Classic Hits: Evolution or Revolution?

[CTListener]

OK, substitute a 40something listener for a teen. Classic hits station for Top 40. They still want to hear "their" music, not something that was a hit before they were born.

If you radio types keep saying that it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

Keep in mind that a 45 year old today was born in 1967 or 68, and graduated high school in the mid-80s. Madonna, Michael Jackson or Loverboy are going to be nostalgic to them, Gene Pitney or the Cyrkle are not (or the Jackson 5 for that matter).

Nostalgia is but one emotion when it comes to music. I'm guessing, high school reunions aside, most people like certain songs because they like them and not because they are reminded how small the back seat of that old Beetle was.

I'm guessing more people are reminded of MJ because he was weird and stupid than his musical prowess. Loverboy? Madonna? You've GOT to be kidding! :

I'm 57, my brother is 47. His nostalgia is for MJ and Huey Lewis and Phil Collins and Sheena Easton and all those acts that were big when he was in high school and college. I don't know how you can assume that that generation has no nostalgia for its old songs just because you, their elder, find the people who made the music repugnant.

 

[michael hagerty]

Johnny only had six Top ten singles in his career...3 in a row in 1957, one in 1962, one in 1963 and "Too Much, Too Little Too Late" in 1978.

Not only had it been 21 years since his last #1 and 15 years since his last Top 10...it had been 15 years since his last Top 30. And of the 34 singles he released between 1966 and 1978, only three made the Hot 100 at all (at #96, #75, and #54). Did a new generation "discover" Johnny after that #1 duet? No. He released 11 singles in the 14 years following "Too Much"...only three made the Hot 100...at #47, #38, and #81.

All that illustrates why you couldn't just dust off Johnny's version of "Twelfth Of Never" and expect to score (on the charts, not on a date, Landtuna) in 1973. Johnny took that song to #9. Donny Osmond hit #8 with it. His voice changed just in time.

I think you missed my point. The subject wasn't Johnny Mathis specifically but rather than a good song can come back and become popular again no matter the artists age or, in fact, the age of the listener.

No, I'm the one who brought up Mathis/Osmond because it's an example how, even 40 years ago, you'll do better with a romantic ballad by a contemporary heartthrob than you will by playing an older recording of the same song (at that time, the Mathis record was only 16 years old, so the idea of mass appreciation sufficient to sustain ratings by teens and young adults of a record that's 56 years old...your Elvis "Love Me Tender" example...is just not likely).

 

[michael hagerty]

OK, substitute a 40something listener for a teen. Classic hits station for Top 40. They still want to hear "their" music, not something that was a hit before they were born.

If you radio types keep saying that it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

So, if we shut up, then the majority of young people will develop an appreciation for older music that they have not exhibited since the dawn of rock and roll (at least)?

Wow.

 

[michael hagerty]

I'm guessing more people are reminded of MJ because he was weird and stupid than his musical prowess.

Oh dear.

No...Jackson was enormously talented...from being the world's best 10-year old James Brown impersonator through his landmark Quincy Jones sides. In a strange way, his death has given people license to remember all that instead of the weird, drugged, erratic recluse.

You know... kinda like Elvis.

 

[landtuna]

I'm 57, my brother is 47. His nostalgia is for MJ and Huey Lewis and Phil Collins and Sheena Easton and all those acts that were big when he was in high school and college. I don't know how you can assume that that generation has no nostalgia for its old songs just because you, their elder, find the people who made the music repugnant.

If you will carefully re-read my post I said that nostalgia is but one emotion tied to music. I did not say younger people than I do not have nostalgia for their music.

 

[landtuna]

No, I'm the one who brought up Mathis/Osmond because it's an example how, even 40 years ago, you'll do better with a romantic ballad by a contemporary heartthrob than you will by playing an older recording of the same song (at that time, the Mathis record was only 16 years old, so the idea of mass appreciation sufficient to sustain ratings by teens and young adults of a record that's 56 years old...your Elvis "Love Me Tender" example...is just not likely).

We obviously are having a failure to communicate.

I fully agreed with your assessment that a contemporary singer will have a better outcome than an "oldie" with the same song - assuming the quality is equal or better. Michael Buble has made a decent living though by covering Standards even though he hasn't got the singing talent of a hamster. I don't know whether that is due to Mr. Buble's age, looks or simple because there is nothing better today to compare him with.

 

[landtuna]

OK, substitute a 40something listener for a teen. Classic hits station for Top 40. They still want to hear "their" music, not something that was a hit before they were born.

If you radio types keep saying that it will become a self-fulfilling prophesy.

So, if we shut up, then the majority of young people will develop an appreciation for older music that they have not exhibited since the dawn of rock and roll (at least)?

Wow.

Noooooooo. Once again, you are reading something into my statements that were not intended.

To clarify - I maintain that a number (not majority) of young people, if exposed to older music, have the chance to like or dislike it as we of that generation did when we first heard it.

I can't tell you whether my 16-year old niece fell in love with Danny and the Juniors when she heard "At The Hop" at the dance but I can tell you the floor immediately filled with a bunch of dancers - some in their stocking feet. They seem to know more about musical history than we give them credit.

 

[landtuna]

I'm guessing more people are reminded of MJ because he was weird and stupid than his musical prowess.

Oh dear.

No...Jackson was enormously talented...from being the world's best 10-year old James Brown impersonator through his landmark Quincy Jones sides. In a strange way, his death has given people license to remember all that instead of the weird, drugged, erratic recluse.

You know... kinda like Elvis.

You mean like that "fat, old dead guy"?

MJ's antics speak for themselves. It isn't necessary for me to pile on. We will obviously disagree as to his entertainment worth but his life off stage can only be described as deplorable.

Elvis may have had an unnatural appetite for fried banana sandwiches but he wasn't the full-out crackpot that Michael was.

 

[oldies76]

Keep in mind that a 45 year old today was born in 1967 or 68, and graduated high school in the mid-80s. Madonna, Michael Jackson or Loverboy are going to be nostalgic to them, Gene Pitney or the Cyrkle are not (or the Jackson 5 for that matter).

True, since I was born in '67, but I can remember music on top 40 AM radio going back to when I was 9 in 1976. Nostalgia does not just involve high school, it can go back to childhood. Actually Duran Duran would be more nostalgic to me (1983 hits) than Loverboy. ;D

 

[oldies76]

Elvis may have had an unnatural appetite for fried banana sandwiches but he wasn't the full-out crackpot that Michael was.

Michael's music was legendary, at least to the "Bad" album of 1987, but he certainly was strange, especially post 1990's. I mean, who has that many face and nose surguries in just 25 years time....crazy to say the least! He looked just fine before "Thriller".

 

[semoochie]

There's a movie called "Yankee Doodle Dandy", which is about George M. Cohan, who was responsible for a plethora of patriotic hit songs, in the early part of the 20th century. Late in the movie, he's an older man, talking to teenagers. He was a big star and a legendary performer but none of them have ever heard of him. He mentions some of his hits, their eyes glaze over and start talking about a current song that they're crazy about, "Barney Google and his Goo Goo Googly Eyes". This tells me that this was a common generational reaction, even in 1923!

 

[CTListener]

Keep in mind that a 45 year old today was born in 1967 or 68, and graduated high school in the mid-80s. Madonna, Michael Jackson or Loverboy are going to be nostalgic to them, Gene Pitney or the Cyrkle are not (or the Jackson 5 for that matter).

True, since I was born in '67, but I can remember music on top 40 AM radio going back to when I was 9 in 1976. Nostalgia does not just involve high school, it can go back to childhood. Actually Duran Duran would be more nostalgic to me (1983 hits) than Loverboy. ;D

Yep, my childhood was the Beatles, Johnny Rivers, the Motown sound and bubble gum. My high school/college years were Paul McCartney, Elton John, the sound of Philadelphia and disco. Very different sorts of nostalgia at work there. And I have still different nostalgic thought about my favorite '80s songs and performers. As for so many of us, my long love affair with Top 40 ended with rap. I can definitely see how 20-somethings for whom hip-hop has always existed would, for the most part, have no interest in more melodic music or instrumental wizardry. My guess is that there are more 20-somethings who get into the Beatles or Yes than there are 50-somethings who get into The Game or Kanye West. but who knows?

 

[firepoint525]

Brain cramp. I wrote Billy Vera but meant Benny Mardones' "Into The Night". Bob Case was PD by then, but Guy was consulting and/or Nationwide's National PD.

Even though I liked "Into the Night," I thought that one was an odd choice for a "bringback," as some here have called it. It was the biggest hit (the first time) to be reissued, and the oldest (it had hit #11 in 1980). But it was also the most nostalgic for me, given that I was 16 in 1980, and it brought back some memories for me.

If I recall correctly, Guy heard the Madeiros record on vacation in Hawaii, liked it, brought it home, tested it and boom.

I thought that maybe he actually met Medeiros out there, too!

Guy deserves credit, but you gotta understand, he's a pro. He's not going to take chances (even then) that would hurt a radio station. He has great ears, understands his audience and what they expect from their radio stations...finds songs he thinks they'll like...and tests them.

It doesn't appear to me (as an outsider) that he took any unnecessary risks. He didn't bring back anything that was more than five years old at the time, and the ones that he revived HAD gotten SOME airplay back then, so they were still in the public conscience, not quite forgotten (yet). I'm wondering if maybe he took notice of Steve Winwood's success with the reissued, remixed "Valerie" and got some ideas! Zapoleon didn't bring back "Valerie;" Island Records (Winwood's label) did.

 

[firepoint525]

Donny Osmond hit #8 with it. His voice changed just in time.

Was this about the time that Jimmy Osmond took over as lead vocalist with the Osmonds? ;D

 

[firepoint525]

This discussion is not about top 40 radio. It is about classic hits radio. You are on the wrong board. Of course we don't expect top 40 to play any of those. :

OK, substitute a 40something listener for a teen. Classic hits station for Top 40. They still want to hear "their" music, not something that was a hit before they were born.

You might want to revisit that "speaking just for myself" admonition. I was born in '63, but don't mind the occasional Elvis song from the '50s.

Keep in mind that a 45 year old today was born in 1967 or 68, and graduated high school in the mid-80s. Madonna, Michael Jackson or Loverboy are going to be nostalgic to them, Gene Pitney or the Cyrkle are not (or the Jackson 5 for that matter).

Again who exactly is asking for this mix of performers on the same station? No one that I know of.

 

[oldies76]

My guess is that there are more 20-somethings who get into the Beatles or Yes than there are 50-somethings who get into The Game or Kanye West. but who knows?

Well, it's the "intrumental wizardry" and real songwriting talent that keeps these older classics timeless and that computer generated noise won't (with maybe some exemptions??)

I did one of those home parties last year and I got a request from a 17 year old girl..The song?

"Can't Take My Eyes Of You" by Franki Valli and danced it with her boy..I was impressed to say the least! It wasn't some Rihanna or Justin Beiber song, it was a hit from 1967.

 

[PirateJohnny]

This discussion is not about top 40 radio. It is about classic hits radio. You are on the wrong board. Of course we don't expect top 40 to play any of those. :

OK, substitute a 40something listener for a teen. Classic hits station for Top 40. They still want to hear "their" music, not something that was a hit before they were born.

You might want to revisit that "speaking just for myself" admonition. I was born in '63, but don't mind the occasional Elvis song from the '50s.

Keep in mind that a 45 year old today was born in 1967 or 68, and graduated high school in the mid-80s. Madonna, Michael Jackson or Loverboy are going to be nostalgic to them, Gene Pitney or the Cyrkle are not (or the Jackson 5 for that matter).

Again who exactly is asking for this mix of performers on the same station? No one that I know of.

I'm 55 and all of those artists get played on my home system, sometimes in the same hour. But then again, as I stated in another post, I am an uber-anomaly.

 

[landtuna]

Michael's music was legendary, ...

Not to me. MJ is my primary button pusher with the sole exception of "Billy Jean".

 

[landtuna]

There's a movie called "Yankee Doodle Dandy", which is about George M. Cohan, who was responsible for a plethora of patriotic hit songs, in the early part of the 20th century. Late in the movie, he's an older man, talking to teenagers. He was a big star and a legendary performer but none of them have ever heard of him. He mentions some of his hits, their eyes glaze over and start talking about a current song that they're crazy about, "Barney Google and his Goo Goo Googly Eyes". This tells me that this was a common generational reaction, even in 1923!

Was it the age of Cohan's music or the type that didn't impress those younger kids? Jazz was all the rage in 1923 so a collection of marching songs would almost be guaranteed to repel them. Completely different music genres. Jazz (and the then popular Swing) was dance music. OOM-PAH music cannot compete.

If you want a almost-pure opinion of an Oldies song from today's youth you just have to play the song without any intro or background. Once they hear it is an Oldie they turn it off, as you would expect. Let them judge the song on its merits without any age bias and your results will be somewhat different.

 

[allenv]

The Peanut Butter & Banana sandwich thing is something that has been blow way out of proportion..Elvis actually ate very few of those..Now Pork Chops & mashed potatoes or most any southern comfort food was much more the truth.