I said soon, not immediately. As for old folks music, there are any number of posts on this board that say just that about 60s music. And this thread is about #1 songs. In 1964, only around 3 songs managed to top the charts with that 'style", a drastic reduction from the year before. Many of the popular artists pre-Beatles continued to hit the charts throughout the 60s, just not at the levels they were accustomed to. Time marches on.
I am ambivalent about this. Having lived in Paris as a teenager (1957 - 1960), and listening to a music station, Radio Luxembourg, out of London every night, I became acquainted with artists like Cliff Richard long before people here in the States had ever even heard of him. I was also introduced to a number of UK artists who would cover the American hits, the most memorable of these being a singer who revised the words to Johnny Horton's famous, "The Battle of New Orleans." In this revision, historical accuracy was altered beyond all recognition by the replacement of "bloody British" with "bloomin' rebels" and the complete eradication of "Old Hickory." Even at the ripe old age of 14 I found the humor and British patriotism in this quite wonderful. Also, let's not forget that beyond the Beatles and Rolling Stones — and even Petula Clark — a host of new artists and groups would come our way, The Bachelors, Gerry and the Pacemakers, The Searchers and Mary Hopkin just to name a few who immediately come to mind. And, at least to me this had no effect on my love of American artists who kept the beat going on (sorry about that, Cher).
I've just been listening to one of those PD sets, called British Rock and Roll. An amazing number of covers of North American original hits, and some of them seem awful in comparison to the originals. Wonder if there was some kind of legal barrier in Britain to getting access to the originals?
Well, in the case of "The Battle of New Orleans" it would be obvious that the American original wouldn't be aired because it was the British who "ran so fast that hounds couldn't catch 'em, down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico." That wouldn't sit well with the UK patriots, I would think. I cannot think of any flagrant editorializing of USA lyrics, but I am sure there were some. For the most part, my 14 year old attitude was that they were copy cats.
Well, next up is "I Want To Hold Your Hand" by the Beatles, #1 from February 1 - March 20, 1964. Biggest song of the year in 1964. Beatles songs have all been excised from youtube... so live versions are the best we are going to get.
One of the most important songs of the 20th century, surely. It's actually a pretty interesting work even without that weight attached to it - I hear echoes of a bunch of what had gone on in pop and what was going on, everything from Buddy Holly to the girl group sound to the folk boom. A very creative synthesis in hindsight, and an earworm in its own right in addition to that. Beyond that, from a personality standpoint we hadn't seen acts quite like this one before - bands had typically been dominated by a leader, and this quartet clearly broke out of that mould. You had two guys who appeared to be calling the shots, but the other two members had distinct personalities of their own as well. It was kind of like getting four stars instead of just one.
This has never been one of my favorite early Beatles tunes. The one coming up next holds that distinction. Nevertheless, it is an important part of Rock & Roll history and I remember well the giddy rush I felt that first night they performed on The Ed Sullivan Show. Indeed, half the fun was watching the youngsters, as Ed often put it, lose their collective minds. Pop music would never be the same again.
Still love the song. I was the first kid on my school bus to have a Beatle haircut. My hair had been a bit longer than average before, so it was easy to comb it down.
Can't deny the historical importance or the significance of IWTHYH being the song that broke the Beatles in the US when everything before it flopped, but it's never been among my favorites. It was one of the few Beatles songs I knew before I really got into them when I was 14, and I even remember thinking "what's the big deal about this?" Do you mean rerecordings of the British covers, or are you saying the British versions were awful the first time around? I don't think there were any legal barriers to getting the original North American recordings provided either a British label would release them or you could find an import copy on the original label. I do agree, in any event, that the covers rarely lived up to the originals. Remember, too, that one reason why the Beatles became rock's biggest band ever is that they didn't get a chance to make a record until they'd had years of practice and were really good at both their own songs and other people's. If they had somehow gotten a record deal ca 1961, they might have been one of a hundred or more bands that made one subpar American R&B cover and then disappeared. That could be the problem with some of these other records you're referring to: the artists simply weren't very good at their craft at the time no matter how good the source-material was. Indeed, the first two bands I knew much of anything about were the Monkees and then the Beatles, and as a result I thought for a long time that all bands had every member take the lead on a song here and there, that every member wrote at least a few of their songs, etc.
I just read that IWTHYH entered the Billboard Top 100 the week of Jan 18th, which means it shot to Number One in just 2 weeks. Wonder if any other songs hit Number One that quickly.
"Can't Buy Me Love" also got to #1 in two weeks, and I believe in the '90s at least one song debuted at #1.
I guess it depends how you reckon time. But since CBML debuted the week of March 28th in the Top 100, I would say it just took one week to reach Number One on the following week's chart. The week the Beatles held the top 5 spots.
26 songs have debuted at #1 on the Hot 100. The first was "You Are Not Alone" by Michael Jackson in 1995.
Decent song. Ashamed to admit I'd not heard it before. Some of these #1 songs never get any play on oldies stations. I guess it depends on who the programmer in your area is into.
The appeal of the Beatles has always mystified me. In their early career, I see no other reason to believe they were historically important, other than a bunch of teenage girls were gaga over them, and even THAT I couldn't understand, as none of them were particularly good looking. None of them were ugly, but heavens... we're not talking George Michael or Barry Gibb territory here. As time went on, they DID reveal themselves to be perhaps one of the most important songwriters of the 20th century, and that is where their brilliance lied.... but certainly not as performers. "I Wanna Hold your Hand" to me was simplistic and screechy, I never liked this song even performed by someone else. Later on, beatles songs performed by others I love VERY VERY much... and even two Beatles songs themselves I love (The Long and Winding Road and Nowhere Man).
I've always been decidedly lukewarm to I Want to Hold Your Hand. It didn't approach Please Please Me or From Me to You, nor She Loves You or many that followed it.
Hey, I definitely think you hit on something here: Thinking about what you said regarding those particular influences, I started picking apart "I Want to Hold Your Hand" in my head. I could definitely hear Buddy Holly doing a rendition of this song in the manner of "Rave On". I'd imagine the Holly influence was the primary one heard here-- to which John added high multi-part harmonies at certain key points that remind me of the Marvelettes on "Please Mr. Postman". The folk influence I'm mainly hearing during the bridge-- it could work as another song in and of itself. It almost lends itself to an acoustic treatment in the manner of more poppy/folkish Beatles songs like "And I Love Her" or "Til There Was You". I have no way of knowing, but I'd guess McCartney was responsible for that section.
I think the formula is "nationwide" in view of the fact that so many of these oldies stations — of which there are NONE in my town any longer — are owned by chains of stations. The oldies stations here now are generally "classic rock" and play music from the Seventies through the Nineties.
I wish I had been old enough, and in a position to understand and feel the impact of The Beatles music on America.
