Didn't Bill Haley's "Rock the Joint" predate this one? If so, I'd say
that was the first rockabilly record.
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody
have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody
have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody
have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would cllassify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Didn't Bill Haley's "Rock the Joint" predate this one? If so, I'd say
that was the first rockabilly record.
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 3:57:21 +0000, Dean wrote:
Didn't Bill Haley's "Rock the Joint" predate this one? If so, I'd say
that was the first rockabilly record.
If this is rockabilly then so is "Rock Around The Clock"
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>> have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
"Blue Moon Of Kentucky" was released at the same time. Is that not rockabilly? IMO it's easily better than "That's All Right."
--
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
"Blue Moon Of Kentucky" was released at the same time. Is that not >rockabilly? IMO it's easily better than "That's All Right."
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
I agree that Elvis comes closest yet to rockabilly with "That's All
Right" but IMO he REALLY nails it with "Baby Let's Play House"---which
I've held up before on here on being the prototype that scores of
subsequent rockabilly records are based on or owe a good deal to
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 16:10:14 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
"Blue Moon Of Kentucky" was released at the same time. Is that not >>rockabilly? IMO it's easily better than "That's All Right."
It works too. The only reason I cite my pick is that it was allegedly recorded first. I can also agree that "Baby, Let's Play House" is more
fully formed as Roger points out.
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:46:38 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 16:10:14 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>>>>have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
"Blue Moon Of Kentucky" was released at the same time. Is that not >>>rockabilly? IMO it's easily better than "That's All Right."
It works too. The only reason I cite my pick is that it was allegedly
recorded first. I can also agree that "Baby, Let's Play House" is more
fully formed as Roger points out.
Okay. "Baby Let's Play House" was recorded on February 5, 1955 and
released in April of 1955. How about these other earlier or same time >recordings. Are any of them "fully formed" rockabilly?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEyXhQdydDE
Released 1954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwGBne4KUTQ
Recorded 1954 - released many years later
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiqeZDX4f1A
Released 3 weeks before BLPH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Bt49GROkk
Released about a week after "House" was recorded and like 7 weeks before >"House" was released.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbqxV33lT44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLtGvJApMnw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=othURNoyZ7k
(From 1955, but not sure what month)
If you guys agree that neither side of the first Elvis release is "fully >formed rockabilly," certainly "Good Rockin' Tonight" is fully formed,
no?
"Baby, Let's Play House" may be more influential, and the first Elvis
thing to hit the national charts, but "GRT" is probably the first "fully >formed rockabilly" IMO.
This conversation is interesting. Especially the disagreements.
Let me ask a follow-up question.
What do you all think was the LAST song that Elvis released that could
be considered rockabilly?
To me, My Baby Left Me still qualifies. Am I wrong?
On the other hand, to me Hound Dog clearly does not, but what
specifically is disqualifying?
And what about his up-tempo version of When My Blue Moon Turns to Gold
Again? Or Paralyzed?
Or any of his Little Richard stuff?
And, moving into 1957, how about (You're So Square) Baby I Don't Care?
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 4:08:58 +0000, BobRoman wrote:
This conversation is interesting. Especially the disagreements.I agree "My Baby Left Me" has some rockabilly "feel" to it
Let me ask a follow-up question.
What do you all think was the LAST song that Elvis released that could
be considered rockabilly?
To me, My Baby Left Me still qualifies. Am I wrong?
On the other hand, to me Hound Dog clearly does not, but what
specifically is disqualifying?
And what about his up-tempo version of When My Blue Moon Turns to Gold
Again? Or Paralyzed?
Or any of his Little Richard stuff?
And, moving into 1957, how about (You're So Square) Baby I Don't Care?
For a while back there in the 60's with a dearth of the record
information such as we have now I thought that "My Baby Left Me" even
sounded like it might have been a left over Sun recording
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:09:30 +0000, Steve Mc wrote:
Points are often removed for the following items :
*obvious commercial intent
What released records do not have commercial intent? These were not
monks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eG-U8n0tfQ
I hear an authentic unproduced recording without any intent to having a >national pop chart hit. They just wanted to sell some records locally to >people who came to see them live and others in the area.
On Thu, 16 Jan 2025 17:19:02 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Bob, do you see something like this as having "obvious commercial
intent?"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3eG-U8n0tfQ
I hear something that probably got a good response from their audience,
and they recorded in an attempt to appeal to that audience.
On Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:28:22 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Yes, but there was no attempt to appeal to a wide mainstream audience in
order to try and have a national pop chart hit. That's what "obvious
commercial intent" means.
If that is what was meant, whoever originally wrote the list chose the
wrong words. Genre artists have "commercial intent." What you are
discussing now is "crossover intent." That's something else entirely.
BR
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 1:02:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
commercial = crossover
commercial = pertaining to commerce
Anyone who hopes to sell records is commercial.
Maybe some performers recorded by John and Alan Lomax were truly non-commercial.
But anyone who wants a career is not.
Performers did not flock to Sun in hopes of NOT selling records.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:42:33 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Bob, can you kindly tell us which Howlin' Wolf records were commercial?
All of them. In the genre in which he was working, he wanted to sell
records. Bluesmen are not monks.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:42:33 +0000, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:20:41 +0000, BobRoman wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 1:02:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Performers did not flock to Sun in hopes of NOT selling records.
Some did. They just wanted to make a record. Elvis originally went there
AND PAID to make a record for his mama.
He was hoping to be discovered. That story was bunk. He said it was for
his mother's birthday, but her birthday was nowhere near the time of
year when he made the record.
Bob, can you kindly tell us which Howlin' Wolf records were commercial?
All of them. In the genre in which he was working, he wanted to sell
records. Bluesmen are not monks.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:42:33 +0000, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:20:41 +0000, BobRoman wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 1:02:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Performers did not flock to Sun in hopes of NOT selling records.
Some did. They just wanted to make a record. Elvis originally went there
AND PAID to make a record for his mama.
He was hoping to be discovered. That story was bunk. He said it was for
his mother's birthday, but her birthday was nowhere near the time of
year when he made the record.
Bob, can you kindly tell us which Howlin' Wolf records were commercial?
All of them. In the genre in which he was working, he wanted to sell
records. Bluesmen are not monks.
We seem to want to look at these performers as untouched by a desire for >money, fame, or using their music to get laid.
But I stand by my "not monks" point.
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 20:28:09 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 17:46:38 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 16:10:14 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 15:06:55 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 05:41:08 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote:
On Thu, 9 Jan 2025 4:51:53 +0000, Jim Colegrove wrote:
On Wed, 8 Jan 2025 20:40:16 +0000, savoybg@aol.com (Bruce) wrote: >>>>>>>
This was reviewed in Cash Box in the December 20, 1952 issue. Anybody >>>>>>>> have anything earlier than this to suggest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0drtciUy2g
https://rcs-discography.com/rcs/pics/03/3019.jpg
IMO that's a stretch. I would classify it as Hillbilly Boogie.
Do you have an opinion on what is the first rockabilly record?
In the classic sense, Elvis Presley, "That's All Right."
"Blue Moon Of Kentucky" was released at the same time. Is that not
rockabilly? IMO it's easily better than "That's All Right."
It works too. The only reason I cite my pick is that it was allegedly
recorded first. I can also agree that "Baby, Let's Play House" is more
fully formed as Roger points out.
Okay. "Baby Let's Play House" was recorded on February 5, 1955 and
released in April of 1955. How about these other earlier or same time
recordings. Are any of them "fully formed" rockabilly?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DEyXhQdydDE
Released 1954
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwGBne4KUTQ
Recorded 1954 - released many years later
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RiqeZDX4f1A
Released 3 weeks before BLPH
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N2Bt49GROkk
Released about a week after "House" was recorded and like 7 weeks before
"House" was released.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WbqxV33lT44
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eLtGvJApMnw
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=othURNoyZ7k
(From 1955, but not sure what month)
If you guys agree that neither side of the first Elvis release is "fully
formed rockabilly," certainly "Good Rockin' Tonight" is fully formed,
no?
"Baby, Let's Play House" may be more influential, and the first Elvis
thing to hit the national charts, but "GRT" is probably the first "fully
formed rockabilly" IMO.
I don't think "BLPH" was the only one nor did I say so. By 1955 every hillbilly was into the style, among them Sid King who started a band---------
in 1952. By 1955 even I was.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 16:35:04 +0000, robertjroman@gmail.com (BobRoman)
wrote:
We seem to want to look at these performers as untouched by a desire for >>money, fame, or using their music to get laid.
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 17:40:07 +0000, RWC wrote:
Artist desires are irrelevant to the "obvious commercial intent"
debate, which is only about the recorded music.
From where does INTENT arise if not DESIRE?
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 19:16:26 +0000, BobRoman wrote:----------
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 17:40:07 +0000, RWC wrote:
Artist desires are irrelevant to the "obvious commercial intent"
debate, which is only about the recorded music.
From where does INTENT arise if not DESIRE?
But whose desire?
The record label?
The producer?
The artist themself?
How about Lightnin' Hopkins? No label kept him for very long, and he
recorded for dozens of them. None of them sound to me like there was any "obvious commercial intent." But he was a big money maker with his live
gigs. Variety or some other source ranked him as the 50th biggest money
maker of the 50s among all styles of music performers in the decade.
Apparently he was a consistent drawing card throughout the decade with
his live shows. Maybe all of these different labels were trying to
capture whatever he had on records and most just could not do it. He had
5 R&B chart hits between 1949 and 1952 back when blues was pretty
mainstream music in the black community. "Mojo Hand" did not chart R&B
or Pop in BB, and none of his albums ever charted on the BB POP albums
chart. "Mojo Hand" did make the Cash Box R&B chart for 5 weeks, topping
off at #27.
He made a shitload of records in the 50s on all kinds of labels, but
nothing from then had any "obvious commercial intent" that I could see.
--
Here's a question: If you have no commercial intent, why make records at
all?
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 20:27:54 +0000, DianeE wrote:------------
Here's a question: If you have no commercial intent, why make records at
all?
To show others who are anti-commercial just how anti-commercial they can
be. Like how Todd Clark posts his "Original Song Of The Month" every
month. Here is his song for January.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vTCx46qJXw
--
How about Lightnin' Hopkins? No label kept him for very long, and he------------
recorded for dozens of them. None of them sound to me like there was any "obvious commercial intent." But he was a big money maker with his live
gigs. Variety or some other source ranked him as the 50th biggest money
maker of the 50s among all styles of music performers in the decade.
Apparently he was a consistent drawing card throughout the decade with
his live shows. Maybe all of these different labels were trying to
capture whatever he had on records and most just could not do it. He had
5 R&B chart hits between 1949 and 1952 back when blues was pretty
mainstream music in the black community. "Mojo Hand" did not chart R&B
or Pop in BB, and none of his albums ever charted on the BB POP albums
chart. "Mojo Hand" did make the Cash Box R&B chart for 5 weeks, topping
off at #27.
On 1/19/2025 2:59 PM, Bruce wrote:
------------
How about Lightnin' Hopkins? No label kept him for very long, and he
recorded for dozens of them. None of them sound to me like there was any
"obvious commercial intent." But he was a big money maker with his live
gigs. Variety or some other source ranked him as the 50th biggest money
maker of the 50s among all styles of music performers in the decade.
Apparently he was a consistent drawing card throughout the decade with
his live shows. Maybe all of these different labels were trying to
capture whatever he had on records and most just could not do it. He had
5 R&B chart hits between 1949 and 1952 back when blues was pretty
mainstream music in the black community. "Mojo Hand" did not chart R&B
or Pop in BB, and none of his albums ever charted on the BB POP albums
chart. "Mojo Hand" did make the Cash Box R&B chart for 5 weeks, topping
off at #27.
I think that during the era we discuss here, the Billboard charts were
not the 100% indicator of an artist's commercial success that they are today. For one thing, you had something you don't have today--*regional hits*. So the Billboard and even the Cash Box charts wouldn't tell us
how many records Lightning Hopkins was selling, or how many juke box
and radio plays he was getting, IN TEXAS. Probably far more than in the
rest of the country. (Or how many plays the Harptones, Channels, and Teenchords were getting in NYC.)
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 0:06:25 +0000, DianeE wrote:--------------
On 1/19/2025 2:59 PM, Bruce wrote:
------------
How about Lightnin' Hopkins? No label kept him for very long, and he
recorded for dozens of them. None of them sound to me like there was any >>> "obvious commercial intent." But he was a big money maker with his live
gigs. Variety or some other source ranked him as the 50th biggest money
maker of the 50s among all styles of music performers in the decade.
Apparently he was a consistent drawing card throughout the decade with
his live shows. Maybe all of these different labels were trying to
capture whatever he had on records and most just could not do it. He had >>> 5 R&B chart hits between 1949 and 1952 back when blues was pretty
mainstream music in the black community. "Mojo Hand" did not chart R&B
or Pop in BB, and none of his albums ever charted on the BB POP albums
chart. "Mojo Hand" did make the Cash Box R&B chart for 5 weeks, topping
off at #27.
I think that during the era we discuss here, the Billboard charts were
not the 100% indicator of an artist's commercial success that they are
today. For one thing, you had something you don't have today--*regional
hits*. So the Billboard and even the Cash Box charts wouldn't tell us
how many records Lightning Hopkins was selling, or how many juke box
and radio plays he was getting, IN TEXAS. Probably far more than in the
rest of the country. (Or how many plays the Harptones, Channels, and
Teenchords were getting in NYC.)
Well the R&B chart in the 50s was only a top 10 or 15 until they finally
went to 20 in 1958 and then 30 some time in 1959. It's been a Top 100
now for like over 50 years. So the regional hits of the 50s were things
that would have been national hits down lower on the chart if they had
had a top 50 or more all through the 50s.
So yeah, Hopkins likely sold like 5,000 copies of anything he came out
with in those days, and his better sellers probably got to like 20,000.
His chart hits in the early days likely sold anywhere from 50,000 to
100,000 or more.
So, Bob. Jim and I wrote a song together last year and Jim produced a recording with himself as the artist. Do you think we were doing it for commercial intent?
My thought was to see if I could write an authentic sounding rockabilly
song and get a recording made sounding like the way I heard it in my
mind. Jim wrote the music based on a demo vocal I sent him to show him
how I heard it. We both love that genre and wanted to see what we could
come up with in that style. I was very happy with the final recording,
and so was Jim. But we never had any commercial intent. Not that we
wouldn't be happy if it somehow became popular with today's rockabilly
crowd, but that's not why we did it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOAd71-I7xc
--
On 1/19/2025 7:27 PM, Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 0:06:25 +0000, DianeE wrote:--------------
On 1/19/2025 2:59 PM, Bruce wrote:
------------
How about Lightnin' Hopkins? No label kept him for very long, and he
recorded for dozens of them. None of them sound to me like there was any >>>> "obvious commercial intent." But he was a big money maker with his live >>>> gigs. Variety or some other source ranked him as the 50th biggest money >>>> maker of the 50s among all styles of music performers in the decade.
Apparently he was a consistent drawing card throughout the decade with >>>> his live shows. Maybe all of these different labels were trying to
capture whatever he had on records and most just could not do it. He had >>>> 5 R&B chart hits between 1949 and 1952 back when blues was pretty
mainstream music in the black community. "Mojo Hand" did not chart R&B >>>> or Pop in BB, and none of his albums ever charted on the BB POP albums >>>> chart. "Mojo Hand" did make the Cash Box R&B chart for 5 weeks, topping >>>> off at #27.
I think that during the era we discuss here, the Billboard charts were
not the 100% indicator of an artist's commercial success that they are >>> today. For one thing, you had something you don't have today--*regional >>> hits*. So the Billboard and even the Cash Box charts wouldn't tell us
how many records Lightning Hopkins was selling, or how many juke box
and radio plays he was getting, IN TEXAS. Probably far more than in the >>> rest of the country. (Or how many plays the Harptones, Channels, and
Teenchords were getting in NYC.)
Well the R&B chart in the 50s was only a top 10 or 15 until they finally
went to 20 in 1958 and then 30 some time in 1959. It's been a Top 100
now for like over 50 years. So the regional hits of the 50s were things
that would have been national hits down lower on the chart if they had
had a top 50 or more all through the 50s.
So yeah, Hopkins likely sold like 5,000 copies of anything he came out
with in those days, and his better sellers probably got to like 20,000.
His chart hits in the early days likely sold anywhere from 50,000 to
100,000 or more.
So, Bob. Jim and I wrote a song together last year and Jim produced a
recording with himself as the artist. Do you think we were doing it for
commercial intent?
My thought was to see if I could write an authentic sounding rockabilly
song and get a recording made sounding like the way I heard it in my
mind. Jim wrote the music based on a demo vocal I sent him to show him
how I heard it. We both love that genre and wanted to see what we could
come up with in that style. I was very happy with the final recording,
and so was Jim. But we never had any commercial intent. Not that we
wouldn't be happy if it somehow became popular with today's rockabilly
crowd, but that's not why we did it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BOAd71-I7xc
--
You sold a lot of records in 2024....but that wasn't one of them! :)
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 0:27:14 +0000, Bruce wrote:
So, Bob. Jim and I wrote a song together last year and Jim produced a
recording with himself as the artist. Do you think we were doing it for
commercial intent?
I don't think you are getting the point if you think this anecdote is relevant.
You did what you did simply to see if you could. That was your intent.
It is like someone going to the Met with a sketchpad hoping to imitate
the brushstrokes of a master.
But if you were a performer, working the clubs night after night, hoping
to build a career, you would have a different intent.
Think about it. If your intent was only to "see if you could," no record company would sign you.
I'll tell you what. To allow for your anecdote, I will add a caveat: In
the era of no-cost streaming from your bedroom, it is possible that some people do offer music with no obvious commercial intent.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 3:51:16 +0000, Bruce wrote:
It was known as Starday Custom. One of the Starday Custom
pressings was by Jimmy Johnson with his original version of "Woman
Love."
Most people pressing amateur records on a custom label are still, 99
times out of a hundred, hoping to be discovered.
Elvis Presley told the staff at Sun that he was cutting a record as a birthday present for his mother, but that story falls apart when we
notice that his mother's birthday was in a different part of the year entirely. He was ambitious, and he was hoping to be discovered.
But lets assume you are correct that all the performers recording on
Starday Custom were not ambitious and not hoping to be discovered.
Do you recognize how far then your argument is slipped? If it is true
that the criteria for being rockabilly is to not have commercial intent,
the only true rockabilly records would be those made at Starday Custom.
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 7:29:49 +0000, Bruce wrote:
On Mon, 20 Jan 2025 4:38:17 +0000, BobRoman wrote:
Elvis Presley told the staff at Sun that he was cutting a record as a
birthday present for his mother, but that story falls apart when we
notice that his mother's birthday was in a different part of the year
entirely. He was ambitious, and he was hoping to be discovered.
That's nothing more than a guess on your part. What was the date that he
was there, and when was her birthday?
July 18, 1953, almost three months after her birthday on April 25.
Come on. Do you really want to argue that Elvis Presley was not
ambitious? That he didn't want to be a recording star?
On 1/19/2025 10:11 AM, BobRoman wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:42:33 +0000, Bruce wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 5:20:41 +0000, BobRoman wrote:
On Sun, 19 Jan 2025 1:02:20 +0000, Bruce wrote:
Performers did not flock to Sun in hopes of NOT selling records.
Some did. They just wanted to make a record. Elvis originally went there >>> AND PAID to make a record for his mama.
He was hoping to be discovered. That story was bunk. He said it was for
his mother's birthday, but her birthday was nowhere near the time of
year when he made the record.
Bob, can you kindly tell us which Howlin' Wolf records were commercial?
All of them. In the genre in which he was working, he wanted to sell
records. Bluesmen are not monks.
I absolutely agree with him. Having seen Howlin' Wolf live I can attest
that he was charismatic and put on a great show. IOW, audience appeal.
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 546 |
| Nodes: | 16 (0 / 16) |
| Uptime: | 167:44:45 |
| Calls: | 10,385 |
| Calls today: | 2 |
| Files: | 14,057 |
| Messages: | 6,416,540 |
