an auditory pleasure first and foremost. If we are focusing on dancing too then, yes, Michael Jackson's 'Thriller' videos in particular were ground-breaking and set a new industry standard. Also, if we are focusing on the visuals then, for me, that slightly handicaps Elvis. His best music was definitely from those early rock 'n' roll years. Many of his later movie soundtracks are cookie-cutter standard by comparison, especially when the Colonel started buying the songs from cheaper song-writing teams.

Don't get me wrong, Michael Jackson was a stellar performer, a one-in-a-generation talent. The Beatles are obviously superior though. Their innovations go way beyond fronting a decent music video. There's nothing wrong with appreciating a good dance routine but it should never be prioritised over song-writing and performing talent. That mindset has helped create today's immensely shallow music industry. Ears first, eyes a very distant second. Always.

[Valentis]

1. The Beatles
2. Michael Jackson/Elvis Presley are a tie.

Dance is not all that important to me in the larger picture. Britney Spears can dance better than Celine Dion. I did still go to the Celine Dion Vegas residency over Britney. Elvis may not have written his songs, however Elvis could sing many music genres including Gospel, R&B Soul and Country.


Come Together, Right now, Over me.


Beatles for the win.

[ChrisIII]

I'd vote for Queen of course but I'm not sure if they were really that big in America until "Wayne's World"/post-Freddie, mainly known for being on the soundtracks of somewhat 'cult' movies like Flash Gordon and Highlander.


Of course in the topic itself, the three sort of crossed paths in interesting ways (although Elvis was of course long passed); Michael had that brief marriage with Lisa Marie Presley in the '90s; Paul McCartney and Michael appeared on each other's albums (Although I think Say, Say, Say has aged a lot better than "The girl is mine") until their friendship dissolved after Michael bought the Beatles music rights or something like that.

[Noodle]

Dancing is part of the music package.

The Beatles evolved a lot as musicians, Michael never could really evolve, he did thriller and tried and tried to replicate the success of thriller. Beatles constantly changed. The White Album, Revolver, Abbey Road and Sgt Pepper to name some of the Beatles Albums that displayed how the Fab Four were changing for the better as musicians.

The beatles to me are better artists but Michael is still more complete. He was not only a great dancer, he changed the dance genre forever with Thriller and Bad. Zero interest to you or not, Dance is still part of the topic that has to be greatly considered objectively.

You're faulting The Beatles for something that wasn't a factor in the time they were popular. Bands/singers didn't dance in their performances back then. That wasn't a thing until much later, when things like music videos were more common. Most of The Beatles' "music videos" were just clips from their movies or, in their earlier days, live performances.

[Tuck]

I feel like maybe Prince belongs in this conversation. Guy wrote songs in his sleep, across a wide range of genres.

[caj]

I feel like maybe Prince belongs in this conversation. Guy wrote songs in his sleep, across a wide range of genres.

I agree. Prince would be my pick.

Of the three listed in the OP, I'd choose Jackson. But any of the three would be a great choice. All were talented and gifted. I completely understand why they were as popular as they were in their day.

[wjowski]

Other

Stevie Wonder...or maybe Roy Orbison.