Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

There is no question that Norman Petty was very influential in Buddy's early stuff, but Buddy broke off from Petty sometime before the plane crash. I am pretty sure that Buddy was involved in the production of some songs that were recorded in NYC w/o Petty's involvement. Buddy was a very creative person.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Norman Petty didn't just produce the early stuff, he produced ALL the post-That'll Be the Day stuff, with the exception of the four-song NY session at the end of 1958. Dick Jacobs was the producer of that NY session.

Certainly Buddy had input/involvement in the production of all his records (just as Elvis did), but he also always worked with a producer. Buddy did serve as producer of a few other people's records (Waylon Jennings, Lou Giordano) but never on his own. In the film version, after the debacle with Owen Bradley in Nashville, Buddy vows that henceforth he will produce all his records by himself; and he is shown doing just that as the film progresses; that is just patently untrue, and really unfair to Norman Petty and his contributions.

Which is not to deny Buddy was a very creative person. But the split with Norman Petty at the end of 1958 was more about money (Petty was ripping the Crickets off of songwriting royalties, among other things) than about creative control.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Hey, I dug out my Holly box and found those Holly as producer credits for Jennings and Giordano - you sly dog, do you have that set, too??? It boggles the mind to imagine a new Holly box, but I think that'll be the day when hell is frozen over...

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

I didn't mean to imply that Buddy left Petty over creative control issues ... I know it was a money issue. There is no question that Petty deserves a lot of credit for Buddy's success but it was a collaborative effort in Colvis ... but I am convinced (my opinion) that Buddy would have continued to be successful in the music business, w/o Petty, had he lived. My guess is the reason that Petty was slighted in the movie goes back to the money that he owed Buddy and the Crickets ... or was there another reason?

 

I'm puzzled that with these criteria so many members are voting for Elvis.
He arguably qualifies under the performance and influence categories, although his influence is more on modern culture than on other musicians.

He can't qualify under the other categories surely!

I haven't voted yet because it's a very difficult question, but I guess if we're talking Rock'n'roll Chuck has to come pretty close. I like Buddy more though.

 

Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Filled with inaccuracies??? I can't possibly believe that. Next you're going to tell me that he never played a rosewood neck'd three bolt Strat or Tele

I voted for Chuck too

 

I said Elvis earlier in the thread. But right now, listening to Bruce's new album five times straight, I say Bruce Springsteen. I'll reconsider later, but right now, Bruce is King, Boss, anything you wanna call him.

 

I am going to say Robert Johnson, the grandaddy of all rock & roll.

 

I would have to say Chuck Berry although I don't have a lot of respect for him as a showman. I think he has a huge chip on his shoulder and can be extremely rude to his fans. Let me explain. I took my wife and mother to Santa Monica Civic several years ago to see Chuck Berry and The Johnny Otis show. Johnny Otis finishes and about 40 minutes later Chuck comes out on stage bitchin about how they promised to have some special amp and if they didn't get it he wasn't goin on yada, yada, yada. Finally got the bone out of his nose and delivered a great show. A year or two ago I seen a documentary on Chuck Berry. The one with a show at the end, I think at the Apollo with Keith Richards and several other well known artists . Anyway at some point during the video here's Chuck Berry bitchin about the same thing, acting like some kind of potentate and throwin' a wingding

Sorry for the rant and the unkind words but you'd a have to a been there.

 

Same kind of thing happened to me last time I saw him, years ago. It was something like the Anniversary of Rock and Roll Show. Bo Diddley and Chuck Berry were the headliners but had a backup band (who opened with their solo stuff) of John Hammond, John Mayall, John Lodge, Rudy Sarzo, Ron Wood and on and on. Bo came out and did a killer show and then they drug Chuck out. He kept trying to leave stage in the middle of songs and Ron Wood had to keep dragging him back. He only played like 3 or 4 songs all the way through and all the others he just quit in the middle. Luckily I had seen him several times before and he was always excellent. Who knows maybe he just got tired of playing anymore. But still the King (or Father) to me. They did put out a dvd of this show but edited Chuck's part, I think.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Buddy's family/estate and the Crickets had no creative control over the movie, so their differences with Petty wouldn't have influenced the content of the film. I think the ommission of Petty was done:
a. in a typical Hollywood desire to simplify the story, and
b. to avoid any potential legal entanglements that might arise if Petty felt he was depicted inaccurately and wanted to pursue libel action. That is also the reason Jerry Allison and Joe B Mauldin's names were changed to "Jesse and Raybob" in the film.

I agree that Buddy would have continued to be successful had he lived, and most likely he eventually would have started producing himself eventually.

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Off the top of my head I remember these:
1. The film depicts Buddy's dad as a cliched "why don't you give up rock-n-roll and get a real job" dad, and depicts them arguing about Buddy's music. In reality, Buddy's parents enthusiastically encouraged and supported his musical career.
2. In the film Buddy is depicted as producing his own records, and Norman Petty does not appear at all. In reality, Petty produced and engineered almost all Buddy's records, and also managed the Crickets, as well as allegedly ripping them off of a pile of songwriting publishing $$. A huge omission.
3. Buddy never punched out Owen Bradley, as depicted in the film.
4. Sonny Curtis (lead guitar for the Crickets up until right before they hit it big) and Nikki Sullivan (rhythm guitar) are not depicted at all in the film.
5. In the film, the drummer (called "Jesse" rather than Jerry) is a hotheaded loudmouth who makes racist comments about Maria Elena. Needless to say this is not what Jerry Allison is really like, and he was really pissed off to be depicted that way.
6. In the film, Buddy's breakup with the Crickets is blamed simply on his desire to relocate to New York. In reality, they broke up because Buddy wanted to dump Petty as manager, and the Crickets sided with Petty.
7. In the film Buddy is shown performing with a full orchestra at his last show. Buddy Holly never appeared onstage with an orchestra (though I guess I can sorta understand the artistic license taken on this last point).

 

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Would the real King of Rock 'N' Roll please stand up?

Hey, I have that Holly box too! One of the best gifts my wife (then girlfriend) ever gave me!

 

Folks,it's gotta be Little Richard.
He may not meet the criteria etc. but his 1955-57 stuff is bloody essential.Has there been anything to top those 90 odd seconds of cyclonic force knows as Ooh My Soul.That's true,sweating,pulsating full of filth rock n roll.There endeth my rant.Accept no substitutes.

 

Re: Hail, Hail, Rock And Roll

Sounds just like Chuck. I have seen him several times over the years and the best place to see him is in Las Vegas. Since the hotels (or its customers) don't take kindly to amateur backing bands, Chuck has to actually rehearse and he puts on a good, tight show (with complete songs). The other times I have seen him are usually disasters. The best part about these shows is observing the reactions of confused audience members who don't know what the hell is going on.

 

I've never seen Chuck in person, so I never had the shock of seeing him act that way. I first got a hint of his personality from something a critic wrote, when he said that some people thought Chuck became anti-social after being jailed for a trumped-up charge (after which, he makes a joke, saying Chuck was always anti-social). Then I heard Carl Perkins tell the anecdote he's told so many times about going on tour with Chuck, and trying to encourage him to write more songs, only to have Chuck snap back at him.

But, you love the artist for the music...

 

And for the other side of the coin on Chuck Berry. I once went to see him tape an old TV show called the Midnight Special. Chuck had the flu and came out and did like 3 songs pretty good but not great. After Lee Michaels and the Bee Gees did their sets. Chuck Berry comes wandering back out and wants to retake. Taping was pretty much over and most of the people had left but Chuck Berry got up there and played for an hour or so with about 20 of us left in the audience, most of us ended up just sitting up on the stage with him watching him up close. He was just great that time.

 

Buddy Holly. No doubt. Great voice, incredible guitar chops (he only played what was NEEDED and what was APPROPRIATE, though), and equally impressive songwriting. As for influence.... the Stones, the Beatles, Clapton, Knopfler, Waylon.... do I even need to list the rest of them? If you want to talk about TALENT, it's Buddy all the way.

 

I would have voted for Chuck Berry if his name was up there when I first saw the poll.

Take one vote away from Little Richard, and add it to Berry, to be fair.

 

I voted other because I had a hard time deciding between several of those listed (except Lewis).

But wait! Where's CCR?

 

I saw Chuck Berry perform at Caesar's Palace in Vegas during April of 1999.

Little Richard opened the show, and he was competent if unremarkable.

James Brown was in the audience, which sat about 2000 people or so.

Chuck came on, and put on a good show. He seemed likable, but threw a jab at the audience. He said something like: "You people in Las Vegas are really (long pause) somethin'."

He duck-walked only once (arthritis), and the place went friggin nuts. He played some blues too, and gave some solo space to the pianist.

I sort of got the impression he was a little jaded, and he still had to gig as a 72 year old man to make ends meet.

Still though, it was a neat experience to see one of rock's true legends in the flesh.