• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Formats: Rock dying

There were loads of thoughtless mindless songs in the 50s. There was a reason why schools & churches didn't want kids to listen to it, and why radio stations typically played it after dark.

As to "mindless" that seems to be cyclical, going at least back to the Charleston and including the disco years and the freestyle period.

I always felt that the reaction among some schools and religious denominations had to do with the dress and the body movements. Think "Blackboard Jungle" and the Elvis appearance on Ed Sullivan with just upper body shots...
 
There was a reason why schools & churches didn't want kids to listen to it, and why radio stations typically played it after dark.

That reason was more about race than anything else. Far more. Elvis was chastised as much for "sounding like a Negro" as he was for his movements. And a lot of "respectable" radio stations in the 1950s played songs written by Blacks but sung by Whites because it was "the proper thing to do."
 
That reason was more about race than anything else. Far more. Elvis was chastised as much for "sounding like a Negro" as he was for his movements. And a lot of "respectable" radio stations in the 1950s played songs written by Blacks but sung by Whites because it was "the proper thing to do."

Sure, some did, but not all. WSM played acceptable pop standards during the day. The played the drinking & cheating country songs at night.
 
Landtuna, are you almost 70? I have to say "BRAVO!" The fact that you are taking the time to post on here and "fight the fight" is pretty awesome. I have never understood the anger associated with different cultures, ages, opinions, etc. I certainly have few logical answers that will solve the serious problems of the world or cure diseases. What I have always strived to do is simply make people enjoy their jobs, enjoy their lives and hopefully make them a bit happier with music and radio and other businesses that I own. No matter what I may question on your take on radio and music, I am 57 and totally appreciate and respect that you would dare tread in these waters.

BigA - you are still ALWAYS wrong. :) *

*until your last two posts. :)
 
Last edited:
It depends. The big stars get to the point where no one can tell them anything. They're making music for their tribe. Research doesn't matter.

On the other hand, there's nothing wrong with targeting music to an audience. It beats singing to a hairbrush in your bedroom.

That it does, but I'd be very surprised if Little Richard, his management, his producer or his label's people had any precise formula in mind when the red light went on and the recording session for "Tutti Frutti" started. They knew the song would appeal to young black listeners, but did they know that DJs and PDs at stations with mostly white audiences would hear something in Richard's wild vocals that would spur them into giving the record exposure? The song wasn't tested and precisely tailored for crossover appeal the way songs have been in recent years, was it?
 
That it does, but I'd be very surprised if Little Richard, his management, his producer or his label's people had any precise formula in mind when the red light went on and the recording session for "Tutti Frutti" started. They knew the song would appeal to young black listeners, but did they know that DJs and PDs at stations with mostly white audiences would hear something in Richard's wild vocals that would spur them into giving the record exposure? The song wasn't tested and precisely tailored for crossover appeal the way songs have been in recent years, was it?

Tutti Frutti is a perfect example of what I was talking about. Little Richard co-wrote it and recorded the classic version (which was already cleaned up somewhat), but it just wasn't going to air on most "white" radio stations. It was up to Pat Boone and Elvis to record their versions to give it exposure to White America.

Same for Fats Domino's "Ain't That a Shame." Domino had a hit with it, but Boone's version made Domino more money than his own recording, a fact that Domino readily and often acknowledged. Dozens, if not hundreds of white covers of black songs made more money for the black songwriters (and the publishers that screwed them over) than their own recordings did.

Them's were the facts of recording and radio life -- really, American life in general -- in the segregated 1950s.
 
The song wasn't tested and precisely tailored for crossover appeal the way songs have been in recent years, was it?

No you're right, that was never the intention at all. By the same token, I've watched songs crafted for crossover fall flat on their faces. It not always that simple, and music fans aren't sheep willing to listen to anything. I've watched labels spend millions on all kinds of things trying to manufacture hits. People are very unpredictable. If it was easy, it would happen more often. What I see is that all the research and marketing happens AFTER the music gets made. The seems to have the best success.
 
John Lennon said the reason he made music was to get girls. That's why most people that age make music.

With all due respect to Lennon - he had his reasons. Others want to accomplish a skill in music. Many, many artists began their careers at the tender ages of 4-5 years of age and just kept at it because they enjoyed playing. Others converted from singing in church to recording because people told them they could earn a living at it (Dolly Parton is a great example but there are hundreds more).

BTW Be Bop a Lula was an early hit by Buddy Holly. Figured you'd know that. The other one was Little Richard.

The most popular version I remember was by Gene Vincent.
 
Landtuna, are you almost 70?

Nope. Almost 75. But age is only a reflection in the mirror, right?

I really enjoy this forum and especially the "discussions" with BigA and The Old Gringo. They make good cases *sometimes* and I think I win one a time or two. Still, I have learned a ton about the music and radio industries (not only from those two) and I enjoy getting on here and cranking it up a few times a week.
 
I have to agree with KeithE4 on the early "Rock n Roll" (a Black euphemism for sex) and why White Radio called it Be-Bop (although that had its connotations as well).

I lived in a medium sized Southwest city back then but it had its share of racism. I remember people referring to "race music" as the music I listened to as a young teen. I'm not sure I understood what it meant back then. One of my best buddies was Black but he never spoke of the stuff he encountered until we were both adults. I never even realized he was Black until I happened to pass by his desk when we were filling out our high school dream sheets and he had written "Negro" in the race field. It made no difference then and doesn't today.

My age group ate up songs by certain Black performers (Fats Domino, The Platters, Louis Armstrong among many others). My parents never objected but my grandmother was amazed by our dancing to those tunes and always asked for a performance at the most inop times. Then, she never told me about the Black Bottom either so I guess granny and I are even.
 
I have to agree with KeithE4 on the early "Rock n Roll" (a Black euphemism for sex) and why White Radio called it Be-Bop (although that had its connotations as well).

I lived in a medium sized Southwest city back then but it had its share of racism. I remember people referring to "race music" as the music I listened to as a young teen. I'm not sure I understood what it meant back then. One of my best buddies was Black but he never spoke of the stuff he encountered until we were both adults. I never even realized he was Black until I happened to pass by his desk when we were filling out our high school dream sheets and he had written "Negro" in the race field. It made no difference then and doesn't today.

My age group ate up songs by certain Black performers (Fats Domino, The Platters, Louis Armstrong among many others). My parents never objected but my grandmother was amazed by our dancing to those tunes and always asked for a performance at the most inop times. Then, she never told me about the Black Bottom either so I guess granny and I are even.

Chuck berry and even people like Lenny Kravitz really made some of the best rock music out there.
 
The iHeart awards aren't used as a measure of anything for anyone except iHeart. YouTube is only one platform, and I never see it quoted as a measure of success.

However, it's not unusual for an artist to get a plaque for 1 billion streams of a song. As a point of comparison, BMI gives a Millionaire Award to songwriters whose compositions receive a million performances on broadcast radio.

OK I was citing the trending pages of Youtube as a reference though where an artist has a billion views for one of their songs though.
 
Tutti Frutti is a perfect example of what I was talking about. Little Richard co-wrote it and recorded the classic version (which was already cleaned up somewhat), but it just wasn't going to air on most "white" radio stations. It was up to Pat Boone and Elvis to record their versions to give it exposure to White America.

Same for Fats Domino's "Ain't That a Shame." Domino had a hit with it, but Boone's version made Domino more money than his own recording, a fact that Domino readily and often acknowledged. Dozens, if not hundreds of white covers of black songs made more money for the black songwriters (and the publishers that screwed them over) than their own recordings did.

Them's were the facts of recording and radio life -- really, American life in general -- in the segregated 1950s.
Whatever program it was, Cheap Trick played a very different version of "Ain't That a Shame" and Pat Boone was on stage after that talking about how much he liked their version, which sounded very strange to me. Years later I found out Pat Boone actually LIKED heavy metal and recorded an album of metal songs.

In the area where Dorian is about to hit, teenagers used to dance to that "forbidden" music and it became known as "beach" music. Myrtle Beach has a legendary radio station Surf 94.9 which plays those versions of the songs recorded by African-Americans as well as related musical styles where the black version was the best-known version. Some white artists are played too. If you want "oldies" these days down there, that's the one station doing it. The classic hits station is focused on the 80s and the former easy listening station is all over the road, but not doing much from before 1970.
 
I still listen to 60's Protest Rock because I was part of that generation (and the war) and it is still very meaningful to me.
I'm too young to consider protest rock to have any meaning. When I was a teenager there had been a return to happier music and the "boy bands" were The Osmonds and The Jackson Five. We had disco and Barry Manilow and John Denver. I know there was rock then but it didn't interest me for the most part. And there was nostalgia for the 50s and TV commercials advertised collections of the great early rock and roll. And I hadn't even discovered what a great singer Elvis was. That came later.

When radio began playing the standards again, I was right there listening. I had tried AC in the 70s and soft AC in the 80s but it didn't always appeal to me.

Billy Joel and Elton John were popular when I was a teenager but I didn't learn to like them until later. Now they are primary artists in the adult standards radio format. How did THAT happen?
 
Old enough to remember music from the mid 60s on. I always favored those groups that were more pop oriented. The 70s was my least favorite decade for music of any genre. The 80s and even some of the alt music of the 90s had more appeal.

Fast forward to the present day, and music of all genres leaves me cold. It's worse than the dreadful 70s. And listening to oldies today just leaves me feeling old.
 
Old enough to remember music from the mid 60s on. I always favored those groups that were more pop oriented. The 70s was my least favorite decade for music of any genre. The 80s and even some of the alt music of the 90s had more appeal.

Fast forward to the present day, and music of all genres leaves me cold. It's worse than the dreadful 70s. And listening to oldies today just leaves me feeling old.

If I could pick a favorite decade it would be the 70's (with the giant exception of Disco).

Listening to Oldies makes me remember better days - both for me personally and our nation.

Interesting how music cues different emotions.
 
I recognized only 5-6 artists on that list, virtually all of them known for their Country work.

Chances are good that you won't know them because they don't appeal to the mass audience, so they don't get mass media. But the reason for that is because they make current music that's in the style of what you might have heard 40 years ago. If you don't want music for teenyboppers, this is where you go. Springsteen is on that chart, and his acoustic music influences a lot of the new artists there, such as The Lumineers. Folk/rock, like what Simon & Garfunkel did. Usually they play their own instruments, and write their own songs.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom