Perception is reality. Especially when it comes to impact and influence.

Sure, there were "albums with a concept" before the Beatles--heck, Sinatra and Nat King Cole used to do that all the time. And to the extent that that type of album is important, the Beatles get no credit for that. But that's not "the concept album", which, like a lot of things in the arts, is something of a misnomer. It was the change in the perception of the album that was so important. The idea that the album could be viewed as a unified statement which was greater than the sum of its parts. That was primarily due to the Beatles. Dylan, the Beach Boys, and the Who contributed to it, but it was a definite marked change from what happened before the Beatles.

You may be right that there's nothing specific that they did first, but I think you tie influence too closely to innovation. As I said elsewhere, there's very little that's actually completely unprecedented, and I think if we applied that idea strictly the Most Influential list would be filled with artists whom we've never heard of or don't know much about, simply because they did something specific first that one of the greats turned into an important and influential idea.

Because we have posting right now what are probably DDD's 2 leading authorities on '50s rock, Sampson and Bruce,

The cool rebel look was much more due to james dean than to elvis.

Well, Marlon Brando beat them both to it in The Wild One. But Elvis was the one that horrified an entire generation of parents. Not Marlon Brando. Not James Dean. And certainly not the Beatles.

In my estimation commercial success would be like 40% with cultural impact no more than 10%.

My girlfriend Diane was born in 1948. When Holly died she was about to turn 11 years old in a few days. She had no idea who Holly was, but knew who Valens was because "Donna" was a huge hit at the time. Holly was just not that well known in the 50s, as three of his four really big hits up to his death were by the Crickets. Only "Peggy Sue" was a big hit by Buddy Holly. Some other kids told Diane that Holly was the guy who did that song "Peggy Sue" a couple of years ago and she then remembered him, but most people at that time did not even realize that Holly was part of the Crickets. She also realized who the Big Bopper was after being reminded that "Chantilly Lace" was a huge hit just a couple of months before the plane crash, and I think may have even still been on the Billboard top 100 that week at the end of its chart run.

The point is that the name "Buddy Holly" did not mean all that much in the 1950s until he died. He did not release a single in 1958 that made the top ten

and none of his solo singles even made the top 30 after "Peggy Sue" until "It Doesn't Matter Anymore" did so after his death.

Where did "Maybe Baby" chart in the USA, Bruce?

Elvis horrified nobody. That was Little Richard you're thinking of.

It's by the Crickets, not by Budddy Holly, and it peaked at # 18 on the top 100.

I really don't think Buddy Holly's notoriety should be measured by the experience of some random 11-year-old.

The Crickets and Buddy Holly are the same thing.

The dominance of Big Band and Swing was ended by Elvis Presley.

If you're going to deny the nation having a collective hissy fit over Elvis Presley's gyrations in his television performances, then there is no point in bothering to continue this with you. I'm sure the nation would have been mortified by Little Richard as well, if they had gotten anywhere near the opportunity to see him that they had with Elvis. But they didn't. So Little Richard didn't. He didn't have the opportunity to shock the nation.

Look, the name Buddy Holly was just not that well known in the 50s, until he died. That's a fact. The Crickets were better known than Buddy Holly, but most people had no idea that he was a member of that group.

What the fuck are you talking about?

Big band and swing were done long before Presley ever recorded, you fucking jackass.