Who ultimately has the greater musical legacy?

[NightTrain]

Elvis Presley or Johnny Cash?

[CBGLuthier]

1. Johnny Cash

Elvis was on the edge of washed up, just a lounge act when he died.

Johnny Cash is still doing great work that is worthy of listening to. Check out his recent release of covers of works by acts like Nine Inch Nails and Depeche Mode.

[madrchsod]

7. the nine inch nail

cover was painful to watch and listen to. i can`t think of any cover that was better than the orginal. all those years came out in that song..the first time i saw it, i was humbled.

[CO Liberal]

2. In the True Sense of "Legacy"......

...I believe that Johnny Cash's children are probably far more talented than Lisa Marie Presley, based on what I've heard of her "singing".

[jcgadfly]

3. Tough question

I would say Cash because he has the opportunity to continue building on his legacy (being alive and all).

[noonwitch]

4. Johnny Cash

Elvis never wrote songs, he was just a performer. Johnny Cash is an artist.

[ForrestGump]

8. Writing songs has nothing to do with it

And Elvis was not just 'a' performer.

I listen to singing - the words are secondary. And without Elvis, to borrow directly from John Lennon, there would havebeen no Beatles. And the same is true for many to a greater or lesser degree, from Bob Dylan to Barry White.

Johnny Cash is and always was great, but he did not make the impact that Elvis did - Elvis changed not just popular culture but also history.

[mitchum]

9. What ForrestGump said

[wyldwolf]

20. What forrestgump and mitchum said...

[Trajan]

5. Elvis by a LONG shot .....

I love Cash and his family .... but lets get real ....

From a media standpoint: ..... Presley has for FORTY SOLID YEARS been defined as the "King of Rock and Roll" ...

He is associated as the ROOT of Rock music: ... right or wrong, this is how he has been packaged and sold ...

THAT is how the human race sees Elvis: .. he is the KING .....

The fact that he didnt write isnt terribly relevent, since he rendered and executed the compositions of others HIS way, and is more strongly identified with the songs he selected than the writers themselves .....

Nah: ..... I love Cash, and I agree he has a stronger connection to his own art than Elvis ....... but to deny the overwhelming mass media animal that the Elvis image has become in 40 years is to deny FDR his "Day of Infamy", JFK His "Ask NOT what your country can do for you ... ", and MLK his "I have a DREAM ..." ....

You cannot deny the King his throne ...

Hell: .. I dont even LIKE Elvis ....

[catzies]

22. What Trajan said.

And I also don't even like him. But I love the Beatles, so if it took Elvis to get them to "be," then that's that.

[rock]

6. I like them both

But I believe Elvis gets the nod.

[geniph]

10. Elvis' legacy is not musical

How could it be? He was a performer, not a musician. Cash is a musician, thus he can leave a musical legacy. Elvis' legacy as a PERFORMER is profound, but don't mistake him for a musician.

[ForrestGump]

11. Elvis was a musician

He produced most of his own sessions in an age when to do so was unusual in pop music and the musicians who played for him - a roster that included some of the best that Memphis, Nashville, and LA ever produced - vouch for his incredible sense of rhythm and his ability to seek and get a sound, whether instrumental or vocal.

Listen to Elvis' sessions - the dude was in charge, and his ear was faultless. Listen to outakes of his sessions, or rehearsals for live gigs, and you're hearing a musician hard at work, and at times he was a perfectionist (31 takes of "Hound Dog," 28 takes of "Don't Be Cruel," etc).

He may not have been the greatest guitar player, or exceptionally great on any other instrument but technical prowess is what the session guys were brought in for. Elvis could always get the sound he wanted, even if his instrumentals were rough and ready at times. It's his guitar that you hear up front on the Sun records, by the way, that're like the Holy Grail of Rock 'n' Roll. He was competent with a few instruments and probably best on piano, that he played on some recordings and live....he also played bass on the 1957 classic "Baby, I Don't Care" when his bass player couldn't get the right feel). And as a vocalist, he was exceptional in range (in term of octaves and the variety of material that he could span) and that elusive quality called 'soul' or 'passion.'

Yeah, he was an incredible performer and showman, but he was also most definitely a serious musical force, when left to record the material he wanted to record (this disqualifies most of the movie soundtracks, not that all of them were necessarily all bad). Fair enough that some people might think he's overrated, but one area in which he's egregiously underrated is as a musician.

[wyldwolf]

21. I agree, ForrestGump, but you're wasting your time....

Nevermind that Elvis co-wrote many songs.
Nevermind he was at least an adequate guitar and piano player.
Nevermind that he has one of the most recognizable voices in history...
Nevermind he was a work-a-holic when it comes to his music.

He sold too many damn records so he taken seriously by some people.

[Michael Daniels]

26. Actually, most of Elvis' "co-writes"

were in effect extortion by his management. They would demand that the actual writer give Elvis co-credit in return for Elvis cutting the song.

Most song-writers went along with the sham because they knew that even at 1/2 royalties they were going to rake in the money if the song became an Elvis hit.

[BlueJazz]

12. As a Musician and

especially as a Jazz Musician (Sax, Piano) I must take exception to those who say that "being a singer and performer" is not the same as being a Musician.
Those who sing well are merely using the instrument that is closest to the body ...their voice.
Listen to groups like "The Manhattan Transfer" and tell me that they are not "making Music" with their voice.
They know Chord Scales and tones just as well as many, many great musicians....They just use a different instrument.

[HEyHEY]

13. WHOAAA!

Some things man was not meant to know!

[proud patriot]

14. For me it's Elvis

:hi:

[Spirochete]

15. Johnny Cash...

for the simple reason that he writes his own stuff. Elvis didn't.

[newyawker99]

16. Another vote for Elvis!

[Lars39]

17. Elvis Presley, and Carl Perkins shaped the early days of rock n roll.

[Snow]

18. Hmmmm - waddya think about Tennessee Ernie Ford?

[Lars39]

24. I like some of his stuff, but I don't think he influenced rock.

:)

[Michael Daniels]

19. Elvis

I love both musicians but a legacy depends on the masses knowing your work and while neither Elvis or Johnny is going disappear from history, I'm willing to bet the average Joe can name more Elvis songs than Johnny Cash songs.

I'd imagine that when people are asked to name a Johnny Cash song most of the answers are going to be either "Ring of Fire", "I Walk the Line" or "Folsom Prison Blues".

God knows how many different answers "Name an Elvis song" would generate.

A better example could be that the recent Elvis compilation went to number 1 on the charts. Even the biggest optimist couldn't realistically hope for a Cash compliation to crack above #40.

Elvis will have the bigger legacy.

[DemNoir]

23. The horror

Of seeing the great Johnny Cash and Elvis mentioned on the same line. Cash is a landmark musical figure whom people will be interested in 100 years from now. Elvis is much more a pop icon than musician.

[Bake]

28. Actually, they SHOULD be mentioned in the same line

Since they were both present at the birth of rock & roll. Both recorded for Sam Phillips at Sun Records. Both were "bad boys." Both were rooted in rockabilly/gospel/blues.

The King will still be talked about 100 years from now. Legacy, to me at least, implies a continued influence over music and/or culture. El will continue to have that kind of influence. Musician? The dude was gifted with an incredible instrument in that voice.

Cash? Geez, he's a legend too. And unlike Elivs, who pretty much in the latter years was a lounge act doing the same old stuff, Cash has never stopped growing and developing as an artist. "Hurt" is just about the most poignant, soulful, powerful and painful song I've heard in YEARS. Most people who know anything about music, who ever listened to a radio, know who the Man in Black is.

Maybe it comes down to The King is a POP CULTURE icon; Cash is a true MUSICAL icon. Or maybe not. But they both deserve to be up there in the pantheon.

Bake
Just call me Wishy-Washy

[ScreamingMeemie]

25. I am going to go my own way with Willie Nelson...

Singer, songwriter, humanitarian extraordinaire. He has left a greater impression on who I am than the other two.

[Bryan]

27. If by "musical legacy", you mean

...overall impact on popular culture, then Elvis clearly gets the nod. He had and continues to have a hold on the public imagination that is so great it's almost unfair to compare him to other artists (and, to a degree, Elvis' stature was tied to his physical beauty, dance talent, and general sense of stagecraft, areas in which Cash cannot compete).

However, if by "musical legacy", you mean overall consistency and the chances of pulling an album off the rack at random and finding it good, Johnny is so far ahead as to be beyond the horizon line.

Elvis' inability/unwillingness to take control of his career greatly damaged the quality of his output; "The Colonel" spent 15+ years treating Elvis as a fad that could go away at any time, and the result is many lackluster albums, a diminishment of the King's reputation as a live act that was only starting to be repaired at the time of his death, schloads of embarrassing TV and movie appearances (Cash has had fewer problems in this area, but I'd probably concede that Elvis had more talent as an actor), and a general avalanche of kitsch (though, in the interest of fairness, Johnny was already an adult when he began to become famous, while the young Elvis underwent a massive amount of scrutiny that even experienced adults would be hard-pressed to handle intelligently).

On the whole, though, Cash's control over his career and image (not to mention his ability to transcend his substance abuse problems, since it's hard to get a lot done when you're fucked up all the time) has, I feel, left him with a much more impressive reputation as a musical figure.

[geniph]

29. Excellent analysis, Bryan

I quite agree. Although I also agree with the earlier poster who mentioned Willie Nelson as leaving a greater legacy than either...and so will Chuck Berry and Buddy Holly.