The "Birth" of the British Invasion

[John FL]

So this morning, as usual my computer streams the sounds of WMXJ 102.7 in Miami and the DJ announces it was 45 years ago the Beatles touched down in New York and as such the British Invasion was born! The station is remembering the event this weekend but it got me thinking - it can't be 45 years ago. Like yesterday, I remember sitting close to the 'ol black & white console as the lads got off the PAN AM airplane. I was 12 then.

Back then I lived in the Northeast (NYC area) and WABC soon became W A BEATLE C and all the stations for the next couple years strived to be the first to play a new Beatles song. And of course the Ed Sullivan appearance and all the screaming girls! Speaking of screaming, I remember my parents screaming for me to turn down that crap. My parents, like others I'm sure, said the Beatles were just a fad and a year from now no one would remember them.

But if we are to tie all of this to today's 60s and 70s oldies/classic hits format, it's still pretty cool so many of the British Invasion songs have stood the test of time and are still being played today.

I realize I have certain bias but no one can convince me otherwise - what an incredible wave of creativity we experienced in the music with the Beatles and the British Invasion, Motown, soul and good 'ol rock and roll. A lot of it still sounds good and despite all the naysayers out there, it's pretty "groovy" seeing even youth obsessed programs like American Idol feature 60s and 70s tunes.

 

[andreajesus]

So this morning, as usual my computer streams the sounds of WMXJ 102.7 in Miami and the DJ announces it was 45 years ago the Beatles touched down in New York and as such the British Invasion was born! The station is remembering the event this weekend but it got me thinking - it can't be 45 years ago. Like yesterday, I remember sitting close to the 'ol black & white console as the lads got off the PAN AM airplane. I was 12 then.

Back then I lived in the Northeast (NYC area) and WABC soon became W A BEATLE C and all the stations for the next couple years strived to be the first to play a new Beatles song. And of course the Ed Sullivan appearance and all the screaming girls! Speaking of screaming, I remember my parents screaming for me to turn down that crap. My parents, like others I'm sure, said the Beatles were just a fad and a year from now no one would remember them.

But if we are to tie all of this to today's 60s and 70s oldies/classic hits format, it's still pretty cool so many of the British Invasion songs have stood the test of time and are still being played today.

I realize I have certain bias but no one can convince me otherwise - what an incredible wave of creativity we experienced in the music with the Beatles and the British Invasion, Motown, soul and good 'ol rock and roll. A lot of it still sounds good and despite all the naysayers out there, it's pretty "groovy" seeing even youth obsessed programs like American Idol feature 60s and 70s tunes.

Some things don't change... 8) besides which, GOOD songs are GOOD songs, NO MATTER WHAT ERA THEY'RE FROM, PERIOD!!

Andrea

 

[Tom Wells]

I remember being a wee tot playing on the floor.
One day it was Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass and Gene Pitney, etc.
The next thing I knew it was all Beatles, all the time for about the next 20 years.

 

[TheFonz]

I realize I have certain bias but no one can convince me otherwise - what an incredible wave of creativity we experienced in the music with the Beatles and the British Invasion, Motown, soul and good 'ol rock and roll. A lot of it still sounds good and despite all the naysayers out there, it's pretty "groovy" seeing even youth obsessed programs like American Idol feature 60s and 70s tunes.

I believe that there's a whole generation of people out there who think the Beatles invented rock & roll. Let us not forget that the Beatles cut their teeth on American '50s rock & roll. For a better understanding of this, Beatles fans should check out the "Beatles Live At The BBC" CD box set.

 

[OldNumber7]

I realize I have certain bias but no one can convince me otherwise - what an incredible wave of creativity we experienced in the music with the Beatles and the British Invasion, Motown, soul and good 'ol rock and roll. A lot of it still sounds good and despite all the naysayers out there, it's pretty "groovy" seeing even youth obsessed programs like American Idol feature 60s and 70s tunes.

I believe that there's a whole generation of people out there who think the Beatles invented rock & roll. Let us not forget that the Beatles cut their teeth on American '50s rock & roll. For a better understanding of this, Beatles fans should check out the "Beatles Live At The BBC" CD box set.

That's an extremely important point. The British Invasion wasn't about "British" music, it was about British bands re-popularizing in America the American "roots" music that had been largely cast aside at the end of the 50s. The Beatles, the Stones, the Dave Clark 5, the Yardbirds and so many others were heavily influenced by the blues and early rock and roll that sort of drifted off the radar in the U.S with Elvis in the Army, Buddy Holly dead, Jerry Lee Lewis scandalized and Little Richard giving up rock for God. The fact the British Invasion occurred at the same time as the mainstream emergence of Motown (and the Civil Rights movement!) is not a coincidence. American kids were ready again for rhythm and blues and it all came together for them in '64, blowing the Singing Nun and such off pop radio.

 

[landtuna]

And let's not forget about the Payola scandal of the late 50's which took a bunch of already-famous groups off radio and replaced them with the payola-free girl groups. Music of 1960-1961 was, in a word, not the stuff of legend.

 

[hornet61]

Before they were British hits:


moody blues "go now" - orig. bessie banks
animals "house of the rising sun - orig. various amer blues men
animals "boom, boom" - orig. John Lee hooker
animals "bring it on home to me" - orig sam cooke
gerry and the pacemakers "I'll be there"- orig bobby darin
gerry and the pacemekers "you'll never walk alone" - orig. from Carousell
dc five - five american recycles including one by of all people bing crosby
hollies "just one look" - orig doris troy
searchers - five american recycles
hermans hermits- I'm in to something good (dee Irwin), Silhouettes (Rays), wonderful world (Sam Cooke), End of the world (skeeter davis)
sandie shaw "always something there... - orig lou johnston
stones "not fade away" (Buddy holly) and "time is on my side" (irma thomas)... and much later "Harlem shuffle" (bob and earl)
kinks - none
peter and gordon - true love ways (buddy holly) I go to pieces (del shannon) "to know him is to love him "(teddy bears)
chad and jerey.....went more broadway "willow weep for me" (paul whitman,'33)"If I loved you" (carousel)
I have dreamed (The king and I)
Zombies - none

and two groups ,at first we thought, were Brits .....PJ Proby fom texas and the Walker brothers from LA

 

[John FL]

The last few posts have brought an interesting perspective to this subject. I'm sure everyone will agree, especially before radio became so fragmented that the music of the day reflected the times and even the mood of the country.

Hornet, wow, I was aware of some cover hits but I never realized they went to such an extent. Great job as always - you do your homework! You actually made a great point as we almost all remember the British version than what preceeded. But all of this got me thinking about how music was almost like a timeline of things.

By the mid 50s the younger generation were finally able to break away from the middle of the road music of their parents. Rock 'n roll was born and so too were radio stations across the country offering this new product. Unlike a generation before, kids had wheels and they had a rebellious side and this reflected how the 50s were changing. They had their car radios and they were able to tune into what they liked. Radio was evolving and playlists tended to be way too long so the national hits we saw in the 60s were not quite there yet. As I also saw the cover hit list, I also couldn't help recall how artists such as Pat Boone covered for the Fats Dominoes of the world. Segregation existed and I'm sure many stations across the country played it safe by playing the lilly white version of the hit songs. One could make the point that music was fragmented then too.

And to Landtuna's point, the payolla scandals pretty much neutered rock 'n roll by the early 60s. Radio certainly played it safe by playing tons of the girl groups and Bobby Vintonish tunes. If we look at 1963, the Top 5 songs for the entire year per WABC surveys were as follows:

1. Be My Baby - The Ronettes
2. I Will Follow Him - Peggy March
3. He's So Fine - The Chiffons
4. Easier Said Than Done - The Essex
5. Our Day Will Come - Ruby and the Romantics

Overall, I like these songs but they certainly didn't rock and there weren't many that did back then. And to Landtuna's point - yes, by 1964, the kids were ready for something else. If you ever compare a Top 100 year-end chart from 1963 to 1964, it would just blow your socks off. It was like a music revolution as there was such a huge difference in just one year.

Speaking of WABC, I remember hearing interviews and reading accounts of the first time the Beatles were introduced to the station. During the music selection meeting, the PD and jocks voted thumbs down on adding the Beatles - I believe it was Please Please Me but I could be wrong on that. Someone correct me if I goofed - this is all in my memory or what is left of it. It goes to show that the public is often a better barometer than the experts.

By 1964, there was a lot of unrest in the country. The nation had mourned the loss of their young president and the young generation, in particular, were pretty hard hit. The story goes that somewhere (I believe it was in the Midwest) the Beatles played for the first time and the reaction just set the request lines ablaze. Yes, the times - they were a changin'.

Of course, we know the sound spread like wildfire. What followed was an incredible near decade of must listen to music. Radio was about as good as it gets back then too. What a ride. Without question, the British Invasion made a huge impact and reflected the times very well. But Motown, the 4 Seasons, Beach Boys, folk rock, protest songs and even bubble gum all worked in harmony together. It seemed the bar had been raised so high that music of the day was just in a word - great.

By the mid 70s, it seemed people were going into different directions musically and again, think about what was happening in the country. Nixon, Watergate, Vietnam, riots. People needed escape and so they danced. Disco boomed and at the same time classic rock also emerged as an alternative. Again, people turned to music to help them cope and enjoy life in their own way.

Some say we shouldn't continue to look back to make radio once what it was. While I understand everything needs to evolve or it will get stale and certainly a 60s style delivery wouldn't work now - nor should it - I just wish there was more incentive for listeners to want to tune in. There is a large audience out there who love the 60s, 70s and even select 80s. I believe if the music is selected carefully, it will transend age and gender. There is emotional attachment to the music born some 45 years ago we celebrate in this string. I love the 60s and 70s classic hits format and I'm hearing a lot of good stuff out there in radio land. The format is not available in all markets but I'm grateful to the choices we now have in this computer age we live.

 

[hornet61]

good stuff..every post makes a great point. The thing about the British Invasion was it was a firestorm started by the Beatles. The amazing part of this story is that, the then unknown Beatles outside of the UK
came to America in 1962 with 16 songs in tow, could not get a label, they agreed to a licensing agreement with VJ Records a Black owned Chicago Label.......in the fall or 1962, they could not crack the hot 100. By Nov 1963 copies of "Meet the Beatles", hit the USA and the firestorm began, at this point VJ released thosed leased cuts as the Album "Introducing the Beatles" and released singles on VJ and subsidary label Tollie, then swan jumped on the bandwagon and released some of thier ealier leases, all those events contributed to the Beatles having on apr 1964 the Top 5 spots on the hot100 and the top 2 spots on the top LP 100. normally with only on label only about 3 singles and one lp are ever released close to each other. then the rest was history. the Beatles continued doing Covers and their Bubble gum hits... but by Rubber Soul their Genius surfaced...the Stones had followed the same path as other groups with covers, by early 65 their manager gathered jagger and richards locked them in a hotel and didn't let them out until they had written enough original material for their next album.

 

[Don62]

In all this talk about the British Invasion, it's easy to forget that some groups, like Brian Wilson & The Beach Boys, were starting to do things that the Beatles got all the credit for.

Brian was writing and producing his own songs, and starting to do concept albums, or LPs that had very little filler.
No one had done that on that level since Buddy Holly, though Roy Orbison and Del Shannon had a lot of songwriting talent as well.

Rock and Roll was changing, and the Beach Boys were leading that change. The Beatles accelerated though and unfortunately got the lion's share of credit for that.

BTW, 1961 wasn't a bad year for Rock and Roll.

Del Shannon's Runaway was a big and great hit. If that wasn't R&R, I don't know what was.

 

[landtuna]

BTW, 1961 wasn't a bad year for Rock and Roll.

Del Shannon's Runaway was a big and great hit. If that wasn't R&R, I don't know what was.

One "big and great" hit does not a year make. But I may have been off a year. I meant to cite 1960-1961. Girl groups, teen 'disaster' songs.....UGH!

 

[TheFonz]

the Beatles continued doing Covers and their Bubble gum hits... but by Rubber Soul their Genius surfaced...

Well, you might run into some disagreement there. Some of us who were around for the birth of Rock & Roll in the '50s were enjoying those "covers" by the British groups. Then, about the time of Rubber Soul, music took a turn for the worse (in the opinion of some). The lyrics turned from just plain fun to songs about drugs and social issues. Vietnam had a lot to do whith this, of course. And it still goes on today. We get a lecture every time we hear a Springsteen song.

 

[hornet61]

The Beachboys are my all time favorite band, #2 the Beatles. I like to think they complemented each other than rivals. The Drug Culture in songs for the Beatles, any way , started more with Sgt Pepper. The three albums before Sgt Pepper "Rubber Soul, Revolver,Yesterday and Today", were still pure pop.
Rubber SouL contains some of the most beautiful Love Songs:
Michelle
I've just seen a face
girls
norwegian wood (first Sitar song, the Beatles definitley started that craze, and Brian Jones took It to another level)
nowhere man
in my life
Words (was a little heavy)

The Beatles probably had more hits that didn't chart than anyother band....you might be amazed that "Michelle' never charted, most program directors that refuse to play anything that didn't chart, play the heck out of Beatles stuff, that didn't chart.

when a beatle new lp arrived at radio stations they were played cover to cover, and everyone knows 95% of the Beatle songs and 30% didnt chart.
That's a tough statement, for other bands to live up to.

20 #1'S and how many individual #1's by all the Beatles maybe another 20, that puts a distance beween second place which belongs to the King of course.

George Strait is not worried he is at bout 60 #1's todate,wow!!!!

 

[Starbucks]

And that's how LP's became the primary or equal purchase to the 45 by the 70's. It set the trend where many artist were not just single hit or one hit wonder artist.

 

[hornet61]

Good point , we forget as Starbucks pointed out, when the LP became the staple, Starbucks time frame coincides, with the appearance of Album Oriented Rock stations accross the country, lead by another British invasion group Led Zepplin.

 

[TheFonz]

And that's how LP's became the primary or equal purchase to the 45 by the 70's. It set the trend where many artist were not just single hit or one hit wonder artist.

But was this really a good thing? Let's face it. Most LPs don't have 10 or 12 great songs. So while we were listening to a medicore LP, we could have been listening to some really great singles. So much good music, so little time.

 

[Starbucks]

I'll answer that question for you......It was a good thing for quite awhile. Don't say that to anyone who owned a Zepplin 4, or Ziggy Stardust LP. No single releases or singles that charted mediocre from those LP's would have proved you completely wrong. Let's say in those days along with those mentioned titles would have had at least 10 out of 12 cuts that were good or great on them. Especially a top charted Album. Even the LP titled names like Aqualung, Secrets, Exile On Main Street, Tea For the Tillerman ran synonymous with the popularity of the artist name or group, as well as the songs on the album. It was like you ate at the (name )of the restaurant and had a great Italian or Mexican dinner. You just didn't have a great Italian or Mexican dinner.
When the singles were played on the radio especially in the 70's, (AM or FM).... the jock would mention or you would know what LP it's from. Even if you didn't own it. It opened up and gave a whole new inside meaning of the artist where by the the time Thriller came out in the 80's....Artist like Michael Jackson, Madonna, Springstein, could score as many as 7 top 10 singles out from there. And by the late 70's to mid 80's, the LP and the single coincided with each other to make that happen. Until the CD replaced vinyl...that's when it declined. I won't mention the reasons or detail...because that will lead into another direction that has been discussed more then once or several times on here (I think).
It's funny today...Springstein has a new LP out today....How may people can name the self title today or will remember the title to it in 10 months???? But they still remember that Hot Rocks was the Rolling Stones, and Tapestry was Carole King. Who cares about the names of the LP's of Matchbox 20, or Fall Out Boy....because there you only have maybe 4 out of 10 tracks that might be worth purchasing.

 

[hornet61]

Yes the Single versus the Lp took on a whole different life, around this period, as both of you pointed out. And the interesting thing is that in the record collecting world the singles from the 50's and 60's (especially picture sleeves) are as valuable as the lp's from that era, and the 70's singles declined greatly in value vs the Lp.

Johnjax listed a great chronology of the music and the related events leading to the British Invasion and thru Viet Nam era. The times were certainly achangin'., I think, we all , are pretty lucky to have grown up listenting to this era of Rock N' Roll from Anka -Zepplin.

 

[Starbucks]

I believe the picture sleeve would have more value then the 45 today except for 50's small record R&B and Sun-Elvis, and British, or certain Beatles 45's. But many of the R&B 45's pretty much are kinda' overvalued .....like real estate where people think they can still get 800,000 dollars for their home when they paid 400,000, and it's really only worth now close to 400,000. Once the recording becomes available in a legal CD release, the value comes down, because it's that much easier to get a hold of the recording....and the record label on the vinyl is the primary thing that becomes valuable. (And if that person is interested into collecting labels which is still a market for it. Plus the younger generation couoldn't care if it's in an original label or not....they just want the recording. So alot of these rarer copies have been showing up. And the original owners and collectors are retiring or passing on.
Picture sleeves of the 60's and before have value. The 80's sleeves you couldn't give it away....they became common with the vinyl release. plus that's when 45's were showing a noticable decline by 1985.

 

[TheFonz]

I'll answer that question for you......It was a good thing for quite awhile. Don't say that to anyone who owned a Zepplin 4, or Ziggy Stardust LP. No single releases or singles that charted mediocre from those LP's would have proved you completely wrong. Let's say in those days along with those mentioned titles would have had at least 10 out of 12 cuts that were good or great on them. Especially a top charted Album. Even the LP titled names like Aqualung, Secrets, Exile On Main Street, Tea For the Tillerman ran synonymous with the popularity of the artist name or group, as well as the songs on the album. It was like you ate at the (name )of the restaurant and had a great Italian or Mexican dinner. You just didn't have a great Italian or Mexican dinner.
When the singles were played on the radio especially in the 70's, (AM or FM).... the jock would mention or you would know what LP it's from. Even if you didn't own it. It opened up and gave a whole new inside meaning of the artist where by the the time Thriller came out in the 80's....Artist like Michael Jackson, Madonna, Springstein, could score as many as 7 top 10 singles out from there. And by the late 70's to mid 80's, the LP and the single coincided with each other to make that happen. Until the CD replaced vinyl...that's when it declined. I won't mention the reasons or detail...because that will lead into another direction that has been discussed more then once or several times on here (I think).
It's funny today...Springstein has a new LP out today....How may people can name the self title today or will remember the title to it in 10 months???? But they still remember that Hot Rocks was the Rolling Stones, and Tapestry was Carole King. Who cares about the names of the LP's of Matchbox 20, or Fall Out Boy....because there you only have maybe 4 out of 10 tracks that might be worth purchasing.

O.K. I guess that I was thinking of the early era of LPs.........................mid to late '60s. As I remember, LPs cost $3.98 and 45 rpm singles were about 79 cents each. Like most kids, I was on a limited budget. So if I had to make a choice between a Beatles Lp with mostly unknown (at the time) content and FIVE Top 40 singles, I'd go with the singles every time.