I am glad they never covered each other's music. Lou Reed's "All I Have to Do is Dream" would be...almost as terrible as "Perfect Day." (What, I love his non-terrible music very much.)
I don't know, a Lou Reed cover of "Wake up Little Susie" might have had potential.
To be fair, Phil Everly had kind of a lost decade with all the heroin use.
I'm fond of both of their music
This is bugging me, grammatically, but I can't figure out what a better version of it is without different word choice altogether. Is it just me?
I can't think of a single Phil Everly song I would recognize.
5: What about Everlast? He's basically just like the Everly Brothers.
5: 'Bye Bye Love' and "Wake Up Little Susie" are the only ones I really know well.
I heard the Everly Brothers live once! It was great.
It was at a Simon and Garfunkel concert. The E. B. were brought out in the middle to do a set, in lieu of an opening act.
1: I think I'd like to hear Lou mumbling "Gee whiz." Just to know what it would sound like.
"Cathy's Clown" was a a monster #1, selling 8 million copies, Warner Brothers records 1st release, building a company that released a lot of my favs of the late 60s (Neil Young)
As someone who was there, the uneven and combined development of mainstream and counterculture was obvious and accepted.
Fran and Nancy released "Something Stupid" in 1966, and Frank had a monster hit with "My Way" in 1969.
Frank had a monster hit with "My Way" in 1969.
So I'm sitting down in my local pizzeria/restaurant/office in Queens and trying to get some work done (instead of reading Unfogged comment threads) and just as I read that My Way came on. I don't think I've ever heard it here before (it's usually far too much Hendrix/Led Zeppelin/Pink Floyd on account of the 19 year old quasi-hippie musician son).
1. Right now Smearcase is listening to Metal Machine Music so back off haters.
Yes to the OP. More to say on that but I'm trying to get some work done (and I love the Everly Brothers' music, RIP).
Oh, I've had the Roy Scheider All That Jazz version of Bye Bye Life running through my head these past few days.
Kenny Rogers, Barbara Streisand, Dionne Warwick, Herb Alpert
Maybe I am not understanding the question
Also, Everly Brothers were Teen Idols and Lou Reed was just a little old.
And as I have said, the important generation for the 60s and 70s and the cultural changes were the ones born roughly 1935-1945. The boomers just consumed their production.
And in turn, Lou Reed was only three years older than Debbie Harry.
Gave it a listen, got a second opinion, and "Cathy's Clown" was HARDFUCKINGROCK for 1961. Check it against some Pat Boone or Patsy.
Kids today can't imagine.
It was at a Simon and Garfunkel concert. The E. B. were brought out in the middle to do a set, in lieu of an opening act.
Oh wait! I think I was there.
1: The Everly Brothers doing "All Tomorrow's Parties" would be awesome.
And in turn, Lou Reed was only three years older than Debbie Harry.
And Marilyn Monroe was just over one month younger than HM Queen Elizabeth.
I wonder if either EIIR or MM was disturbed by that. I'm still trying to come to terms with a president who is my age.
And Mae West was only 4 years younger than Hitler.
I'm not sure I understood the assignment.
By the time Hitler was my age...
By the time Mae West was my age...
By the time Mozart...oh never mind.
4: "both" seems to be modifying music, which it can't, but isn't really. I think that's why it sounds funny, right? To avoid it you have to be a little clunky. "I'm fond of the music of both artists" maybe.
16 gets it right. If you are operating within the assumption that a song has to be tuneful, melodic, following classical songwriting conventions, then "Cathy's Clown" and "Wake Up Little Susie" are pretty intense.
Here's another good song from 1958, Frankie Sardo's "Fake Out". Such vitriol!
25: You could say "bothly I am fond of their music" if you wanted people to look at you funny.
I'm older than Stanley and Neb but younger than LB and Apo. I don't actually know if I'm older or younger than Ogged.
Does anyone else find it unsettling that "Heebie Jeebie" was quoted on Andrew Sullivan dot com?
I'm older than Stanley and Neb and Heebie, but younger than Hitler.
I'm younger than JP, and therefore Hitler.
30 con't: man, pseuds look really silly when everyone else is going by their real names.
That's why everybody is afraid of clowns.
See also, the Hacienda was a tied-house of the Whitbread brewery, bound by contract going on feudal obligation to their monopoly. The Thatcher government's anti-trust people broke up the tied-house system, causing a tasty revolution in British beer and about the only thing that government did I agree with, but it sticks in my mind because it's like Winston Churchill's iPhone.
Another issue here is the way the past gets annealed into a solid block of history. My parents got married in 1976 and had me in 1980, when Odyssey's "Tear It Up and Wear It Out" was No.1 in the UK charts, and they were just back from a delayed honeymoon based on their airline friend's moderne gaff in Palm Springs. On Christmas Day, they turned off the BBC 6 Music special with Nile Rodgers in favour of Chas and Dave doing WW2 era swing and cockney favourites. Nile *is* their real past! But somehow everything in the UK has German bombers in it.
That said, the record in question keeps up the tempo and plays straight through - that stuff was meant for dancing - so it was the equivalent of a cheesy 4/4 house mix from 1942.
A tad off-season, but a great Everly Brotherssong.
The second result of a search for the word Jeebie on andrewsullivan.com is also unsettling.
38. That's the only one I see. Also the only one that comes up with a site search on google.
I get a lot of hits for "heebie jeebie" on that site. I think a lot of things give Sullivan the heebie jeebies.
He never gets Heebie Geebie, though. She stays with us.
I can't stop hearing 36 in Grandpa Simpson's voice.
36: You were born in 1980? Huh. Somehow I was sure you were at least a decade older than I am.
I thought you were younger than 40 but older than it turns out Alex is.
Huh, yeah, I thought Alex was a little older than I am, but I guess not. Maybe he has a January birthday and that's why I'm not as mature.
I assume everybody from the U.K. the same age, 46.
Oh wait! I think I was there.
Waaaaat
48: "And yes! Being willing to fight when we have to fight! Are you against that?"
Boy, Schweitzer missed an opportunity to punch Kirstol in the face right there. That said, I thought Schweitzer wasn't running for Senate because he hates Washington so much. If that's the case, what could he possibly be doing on the Sunday shows?
50 -- Building a media presence. I don't know, but I think he's basically doing the Sarah Palin thing -- at a different political/intellectual level -- and being mentioned as one of the very darkest of 2016 horses is part of that, as is playing Everyman at Kristol (which ought to happen every week).
I find Cokie more disappointing in that clip (not that I have very high expectations for her . . .)
Speaking of punching people for the sake of profit, tomorrow is the 20th anniversary of Tonya Harding's attempt to hire out a job. Thanks for the reminder Wikipedia.
Cokie is one of the worst offenders in that whole gang. And I think Schweitzer is positioning himself for the veep slot under Clinton. Or maybe even for a run at the top spot if she sits out the race (not happening) or hires a bunch of people (again) who don't understand the primary system.
Cokie was bad but everyone focused on Gillooly because of the funny name.
If you snort enough, people will tend to call you that.
Mary Martha Corinne "Cokie" Morrison Claiborne Roberts (née Boggs).
She went to Wellesley with a former colleague, who once described Cokie as "the most privileged and entitled person in one of the most privileged and entitled places that the world has ever seen."
52- I was hoping there was a google doodle for it.
I bet Cokie Roberts is for entitlement reform.
re: 36.last
Yeah. My parents both identify, I think, with the music of the late 60s and early 70s, mostly.* However, both of them are (just) about the right age to also have been punks. My Mum's younger than, say, Joe Strummer.
Youth scenes always overlap, I guess, and people don't sort themselves out into nice easy cohorts.
* although my Mum still listens to a fair bit of newish stuff, and used to go to metal and hard rock gigs with me in the 80s. My nephew always jokes about how being in her car involves her sitting, nose 3 inches from the steering wheel, swearing at other drivers and singing along with the Kings of Leon.
If you listen to older music, it's often quite striking how long and productive some people's careers were and how they overlapped in lots of interesting ways. Miles Davis might be a bit of an outlier; you could argue he was making innovative music from about 1945 through to almost his death over 40 years later. But not that much. Coleman Hawkins basically _invented_ the saxophone solo.* He was gigging by 1921, and still able to cut it with all the bebop and post-bebop musicians who came 20 or even 30 years later.
Or the Wrecking Crew types. Many of whom were playing on records before rock'n'roll was invented, and were still playing on hit records 50 years later.
* how's that for a claim to fame, eh?
re: 62
The vague point being that a lot of records we associate with a particular musical generation often had musicians playing on them that were many musical generations older.
My parents both identify, I think, with the music of the late 60s and early 70s, mostly.*
So do I, though.
re: 64
Well, to be fair, if you came of age musically in the early to mid 90s, that's only natural.*
* insert emoticon.
Special note for ttam: this is fantastic and so is the rest of this guy's work. https://soundcloud.com/thereflex/rock-with-you-o-the-reflex-1
By the time Hitler was my age he'd been dead for six years. On balance, I think this is a good thing.
I think of the Everlys as an early 60s thing and the Velvets as a late 60s thing, so not that far apart.
What does always surprise me is that Elvis Costello and Joe Jackson are only three years younger than me and that Nick Lowe is actually a couple of years older. They did seem to me like another generation at the time.
Whenever I go through airport screening I want to tell them "stop trying to make 3-1-1 happen!" No one finds that mnemonic helpful.
The other thing that always leaps out looking at discographies of older recording artists, is how extraordinarily unproductive a lot of modern musicians are.* I wonder how much that is due to the economics of the recording/touring model as it developed through the 1970s and early 80s and how much is more of a cultural shift in terms of musicians understanding of their own identify/role.
I don't just mean jazz musicians, either. If you look at the recorded output of people like Ronnie Wood, or whoever, they were recording a couple of albums a year (or much more) at a time when they were all supposed to be fecklessly lazing about in a drug induced haze.
* although I guess a lot of producer/musicians in more electronic genres are still pretty prolific.
52: Just read a pretty good retrospective of the whole thing:
DISCUSSED: Weapons Not Used Against Nancy Kerrigan, Factors Likely to Sway an Olympic Judge's "Artistic Expression" Score, The Triple Axel, Sponsorships in the '90s, White Trash and Working Class, The Non-Sexualized Female Athlete, Tonya Harding's Brief Acting Career, Fast-Food Restaurants near the Former Skating Rink in Clackamas CountyAnd then for another point of view, a recent interview with Jeff Gillooly (now Stone).
69: Albums used to be a lot more lucrative.
72: I think it's more modern marketing strategies, starting in the 80s. If you're going to release 4 or 5 singles with accompanying videos, spaced out to allow a few months for each to play out, then you're not going to exceed a rate of 12-18 months/album. (E.g., the Beatles released more singles in 1964 than Miley Cyrus has in her whole career.) Throw in an arena tour behind the album that may last 6-12 months and you're recording every 2-3 years. (Did bands in the 60-70s not treat album+tour as a marketing package, and just tour sporadically, Phish-style?)
Presumably, even artists that don't have video-heavy marketing strategies or arena tours fall in line because (a) that's how the labels operate and (b) the current recording pace is easier on the artists.
70 would have made a good post AHEM.
73: is this why, as is fairly commonly remarked, a lot of legendary albums contain quite a bit of filler?
re: 73
I think that's definitely part of it, yeah. And, for pop bands, before the mid-60s, albums were often just collections of the band's last 10 or 12 singles. Less so for less youth-orientated acts [jazz, or MOR or whatever] where albums conceived as albums had been a thing since the mid 50s [not that long after albums as albums became available tech, for that matter].
I wonder if part of it is also the result of the expectation that gradually arose through the 60s that bands would write all the songs and (apparently, if not actually) play all the music on their records. It's a lot easier to record an album every 6 months if you are a Motown or RnB or soul act who have access to a killer session band, and half a dozen brilliant writers on the top of their game.
The USP of Rubber Soul, when it was released in 1965, was that there was no filler (at least intentionally). This was definitely a break from custom and practice in pop/rock although in the same year Dylan started releasing rock albums with no intentional filler, having been used to this as a folkie. People certainly talked about this at the time as innovative.
re: 78
I'm not a massive Beatles fan [although I like them just fine] but yeah, I think their albums from Rubber Soul through to Abbey Road are all pretty solidly good throughout [even the 'Ringo' songs] compared to a lot of their contemporaries.
When my band goes on trips together, I'm not allowed to make fun of Ringo. It's one of the rules.