> The changes brought on by the emergence of Rock and Roll are still very much with us. <
1. "Rock and roll" was little more than "rhythm and blues" -- but performed mostly by whites rather than by blacks.
2. "Rhythm and blues" was basically a simplified form of jazz.
3. There's no question that Louis Armstrong had more influence upon jazz than any other musician, both from the vocal and from the instrumental perspectives.
4. It follows logically that Elvis Presley and "rock and roll as a whole" would never have developed as they did without the prior influence of Louis Armstrong.
5. Ergo, Louis Armstrong should be ranked higher than Elvis Presley in terms of musical influence.
But on the other hand, if we ignore musical matters and consider only the abysmal decline of American culture and social values since 1954, then Elvis goes right to the top of the list!
I agree that Louis Armstrong was a bigger musical force then Elvis but Rock was more then just R&B. Elvis brought 'country and western' and mainstream pop influences to bear on existing black musical traditions. The whole point was that wasn't merely black music or white music but a mixture of the two.
Louis Armstrong was influential on music, but much less so on American society as a whole. I could probably name a couple dozen American musicians and composers who were far more influential than Armstrong. Just because someone comes along earlier in chronological time doesn't mean that they are more influential on society than someone who came later. When I think of influential musicians, I think of people who not simply successful musicians, but who also fundamentally transformed the way men and women, different races, and different generations interacted with one another. George M Cohan probably was second to Elvis in affecting society. His music altered the psyche of the American people and how they perceived themselves to be Americans.