Re: One for the record books?
F R
"Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M
was #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
---------------------------
I'm pretty sure that "S.O.S." by ABBA made it to #1 and if so, is
only 7 characters long.
As well, it is the only hit song to my knowledge whose title and artist
are both palindromes.
Roger Ford
>denn...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis=A0M)
One of my favorite palindromes is the one originated by Zelma Redding
in honor of her hubby (note the feeble attempt to keep this on
topic :)
"Sit on a potato pan,Otis",
ROGER FORD
-----------------------
"Spam Free Zone" - to combat unwanted automatic spamming I have added
an extra "b" in my e-mail address (mari...@bblueyonder.co.uk).
Please delete same before responding.Thank you!
F R
Garden of Dden.
"Madam, I'm Adam".
To which she simply replied, "Eve".
Richard Ardini
"Dennis M" <denn...@dennism3.invalid> wrote in message
news:dennism3-ya0240800...@news.datemas.de...
> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M was
> #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
>
1993: Weak by SWV
50s
> denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M)
> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M
> was #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
> ---------------------------
> I'm pretty sure that "S.O.S." by ABBA made it to #1 and if so, is
> only 7 characters long.
Why are you pretty sure?
SOS was not even top ten in the U.S. and it's spelled without the
periods SOS
F R
Why are you pretty sure?
SOS was not even top ten in the U.S. and it's spelled without the
periods SOS
because it was a guess that's why i was "pretty sure". i don't know what
the label read but on google, after i posted it's listed as both SOS and
S.O.S..
can you think of antoher song that had a palindromic title and group,
that ranked higher, Mr. brainiac?
Either way it was only seven characters whether it charted #1 in
America. it did chart at #1 in a few countries in europe.
Len Blanks
> On Fri, 18 Dec 2009 21:13:14 -0500, espo...@webtv.net (F R) wrote:
>
>>I'm pretty sure that "S.O.S." by ABBA made it to #1 and if so, is
>>only 7 characters long.
>>
>>As well, it is the only hit song to my knowledge whose title and artist
>>are both palindromes.
>
> One of my favorite palindromes is the one originated by Zelma Redding
> in honor of her hubby (note the feeble attempt to keep this on
> topic :)
>
> "Sit on a potato pan,Otis",
Yet another in the imperative mood and music-based:
Satan, oscillate my metallic sonatas!
--
Len
A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs, a coloratura, maps, snipe,
percale, macaroni, a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag again
(or a camel), a crepe, pins, SPAM, a rut, a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats,
a peon, a canal - Panama!
DianeE
"Len Blanks" <use...@smashcapitalism.com> wrote in message
news:m2d42bx...@haruspex.net...
>
> A man, a plan, a canoe, pasta, heros, rajahs, a coloratura, maps, snipe,
> percale, macaroni, a gag, a banana bag, a tan, a tag, a banana bag again
> (or a camel), a crepe, pins, SPAM, a rut, a Rolo, cash, a jar, sore hats,
> a peon, a canal - Panama!
Why are you posting the lyrics to "Waters Of March" by Sergio Mendes here?
DianeE
Len Blanks
I wanted to, but Jobim's Portuguese original wasn't palindromic.
--
Len
They are better than the Beatles. They are even better than Budgie and
REO Speedwagen combined -- Lester Bangs on the Mekons
Steven J. Nutella
F R
nel blu di pinto di blu-- dominigo megduno?
How Much is that doggie in the window in the window? Patti page?
probably not either
F R
did either "It's a Sin to Tell a Lie" by Somethin' Smith and the
Redheads, or
"The Little Drummer Boy" by the Harry Simeone Chorale hit #1?
Sharx35
"Steven J. Nutella" <amongthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:fd4f3d0f-f5c2-4288...@f20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> Does "Beth" by KISS qualify?
Anything by KISS is the shits. This is a fucking 50s ng, get the fuck out.
Nutella
> "Steven J. Nutella" <amongthebeliev...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:fd4f3d0f-f5c2-4288...@f20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Does "Beth" by KISS qualify?
>
> Anything by KISS is the shits. This is a fucking 50s ng, get the fuck out.
Where do you get off dissing KISS? I'll get Moonpie, Evil Rev, AJ and
Labrat on yo' ass.
Rick Schubert
>Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
For 1955-1969, this is the longest I could find:
David Seville And The Chipmunks: "The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)"
Combined length including spaces and punctuation: 75
Combined length including punctuation but no spaces: 64
Combined length excluding spaces and punctuation: 61
Going back much farther (to 1916):
Arthur Collins & Byron Harlan: "Oh How She Could Yacki Hacki Wicki Wachi Woo (That's Love In
Honolulu)"
Combined length including spaces and punctuation: 99
Combined length including punctuation but no spaces: 83
Combined length excluding spaces and punctuation: 80
-- Rick Schubert <r...@san.rr.com>
Turk 182
> "Steven J. Nutella" <amongthebeliev...@yahoo.com> wrote in messagenews:fd4f3d0f-f5c2-4288...@f20g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
>
> > Does "Beth" by KISS qualify?
>
> Anything by KISS is the shits. This is a fucking 50s ng, get the fuck out.
You mispelled 60's...
HTH
Turk 182
---
"What do I know about sex? I'm a married man." - Tom Clancy
Blue
> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M was
> #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
>
> --
> / `--''> ,,, we are here to party."
> | / I I |||||||||[:::]
> \ oo ,-._> ''' Super Seventies RockSite!
> `--' http://www.superseventies.com/
How high did "Peanuts" get in the charts, amember that one, Rick &
the Teens?
50s
> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:22:37 -0600, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
> >Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>
> For 1955-1969, this is the longest I could find:
>
> David Seville And The Chipmunks: "The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be Late)"
>
> Combined length including spaces and punctuation: 75
> Combined length including punctuation but no spaces: 64
> Combined length excluding spaces and punctuation: 61
The label just says Chipmunks.
way at the bottom it says "with the music of David Seville" but if you
want to start counting that stuff then you've got all kinds of crazy
stuff, like...
Don't Sit Under The Apple Tree-F.T. (With Anyone Else But Me)
Glenn Miller and his Orchestra - vocal refrain by Marion Hutton, Tex
Beneke and the Modernaires
Chris S.
>
> Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>
In 1981, there was a #1 hit called "Medley (Intro Venus/Sugar Sugar/No
Reply/I'll Be Back/Drive My Car/Do You Want to Know a Secret/We Can
Work it Out/I Should Have Known Better/Nowhere Man/You're Going to
Lose That Girl/Stars on 45)" by Stars on 45. I'm not going to count
the number of characters in that.
Not sure how the label lists it, but in Fred Bronson's book The
Billboard Book of Number 1 Hits it's listed they way I wrote it
above.
IIRC, in the UK the group was simply called Starsound. Our British
friends here can elaborate on that.
Roger Ford
>On Dec 19, 10:14=A0pm, Rick Schubert <r...@san.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Sat, 19 Dec 2009 14:22:37 -0600, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) =
>wrote:
>> >Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>>
>> For 1955-1969, this is the longest I could find:
>>
>> David Seville And The Chipmunks: "The Chipmunk Song (Christmas Don't Be L=
>ate)"
>>
>> Combined length including spaces and punctuation: 75
>> Combined length including punctuation but no spaces: 64
>> Combined length excluding spaces and punctuation: 61
>
>The label just says Chipmunks.
>
>way at the bottom it says "with the music of David Seville" but if you
>want to start counting that stuff then you've got all kinds of crazy
>stuff, like...
>
I no longer have the original copy but it came out originally simply
credited to "The Music Of David Seville" and "Christmas Don't Be Late"
Paul
On the 45 label it was listed just as you typed it and credited to
Stars on 45. Another for a very long title was The Beach Boys Medley
also from 1981 which listed every song included in it Good Vibrations,
Help Me Rhonda, I Get Around, Shut Down, Surfin' Safari, Barbara Ann,
Surfin' USA, Fun, Fun, Fun all in glorious mono!!! I never saw a
stereo commercial release of this record.
As a side note to the BB Medley, also in 1981 there was a group who
called themselves The Cantina Band(Lou 'Lightnin' Strikes' Christie
was a member)who did their own BB Medley called Summer 81 and included
several of the same songs included in the original BB medley... here
is the listing for that 45
SIDE A: Summer '81 (4:18) Includes: Surfer Girl/Fun, Fun, Fun/409/I
Get Around/Dance,Dance,Dance/California Girls/Wouldn't It Be Nice/Help
Me Rhonda/Good Vibrations.
SIDE B: Summer '81 (4:04) Includes: Fun, Fun, Fun/409/I Get Around/
Dance, Dance, Dance/California Girls/Wouldn't It Be Nice/Help Me,
Rhonda/Good Vibrations.
The above listing comes from the promo 45. The commercial pressing was
identical to side A and included a song called Out in California as
the 'b' side
A third Beach Boys themed medley was by California and called Summer
Fun Medley and included a whopping 10 songs in it.
from 1984, there was a group called Band of Gold who did a medley
called Love Songs Are Back Again(#64 Hot 100, #62 R+B) which also
listed each and every song included on the label.
in 1982 there was also The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra Hooked On
Classics(#10 Hot 100) which also listed each and every song title on
its label.
in 1978 there was a group called Sea Cruise who did their own Beach
Boys medley and once again, each and every song is listed on the
label.
1981 must've been the year of the medley as there were sure a lot of
them. Up until then the only song that was a medley of others that
comes to mind is The Ritchie Family Best Disco In Town from 1976 which
did not list any of the songs included in it on the label or
elsewhere.
Although some of what I mentioned DID NOT chart, they were mentioned
because of having a very long title.
Paul
because of their excessively long titles.
RandyPNY
(in article <dennism3-ya0240800...@news.datemas.de>):
> In article
> <8b28a04f-63b7-403c...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Blue
> <blues...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
>> On Dec 18, 8:59ï¿œpm, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
>>> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
>>> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
>>> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M was
>>> #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
>>>
>>> --
>>> ￜ _--_ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ"Ain't no doubt,
>>> ￜ/ ￜ ￜ`--''> ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ,,, ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜwe are here to party."
>>> ￜ| ￜ/ I I |||||||||[:::]
>>> ￜ\ oo ,-._> ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ''' ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜSuper Seventies RockSite!
>>> ￜ `--' ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜhttp://www.superseventies.com/
>>
>>
>> How high did "Peanuts" get in the charts, amember that one, Rick &
>> the Teens?
>
> Actually it was "Rick & the Keens" according to a printed source I have. I
> only know it came out in 1961, I'm sure some of the others with a more
> comprehensive database could tell you how high it charted.
"Peanuts" peaked at #60 in Billboard, #77 in Cash Box and #72 in Music Vendor
(precursor to Record World).
- Randy
50s
> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:59:00 -0500, Dennis M wrote
>
>
>
>
>
> > In article
> > <8b28a04f-63b7-403c-a53f-1357c44fb...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Blue
> > <bluescr...@windstream.net> wrote:
>
> >> On Dec 18, 8:59 pm, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
> >>> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
> >>> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
> >>> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M was
> >>> #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
>
> >>> --
> >>> / `--''> ,,, we are here to party."
> >>> | / I I |||||||||[:::]
> >>> \ oo ,-._> ''' Super Seventies RockSite!
>
> >> How high did "Peanuts" get in the charts, amember that one, Rick &
> >> the Teens?
>
> > Actually it was "Rick & the Keens" according to a printed source I have. I
> > only know it came out in 1961, I'm sure some of the others with a more
> > comprehensive database could tell you how high it charted.
>
> "Peanuts" peaked at #60 in Billboard, #77 in Cash Box and #72 in Music Vendor
> (precursor to Record World).
I thought the precursor to "Record World" was "Music Business."
Evil Rev Returns
under Elvis in the rock & roll food chain, ahead of such greats as
Fats Domino, Ricky Nelson (both artists, per Whitburn, had just about
as many chart hits in the 50's & early 60's with far more long-term
impact), Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, etc.
IMO, that should tell you all you need to know :) :)
ER
Lonesome Town, USA
Musicman55
>
> Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>
Chipmunk Song should be
The Chipmunk Song - David Seville & The Chipmunks
So that would be exactly 40 characters.
The Stars On 45 Number 1 Hit is usually listed as Medley.
The longest Title of a Billboard Number 1 Pop Hit I can recall would
be
(Hey Won't You Play) Another Somebody Done Somebody Wrong Song - B. J.
Thomas
So depending on whether you count the parentheses or periods, this
Single would have at least 59 characters with a possibility of as many
as 63 characters.
Phil Zorn
50s
> On Dec 19, 1:22 pm, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
>
> > Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>
> As far as I can fairly determine the actual correct listing for The
> Chipmunk Song should be
>
> The Chipmunk Song - David Seville & The Chipmunks
And just how are you determining this?
I determined it by actually LOOKING at the 45.
and it says:
The Chipmunk Song
The Chipmunks
Musicman55
Bruce,
As you and I both know quite a few Singles were released with
different listings on various pressings. I am well aware that some of
the sources such as the original "Top Pop Records" book by Joel
Whitburn list the record exactly as you do.
But both the 2000 edition of "The Billboard Book Of Top 40 Hits" by
Joel Whitburn and "Rock Encyclopedia" by Lillian Roxon show the Single
exactly as I listed it. Since Whitburn revised the listing, I assumed
it was more accurate.
I have no vested interest in whether the Single is listed as The
Chipmunks or David Seville & The Chipmunks. Either way the B.J.
Thomas Single would have far more characters anyway. If anyone else
chooses to accept The Chipmunks as being correct that is fine with me.
Phil Zorn
50s
> On Dec 20, 11:34 pm, 50s <Savo...@aol.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:18 am, Musicman55 <xtra...@ymail.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 19, 1:22 pm, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
>
> > > > Say, while we're at it can you also ascertain the lengthiest #1?
>
> > > As far as I can fairly determine the actual correct listing for The
> > > Chipmunk Song should be
>
> > > The Chipmunk Song - David Seville & The Chipmunks
>
> > And just how are you determining this?
>
> > I determined it by actually LOOKING at the 45.
>
> > and it says:
>
> > The Chipmunk Song
> > The Chipmunks
>
> > way at the bottom it says "with the music of David Seville"
>
> Bruce,
>
> As you and I both know quite a few Singles were released with
> different listings on various pressings. I am well aware that some of
> the sources such as the original "Top Pop Records" book by Joel
> Whitburn list the record exactly as you do.
>
> But both the 2000 edition of "The Billboard Book Of Top 40 Hits" by
> Joel Whitburn and "Rock Encyclopedia" by Lillian Roxon show the Single
> exactly as I listed it. Since Whitburn revised the listing, I assumed
> it was more accurate.
Lilian Roxon doesn't know shit about records.
Who cares what some book says when you can look at the actual record
instead?
It says:
The Chipmunks
(Alvin, Theodore & Simon)
With The Music Of David Seville
RandyPNY
(in article
<f227e457-8561-42fb...@d20g2000yqh.googlegroups.com>):
> On Dec 20, 8:52ï¿œpm, RandyPNY <randy...@nyc.rr.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 20 Dec 2009 16:59:00 -0500, Dennis M wrote
>> (in article <dennism3-ya02408000R2012091559000...@news.datemas.de>):
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>> In article
>>> <8b28a04f-63b7-403c-a53f-1357c44fb...@a32g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Blue
>>> <bluescr...@windstream.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> On Dec 18, 8:59ï¿œpm, denni...@dennism3.invalid (Dennis M) wrote:
>>>>> "Babe" by Styx was the #1 song in America for the week of Dec. 15, 1979.
>>>>> Can anyone think of another #1 record in any decade that was only 8
>>>>> characters or less, including the title and artist? ("Pop Muzik" by M was
>>>>> #1 just a few weeks earlier, but it's 9 characters!).
>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> ￜ _--_ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ"Ain't no doubt,
>>>>> ￜ/ ￜ ￜ`--''> ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ,,, ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜwe are here to party."
>>>>> ￜ| ￜ/ I I |||||||||[:::]
>>>>> ￜ\ oo ,-._> ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ''' ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜSuper Seventies RockSite!
>>>>> ￜ `--' ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜ ￜhttp://www.superseventies.com/
>>
>>>> How high did "Peanuts" get in the charts, amember that one, Rick &
>>>> the Teens?
>>
>>> Actually it was "Rick & the Keens" according to a printed source I have. I
>>> only know it came out in 1961, I'm sure some of the others with a more
>>> comprehensive database could tell you how high it charted.
>>
>> "Peanuts" peaked at #60 in Billboard, #77 in Cash Box and #72 in Music
>> Vendor
>> (precursor to Record World).
>
> I thought the precursor to "Record World" was "Music Business."
>
>
http://cgi.ebay.com/Music-Business-Magazine-11-28-1964-Rare-Beatles-Ad-
LOOK_W0
> QQitemZ400090644111QQcmdZViewItemQQptZMagazines?hash=item5d2742be8f
The name change from Music Vendor to Record World took place with the issue
dated April 18, 1964, 7 months before the Music Business issue shown in that
eBay listing.
- Randy
Ell...@ee.net
news:84e08041-cd2f-42a3...@k17g2000yqh.googlegroups.com:
Only on the original 1958 pressing.
Liberty re-issued the single the following year, in 1959, and revised
(corrected) the credits, this time fully crediting it to David Seville
& The Chipmunks:
http://cgi.ebay.com/DAVID-SEVILLE-&-The-CHIPMUNKS-Chipmunk-Song-%2F-
LIBERTY_W0QQitemZ370305611851QQcmdZViewItemQQimsxZ20091213?
IMSfp=TL091213019003r12095
All later singles (not just this song) appear to be credited that way.
Roger Ford
No sorry!
The absolute ORIGINAL 1958 first pressing had the original
title---"Christmas Don't Be Late"----and was credited to "The Music Of
David Seville".
There was NO mention of "The Chipmunk Song" or any Chipmunks at all on
that first pressing.
50s
> On 21 Dec 2009 15:46:24 GMT, Elli...@ee.net wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> >50s <Savo...@aol.com> wrote in
But the first pressing was not a #1 record, and neither was the 1959
(or any later pressing), so the answer to this question is the way it
looked on the 1958 pressing when it was #1.
Scarlotti
wrote:
None of the artists you mention (after The King) had anywhere near as
much impact as Pat Boone. Regardless of whether you consider his
records to be rock 'n' roll or pop, *he made rock 'n' roll accessible
to, and acceptable by, mainstream America*, thus making it a
commercially viable form.
Would rock 'n' roll have made it without Pat? We can speculate, but
we'll never know for sure.
Historically, however, if you remove Pat Boone from the picture, rock
'n' roll was a brief fad that gave way to Calypso in 1956.
50s
LOL
Chris S.
> much impact as Pat Boone. Regardless of whether you consider his
> records to be rock 'n' roll or pop, *he made rock 'n' roll accessible
> to, and acceptable by, mainstream America*, thus making it a
> commercially viable form.
>
> Would rock 'n' roll have made it without Pat? We can speculate, but
> we'll never know for sure.
>
> Historically, however, if you remove Pat Boone from the picture, rock
> 'n' roll was a brief fad that gave way to Calypso in 1956.
Not making a speculation about what could have happened to R&R had
Boone not turned the raw sound into white bread suitable for the
masses (and I will grant you it was a vital step in allowing the music
to be more widely accessible to a more affluent crowd)...but his
absence would not have stopped guys like Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry,
Little Richard, Chuck Jackson...the guys who influenced many of the
British musicians who almost made Elvis irrelevant as he was doing
films. Nor would it have stopped guys like Bob Dylan or Creedence from
making records later.
Besides, the fact that somebody was able to refine a sound to make it
more appealing to an audience that was willing to spend more money on
records wouldn't have been tried had Pat Boone not been around to give
it a shot. In Elvis, Sam Phillips saw the potential of a white kid
singing black music for a pop (and also country) audience. Boone was
simply a manifestation of that business model on a national scale, not
a regional one like Sun Records had. Once the executives at the major
labels saw the potential for teen idols, there would be many others
trying to do what Boone attempted: Frankie Avalon, Fabian, Bobby
Rydell, etc., guys that adults would actually allow their daughters to
go on dates with.
Nutella
That's even funnier than the President Obama Christmas ornament
thread.
Pat Boone, huh? Okay. Next you'll be telling us about the saving
qualities of Robert Goulet.
Scarlotti
> On Dec 21, 1:40 pm, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > None of the artists you mention (after The King) had anywhere near as
> > much impact as Pat Boone. Regardless of whether you consider his
> > records to be rock 'n' roll or pop, *he made rock 'n' roll accessible
> > to, and acceptable by, mainstream America*, thus making it a
> > commercially viable form.
>
> > Would rock 'n' roll have made it without Pat? We can speculate, but
> > we'll never know for sure.
>
> > Historically, however, if you remove Pat Boone from the picture, rock
> > 'n' roll was a brief fad that gave way to Calypso in 1956.
>
> Not making a speculation about what could have happened to R&R had
> Boone not turned the raw sound into white bread suitable for the
> masses (and I will grant you it was a vital step in allowing the music
> to be more widely accessible to a more affluent crowd)...but his
> absence would not have stopped guys like Buddy Holly, Chuck Berry,
> Little Richard, Chuck Jackson...
The truth is that we don't know if it would have stopped them from
getting record deals. Pat not only kept r'n'r on the radios, record
players and jukeboxes of mainstream America for six months before
Elvis was able to step in and take over, but his clean-cut image
helped make Elvis' image change from a sexed up badboy to "a real
decent, fine boy" (Ed Sullivan, 1957) easier to swallow. Holly,
Berry, et al., were able to cut r'n'r records because Elvis had made
rock a lasting phenomenon. The real (and, ultimately, unanswerable)
question is: would Elvis have become the King of Rock 'n' Roll had Pat
Boone not paved the way for him.
Before you answer, another point to consider is that Elvis liked all
kinds of music. He also believed that he was destined to sing all
kinds of music, and certainly crossed over into his fair share of
genres (and then some). His biggest idol was most likely Dean Martin,
and as Love Me Tender ably demonstrated, Elvis could have been a chart-
topper had he gone the romantic ballad route.
> the guys who influenced many of the
> British musicians who almost made Elvis irrelevant as he was doing
> films. Nor would it have stopped guys like Bob Dylan or Creedence from
> making records later.
1. Elvis was never irrelevant.
2. Not only was Blue Hawaii (1961) a huge box office hit, but the
soundtrack album "was on the Billboard Pop Albums chart for 79 weeks,
spent 20 weeks at #1 on the Pop Albums chart, and sold more than 2-
million copies [See: Joel Whitburn's Top Pop Albums 1955-1996]" (from
Wikipedia).
3. The Beatles:
a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
b) were a glorified Boy Band
c) sucked
4. Folk singer Bob Dylan has absolutely nothing to do with rock 'n'
roll, and folk rock CCR little more.
> Besides, the fact that somebody was able to refine a sound to make it
> more appealing to an audience that was willing to spend more money on
> records wouldn't have been tried had Pat Boone not been around to give
> it a shot.
It's a fair assumption that they might have tried promoting the new
form with another poster boy, but who?
Pat Boone was the ultimate ideal male for the 50s: a handsome, preppy-
and-athletic college student, who was a direct descendant of Daniel
Boone, and an avowed Christian who refused to kiss his April Love
leading lady because she was married in real life. What other (later)
50s teen idol could even come close to those credentials?
> In Elvis, Sam Phillips saw the potential of a white kid
> singing black music for a pop (and also country) audience. Boone was
> simply a manifestation of that business model on a national scale, not
> a regional one like Sun Records had.
Sure. But if Pat hadn't been holding the r'n'r fort while Elvis was
at Sun, what proof do we have that Elvis would have ever become a
national Rock 'n' Roll icon?
He almost certainly would have become one of the biggest pop culture
icons of the century. He had tons of talent and star magnetism. But
RCA (a conservative label and home to Perry Como) had him cutting his
fair share of pop ballads as it was, and I'm pretty sure that they'd
have been even happier to have him abandon rock for pop if it were as
marketable.
His debut film, Love Me Tender, found him playing a nice Civil War era
farmboy. He played himself (an outwardly "bad", ultimately
misunderstood rock singer) in his next films -- but only because rock
'n' roll took hold on the mainstream culture.
Without Boone, r'n'r might have gone the way of 3-D glasses and hula
hoops, and Elvis might have followed Love Me Tender up with films like
G.I. Blues, Blue Hawaii, and Viva Las Vegas where he plays a non-
Italian version of Dean Martin's glitzy vegas ladykiller. Just
imagine the films with the songs being all pop instead of pop and pop
rock.
> Once the executives at the major
> labels saw the potential for teen idols, there would be many others
> trying to do what Boone attempted: Frankie Avalon, Fabian, Bobby
> Rydell, etc., guys that adults would actually allow their daughters to
> go on dates with.
Wow, I thought I was the only one here who considered the teen idols
to be rock 'n' rollers! (Just kiddin' -- there are one or two others
who share our opinion.) But, yes, they all owe a big debt to Pat
Boone.
Scarlotti
Robert Goulet's not one of my favorites. Good voice, but a little
emotionally stilted (in the Broadway style of the time).
I'm not about to buy an album by him, but if I come across one in a
library, I'll probably rip it to my collection.
BobbyM
news:d861726c-6436-4247...@k9g2000vbl.googlegroups.com...
> On Dec 21, 5:10 pm, "Chris S." <chrisstufflestr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> the guys who influenced many of the
>> British musicians who almost made Elvis irrelevant as he was doing
>> films. Nor would it have stopped guys like Bob Dylan or Creedence from
>> making records later.
>
> 1. Elvis was never irrelevant.
Selective reading; the operative word is "almost".
>
> 3. The Beatles:
> a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
> b) were a glorified Boy Band
> c) sucked
LMAO; be sure to include that in your "book".
> 4. Folk singer Bob Dylan has absolutely nothing to do with rock 'n'
> roll, and folk rock CCR little more.
LMAO - surely you know that Dylan has had a long career, a miniscule part of
it as a folk singer, although it was a highly influential part. CCR had a
heck of lot more to do with rock & roll (and were more favorable to the
music) than Pat Boone, Georgia Gibbs, Johnnie Ray & Frankie Laine combined.
>> Once the executives at the major
>> labels saw the potential for teen idols, there would be many others
>> trying to do what Boone attempted: Frankie Avalon, Fabian, Bobby
>> Rydell, etc., guys that adults would actually allow their daughters to
>> go on dates with.
>
> Wow, I thought I was the only one here who considered the teen idols
> to be rock 'n' rollers! (Just kiddin' -- there are one or two others
> who share our opinion.) But, yes, they all owe a big debt to Pat
> Boone.
Some pretty good interpretive reading there & a fine example of you seeing
rock & roll where it doesn't exist. In the paragraph above yours, while the
phrase "teen idols" exists, "rock & roll" doesn't. And don't try telling me
the two phrases are synonymous.
Chris S.
our opinions are going to diverge. That's great because it's exactly
why I read this newsgroup; I enjoy reading conflicting opinions as
long as the discussion stays somewhat civil. Having been born in 1972,
my own background is much different than those who lived through the
time...not sure when your formative years were, but as somebody who
was a teenager in the 1980, my take on 1950s R&R was colored by oldies
radio and what my parents had in their record collections.
That said, I'm not going to debate you about Pat Boone's place in
history. I can pick up my Whitburn book and see when his hit records
charted and how many he had...but I'm not going to. I never paid a lot
of attention to him, as he wasn't one of the people I listened to
(aside from his couple of #1 Billboard singles) when I was gaining my
appreciation for 1950s music as a kid. He wasn't played on oldies
radio -- which I realize didn't cover the entire spectrum of artists
of the day -- and he wasn't represented at all in my parents' music
collection. Besides, I only knew of him as the father of Debby Boone.
So I'm really not prepared to argue with you about him because your
facts about him are much more accurate than mine.
However, your answer did twist my original meaning and I'd simply like
to point those out:
On Dec 22, 1:44 am, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 21, 5:10 pm, "Chris S." <chrisstufflestr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > On Dec 21, 1:40 pm, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
>
> Before you answer, another point to consider is that Elvis liked all
> kinds of music. He also believed that he was destined to sing all
> kinds of music, and certainly crossed over into his fair share of
> genres (and then some). His biggest idol was most likely Dean Martin,
> and as Love Me Tender ably demonstrated, Elvis could have been a chart-
> topper had he gone the romantic ballad route.
I did mention in my initial post that Elvis could be marketed to
multiple audiences. Yes, I specifically mentioned pop and country but
did know he was influenced by gospel as well as R&B.
Next point (and including your use of my original post):
>
> > the guys who influenced many of the
> > British musicians who almost made Elvis irrelevant as he was doing
> > films. Nor would it have stopped guys like Bob Dylan or Creedence from
> > making records later.
>
> 1. Elvis was never irrelevant.
>
Please read my original comment a few lines above yours. I used the
word "almost." I never said he was irrelevant.
However, the artists I listened to as a kid were themselves raised on
1960s rock. When those artists were asked about their influences, they
mentioned the Beatles, the Stones, Dylan...and a lot of them pointed
to Creedence. The Beach Boys, the Four Seasons and the Motown sound as
well as Atlantic records' soul records got mentioned as well. However,
few would point out "Blue Hawaii" or "GI Blues" and nobody mentioned
Pat Boone.
So let me ask you this...had Elvis not become marginalized during the
1960s, why was that 1968 TV special so important to him?
I'm not saying his 1960s output was meager. "Suspicious Minds" is one
of my favorite songs because the guy just did a fantastic job singing
it. His take on "How Great Thou Art" moves me and I'm not much of a
religious person. "It's Now or Never and "Are You Lonesome Tonight"
are good too but my ears prefer the King's 1970s material to his 1960s
stuff. And his 1950s (pre-Army) stuff is the best of all.
Next point:
>
> 3. The Beatles:
> a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
> b) were a glorified Boy Band
> c) sucked
Wow, our opinions really diverge here. And I'm not going to say
anything beyond the fact that we disagree on this point.
Next point:
>
> 4. Folk singer Bob Dylan has absolutely nothing to do with rock 'n'
> roll, and folk rock CCR little more.
See my comment above about influences. You may see Mr. Zimmerman as
merely a folk singer, but his music moved a bunch of people to the
point where they became musicians themselves. His influence on later
rockers merits his place in history. At the same time, CCR was listed
by a bunch of musicians as their favorite band. I wouldn't
characterize CCR as a folk-rock band in the same vein as The Byrds;
their sound was more rooted in New Orleans swamp rock, just filtered
through the psychedelia of their Bay Area home base.
Not a point here...merely answering a question:
> > Besides, the fact that somebody was able to refine a sound to make it
> > more appealing to an audience that was willing to spend more money on
> > records wouldn't have been tried had Pat Boone not been around to give
> > it a shot.
>
> It's a fair assumption that they might have tried promoting the new
> form with another poster boy, but who?
>
I have no idea. Again, I wasn't around in the 1950s and won't suggest
anybody who could have filled that role. But I will say that the
corporate suits would have found one once they understood that there
was money to be made by it. Even 50 years ago, the end result of
business was the amount listed on the bottom line.
50s
>
> I have no idea. Again, I wasn't around in the 1950s and won't suggest
> anybody who could have filled that role. But I will say that the
> corporate suits would have found one once they understood that there
> was money to be made by it. Even 50 years ago, the end result of
> business was the amount listed on the bottom line.
Chris, Scarlotti was not around in the 50s either and grew up
listening to 40s and 50s pop and big band standards that he heard
through his (much older) parents as an only child. His incredibly
warped view of the origins of rock and roll is infamous around here.
He's twisted every fact around to make it suit his nerdy tastes. He
acually claims to prefer "Tutti Frutii" and "Long Tall Sally" by Pat
Boone over the Little Richard versions., as well as every other
whitewashed shit cover version of 50s R&B.
Roger Ford
<chrisstuf...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>I'm not going to debate you about Pat Boone's place in
>history. I can pick up my Whitburn book and see when his hit records
>charted and how many he had...
Whitburn will verify that Boone's real "one for the record books"
achievement in the 1950's was his unmatched feat of placing at least
one single on the main Billboard pop chart continously for an unbroken
period of OVER FOUR YEARS!
That has to be impressive by anyone's standards :)
Sharx35
"50s" <Sav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:f9b6fdf4-a435-45a4...@j4g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
Bruthie, you REALLY are an asswad. Tiny Prick is ghetto dreck. Period.
Scarlotti
> our opinions are going to diverge. That's great because it's exactly
> why I read this newsgroup; I enjoy reading conflicting opinions as
> long as the discussion stays somewhat civil. Having been born in 1972,
> my own background is much different than those who lived through the
> time...not sure when your formative years were, but as somebody who
> was a teenager in the 1980, my take on 1950s R&R was colored by oldies
> radio and what my parents had in their record collections.
I was born at the tail-end of 1963, and also discovered 50s music
largely through oldies stations and my parents' record collections.
The only difference is that the oldies stations in the 1960s (at least
those that my parents listened to) as well as my parents' records
stuck mostly to the post-war/pre-rock era. I seem to have inherited
their taste.
I've been a fan of this type of music since I was born. Maybe even in
vitro. I'm joking a little ... but only a little. I've known How
Much is the Doggie in the Window, Little White Cloud that Cried,
Little Things Mean a Lot, That Lucky Old Sun, Side By Side, Paper
Doll, Riders in the Sky, Catch a Falling Star, and many others for as
far back as I can remember. And I can remember quite a few incidents
from when I was one-year old (some even before that).
It's as though this music has always existed as a part of my life, and
always as the standard to which everything else was held. It's a
towering part of the landscape of the world as I first experienced
it.
I'm sure that this has colored my perception in that I have always
thought of it as Classic, Traditional, Music Proper. Everything else
(country, r&b, r'n'r, etc.) may have its merits (and I may like a lot
of rock and country songs), but it's necessarily inferior to the Real
Music of legendary demi-gods like Doris Day, Bing Crosby, Nat Cole,
Frankie Laine, Dean Martin, Kay Starr, et al. And they were demi-gods
to me.
I also grew up with an intense hatred of rock 'n' roll (and the
Beatles, disco, and everything else that followed). I didn't get into
50s rock until I was a senior in high school. I got pretty heavily
into it for several years, putting my pre-rock favorites on the back
burner while I discovered the music of Elvis, Dion, Buddy Holly, Chuck
Berry, et al. But the rock songs never really took hold of my soul
the way that 50s pop did, and I soon reached the musical compromise
where I remain today: enjoying an amalgamation of popular music
(including rock) from 1946-1964. Mostly. I also listen to some
earlier and later artists, some country, some blues, etc.
> That said, I'm not going to debate you about Pat Boone's place in
> history. I can pick up my Whitburn book and see when his hit records
> charted and how many he had...but I'm not going to. I never paid a lot
> of attention to him, as he wasn't one of the people I listened to
> (aside from his couple of #1 Billboard singles) when I was gaining my
> appreciation for 1950s music as a kid. He wasn't played on oldies
> radio -- which I realize didn't cover the entire spectrum of artists
> of the day -- and he wasn't represented at all in my parents' music
> collection. Besides, I only knew of him as the father of Debby Boone.
> So I'm really not prepared to argue with you about him because your
> facts about him are much more accurate than mine.
That's always been a bit of a sore point with me -- that the oldies
stations never played (or play) Pat Boone.
> However, your answer did twist my original meaning and I'd simply like
> to point those out:
>
> On Dec 22, 1:44 am, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> > On Dec 21, 5:10 pm, "Chris S." <chrisstufflestr...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > On Dec 21, 1:40 pm, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Before you answer, another point to consider is that Elvis liked all
> > kinds of music. He also believed that he was destined to sing all
> > kinds of music, and certainly crossed over into his fair share of
> > genres (and then some). His biggest idol was most likely Dean Martin,
> > and as Love Me Tender ably demonstrated, Elvis could have been a chart-
> > topper had he gone the romantic ballad route.
>
> I did mention in my initial post that Elvis could be marketed to
> multiple audiences. Yes, I specifically mentioned pop and country but
> did know he was influenced by gospel as well as R&B.
>
> Next point (and including your use of my original post):
My point was slightly different: that Elvis *believed that he was
destined* to sing all styles and genres of music. In other words, he
didn't consider himself a "rock singer" who sometimes dabbled in
country or gospel. He considered himself to be a universal singer who
dabbled in rock, country, gospel, and pop.
> > > the guys who influenced many of the
> > > British musicians who almost made Elvis irrelevant as he was doing
> > > films. Nor would it have stopped guys like Bob Dylan or Creedence from
> > > making records later.
>
> > 1. Elvis was never irrelevant.
>
> Please read my original comment a few lines above yours. I used the
> word "almost." I never said he was irrelevant.
Almost is close enough. Elvis was a superstar when I was growing up
in the 60s and 70s. He was 1000x larger than life. You could drive
down the road through some South Jersey boonies and see oversized
black velvet paintings for sale along the road. And I don't just mean
at one or two gas stations. They were all over the place. He was on
the radio, in the papers (especially the tabloids), on the
bookshelves, in the movies, on tv -- everywhere. And anyplace he
wasn't, there were half a dozen Elvis impersonators standing in. He
permeated the culture beyond the saturation point. He was a part of
everyone's daily existence - whether you wanted him to be or not.
I only partly liked him back then. I hadn't yet developed a taste for
his rock songs, but I like his movies otherwise, and loved his
ballads.
But even more important than the extent to which he dominated American
culture was the fact that all American music, either directly or
indirectly, had been affected by him. Pull Elvis out of the picture
and the rock 'n' roll landscape is even more barren than when you pull
out Pat Boone.
> However, the artists I listened to as a kid were themselves raised on
> 1960s rock. When those artists were asked about their influences, they
> mentioned the Beatles, the Stones, Dylan...and a lot of them pointed
> to Creedence. The Beach Boys, the Four Seasons and the Motown sound as
> well as Atlantic records' soul records got mentioned as well. However,
> few would point out "Blue Hawaii" or "GI Blues" and nobody mentioned
> Pat Boone.
That's because 80s musicians weren't rock 'n' rollers, either. Of
course they were influenced by non-rock 'n' rollers like the Beatles,
the Stones and Dylan. The Stray Cats/Brian Setzer and George
Thorogood were the only rock 'n' rollers to emerge since Bobby Fuller.
> So let me ask you this...had Elvis not become marginalized during the
> 1960s, why was that 1968 TV special so important to him?
His songs were no longer dominating the charts they way they did in
the fifties, but (as noted above) he was still THE cultural icon of
the 1960s.
> I'm not saying his 1960s output was meager. "Suspicious Minds" is one
> of my favorite songs because the guy just did a fantastic job singing
> it. His take on "How Great Thou Art" moves me and I'm not much of a
> religious person. "It's Now or Never and "Are You Lonesome Tonight"
> are good too but my ears prefer the King's 1970s material to his 1960s
> stuff. And his 1950s (pre-Army) stuff is the best of all.
>
> Next point:
>
>
>
> > 3. The Beatles:
> > a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
> > b) were a glorified Boy Band
> > c) sucked
>
> Wow, our opinions really diverge here. And I'm not going to say
> anything beyond the fact that we disagree on this point.
I like about a half dozen of their songs. :-)
> Next point:
>
>
>
> > 4. Folk singer Bob Dylan has absolutely nothing to do with rock 'n'
> > roll, and folk rock CCR little more.
>
> See my comment above about influences. You may see Mr. Zimmerman as
> merely a folk singer, but his music moved a bunch of people to the
> point where they became musicians themselves. His influence on later
> rockers merits his place in history. At the same time, CCR was listed
> by a bunch of musicians as their favorite band. I wouldn't
> characterize CCR as a folk-rock band in the same vein as The Byrds;
> their sound was more rooted in New Orleans swamp rock, just filtered
> through the psychedelia of their Bay Area home base.
I've always thought of the Byrds more as folk-pop.
> Not a point here...merely answering a question:
>
> > > Besides, the fact that somebody was able to refine a sound to make it
> > > more appealing to an audience that was willing to spend more money on
> > > records wouldn't have been tried had Pat Boone not been around to give
> > > it a shot.
>
> > It's a fair assumption that they might have tried promoting the new
> > form with another poster boy, but who?
>
> I have no idea. Again, I wasn't around in the 1950s and won't suggest
> anybody who could have filled that role. But I will say that the
> corporate suits would have found one once they understood that there
> was money to be made by it. Even 50 years ago, the end result of
> business was the amount listed on the bottom line.
I agree that they would have *if* they thought there was money to be
made by it. But if, after the initial explosion kicked off by
Blackboard Jungle, rock 'n' roll had settled back down to a middling-
to-low position on the charts (having as brief a moment in the sun as
The Comets), the execs might have thought that Calypso artists or a
more youthful group of pop singers held a more financially rewarding
future.
I'm not saying it *would* have happened. Or even that it's more
probable than the scenario where Elvis bursts on the scene in his
rocker guise six months earlier to make up for Pat's absence. Or that
rockers like Elvis wouldn't have gotten record contracts and charted
anyway. I'm just saying that it's at least equally probable that the
charts would have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
Vale, Connie Francis and Johnny Mathis (who were holding their own on
the charts with traditional ballads), and Bobby Darin hits like Mack
the Knife, Beyond the Sea, and Things. American Music from the
mid-60s could have been solely comprised of music in this vein --
throw in some Elvis ballads, some Bobby Vinton, a little Andy
Williams, Nancy Wilson, Neil Diamond, post-rock Pat Boone and rock 'n'
roll just became a footnote in musical history.
50s
> Pull Elvis out of the picture and the rock 'n' roll landscape is even more barren than when you pull
> out Pat Boone.
ROFL.....only YOU can type that with a straight face.
You can pull out Phil Philllips and the rock 'n' roll landscape is
even more barren than when you pull
out Pat Boone.
The rock 'n' roll landscape would have been much more fruitful if
Boone had never recorded. "Rock Around The Clock" brought the music to
the entire mainstream world. Boone didn't do shit but glom some sales
away from much better artists because of the ignorance of cornball
whites like you and your mommy and daddy.
There were even legitimite top ten (or close) pop chart rock and roll
hits before Boone, like "Crying In The Chapel" by the Orioles, "Gee"
by the Crows and "Sh-Boom" by the Chords. "Crazy Man Crazy" was top
ten in 1953 already. Even "Sixty Minute Man" was top 20 on the pop
chart in 1951.
Boone's rock and roll records are horrendous and that's the reason
that they have never been played on oldies radio. No self respecting
program director would embarrass his station by playing any of that
dogshit.
I can't wait to see what the people in rec.music.artists.springsteen
think of your Pat Boone fantasies.
If by some miracle some schmuck actually publishes your book, you'll
be a laughing stock with this nonsense.
Scarlotti
My book merely examines the popular music of the era. It doesn't
offer personal theories on alternative paths music might have taken.
50s
Please.....you can't help but let your own feelings get involved. Just
claiming that Pat Boone was a rock and roller will get you killed by
any of the reviewers that you so covet.
Give us a sample few paragraphs from where you write about Boone.
RWC
>On Dec 23, 11:15�pm, Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
>>�Pull Elvis out of the picture and the rock 'n' roll landscape is even more barren than when you pull
>> out Pat Boone.
>
> "Rock Around The Clock" brought the music to
>the entire mainstream world. {Pat} Boone didn't.....
Hmmm. Interesting. I think? I can agree. Thanks Bruce for the thought
provoking remark.
Geoff
Sharx35
"50s" <Sav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:78a5e9d8-9a5c-4f8c...@e37g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...
In 20 years no one will remember Springsteen. What a poseur! The
Boss--yeah, right. It is to laugh.
RWC
<Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>I was born at the tail-end of 1963, and also discovered 50s music
>largely through oldies stations and my parents' record collections.
>
>The only difference is that the oldies stations in the 1960s (at least
>those that my parents listened to)...
>stuck mostly to the post-war/pre-rock era.
This seems a bit strange, unless they were 'easy listening' (as
distinct from 'oldies') stations for the over 40s.
> I seem to have inherited
>their taste.
>
>I've been a fan of this type of music since I was born. Maybe even in
>vitro. I'm joking a little ... but only a little.
> And I can remember quite a few incidents
>from when I was one-year old (some even before that).
>
Amazing.
>It's as though this music has always existed as a part of my life, and
>always as the standard to which everything else was held. It's a
>towering part of the landscape of the world as I first experienced
>it.
>
Thanks for sharing, Mike.
>I'm sure that this has colored my perception in that I have always
>thought of it as Classic, Traditional, Music Proper. Everything else
>(country, r&b, r'n'r, etc.) may have its merits (and I may like a lot
>of rock and country songs), but it's necessarily inferior to the Real
>Music of legendary demi-gods like Doris Day, Bing Crosby, Nat Cole,
>Frankie Laine, Dean Martin, Kay Starr, et al. And they were demi-gods
>to me.
>
Again, thanks for the insight into the music related part of your
soul.
Your remark: "country, r&b, r'n'r, etc. may have its merits, but it's
necessarily inferior to the Real Music of legendary {50s adult pop}
demi-gods,,," is however, somewhat controversial - to say the least.
>I also grew up with an intense hatred of rock 'n' roll (and the
>Beatles, disco, and everything else that followed).
Please, qualified psychoanalysts respond ! :-)
(Again, thanks for sharing)
>I didn't get into
>50s rock until I was a senior in high school. I got pretty heavily
>into it for several years, putting my pre-rock favorites on the back
>burner while I discovered the music of Elvis, Dion, Buddy Holly, Chuck
>Berry, et al.
This would be around 1980, yes?
>But the rock songs never really took hold of my soul
>the way that 50s pop did, and I soon reached the musical compromise
>where I remain today: enjoying an amalgamation of popular music
>(including rock) from 1946-1964. Mostly. I also listen to some
>earlier and later artists, some country, some blues, etc.
>
I'd be genuinely interested in learning about your interest in
specific blues records and why you like them, Mike.
>That's always been a bit of a sore point with me -- that the oldies
>stations never played (or play) Pat Boone.
Pre 70s, at least, oldies stations *should* play Pat Boone records; in
particular:
Rock Me Baby - 1956 (relatively unknown, but passable - cruisy)
I Almost Lost My Mind - 1956
Love Letters In The Sand - 1957
(Welcome) New Lovers - 1960 (ditto above)
Moody River - 1961
Speedy Gonzales - 1962
(and, yes I know. But....)
Tennessee Saturday Night - 1954
Ain't That A Shame - 1955
At My Front Door - 1955
Tutti Frutti - 1956
Long Tall Sally - 1956 (great sax, etc. At least as bright and rockin'
as anything the vocal range and variety challenged Wynonie ever did !)
>But even more important than the extent to which he dominated American
>culture was the fact that all American music, either directly or
>indirectly, had been affected by him. Pull Elvis out of the picture
>and the rock 'n' roll landscape is even more barren than when you pull
>out Pat Boone.
>
You might confirm this 'barren' claim by inquiring of intelligent
reflective folk who were young fans of the music in the 50s.
>That's because 80s musicians weren't rock 'n' rollers, either. Of
>course they were influenced by non-rock 'n' rollers like the Beatles,
>the Stones and Dylan. The Stray Cats/Brian Setzer and George
>Thorogood were the only rock 'n' rollers to emerge since Bobby Fuller.
>
The early Beatles were rock 'n' rollers:
I Saw Her Standing There
Rock and Roll Music
Honey Don't
Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby
That'll Be The Day (Quarrymen)
It Won't Be Long
Little Child
Roll Over Beethoven
Twist and Shout
Dizzy Miss Lizzy
Slow Down
Matchbox
Ain't She Sweet (with Tony Sheridan)
and there are many hybrid r'n'r/pop and r'n'r/r&b songs such as:
She Loves You
Please Mr Postman
Any Time At All
P.S. I Love You
Please Please Me
I Want To Hold Your Hand
The early Rolling Stones were rock 'n' rollers:
Come On
50s
> "50s" <Savo...@aol.com> wrote in message
If we're lucky you won't be around anymore then to care.
50s
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 20:15:03 -0800 (PST), Scarlotti
>
LOL.....he has no idea what constitutes a blues record. One of his
favorites is "Don't Make My Baby Blue" by Frankie Laine. His idea of
blues is even more laughable than his idea of rock and roll. At least
he accidentally likes some real rock and roll, since a decent amount
of white people made good rock and roll. But he does not like anything
that is really blues, as in the Leadbetter discography.
> Tennessee Saturday Night - 1954
That's from 1955.
Sharx35
"50s" <Sav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:3c8a83e5-2a54-4824...@b2g2000yqi.googlegroups.com...
Dickbeater, leadbetter, whatever, is just more dreck.
>
Scarlotti
>
> >I was born at the tail-end of 1963, and also discovered 50s music
> >largely through oldies stations and my parents' record collections.
>
> >The only difference is that the oldies stations in the 1960s (at least
> >those that my parents listened to)...
> >stuck mostly to the post-war/pre-rock era.
>
> This seems a bit strange, unless they were 'easy listening' (as
> distinct from 'oldies') stations for the over 40s.
Possibly. I know that my parents called them "oldies" stations. They
included occasional rock era ballads by Elvis and the Everlys, but
focused primarily on songs like You Belong to Me, Standing on the
Corner, and Mama from the Train. I've always supposed that 1968
wasn't far enough removed from the rock 'n' roll era for rock songs to
warrant the "oldies" tag.
When my parents used the term "easy listening," they were referring to
the organ music that was piped into department stores and dentist
offices.
My mother also listened to what she called an "adult contemporary"
station. It played a lot of current (late 60s) music. At first I
didn't like it, but she got me to agree to having it on every now and
then by pointing out songs by Frankie Laine and Dean Martin.
> > I seem to have inherited
> >their taste.
>
> >I've been a fan of this type of music since I was born. Maybe even in
> >vitro. I'm joking a little ... but only a little.
> > And I can remember quite a few incidents
> >from when I was one-year old (some even before that).
>
> Amazing.
Yes. I'm not saying how far back, because people always think I'm
exaggerating.
Otoh, I have difficulty remembering things from last week.
> >It's as though this music has always existed as a part of my life, and
> >always as the standard to which everything else was held. It's a
> >towering part of the landscape of the world as I first experienced
> >it.
>
> Thanks for sharing, Mike.
>
> >I'm sure that this has colored my perception in that I have always
> >thought of it as Classic, Traditional, Music Proper. Everything else
> >(country, r&b, r'n'r, etc.) may have its merits (and I may like a lot
> >of rock and country songs), but it's necessarily inferior to the Real
> >Music of legendary demi-gods like Doris Day, Bing Crosby, Nat Cole,
> >Frankie Laine, Dean Martin, Kay Starr, et al. And they were demi-gods
> >to me.
>
> Again, thanks for the insight into the music related part of your
> soul.
You're very welcome. :-)
> Your remark: "country, r&b, r'n'r, etc. may have its merits, but it's
> necessarily inferior to the Real Music of legendary {50s adult pop}
> demi-gods,,," is however, somewhat controversial - to say the least.
I don't mean this as a general statement. I'm only talking about for
me. It's a very difficult point to get across clearly, but I'm trying
to give an example of the role 50s pop played in psychological
development, and how it consequently colored my world. From early
childhood, something in the overall sound of 50s music ingrained
itself in my psyche, saying "This is the way that music is supposed to
sound." I can hear a 50s recording by Teresa Brewer or the McGuire
Sisters for the first time today, and have this immediate connection
with it. I'm a little wary when trying out a country or r&b cd,
because at some subconscious level they're still something *foreign*
to me. I've loved Jim Reeves since I was 2, but only got my first
Eddy Arnold cd last year. Now Arnold's one of my favorites, too, but
I'd always regarded him with suspicion: "60s ... country ...
hmm...").
> >I also grew up with an intense hatred of rock 'n' roll (and the
> >Beatles, disco, and everything else that followed).
>
> Please, qualified psychoanalysts respond ! :-)
> (Again, thanks for sharing)
I've made a lot of progress since then. Nowadays when I hear
something from the 70s and 80s (the stuff that everyone else was
listening to when I was in high school), I think, hey that's really
not so horrible after all. *Except for those goddawful falsetto disco
songs by the Bee Gees and their ilk.
> >I didn't get into
> >50s rock until I was a senior in high school. I got pretty heavily
> >into it for several years, putting my pre-rock favorites on the back
> >burner while I discovered the music of Elvis, Dion, Buddy Holly, Chuck
> >Berry, et al.
>
> This would be around 1980, yes?
1982.
In 1983 I bought a '57 Silver Hawk and started greasing my hair,
wearing retro-style clothes, wearing a leather motorcycle jacket,
etc. I was a real freak, but since retro was borderline "in" at that
time, I was actually less of a freak than before.
> >But the rock songs never really took hold of my soul
> >the way that 50s pop did, and I soon reached the musical compromise
> >where I remain today: enjoying an amalgamation of popular music
> >(including rock) from 1946-1964. Mostly. I also listen to some
> >earlier and later artists, some country, some blues, etc.
>
> I'd be genuinely interested in learning about your interest in
> specific blues records and why you like them, Mike.
Robert Johnson. One of my roommates at college (Spring 1988) was into
him and had a greatest hits cassette by him that I liked. I've got
the complete recordings by him.
Dion. Dion's been my favorite rocker since 1982 when I first got into
the genre. When his recent blues albums came I gave them a try -- and
LOVE them.
Bessie Smith -- Frankie Laine wrote in his autobiography how Bessie
Smith's Bleeding Hearted Blues was one of the records that first
inspired him. So I had to check that one out. I've now got 2 double-
cd sets by her.
And, as Bruce noted, I'm a big fan of blues numbers by Woody Herman
(Blues in the Night, Laughing Boy Blues, Blue Prelude, etc.).
Apparently Woody isn't accepted in certain blues circles, but he
should be.
On the whole, though, I prefer blues songs done by pop artists (pretty
much all of them have taken a shot at the blues).
> >That's always been a bit of a sore point with me -- that the oldies
> >stations never played (or play) Pat Boone.
>
> Pre 70s, at least, oldies stations *should* play Pat Boone records; in
> particular:
>
> Rock Me Baby - 1956 (relatively unknown, but passable - cruisy)
> I Almost Lost My Mind - 1956
> Love Letters In The Sand - 1957
> (Welcome) New Lovers - 1960 (ditto above)
> Moody River - 1961
> Speedy Gonzales - 1962
>
> (and, yes I know. But....)
> Tennessee Saturday Night - 1954
> Ain't That A Shame - 1955
> At My Front Door - 1955
> Tutti Frutti - 1956
> Long Tall Sally - 1956 (great sax, etc. At least as bright and rockin'
> as anything the vocal range and variety challenged Wynonie ever did !)
And my personal favorite, April Love.
> >But even more important than the extent to which he dominated American
> >culture was the fact that all American music, either directly or
> >indirectly, had been affected by him. Pull Elvis out of the picture
> >and the rock 'n' roll landscape is even more barren than when you pull
> >out Pat Boone.
>
> You might confirm this 'barren' claim by inquiring of intelligent
> reflective folk who were young fans of the music in the 50s.
Such a confirmation would only be subjective.
Anyway, I wasn't commenting on the quality of the non-Elvis rock
songs, but on the sparsity of other rock songs on the charts. That
is, if you pull all of Elvis' top ten hits off the charts, 1956 is
going to have quite a lot of empty slots.
How do we fill those slots? Move the remaining songs up a few
notches. I haven't got my trusty Whitburn handy, but I'm pretty
confident that if you were to try it, the 1956 charts would look like
those of 1954 (mostly pop, some r&b).
And, if the 1956 charts were dominated by traditional pop, then astute
record producers would promote traditional pop artists for 1957.
> >That's because 80s musicians weren't rock 'n' rollers, either. Of
> >course they were influenced by non-rock 'n' rollers like the Beatles,
> >the Stones and Dylan. The Stray Cats/Brian Setzer and George
> >Thorogood were the only rock 'n' rollers to emerge since Bobby Fuller.
>
> The early Beatles were rock 'n' rollers:
>
> I Saw Her Standing There
Their best.
> Rock and Roll Music
> Honey Don't
> Everybody's Trying To Be My Baby
> That'll Be The Day (Quarrymen)
> It Won't Be Long
> Little Child
> Roll Over Beethoven
> Twist and Shout
> Dizzy Miss Lizzy
> Slow Down
> Matchbox
> Ain't She Sweet (with Tony Sheridan)
Haven't heard most of these.
Even so, they're not straight rock 'n' roll. There's some new element
in them (even in I Saw Her Standing There) -- something smooth and
synthetic, vaguely alien.
> and there are many hybrid r'n'r/pop and r'n'r/r&b songs such as:
>
> She Loves You
> Please Mr Postman
> Any Time At All
> P.S. I Love You
> Please Please Me
> I Want To Hold Your Hand
>
> The early Rolling Stones were rock 'n' rollers:
>
> Come On
Only one song? And one that I haven't heard. The only Stones song
I've ever liked is Paint It Black ... but I don't consider it r'n'r.
Scarlotti
No. I think of that as a pop rock song.
For Frankie Laine blues, I'd cite West End Blues, Rockin' Chair, St.
James Infirmary, and That Ain't Right.
> His idea of
> blues is even more laughable than his idea of rock and roll. At least
> he accidentally likes some real rock and roll, since a decent amount
> of white people made good rock and roll. But he does not like anything
> that is really blues, as in the Leadbetter discography.
There you go with race again!
50s
>
> In 1983 I bought a '57 Silver Hawk and started greasing my hair,
> wearing retro-style clothes, wearing a leather motorcycle jacket,
> etc. I was a real freak,
Change that to
I became and still am a real freak.
Your musical taste alone makes you a gigantic freak (and/or geek).
50s
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blues
Blues is the name given to both a musical form and a music genre
created within the African-American communities in the Deep South of
the United States at the end of the 19th century from spirituals, work
songs, field hollers, shouts and chants, and rhymed simple narrative
ballads.
Sharx35
"50s" <Sav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:35408cb6-222c-4f64...@n35g2000yqm.googlegroups.com...
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Uni
His black artist music faded quickly in the early '70's.
Uni
Mark Dintenfass
<659fdc48-040e-44d2...@t19g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Scarlotti <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
<snip>
> I'm not saying it *would* have happened. Or even that it's more
> probable than the scenario where Elvis bursts on the scene in his
> rocker guise six months earlier to make up for Pat's absence. Or that
> rockers like Elvis wouldn't have gotten record contracts and charted
> anyway. I'm just saying that it's at least equally probable that the
> charts would have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
> Vale, Connie Francis and Johnny Mathis (who were holding their own on
> the charts with traditional ballads), and Bobby Darin hits like Mack
> the Knife, Beyond the Sea, and Things. American Music from the
> mid-60s could have been solely comprised of music in this vein --
> throw in some Elvis ballads, some Bobby Vinton, a little Andy
> Williams, Nancy Wilson, Neil Diamond, post-rock Pat Boone and rock 'n'
> roll just became a footnote in musical history.
The problem I have with your historical arguments is that they all seem
to flow directly from you admittedly idiosyncratic tastes. In brief,
you seem always to be insisting that what you like is significant and
that what you don't like is insignificant. Sorry, but that's just
vanity at work. Nothing wrong with having your own tastes, but to base
any kind of objective history on such a subjective basis is bound to
produce a distorted account of things.
--
--md
_________
Remove xx's from address to reply
Scarlotti
> In article
> <659fdc48-040e-44d2-9a56-8e380e1de...@t19g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
Huh?
The above-quoted argument is speculative, not historical.
Nor am I claiming that pop is superior to r'n'r (or that Pat Boone is
superior to Little Richard).
I'm only theorizing that the course of popular music *could* have been
very different had not Pat Boone been in the picture.
It's only a theory ... but I think, a legitimate one.
When making a historical argument, I try to limit qualitative
judgments (and subjective preferences) to personal asides.
Mark Dintenfass
<54c5559a-1eb1-475e...@d7g2000vbs.googlegroups.com>,
Scarlotti <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
> On Dec 25, 11:34锟絘m, Mark Dintenfass <mdintenf...@xxnew.rr.com> wrote:
> > In article
> > <659fdc48-040e-44d2-9a56-8e380e1de...@t19g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
> >
> > Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > <snip>
> >
> > > I'm not saying it *would* have happened. 锟絆r even that it's more
> > > probable than the scenario where Elvis bursts on the scene in his
> > > rocker guise six months earlier to make up for Pat's absence. 锟絆r that
> > > rockers like Elvis wouldn't have gotten record contracts and charted
> > > anyway. 锟絀'm just saying that it's at least equally probable that the
> > > charts would have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
> > > Vale, Connie Francis and Johnny Mathis (who were holding their own on
> > > the charts with traditional ballads), and Bobby Darin hits like Mack
> > > the Knife, Beyond the Sea, and Things. 锟紸merican Music from the
> > > mid-60s could have been solely comprised of music in this vein --
> > > throw in some Elvis ballads, some Bobby Vinton, a little Andy
> > > Williams, Nancy Wilson, Neil Diamond, post-rock Pat Boone and rock 'n'
> > > roll just became a footnote in musical history.
> >
> > The problem I have with your historical arguments is that they all seem
> > to flow directly from you admittedly idiosyncratic tastes. In brief,
> > you seem always to be insisting that what you like is significant and
> > that what you don't like is insignificant. Sorry, but that's just
> > vanity at work. Nothing wrong with having your own tastes, but to base
> > any kind of objective history on such a subjective basis is bound to
> > produce a distorted account of things.
> >
> > --
> > --md
>
> Huh?
>
> The above-quoted argument is speculative, not historical.
>
> Nor am I claiming that pop is superior to r'n'r (or that Pat Boone is
> superior to Little Richard).
>
> I'm only theorizing that the course of popular music *could* have been
> very different had not Pat Boone been in the picture.
>
> It's only a theory ... but I think, a legitimate one.
>
> When making a historical argument, I try to limit qualitative
> judgments (and subjective preferences) to personal asides.
Huh?
Your speculation came at the end of a long historical argument about
what you take to be the importance of Pat Boone to the history of
r'n'r.
It's part and parcel of the many historical arguments you have made in
the past and in this thread about the development of r'n'r, arguments
that almost everyone with knowledge and personal experience of how
r'n'r was born and developed find misleading, wrongheaded, or just
plain loopy, as a bunch of people have in this thread. In addition to
your claim about Boone, you have argued, as factual, not speculative,
that Johnny Ray is the father or r'n'r, that r'n'r comes directly out
of pop and only indirectly out of r&b, that Bob Dylan is a folk singer
who is irrelevant to the history of r'n'r, to name just a few. Almost
always, it seems to me, you have projected your tastes onto history in
the way I described. Even your fantasy about r'n'r being stillborn if
it wasn't for Boone suggests wishful thinking rather than cultural
insight.
I really didn't intend to get into this argument, and I certainly don't
want to rehash our old arguments again. My comment probably wasn't
even helpful, though I meant it to be. I find you interesting when you
talk about what you like and know. Like many others, I find you
maddening when you talk about what you dislike and hardly know at all.
Having a strong point of view is useful for a musical historian, but it
stops being history when that strong point of view starts blocking out
reality.
gully
it seems to me that twp points are clear.
Pat Boone introduced a lot of music to people who probably wouldn't
otherwise have heard it.
Having said that, it is clear that the inevitable march of rock and
roll, whatever that is, would have gone on much the same without Mr.
Boone.
We'd still argue over what RnR is, whether Bob Dylan is part of it or
not, what the first songs were, and what the dividing line between pop
and RnR is, as well as all those other things we argue about
50s
> While it is undeniably foolish to enter a worn-out thread this late,
> it seems to me that twp points are clear.
> Pat Boone introduced a lot of music to people who probably wouldn't
> otherwise have heard it.
No he didn't.
There's only one or two hit songs that he did that were not also
mainstream pop hits by the artists he was covering.
His first hit, "Two Hearts" (a cover of the Charms) was barely top
twenty on the pop charts. Things like "Sh-Boom" by the Chords and
"Gee" by the Crows and "Crazy Man Crazy" by Haley and several other
authentic rock and roll records were bigger pop chart hits, AND were
MUCH earlier than Boone's first hit.
Four months before Boone's first hit the Charms had "Hearts Of Stone"
which was a bigger pop chart hit than Boone's version of "Two Hearts"
was. The record did fine without any help from Pat.
"At My Front Door" by the El Dorados was top twenty on the pop charts.
"Ain't That A Shame" by Fats Domino was top ten on the pop charts.
"Tutti-Frutti" by Little Richard was top twenty on the pop charts.
Little Richard's version of "Long Tall sally" was bigger than Pat's
version. There were plenty of other big authentic rock and roll hits
between when Boone did "Two Hearts" and when his rock and roll days
were over. The whole thing was only about a year. Records like
"Maybellene" by Chuck Berry and "Seventeen" by Boyd Bennett and many
others in the time periood (Spring of '55 to sring of '56) were
legitimite top 20 pop chart hits.
Rock and roll was becoming big because teenagers were listening to the
real artists and loving them. Not because pop fans were buying pop
versions of rock and roll songs.
His part in exposing rock and roll to people who were unaware of it is
minimal at best.
Pat's covers of rock and roll songs are a joke, always were, and
always will be.
gordie
>
> His part in exposing rock and roll to people who were unaware of it is
> minimal at best.
>
> Pat's covers of rock and roll songs are a joke, always were, and
> always will be.
You are no doubt correct. However, I am not sure you grew up in the
midwest, where radio stations did not play the original songs, even if
they made higher or as high chart positions. Radio stations in Western
Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska would be more likely to play the white
bread version, to small audiences, I realize.
Scarlotti
>
>
>
> Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
> > On Dec 25, 11:34 am, Mark Dintenfass <mdintenf...@xxnew.rr.com> wrote:
> > > In article
> > > <659fdc48-040e-44d2-9a56-8e380e1de...@t19g2000vbc.googlegroups.com>,
>
> > > Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > <snip>
>
> > > > probable than the scenario where Elvis bursts on the scene in his
> > > > rockers like Elvis wouldn't have gotten record contracts and charted
> > > > charts would have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
> > > > Vale, Connie Francis and Johnny Mathis (who were holding their own on
> > > > the charts with traditional ballads), and Bobby Darin hits like Mack
1) Fact: Pat Boone was labeled and marketed as "rock 'n' roll" in
1955. Whether he's considered "rock 'n' roll" today has no bearing on
his historical role in bringing the genre into the mainstream.
> you have argued, as factual, not speculative,
> that Johnny Ray is the father or r'n'r,
2) Fact: Tony Bennett (someone far more knowledgeable than I) bestowed
that title on him. And many of his peers (Patti Page, Frankie Laine,
et al.) have echoed that sentiment. I'm not claiming that he created
rock 'n' roll, but rather that his music was certainly close enough to
rock 'n' roll to have paved the way for its acceptance into the
mainstream.
> that r'n'r comes directly out
> of pop and only indirectly out of r&b, that Bob Dylan is a folk singer
> who is irrelevant to the history of r'n'r,
3) Fact: In 1985 Dylan explained the attraction that folk music had
exerted on him: "The thing about rock'n'roll is that for me anyway it
wasn't enough ... There were great catch-phrases and driving pulse
rhythms ... but the songs weren't serious or didn't reflect life in a
realistic way. I knew that when I got into folk music, it was more of
a serious type of thing. The songs are filled with more despair, more
sadness, more triumph, more faith in the supernatural, much deeper
feelings." He's predominantly a Folk artist.
> to name just a few. Almost
> always, it seems to me, you have projected your tastes onto history in
> the way I described. Even your fantasy about r'n'r being stillborn if
> it wasn't for Boone suggests wishful thinking rather than cultural
> insight.
Maybe just a little ... :-D
I still think it's a viable scenario.
> I really didn't intend to get into this argument, and I certainly don't
> want to rehash our old arguments again. My comment probably wasn't
> even helpful, though I meant it to be. I find you interesting when you
> talk about what you like and know.
Thanks Mark!
> Like many others, I find you
> maddening when you talk about what you dislike and hardly know at all.
I kinda like that too. ;-)
50s
Even if true there were plenty of other faggy white people doing faggy
cover versions of cool black records. Without Pat Boone NOTHING at all
would have changed, except maybe we would have been spared his
daughter's dogshit mega hit "You Light Up My Life" in the 1970s.
The Crew Cuts, McGuire Sisters, Gale Storm and Georgia Gibbs would
still have been there to bring their shit copies of rock and roll to
your pussies in Nebraska.
Mark Dintenfass
<0270f4eb-73d9-4e63...@p23g2000vbl.googlegroups.com>,
Scarlotti <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> > that r'n'r comes directly out
> > of pop and only indirectly out of r&b, �that Bob Dylan is a folk singer
> > who is irrelevant to the history of r'n'r,
>
> 3) Fact: In 1985 Dylan explained the attraction that folk music had
> exerted on him: "The thing about rock'n'roll is that for me anyway it
> wasn't enough ... There were great catch-phrases and driving pulse
> rhythms ... but the songs weren't serious or didn't reflect life in a
> realistic way. I knew that when I got into folk music, it was more of
> a serious type of thing. The songs are filled with more despair, more
> sadness, more triumph, more faith in the supernatural, much deeper
> feelings." He's predominantly a Folk artist.
Dylan brought serious lyrics to r'n'r. That's his contribution, for
better or worse. Many of the real hard-core folkies were furious when
he went electric because his notion of "folk" was a lot different from
theirs.
That is, what he called "folk" wasn't just the old Appalachian stuff.
For him "folk" encompassed lots of early blues and even r&b. Give a
listen to the radio program on Sirius sometimes (it gets posted
regularly at alt.binaries.sounds.mp3.bob-dylan). He's a fascinating
deejay and the variety of stuff he plays, (everything from country
swing and rural blues to punk and hard rock, with a heavy emphasis on
early r&b) is very enlightening about his influences and, for me,
highly entertaining.
Sharx35
"Scarlotti" <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote in message
news:54c5559a-1eb1-475e...@d7g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...
Well, *I* AM making those claims. I just can't STAND discordant ghetto
dreck. If it's hard on my ears, most of the time, I do NOT like it. I can't
abide performers who scream, who are out of harmony, or who gyrate around
like crack monkeys or victims of Parkinson's.
Sharx35
"gordie" <gordon.u...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:59a7616f-f5c9-43f0...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
NOT small audiences. COLLECTIVELY, the "white bread" versions, as YOU call
them, were preferred by TENS OF MILLIONS MORE people than the ghetto dreck
YOU seem to prefer.
Mr. M
wrote:
I like a lot of the Pat Boone versions - probably just as much as the
rock versions - a lot of hat probably has to do with that I can
listen to any version of the song at any time. If I was a teen in the
1950's with a transistor radio glued to my ear, foaming at the bit for
the next rock and roll song to come on, I'd probably despise Pat
Boone as much as anyone else if that's all radio stations were
playing..
Mr. M
Sharx35
"Mr. M" <m...@n.com> wrote in message
news:h1qaj5thtshksi28g...@4ax.com...
The stations that I listened to back in the 50's and 60's usually played a
mixture. Black artists got air time up here in Canada, perhaps the stronger
sexual stuff was filtered out, though, if the DJ had career ambitions.
Mr. M
>
>The stations that I listened to back in the 50's and 60's usually played a
>mixture. Black artists got air time up here in Canada, perhaps the stronger
>sexual stuff was filtered out, though, if the DJ had career ambitions.
>
>
>
break out the soul music on Friday night, not much the rest of the
week.
Mr. M
50s
> On Sat, 26 Dec 2009 01:27:03 GMT, "Sharx35" <shar...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >"gordie" <gordon.urquhar...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> >news:59a7616f-f5c9-43f0...@s21g2000prm.googlegroups.com...
>
> >>> His part in exposing rock and roll to people who were unaware of it is
> >>> minimal at best.
>
> >>> Pat's covers of rock and roll songs are a joke, always were, and
> >>> always will be.
>
> >> You are no doubt correct. However, I am not sure you grew up in the
> >> midwest, where radio stations did not play the original songs, even if
> >> they made higher or as high chart positions. Radio stations in Western
> >> Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska would be more likely to play the white
> >> bread version, to small audiences, I realize.
>
> >NOT small audiences. COLLECTIVELY, the "white bread" versions, as YOU call
> >them, were preferred by TENS OF MILLIONS MORE people than the ghetto dreck
> >YOU seem to prefer.
>
> I like a lot of the Pat Boone versions - probably just as much as the
> listen to any version of the song at any time.
No, it has more to do with the fact that you have no musical taste.
You like just about anything and everything, which is no different
than liking nothing.
Scarlotti
I don't know if he can claim to be the first rock era songwriter to
have "serious" lyrics -- Pete Seeger (Where Have All the Flowers Gone)
certainly preceded him.
But the real issue here isn't whether Bob Dylan contributed to the
development of American music, as it is whether he contributed to rock
'n' roll.
He seems to have started to gain national recognition in 1963. How
many rock and roll artists have appeared since 1963? I count Bobby
Fuller, George Thorogood, and The Stray Cats/Brian Setzer.
Now I like other groups/artists from the 60s and 70s: The Monkees, The
Doors, Pink Floyd, Sinead O'Connor -- but they aren't rock 'n' roll.
Not really. Not in the sense that they play the same form of music
that was known as rock 'n' roll back in 1956.
Rock 'n' roll is Bill Haley & His Comets, Pat Boone ;-), Elvis
Presley, Chuck Berry, Buddy Holly, Jerry Lee Lewis, Bobby Darin,
Little Richard, Bobby Rydell and Dion. (I would also throw in Doo-Wop
groups, since no one differentiated btw rock 'n' roll and "doo-wop" at
the time -- and as the latter term had yet to be coined.)
Post-British Invasion music has been called "rock," but it sure
doesn't sound like rock 'n' roll. As far as I can determine (and,
this is just an educated guess on my part), the music industry held
onto the term "rock" because of its "cool" connotations. Instead of
simply renaming the new musical forms they simply apply an ever-
changing series of adjectives to the trusty old "rock" base ("acid-
rock," "heavy metal rock," "punk rock," "grunge rock," etc.).
And I'm sure that a lot of *those* musical genres owe a great debt to
Bob Dylan. But they're still *not* rock 'n' roll, and neither is he.
Thanks for the hint about Sirius/binaries, but I'm afraid I'm still
binary challenged. Last month I dropped Verizon/Msn for Optimum
Online, but I don't think that Optimum has binary access either. I
tried cutting and pasting the link to my address bar and got a message
saying "server not found."
Scarlotti
You know Bruce, the fact that there are millions of fans for all
styles and genres of music (and for all artists with hit records), is
strong evidence for an argument that all music is equally good --
relative to the individual taste of each listener.
I can't fathom how anyone can listen to Little Richard shrieking,
whereas you thinks it's one of the most sublime sounds on the planet.
Millions of LR fans agree with you. Millions of others agree with
me. Ultimately there can be no right or wrong.
Nor can one person's preferences be set up on a proverbial pedestal
and deemed "TASTE." Taste is subjective, not universal, and only a
narcissist would attempt to hold his preferences up as a standard for
mankind. At best we can only attempt to explain *why* a given
recording affects us in a positive or negative manner.
Perhaps the best measure of talent/quality that we have is that of
popularity within a given group of similarly minded people at a given
place and time. If a decided majority of New York-based, teenaged
rock 'n' roll fans in 1956 felt that Elvis was the greatest thing
they'd ever heard, then Elvis was just that ... for them. Drawing on
the national charts, we can extend that claim to state that Elvis was
the greatest rock 'n' roll artist of 1956 -- but the more we attempt
to universalize (generalize) the claim, the more we open ourselves up
for viable objections. Legitimately, we can only surmise that *many*
people felt so.
Ideally one should strive to achieve a state of "mind at large"
wherein one can partake equally of the joy and beauty inherent in all
things which comprise the human experience. To enjoy just about
anything and everything should be a collective goal of the human
race. "If the doors of perception were cleansed, everything would
appear to man as it is -- infinite."
I doubt I'll ever reach a state where I can appreciate certain
subgenres of rap, but I am striving to expand my musical tastes. 30
years ago, if anyone had told me that one day I'd actually own albums
by The Doors, Billy Joel, Chuck Berry, Crystal Gayle, Pink Floyd,
Meatloaf, the Monkees, Franz Liszt, Frederic Chopin, Kitty Wells, Roy
Acuff, Charles Manson, The Beach Boys, Don McLean, Robert Johnson, The
Flamingos, Pete Seeger, The Kingston Trio, Juice Newton, Kate Bush and
many others, I'd have laughed in their face.
Sometimes they even touch me as much as early 50s pop. :-)
Sharx35
"Scarlotti" <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote in message
news:abe1a972-3389-49a8...@33g2000vbe.googlegroups.com...
Well, "People are Strange" by the Doors is okay; Crystal Gayle's sultry
voice popped a few woodies, e.g. Brown Eyes blue..; Liszt and Chopin--2
fine classical musicians; Beach Boys...iconic; Don McLean, yes; but the
rest.......I could have a long pleasant life and never hear.
RWC
>Only one song? And one that I haven't heard. The only Stones song
>I've ever liked is Paint It Black ... but I don't consider it r'n'r.
Oops, it seems I pressed some key which sent my nesssage before
completion. To continue:
Bye Bye Johnny
Carol
Poison Ivy
Route 66
Susie Q
Little Queenie
I Wanna Be Your Man
and the hybrid pop/r&b rockers include
The Last Time
Paint It Black
19th Nervous Breakdown
(I Can't Get No) Satisfaction
Get Off Of My Cloud
I'm All Right (live)
Not Fade Away
>His songs were no longer dominating the charts they way they did in
>the fifties, but (as noted above) he was still THE cultural icon of
>the 1960s.
I don't think so. In the 60's Elvis was seen as an awesome first
rate*50's* icon. In the 60s he had dropped to second or third rate
icon.
From 1962 to 1967 approx, beat groups, motown and psychedelia (Jimi
Hendrix, Cream, Jefferson Airplane...) were the major popular music
cultural icons, not "Flamingo Star" Elvis.
>
>> > 3. The Beatles:
>> > a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
>> > b) were a glorified Boy Band
>> > c) sucked
>>
Oh dear !
Perhaps, the most controversial comment you've ever made in this
newsgroup, Mike?
Unfortunately, your opinion is somewhat sus(pect) here.
The Beatles played and then *progressed* from 50s rock and roll.
Perhaps without this progression we would not have the magical "White
Rabbit" by Jefferson Airplane, "Strange" by The Doors, and "D'yer
Mak'er" by Led Zeppelin?
>if, after the initial explosion kicked off by
>Blackboard Jungle, rock 'n' roll had settled back down to a middling-
>to-low position on the charts
But it didn't. I don't get your argument that follows. How could the
charts have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
Vale and Johnny Mathis?
Geoff
RWC
<Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>On Dec 24, 7:34�am, RWC <letsr...@opbox.com> wrote:
>Nowadays when I hear
>something from the 70s and 80s (the stuff that everyone else was
>listening to when I was in high school), I think, hey that's really
>not so horrible after all.
> *Except for those goddawful falsetto disco
>songs by the Bee Gees and their ilk.
If you mean records like "Night Fever" - I'm with you.
Excerpts from Wikipedia:
"Disco is a genre of dance music whose popularity peaked during the
middle to late 1970s. Disco was a reaction particularly among New York
City *gays* against the domination of rock music. Disco was a form of
black commercial pop music and a craze among black *gays* especially.
Latinos and women embraced disco as well."
I've never related to falsetto disco music - I always thought it was
kinda effeminate (I didn't know about the gay connection).
"Well-known late 1970s disco performers included Donna Summer, Amanda
Lear, The Bee Gees, KC and the Sunshine Band, Chic, and The Jacksons.
According to music writer Piero Scaruffi the disco phenomenon spread
quickly because the "collective ecstasy" of disco was cathartic and
regenerative and lead to freedom of expression."
"An angry backlash against disco music and culture emerged in the
United States hitting its peak with the July 1979 Disco Demolition
Night riot."
>In 1983 I bought a '57 Silver Hawk and started greasing my hair,
>wearing retro-style clothes, wearing a leather motorcycle jacket,
>etc. I was a real freak, but since retro was borderline "in" at that
>time, I was actually less of a freak than before.
I admire individuality (within reason I suppose). To the extent I have
a weakness in that I quietly frown upon folk who let their actions be
determined/controlled by their social peers,
Synthetic (not natural or genuine [r'n'r]; but rather artificial or
contrived). On the contrary, for me these records conjure up their
rough and raw, unaffected, Cavern days. Alien because of the new and
different, for you, Brit Beat sound (compared to the Establishment
likes of Chuck Berry, Little Richard and Jerry Lee) - but this early
60s Brit 'pop group' scene is reminiscent of late 50s/cusp American
rockabilly/garage such as:
The Phaetons - I Love My Baby (1959)
Andy Starr and The Casinos - Just-A-Walkin (1960)
The Earthquakes & Rhythm kings - Crazy Bop (1960)
Jack Roubik - Live It Up (1958)
Joe, Ron & George - Half Ton Mama
and earlier
Lloyd McCollough - 'Cause I Love You (1956)
Lou Millet - Slip, Slip, Slippin' In (1956)
last but not least
Pete Cummins and the Redeemers Four - In The Middle (Of The Night)
label: http://rcs.law.emory.edu/rcs/pics/d14/14753.htm
I wish I knew the year for this record. As I said in a message some
years ago, it *sounds* like Mick Jagger backed by the "Cavern" Beatles
(it isn't of course) :-)
Some late 50s rockabilly even sounds a bit more restrained (the vocal
or perceived general energy level) in comparison:
Jesse Lee Turner - Shake,Baby Shake
Jack Winston - It's Rock And Roll - 1958
Johnny Duffett - Just Give Me Your Heart - 1959
Les Cole & The Echoes - Be Boppin' Baby
Mel Price - Little Dog Blues - 1959
One could say the Beatles records listed above are British flavored
Rock and Roll, while Chuck Berry records, such as Jo Jo Gunne, are
Black flavored Rock and Roll.
Geoff
Mr. M
I never went to clubs very much, but I liked a lot of disco tunes that
were popular over the years, and I bought quite a few 45s - I used to
make tapes for the car and found that disco music went well with 50's
rock and roll. A lot of the well-known disco hits were good songs on
their own, and not just as dance floor hits, but good pop-rock hits.
Mr. M
Nutella
roll" is like an elevator in an outhouse. It doesn't belong.
Scarlotti
> On Wed, 23 Dec 2009 20:15:03 -0800 (PST), Scarlotti
>
I didn't say that he was seen as "awesome." One doesn't have to be
cutting edge, critically acclaimed, or even talented to dominate
mainstream culture -- take Anna Nicole Smith, Paris Hilton, and
Brittney Spears for 3 of this decade's prime examples.
The Beatles were "in" -- Elvis was "out." But the Beatles weren't
dominating mainstream culture quite as much as Elvis was. They were
close, but The King had a decided lead. Elvis was American royalty.
He was practically the Second Coming of Christ. He was (and in many
circles remains) *that* big.
> From 1962 to 1967 approx, beat groups, motown and psychedelia (Jimi
> Hendrix, Cream, Jefferson Airplane...) were the major popular music
> cultural icons, not "Flamingo Star" Elvis.
Nah. They may have out-charted him, but they weren't even on the same
playing field with him.
Iconically speaking, Elvis' peers were The Beatles, Elizabeth Taylor
(& Richard Burton by extention), JFK, Jackie O, and Martin Luther
King.
> >> > 3. The Beatles:
> >> > a) destroyed rock 'n' roll
> >> > b) were a glorified Boy Band
> >> > c) sucked
>
> Oh dear !
>
> Perhaps, the most controversial comment you've ever made in this
> newsgroup, Mike?
Anywhere else, yes. But as far as this group goes, I think the
Beatles are less popular here than Howlin' Wolf, Wynonie Harris, and
Little Richard (all of whom I've sounded off against in the past).
> Unfortunately, your opinion is somewhat sus(pect) here.
>
> The Beatles played and then *progressed* from 50s rock and roll.
> Perhaps without this progression we would not have the magical "White
> Rabbit" by Jefferson Airplane, "Strange" by The Doors, and "D'yer
> Mak'er" by Led Zeppelin?
White Rabbit is a wonderful, magical song. But it's *not* rock 'n'
roll. Literary acid.
> >if, after the initial explosion kicked off by
> >Blackboard Jungle, rock 'n' roll had settled back down to a middling-
> >to-low position on the charts
>
> But it didn't. I don't get your argument that follows. How could the
> charts have been dominated by younger pop artists like Jerry
> Vale and Johnny Mathis?
Of course it didn't. Pat Boone was there to keep it going.
It's only a possible alternative scenario. If r'n'r had fizzled out
after Blackboard Jungle (due to the absence of Pat Boone in those
crucial early days when it was being written off as a passing fad and
practically supplanted by calypso), then it's more than conceivable
that record labels large and small would have continued to promote a
new, younger batch of pop artists, and r'n'r would have been
stillborn.
Mark Dintenfass
<6e18885c-c6cb-4c93...@g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
Scarlotti <Scar...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> The Beatles were "in" -- Elvis was "out." But the Beatles weren't
> dominating mainstream culture quite as much as Elvis was. They were
> close, but The King had a decided lead. Elvis was American royalty.
> He was practically the Second Coming of Christ. He was (and in many
> circles remains) *that* big.
Not even close. Read this for starters:
http://oldies.about.com/cs/elvis/a/comeback.htm
Someone who's on top during the mid-60s hardly needs a "comeback"
special.
Scarlotti
>
> Scarlotti <Scarlo...@searchhawkmail.com> wrote:
>
> > The Beatles were "in" -- Elvis was "out." But the Beatles weren't
> > dominating mainstream culture quite as much as Elvis was. They were
> > close, but The King had a decided lead. Elvis was American royalty.
> > He was practically the Second Coming of Christ. He was (and in many
> > circles remains) *that* big.
>
> Not even close. Read this for starters:
>
> http://oldies.about.com/cs/elvis/a/comeback.htm
>
> Someone who's on top during the mid-60s hardly needs a "comeback"
> special.
>
> --
> --md
Interesting article. But I think we're talking about two different
things here: critical acclaim/chart success vs the degree which his
image/voice permeate the culture.
By the late 60s, Elvis was no longer considered viable rock artist.
His films were critically panned. His records were critically
panned. And he needed a comeback -- if he was to reclaim his former
position at the top of the charts.
But passe or not, he was still an iconic figure.
His movies were all popular hits. Here's a snippet from Wikipedia
regarding them:
*Presley movies were nevertheless commercially successful, and he
"became a film genre of his own."[279] Hal Wallis would later remark,
"An Elvis Presley picture is the only sure thing in Hollywood."[280]
Elvis on celluloid was the only chance for many of his fans around the
world to see him, in the absence of live appearances (the only time he
toured outside of the U.S. was in Canada in 1957). Some of his most
popular songs came from such movies, like "Can't Help Falling in
Love," "Return to Sender", and "Viva Las Vegas."[281] His 1960s films
and soundtracks grossed some $280 million.* [END QUOTE]
Personally, I still enjoy watching/rewatching his films and think that
he cut a *lot* of great records in the 1960s. Over the past few
months, I've watched the following on dvd: Love Me Tender, Wild in the
Country, Roustabout, G.I. Blues, Blue Hawaii and Stay Away Joe.
Throughout the 60s, he was a *big* box office movie star. His
marriage was a huge cultural event. His songs were still played on
the radio. His name was always in the headlines. And his image was
everywhere. He was one of the biggest icons of the 20th Century
(arguably, the biggest). Elvis, Chaplin, Marilyn, Mickey Mouse ...
not many others in that category of iconic stature.
But even granting that his *career* had fallen into a mid-decade
slump: he'd started off the decade with his biggest box office smash
(Blue Hawaii) and his all-time biggest hit (It's Now or Never) and
finished it off with his legendary Comeback Special. As Newsweek
commented: "There are several unbelievable things about Elvis, but the
most incredible is his staying power in a world where meteoric careers
fade like shooting stars."
But I'll give the final word to Dick Clark: “It’s rare when an
artist’s talent can touch an entire generation of people. It’s even
rarer when that same influence affects several generations. Elvis made
an imprint on the world of pop music unequaled by any other single
performer.”
Scarlotti
> In article
> <6e18885c-c6cb-4c93-87f5-4007da155...@g31g2000vbr.googlegroups.com>,
>
>
> > The Beatles were "in" -- Elvis was "out." But the Beatles weren't
> > dominating mainstream culture quite as much as Elvis was. They were
> > close, but The King had a decided lead. Elvis was American royalty.
> > He was practically the Second Coming of Christ. He was (and in many
> > circles remains) *that* big.
>
> Not even close. Read this for starters:
>
> http://oldies.about.com/cs/elvis/a/comeback.htm
>
> Someone who's on top during the mid-60s hardly needs a "comeback"
> special.
>
> --
> --md
Well I'd responded to this, but it doesn't appear to have taken (no
doubt it'll show up after I post this rehash). Anyway, if there's a
post by me above this, please disregard the latter.
Interesting article, Mark, but I think we're talking about two
different things here: critical acclaim/chart position vs the degree
to which a name/image/voice permeates popular culture at large.
Sure, Elvis needed a comeback special to regain his position at the
top of the charts, to restore critical acclaim to his work, and to
reestablish him as a viable force in the music industry.
But he was still an iconic figure throughout the decade. He started
off the decade with his biggest box office picture, Blue Hawaii, and
his biggest hit record, It's Now or Never. He remained hugely popular
at the box office despite the fact that his films were often little
more than formulaic star vehicles. Here's a Wiki quote regarding his
films:
*Presley movies were nevertheless commercially successful, and he
"became a film genre of his own."[279] Hal Wallis would later remark,
"An Elvis Presley picture is the only sure thing in Hollywood."[280]
Elvis on celluloid was the only chance for many of his fans around the
world to see him, in the absence of live appearances (the only time he
toured outside of the U.S. was in Canada in 1957).f Some of his most
popular songs came from such movies, like "Can't Help Falling in
Love," "Return to Sender", and "Viva Las Vegas."[281] His 1960s films
and soundtracks grossed some $280 million.[282]* [End Quote]
Personal aside: I still enjoy his films and think his 60s records are
great. I've recently watched/rewatched the following EP films on dvd:
Love Me Tender, G.I. Blues, Blue Hawaii, Roustabout, Wild in the
Country and Stay Away Joe.
He ended the decade with his legendary Comeback Special. Newsweek
commented: "There are several unbelievable things about Elvis, but the
most incredible is his staying power in a world where meteoric careers
fade like shooting stars."
He was more than a major star of the decade -- he was one of the
biggest, most iconic stars of the 20th century: Elvis, Marilyn Monroe,
Charles Chaplin, and Mickey Mouse. Not many others can make a claim
to that level of iconic stature.
But I'll give Dick Clark the final word: “It’s rare when an artist’s
Sharx35
"Mr. M" <m...@n.com> wrote in message
news:ivccj5pc5bmss3rjr...@4ax.com...
Disco was, is and will ALWAYS be a blight. It sucked then, It sucks now and
it will always suck. Similarly, anyone who LIKES disco sucks the organs of
their same-sex partner.
Sharx35
"Nutella" <amongthe...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:126d77d6-62df-4f6e...@h2g2000vbd.googlegroups.com...
> Mentioning the name Pat Boone in the same sentence with "rock and
> roll" is like an elevator in an outhouse. It doesn't belong.
Mentioning YOU in any discussion about sentient beings just doesn't belong.
Mr. M
>
>Disco was, is and will ALWAYS be a blight. It sucked then, It sucks now and
>it will always suck. Similarly, anyone who LIKES disco sucks the organs of
>their same-sex partner.
>
>
>
posts. If that's the only manner of response that you are capable of
giving, I'm going to delete all of your posts without reading any of
them.
Mr. M
50s
You can't delete posts.
Sharx35
"Mr. M" <m...@n.com> wrote in message
news:1ksdj5p0e73jn938k...@4ax.com...
Obviously you relate to the same-sex remark.
Sharx35
"50s" <Sav...@aol.com> wrote in message
news:6b736b96-8650-4ec8...@j24g2000yqa.googlegroups.com...
Mr. M obviously knows as much about UseNet as he does about music.
Uni
Most profitable period in music history, though.
Uni
Uni
People used to download posted articles, delete what they wished, then
would later reply. Why they would frown against someone posting binaries
in a text newsgroup - took so long to download.
Uni
>
Uni
In about 1998, you could easily delete posted articles by others.
Uni
Sharx35
"Uni" <no.e...@no.email.invalid> wrote in message
news:4B3753F3...@no.email.invalid...
Ah, the good ole cancel bots?
>
>
>