Unbeatable: Fab Four Top All-Time Chart

Jun 4, 2012 | Posted by: roboblogger | Full story: NEWS.com.au

The Beatles have beaten Elvis Presley and Madonna to be declared the biggest selling singles act since charts began 60 years ago.

Comments
1 - 17 of 17 Comments Last updated Jun 6, 2012
DENNIS HAUSER

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#1
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

WAIT A MINUTE! THE BEATLES WERE A GROUP, NOT ONE "SINGLE" ACT.
Hector Cornholio

Renton, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#2
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

Yeah The Beatles rule. They were an act even if they were a group of four.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DENNIS HAUSER wrote:
WAIT A MINUTE! THE BEATLES WERE A GROUP, NOT ONE "SINGLE" ACT.
Did they count Elvis's first three years as a recording artist?

The billboard chart started keeping tabs in the rock era in 1958, right?

So, if they counted that in, Elvis would certainly be ahead The Beatles.

Also they fail to mention that Elvis had many other #1's on other charts.

Cashbox, Country, R & B and Easy Listening. They only focus on Pop.

Surely, Elvis hit #1 on billboard top 100 which wasn't billboard pop.

These are his charted singles after his death:

"My Way"....#1 country
"Unchained Medley"....#2 country
"Are You Sincere".....#10 country
"Honky Tonk Angel"....#6 country
"Guitar Man"....#1 country
"Loving Arms"....#8 country
"America"....#6 hot 100
"A Little Less Conversation"....#1 hot 100
"Rubberneckin"....#1 hot 100
"That's All Right"....#1 hot 100

How many singles has a living Paul McCartney put in the top 10 since '78?
DENNIS HAUSER

United States

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jun 4, 2012
 
All you Beatles fans out their, don't get me wrong! The Beatles were a great group/band! But as the late walter Brennan said,"No brag, just fact!" If I remeber Octo, help my old gray head out, I believe Elvis had MOODY BLUE or Way DOWN or both number one one charts after his' death? Maybe country charts?
octopus brain wrote:
<quoted text>
Did they count Elvis's first three years as a recording artist?
The billboard chart started keeping tabs in the rock era in 1958, right?
So, if they counted that in, Elvis would certainly be ahead The Beatles.
Also they fail to mention that Elvis had many other #1's on other charts.
Cashbox, Country, R & B and Easy Listening. They only focus on Pop.
Surely, Elvis hit #1 on billboard top 100 which wasn't billboard pop.
These are his charted singles after his death:
"My Way"....#1 country
"Unchained Medley"....#2 country
"Are You Sincere".....#10 country
"Honky Tonk Angel"....#6 country
"Guitar Man"....#1 country
"Loving Arms"....#8 country
"America"....#6 hot 100
"A Little Less Conversation"....#1 hot 100
"Rubberneckin"....#1 hot 100
"That's All Right"....#1 hot 100
How many singles has a living Paul McCartney put in the top 10 since '78?

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DENNIS HAUSER wrote:
All you Beatles fans out their, don't get me wrong! The Beatles were a great group/band! But as the late walter Brennan said,"No brag, just fact!" If I remeber Octo, help my old gray head out, I believe Elvis had MOODY BLUE or Way DOWN or both number one one charts after his' death? Maybe country charts? <quoted text>
"Moody Blue" and "Way Down" were both #1 country hits, Dennis.

I think they both hit #1 while Elvis was still alive.

I'm not sure though because the book, "Elvis Sessions III" isn't clear.

No date was given, just the highest position and its chart it hit on.

The book is was from 7 years ago and probably would benefit an update.

Anyway, Elvis did very well in death.

It seems to be ignored by most in the general public though.

I don't think any other dead artist has ever done what Elvis has.

Elvis has nothing more to prove, does he?
Jim Burrows

Managua, Nicaragua

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

This has nothing to do with US sales, which are duly measured by the RIAA. In the US, Elvis is ahead of the Beatles by a 2 to 1 margin, Elvis having 51.5 million singles duly audited, in millions of units, and the Beatles at 28.5.

The latest news item comes from the UK Official Charts Company, which reports in millions sold in the UK, I repeat, in the UK, with Elvis and the Beatles really neck to neck, the difference being 300,000. In the States, the bdifference is 21 million in Elvis' favour.
Bubba

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jun 4, 2012
 
Naturaly the Beatles did better in sales in the UK. Since they were a British Band. The two biggest acts ever were Elvis and the Beatles and Elvis was out much longer than the Beatles were so yeah he should be able to outsell the Beatles being how he was an American singer and entertainer.Elvis was also a Movie Star as to where the beatles were not. They were just a really good band that did very well and still do.I am surprized at how well an artist does even years after their death. Elvis probably wins hands down in that category I suppose.
King Elvis

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jun 4, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

DENNIS HAUSER wrote:
WAIT A MINUTE! THE BEATLES WERE A GROUP, NOT ONE "SINGLE" ACT.
The article refers to SINGLES acts, not single.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jun 4, 2012
 
Bubba wrote:
Naturaly the Beatles did better in sales in the UK. Since they were a British Band. The two biggest acts ever were Elvis and the Beatles and Elvis was out much longer than the Beatles were so yeah he should be able to outsell the Beatles being how he was an American singer and entertainer.Elvis was also a Movie Star as to where the beatles were not. They were just a really good band that did very well and still do.I am surprized at how well an artist does even years after their death. Elvis probably wins hands down in that category I suppose.
Here is what I figured out for Elvis's charted releases on the UK chart:

60 TOP 10 HITS.
21 OF WHICH WENT NUMBER ONE.

43 TOP 10 ALBUMS.
13 WHICH WENT NUMBER ONE.

Now I know that The Beatles have more than double the #1 albums...

But Elvis still did really well in the United Kingdom nevertheless.
Bubba

Monroe, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jun 5, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

King Elvis wrote:
This UK chart compilation began in 1952, four years prior to Elvis making it big worldwide ... so there are no excuses of "bias" or other such claims here.
No need to mention country charts or whatever either.
The Beatles have had more sales than Elvis or anyone in the UK.
Accept it!
Right on King Elvis you have posted the truth.I think Elvis out did everyone in America but not in the U.K. No bias just facts.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jun 5, 2012
 

Judged:

2

2

1

Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>Right on King Elvis you have posted the truth.I think Elvis out did everyone in America but not in the U.K. No bias just facts.
I thank god that EP didn't have an untalented wife on any of his albums.

Linda McCartney with that tambourine and McCartney's sappy love songs.

Yoko Ono with her cat torturing squeal that ruined Lennon's solo albums.

The Beatles beat Elvis in the UK with albums, not singles.

Elvis put 60 TOP 10 SINGLES to The Beatles 22 TOP 10 SINGLES in the UK.

I just think it's bias when they fail to point that fact out, don't you?
Bubba

Everett, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jun 5, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

octopus brain wrote:
<quoted text>
I thank god that EP didn't have an untalented wife on any of his albums.
Linda McCartney with that tambourine and McCartney's sappy love songs.
Yoko Ono with her cat torturing squeal that ruined Lennon's solo albums.
The Beatles beat Elvis in the UK with albums, not singles.
Elvis put 60 TOP 10 SINGLES to The Beatles 22 TOP 10 SINGLES in the UK.
I just think it's bias when they fail to point that fact out, don't you?
Yeah I have to agree with you. Lennon shouldn't of ever let Yoko try to sing.Linda wasn't much of a singer or musician either. I never have been one to keep track of singles I have enough of a hard trying to remember all the albums. But yeah I suppose they should of pointed that out as far as singles go.Both Elvis and the Beatles will always have a huge fan base here and in the U.K. I believe that some people worshipped Elvis and some even thought that he and the Beatles were like magic healers. Elvis could of made a great Evangelist and he did like singing church hyms. Thank God he decided to be a rocker and that he had a big influence on John Lennon and McCartney too.
King Elvis

Australia

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jun 5, 2012
 

Judged:

2

1

1

octopus brain wrote:
Elvis put 60 TOP 10 SINGLES to The Beatles 22 TOP 10 SINGLES in the UK.
I just think it's bias when they fail to point that fact out, don't you?
HTF can it be bias if the report is about SALES FIGURES?!

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jun 5, 2012
 
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>Yeah I have to agree with you. Lennon shouldn't of ever let Yoko try to sing.Linda wasn't much of a singer or musician either. I never have been one to keep track of singles I have enough of a hard trying to remember all the albums. But yeah I suppose they should of pointed that out as far as singles go.Both Elvis and the Beatles will always have a huge fan base here and in the U.K. I believe that some people worshipped Elvis and some even thought that he and the Beatles were like magic healers. Elvis could of made a great Evangelist and he did like singing church hyms. Thank God he decided to be a rocker and that he had a big influence on John Lennon and McCartney too.
I agree that The Beatles and Elvis shouldn't really be compared.

They were both rock legends that will never be replaced.

The fact the Elvis survived the british invasion is proof of his talent.

He stood on his own and still did very well in the business.

He just went into different directions than The Beatles did, that's all.

The recording industry is nothing like it was in the 60's and 70's.

In the end, it really doesn't matter who did better or sold more.

Elvis is gone and so is John Lennon and George Harrison.

It's history and what they did all those years ago is still special.

Elvis and The Beatles are the biggest cultural legends of all time.

Of course, there are others but they can only follow those two acts.

Bob Dylan
Jimi Hendrix
The Rolling Stones

And it goes down the list from there.

Just keep enjoying the music you like and I'll do the same.

They were human beings with faults but as artists they made an impact.

Certainly, some people would love to put Michael Jackson on top.

Whatever, right?
Bubba

Renton, WA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jun 5, 2012
 
octopus brain wrote:
<quoted text>
I agree that The Beatles and Elvis shouldn't really be compared.
They were both rock legends that will never be replaced.
The fact the Elvis survived the british invasion is proof of his talent.
He stood on his own and still did very well in the business.
He just went into different directions than The Beatles did, that's all.
The recording industry is nothing like it was in the 60's and 70's.
In the end, it really doesn't matter who did better or sold more.
Elvis is gone and so is John Lennon and George Harrison.
It's history and what they did all those years ago is still special.
Elvis and The Beatles are the biggest cultural legends of all time.
Of course, there are others but they can only follow those two acts.
Bob Dylan
Jimi Hendrix
The Rolling Stones
And it goes down the list from there.
Just keep enjoying the music you like and I'll do the same.
They were human beings with faults but as artists they made an impact.
Certainly, some people would love to put Michael Jackson on top.
Whatever, right?
Hey Octo we are just lucky to grow up with being able to enjoy so much good music like that of Elvis and the Beatles.I am a little surprised that you are into Elvis as much as you are since you are younger than me and seem to like heavy metal like most guys your age does.It's hard not to like someone like the great Jimi Hendrix he was one of a kind. I know there are millions who adore Michael Jackson but I guess it's to each their own. Certain artist like david Bowie just don't do anything for me. I do like Joe Bonamassa for a newer artist and guitar player.

Since: Mar 10

Location hidden

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#17
Jun 5, 2012
 
Bubba wrote:
<quoted text>Hey Octo we are just lucky to grow up with being able to enjoy so much good music like that of Elvis and the Beatles.I am a little surprised that you are into Elvis as much as you are since you are younger than me and seem to like heavy metal like most guys your age does.It's hard not to like someone like the great Jimi Hendrix he was one of a kind. I know there are millions who adore Michael Jackson but I guess it's to each their own. Certain artist like david Bowie just don't do anything for me. I do like Joe Bonamassa for a newer artist and guitar player.
I always liked Elvis even before he died.

I didn't know who The Beatles were until John Lennon was shot in 1980.

I loved (just like) "Starting Over" when it first came out.

I was unaware that he was a Beatle at the time.

I went through The Beatles, The Kinks, The Rolling Stones, The Doors...

I liked Journey, REO Speedwagon, Asia, Yes and then it was AC/DC.

I really got into Led Zeppelin after that though.

I like all kinds of rock music, really.

It's too bad that no one is making any good rock today that I like.

I heard the new Aerosmith song, "Legendary Child" last night on You Tube.

It sounds like "Wonton Song" by Zep with different lyrics.
Boris Bee

Den Haag, Netherlands

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#18
Jun 6, 2012
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Hector Cornholio wrote:
Yeah The Beatles rule. They were an act even if they were a group of four.
There were in fact 5 Beatles, so their sale should be divided by 5. They are not even in the top 20 then!

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

•••
•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••