There is a fascinating interview between Jon Landau and Paul Simon in 1972 Rolling Stone where PS asks about the extent to which Bessie Smith’s music ( I think it was Smith – I don’t have the interview close to hand) has stood the test of time or lasted into popular consciousness. Landau says to a great extent and Simon remarks that he thinks it has not lasted. This was about 40-50 years after Smith recorded. These days I am surprised at the songs ( more so than the artists) that have, in fact, lasted. But I am also personally surprised at artists / songs that have seemingly disappeared. Watching the film ‘Pleasantville’ I always enjoy the way that Buddy Holly’s Rave On comes bursting from the speakers ( same for Be Bop a Lula). But I realize that I can’t imagine ever playing Buddy Holly again – of making a decision for him and I think there is no chance of a Buddy Holly revival. I’m trying to think of other artists of similar stature ( generally regarded as primal influences) that at a popular consciousness have really, on the whole, give or take, disappeared.
Music that didn’t quite last: Buddy Holly?
by 131 Comments
With just over 2,000,000 regular listeners and almost 90,000,000 spotify plays of Everyday alone, I’d hardly say that BH has disappeared
https://open.spotify.com/artist/3wYyutjgII8LJVVOLrGI0Dp
Interesting. I wonder how that compares to Elvis, for example, or Little Richard?
Anyway, I’m surprised it’s so high, because I too had presumed Buddy Holly had disappeared a bit these days. I know Everyday had a little resurgence when it was used by Lyn Ramsay in the film We Need To Talk About Kevin (along with, bizarrely, a few Lonnie Donegan songs), so I can imagine it has crept up a few playlists based on that.
Oh, there’s also Buddy the musical, isn’t there? That’s probably boosted his popularity as well.
It’s still quite a staggering decline I think. I’m just a spring chicken so I wasn’t there at the time, but from testimony it seems Buddy Holly was just MASSIVE in the late fifties. The Beatles alone demonstrate how influential he was. But you now have to listen to him through rose-tinted ears to appreciate him and get past the apparent twee-ness. This isn’t meant as a put-down of him: I love (most of) his music, but even I can see the fluffiness and hiccuping is a bit passe.
Several high profile tribute albums have done him little harm, either.
IIRC, Paul McCartney bought BH’s publishing in the late 70s. Would imagine he probably still owns it
It doesn’t really answer your question, but I’m interested in acts that don’t escape their decades. I mean groups that had their measure of success for a few years, but for whatever reason weren’t picked up by subsequent generations. For example:
1960s: The Moody Blues, The Pretty Things, Cream
1970s: Be Bop Deluxe, Mott the Hoople, 10CC
1980s: Echo and the Bunnymen, The Sisters of Mercy, Simple Minds
This isn’t a criticism of these groups, I’m just making the point that they really only appeal to a certain age group. Find me a fan of The Sisters of Mercy and I’ll bet they’ll be in their mid 50s (with too much black in their wardrobe).
Why do some acts appeal down the generations and others not? Why are the Doors popular but not Jefferson Airplane? Why The Cure and not Siouxsie and the Banshees?
Catchier, more singalong perhaps.
So much of the early stuff is impeded by the sound quality. Muddy vocals ,crackley recordings.
Surely the most timeless is and will be Chuck Berry.
@Hawkfall
In fairness to the Moody Blues, they continued to shift shedloads of albums into the late 70s/early 80s
Did they? I had no idea. Fair dues to them. Never thought of them as a 70s band if you know what I mean.
Maybe instead of them we can put Procol Harum.
Well, PH were pretty big during the first half of the 70s, though they broke up in ’77. I think the band you’re looking for is Freddie and the Dreamers.
Yeah but I bet the people buying the records in the early 70s were the same people that bought Whiter Shade of Pale a few years before. I’ve nothing against the Harum, I should add, but I doubt they have many big fans under the age of 70. Doesn’t make them a bad band.
I didn’t for a moment think you had anything against the Harum, Hawks.
Nonsense. No comparison between AWSOP and the early/mid 70s albums. To make an admittedly poor comparison, it’s like comparing Syd Floyd with 70s Floyd.
Personally, I couldn’t care less if I never heard AWSOP ever again – but I wouldn’t be without A Salty Dog et seq. And I’m under 70.
Apologies if I’m missing your point, Hawkfall…
Probably not FS. I had tagged the Harum as a band whose fanbase had a narrow age distribution. Wrongly, by the sound of it.
Ah well, can’t win em all. I think I’m on safe ground with The Pretty Things though aren’t I?
Procol Harum were putting out classy material well into the current century. I’d suspect that most of those who bought it were the same people who had been with them since at least the mid-1970s. Their first 10 studio albums (with both Brooker and Reid on board), the last of which was issued in 1977, are all rather excellent.
This. With knobs on.
Interestingly, I think Cream had a little bit of a resurgence about 20 years ago – I’m sure one of their songs (I Feel Free, I think?) was used in a TV show? Maybe CSI or something. I was at art school at the time and was a mature student among a lot of younger students, and I was surprised they all seemed to know of Cream, or at least this one song.
The Who, too. I know they never really went away, but I feel they rocketed in popularity when their songs started getting used in a show. Sorry, my mind is a sieve but it was some cop show, maybe The Wire or something. All these young art kids were adding The Who to their playlists!
Cream’s re-union concerts in 2005 might have had something to do with that…
I Feel Free has cropped up on an advert fairly recently if memory serves.
I think you can make an argument for no end of 60s bands not being listened to any more, but I am endlessly surprised by what my kids (in their 30s) are familiar with.
CSI Who Are You.
I Feel Free was on a car ad. Off the top of my head, I would have said about ten years ago, maybe a little more – but I just checked and it was actually 1986. (Where does the time go?)
Who knows…..
Belinda Carlisle does.
Cream immediately sprang to mind as I thought about the OP’s premise.
Extended jamming on blues classics and similarly-structured originals has proved to be a musical dead end.
Speaking as a mid-fifties Sisters fan with plenty of black in my wardrobe, I’d say the reason Eldritch (and Siouxsie and the Bunnymen) haven’t had such extended mainstream success as is that they never embraced pop in the same way that The Cure did.
More to the point, Eldritch stopped releasing records and the other two bands disbanded – much lower profiles than Robert Smith, who I do think, in a very small way, is a bit of a media tart. Simple Minds dropped out of the public eye, when they moved away from the stadium rock of the Breakfast Club era.
If The Cramps could become cool again, thanks to the ‘Wednesday Addams’ tv series, there’s a whole back catalogue of cool goth tunes waiting for the right advert/tv show/film to soundtrack.
I think the Doors did well because of Jim Morrison (living and dying as he did). Also the film. Mind you, I think Somebody to Love and White Rabbit are deathless classics that will eternally be recycled as musical shorthand for San Francisco psychedelia.
Completely agree with @salwarpe here… The Cure had a few enormous hits and these continue to be on many teenage playlists even now. It’s the Friday I’m In Love and Lovesong type of thing does it though, not the Pornography type stuff. The Bunnymen and The Banshees had their chart moments on TOTP etc but I don’t really see that they actively courted the pop singles market. Any hits they had were just universally good songs, not especially poppy though.
I agree regarding the Sisters, but the Banshees had a decent number of hit singles over 10 years or so. Probably as many as The Cure. You could be right about Robert Smith managing things well.
The Cramps never stopped being cool.
That’s largely true (though I think they did get a bit sleazy at times) – maybe I should say recognized for being cool.
Agreed, The Cramps will be forever cool. And it’s better to have bad taste than taste bad.
Or have no taste at all.
As in a variation of, if I didn’t have bad taste, I’d have no taste at all.
Bunnymen had their (joint) biggest hit in 1997 – Nothing Lasts Forever, which was, I think, their first proper release of the decade. Had a few more hits and then it was over but once the 2000s came around nobody much older than 30 (with exceptions) was having single hits any more.
I’m a big Sisters fan. I’ll cop to the too much black in the wardrobe (but really, how much is too much?), but not the mid-50s part. No, I will have you know that I am, er, 51 in a few days time.
As Sal says, a big part of their failure to add younger generations to their fanbase is simply that they stopped making records. Their last album came out in autumn 1990, and bar a single or two over the next couple of years, that was it. They are an interesting case study in that they continue to write and perform new material, but they’ve never released any of it (I just looked up their last European gigs on setlist.fm – roughly half the set was songs written since that last album, and getting on for three quarters of those are from the last two years). I don’t know of any other band that does that.
I think most of the 50’s stars music goes unlistened these days. Even Elvis, who sits down to listen to one of his albums?
(Cue for someone to say they do that regularly)
There are of course older people still interested but I think it’s the recording quality. When things are just not as crystal as post 60’s the young are not listening
Also the lack of cover versions. Does anyone cover Buddy or Elvis these days?
Maybe the jazz of the 50s is somewhat more … up to date and vital and listened-to than the rock’n roll music of the same era? I’m sure that people still sit down to listen to 50s records by Miles Davis, Charles Mingus, Dave Brubeck, Thelonious Monk and Duke Ellington. I certainly do.
Yes, indeed – I’d choose to sit and listen to almost any 1950s BlueNote recording rather than almost any contemporaneous rock ‘n’ roll.
Up !
Yup, loadsa folk still cover Elvis and a fair few Buddy. Go check out Secondhandsongs.com for proof. Another (I can’t help) falling in love seems to come out every month.
Yup! It could even be an exam question: “50s jazz has aged better than 50s rock n’ roll: Discuss”
My word! The curriculum has changed since my days…
Very amusing @Pessoa!
It is odd. Rock and roll was a tidal wave conquering the world in the 1950s, whereas jazz was a rather minority interest.
And now the tables have turned!
Rock and Roll and the Rock Music that followed it have become old people’s music as the people who were initially conquered by it have aged. Jazz appears to be appealing to all age groups, currently. I don’t suppose it will last.
When I was a kid the aged music fans were the Teds – sideburns and receding greying quiffs – all looking like Paul McShane in Hi-De-Hi – and often as not bus drivers and railway station attendants.
Not sure if that was before or after Matchbox, Showaddywaddy, Stray Cats, etc.
Thinking about it, there’s a bit of a lineage from Buddy Holly, through those bands, to the Cramps. Who takes forward the teddy boy/rockabilly mantle these days, I wonder?
Sadly, Showaddywaddy play on. And Shakin’ Stevens has a new one out.
The Ted thing seems to have been very much a Skilled Working Class phenomenon, including it’s revival around the same time as Punk.
Showaddywaddy sprung onto the stage with “Hey, rock n roll” in 1974, so, er, 21 years ago after the year of Elvis. A bit like whatever was around in 2002 being big this year again. (In 2002 the big hits in the UK were Atomic Kitten, Daniel Bedingfield, Oasis, Ronan Keating, Sugababes, Westlife, Gareth Gates, and Will Young. – an unforgettable year (irony)). Give me the ‘Waddy any day. If they were good enough for Einstürzende Neubauten, they are good enough for me.
In 1979 I was listening to Hanging On The Telephone on one of those dinky tape players with four white piano keys and one red one.
In 1984 Blondie were history , having finished with the whimper that was The Hunter album and our house didn’t even have a phone yet.
Last night I was watching Blondie (okay Debbie, Clem and staff) playing Hanging On The Telephone on my phone. It just took 45 years to get here..
Sorry – I should have mentioned I was listening to them play it live from the other side of the world on my phone. Quite a bit less impressive if you leave that detail out..
Apparently yes. (Trigger warning: features a kitten.)
As an older people I’d say that the amount of music available to listen to increases exponentially with every year that passes, so it’s hardly surprising if individual artists don’t seem as prominent as they once did. I don’t listen to whole albums much any more, but I do have a weakness for Spotify playlists such as Top Hits of 1958, which give you all the Holly or Vincent you need at any given moment, and are a fine accompaniment to cooking or washing up.
As for sound quality, they sound just fine to me on Spotify/Sonos – way better than the original singles did on the Dansette or the tranny. They’re even on Qobuz in hi-res for them as have the kit.
But I once went to the launch of a new edition of The Rolling Stone History of Rock ‘n’ Roll, and they’d laid on an enormous Wurlitzer jukebox that only played 78s. The sound was absolutely sensational.
I’m sure Buddy Holly has been properly remastered and mixed into stereo from the original tapes? I definitely have a greatest hits CD somewhere that sounds terrific and extremely vibrant. Some Gene Vincent stuff is the same. Both artists definitely benefit from music reproduction technology (CDs and all that) catching up to the standard of the original recordings (as do a lot of jazz artists I think).
Funnily enough, I’m not as sure about a lot of early Elvis stuff. The Sun stuff has an energy and uniqueness, but the clarity of CD/digital reveals it as muddy and homespun sounding.
I’ve got an excellent CD titled “Buddy Holly – From The Original Master Tapes”. I think it’s out of print now but “True Love Ways”, in particular, sounds amazing.
US recordings from that period were generally way ahead of the UK, and Buddy’s stuff is no exception. Most were in mono and still are as far as I know, although a few of the last recordings in NYC were made in stereo.
I am a huge fan – I got the big 6 record set around 1980 and it is terrific as it chronologically catalogues his recordings with each LP from a different period – pretty much perfect as it doesn’t overdo it and offer loads of different versions and outtakes, unlike the 6CD Not Fade Away set which has every note he ever taped (currently a stupid price on Amazon, by the way!).
That ‘Original Master Tapes’ CD is a brilliant collection – second hand copies are available from the Amazon UK website for a lot less than the cost of a pint in that Lahndahn.
Was listening to Elvis in Memphis today.
Elvis Is Back!! is my go-to Elvis album. However, the Elvis 56 compilation is absolute ecstasy from beginning to end.
I think a lot of fifties acts suffered during the album decades because they focussed mainly on singles. Buddy Holly is even more disadvantaged by dying young, leaving a relatively small catalogue. However, in these days of streaming, almost anyone could enjoy a revival, given the right TV/movie/advert. Just look at Running Up That Hill.
The great thing about music and indeed most – if not all – forms of art is that unlike people (who famously only truly die with he death of the last person who remembered them), they are reborn every time someone hears/sees/reads them for the first time
@jaygee the recent Kate Bush – Running Up Hill phenomenon proves that. I realise she’s not dead but she was probably completely unknown to the millions who suddenly heard the song and had to know who / what it was. Right song, right time, right place and suddenly you’re number one.
Spotify makes that happen. So easy to check it out and often little idea of or interest in when it came out, which takes away the baggage that goes with the singer/band. No need for prejudice and snobbery and all that ‘is this cool’ business. Quite refreshing really.
So what you’re saying is that the people who Spotify-ed that know jack-shit?
I agree.
Context is everything.
You’ll have to excuse me but I’ve got a hill to run up.
I interviewed a record shop owner the other ahead of Record Store Day. As well as talking about RSD we talked more generally about what his customers are buying and he picked out Easy Listening and Rock and Roll as genres that just keep on selling. Now the obvious assumption is this to old people, but I would have thought that they would pretty much have everything anyway. I was surprised, but maybe that just betrays my prejudices.
Maybe despite Hepworth and Ellen’s scoffing, Brian Eno was right after all and doo-wop will make a comeback!
Huzzah! Bring back the Ink Spots!
My personal favourite is the mighty MIGHTY I Only Have Eyes For You by The Flamingos.
For one of the CD swaps on here a few years ago, I cheekily filled the extra half hour of space I had on the disc with a VERY extended re-edit of I Only Have Eyes For You I specially prepared. I can’t remember who my victim was that I sent the disc to, but I can’t imagine they listened to the whole thing. 🙂
“Snat!”
A stain* on the fabric that is the history of popular music
* More accurately, a series of stains
Arf!
I have an anti-Eno ray gun.
I have his an unused package of his apparently very efficacious Liver Salts
I was startled to learn that he came from a long line of postal workers – I had assumed that he was the missing heir to the liver salts millions.
Buddy Holly’s music’s influence can be heard in the Indie jangle-pop recordings that are still being made. The lyrical innocence of that era’s pop music, not so much in these more cynical times.
Would The Incredible String Band count here? Of course they still have a hardcore of devoted fans (and I personally can’t imagine a world without their music), but I’ve never heard anyone younger than me ever mention them, let alone even heard of them. And their music sounds strange and out of place today: I can’t imagine it ever being used in a film or advert or anything. They never crossed into the higher echelon of trendy hipsters of yesteryear like Nick Drake or Syd Barrett.
Weren’t they even dismissed (their appeal became more selective let’s say) right after the 60s?
I first heard of them in Ian MacDonald’s Beatles tome ‘Revolution in the Head’ as a teen in the mid 90s. Even then Ian talks about ISB being dismissed as museum pieces despite Lennon, Macca, and Led Zep talking them up as huge influences at the time.
Plus remember Folk colossus, Bob Dylan was quoted as saying RW’s first song was “Pretty good”, and it was covered by Jackson Browne.
ISB must be majorly influential to any artist who would call themselves “Psychedelic Folk” but I would guess that’s a niche genre particularly among Gen Z, the TikTok crowd.
Robin Williamson lives near me actually, my only “fame claim”, tenuous as it is. And I have always found him to be a most charming and lovely bloke.
ISB had a moment about 10-15 years ago when they were cited as an influence of a number of contemporary acts (Devendra Banhart, Fleet Foxes, Joanna Newsom, Animal Collective, etc).
I guess that’s a lot of legacy these days – you probably last as long as they play your music in lifts and younger musicians drop your name. Over a long enough time scale though I’m pretty confident everyone will be forgotten. It’s almost certainly healthier to just assume they will.
Oh, and re: the OP, Dearest is still an absolute tune.
I think it was slightly earlier than that. I was at the Bloomsbury Theatre ISB comback gig in 2000.
A friend was a big ISB fan, I’d never seen them (obvs), we were going to meet for dinner before the gig but my train up was late arriving, so I had to grab something on the hoof, it gave me guts ache, ISB sounded like fingernails down a blackboard, I snuck out at half time, the train home was late, and my car got a punctured tyre on the way home from the station. All round, it cost me about 200 quid for 45 minutes of horrid music.
My loss, I know.
You got off lightly – they let you out.
Yes, it could have ended with “and then I gave all my money to Ron Hubbard”.
I suppose the arguments to be made here is the nature of curation. Maybe, with the miniaturization of digital more things can be preserved in smaller physical spaces, or the cloud, but it’s inevitable that some things – books, music, movies – are just going to recede and fade out unless there are vocal fanbases that continue to publicize for them.
The Beatles were the biggest thing going, MacDonald concludes his book by saying that they were so closely associated with the 60s that, as each generation moves on, (i.e. dies I suppose) that the romance of their story, talent and charisma will dissipate.
Whether, 60 years on from their first LP released March ’63, listeners who come to the Beatlemania phenomenon will regard them as completely anachronistic (“All you need is love” being such a 1967 wide-eyed, hippy maxim) is more than likely. But that The Beatles *will* continue to be seen, discussed and critiqued is virtually certain.
I love a blast of Buddy. More so than Elvis (which isn’t to in any way denigrate the marvellous latter in the ‘who was better/more cool – the true King’ nonsense). So much excellent music. I love music as time travel, a parallel step outside of yourself and the world. It’s all in the musical NOW so to speak from krumhorns, sitars and guitars to wailing and skronking saxes. Just don’t give me autotune and that plastic Frampton tube thingy. Also, farty base. Fretless? I think that’t what it’s called. Nor modern ‘r & b’ either. Just don’t. Eurgh.
If you’re including Mick Karn (or Jack Bruce, for that matter) in your hatred of fretless bass – then I shall take my hat off and ask you to step outside!
Paul Young and Pino have a lot to answer for…
Well, if that’s your attitude I shall stay inside, put my hat on, and my very cool retro sunglasses, and peer at you, standing outside hatless, through my letterbox flap whilst I mutter barely audible profanities accompanied by vigorous lewd hand gestures in the shadows, out of your line of vision, so that a furious you will be forced to peer right up close through my said letterbox to ascertain the level of my brave mockery as I suddenly flip the letterbox lid down hard and trap you by the eyelids to the front door as as I then proceed to skedaddle out the back door and round the side to the front and smeer some crunchy peanut butter down the back of your neck and leave you to the squirrels. So there, sir!
Harsh…
How’s your good self, @Rob-C?
Pretty good thanks Fitter. Hope you are too,
ps: not jazz double bass. That is beyond cool, when not played by the potato faced tantric lute spanker.
Great news! May your astral chakras be for ever aligned.
It’s funny, I consider Holly to be pretty much timeless. Fact is he hardly released any records for obvious reasons, I think what he might have evolved into in the 60s would have been very interesting. As it is, I think his Greatest Hits stands up as well as anyone pre Beatles
Just had an email from Spotify, headed ‘Personalized playlist recommendations, curated just for your taste.’ And these three playlists? Buddy Holly? Gene Vincent? Anybody I like listening to? Nope.
1. Unforgettable love songs from the 2010s (Ed Sheeran, Rihanna, One Direction…)
2. Comfort zone – chilled songs that you are familiar with, no surprises! (Ed Sheeran, Harry Styles, Sam Smith, Coldplay…)
3. Soft pop hits (Ed Sheeran, Sam Smith, Coldplay…)
They don’t know me at all, do they?
Do you share your account with a family member? I also get recommendations, clearly influenced by what my daughter is playing and she uses it way more than I do
Only Mrs thep, and she’s not massively into Ed Sheeran either.
Ah, maybe when you are not around she’s “getting down with the kids”
Nah, it’s the kids next door – they’ve got his router password.
Actually I’ve remembered, it was me all along. A Couple of weeks ago I was idly wondering what it is about Messrs Sheeran and Smith that makes people go quite so nuts over them, so I listened to a couple of tracks and then beat a hasty retreat, none the wiser. But Spotify noticed…be careful out there, chaps.
When my daughter was tiny she used to sleep to various types of white noise; waterfalls, static, general whale noises. All streamed through an old iPad using Spotify.
It ruined Discover Weekly playlist for literally years.
My son is now similarly tiny (2 months). He listens to jazz and Max Richter. Whether he likes it or not.
I think The Doors are an interesting case. Obviously huge in the late 60s, but were still huge when I was at school and uni in the 80s and early 90s. Everyone I knew had that two album compilation of theirs and I would say they were far better known amongst my uni peers than The Who or The Kinks. Then they retreated very quickly in the public consciousness to the point where I can’t remember the last time I heard them on radio, tv etc.
I think they are the kind of band who appeal to impressionable teenagers, but that often wears off (certainly did in my case), the film in 1991 would have given them a revival around that time
The Liverpool post punk bands (Teardrops/Bunnymen etc) used to reference The Doors all the time, so pretty much everyone I know had at least the first album or the Greatest Hits. Plus probably a Jim poster. They do quickly become a bit embarrassing though once you’ve grown out of your teens, of the type of stuff to be filed away with that Athena poster of the tennis girl scratching her arse…
I agree that their reputation fell away somewhat in the 90s. Yet I am currently of the view that if you can listen to The Doors as pop music rather than counter-cultural “art” and ignore the cult of Morrison, then they are perfectly enjoyable.
(And was that two album comp “Weird scenes Inside the Gold Mine”? Still a fun listen).
Yeah great album. But the faux-shamanist poetry, on Absolutely Live for example, is inherently part of the Doors mystique, and the fun really. But great musicians too.
I fail to see how The Doors could have continued with any credibility if Jim Morrison hadn’t passed so young. They wouldn’t have got far just rolling out their barrell house blues thing indefinitely, and the adolescent shamanic posturing complete with added Oliver Reed had a very short use by date indeed.
A certain intention to be adolescent and stay that way, avoiding a normal ‘square’ way of life, is the very essence of a rock band as we know it and with that comes pretention, self indulgence and selfishness, a ridiculousness that they can partake of so we don’t have to. In that sense The Doors are the definition of what rock is. It is possible to deride Jim while at the same time find his records to be highly enjoyable, not taking them too seriously. I’ve managed it at least.
Is this where I get to say “DONOVAN”?
Apart from as a figure of fun on here, he hasn’t really stood the test of time. Which is a bit of a shame.
When I saw Donovan at the Green Man Festival (2006 maybe?) I honestly couldn’t work out at first if he was taking the piss or being ironic somehow. The lapsing into a fake Jamaican accent, the “I hung out with the Beatles/Dylan” anecdotes between songs etc. Eventually I decided he was just a but embarrassing.
I heard one of the hits on a podcast recently – never on the radio – and thought it sounded fantastic. I had to switch off the bit of my brain that was telling me “but he’s a knob nowadays”. See also: VTM, Moz, McNabb, etc.
Of all the Rock ‘n’ Rollers, I think Buddy Holly (possibly alongside Elvis, Eddie Cochran and Chuck Berry) is the worse example of someone whose music isn’t lasting.
And, there is bound to be a Hollywood picture on Buddy in the next 10-20 years that will redress this situation, if it is true, anyway.
There are other examples given here that are far more persuasive.
I can’t see myself playing The Incredible String Band, Cream, The Moody Blues or Donovan anytime soon. Someone mentioned The Pretty Things… I play them more than any of the British 60s groups. Well, as much as The Beatles.
I reckon i play Question of Balance a few times a year, every year.
Fair enough, but The Moody Blues may be the best example.
I think the curation argument is very compelling. Partly my view is formed from a personal experience which is that I loved Holly and cared about him quite deeply. Because of the absence, not just of new music, but of new information, I think there was nothing to keep feeding my interest, and at some point, I came to believe I could not wring out any more juice. That’s just a personal response but additionally on this site the posts / blogs etc do overwhelmingly favour the mid – 60s canon and the punk / post punk canon. The comment about the vitality of mid 20 th jazz is on my mind but so is the fact that the American songbook is revisited every few years by both new Bubles and old rockers ( Stewart/McCartney/Clapton). So that music is refreshed / revisited. I’m sure there are Buddy Holly tribute artists out there… but I don’t think singers emerge thinking that a cover of That’ll Be The Day is the perfect addition to their set. What are the coffee shop buskers playing? Let’s tell them to drop Free Fallin’ and Moondance and try Its So Easy.
He mattered so much to me and now not at all despite me still believing that his work ( oeuvre anyone?) is great.
I interviewed Chris Barber once and was intrigued when he went off on a tangent and expressed bafflement that so many of his British blues associates had a soft spot for Buddy Holly – whose music he found ghastly. For me, I don’t have thoughts either way about it save that – like Burt Bacharach in a more sophisticated way – Buddy somehow managed to find a very distinctive, individual, immediately identifiable songwriting style (out of a handful of chords).
On the general theme of music that lasts/doesn’t, AWers might be interested to know that while reissues/archive trawls by Bert Jansch and by the Pentangle still sell well, those by John Renbourn (Bert’s ‘Tangle partner) do not. So the labels tell me.
With Bert, the well is never quite dry. Even after the exhaustive 8CD BBC box set last year, a sensational off-air of a ‘holy grail’ 1971 session recently turned up. There are enough 70s-00s live recordings of quality/interest in existence to fill a 20CD box – though that won’t happen as the estate prefers to trickle things out over years. But the interest in Bert doesn’t seem dependent on momentary new releases etc. It seems fan-led, from the ground up – with loads of people keen to try and learn his songs/tunes, like cracking a code or learning a language. Renbourn was the better player technically, but lacks the mystique of Bert, I suspect.
I don’t think Bert actually knew what he was playing half the time – it just came out of the ends of his fingers direct from the crossroads.
I’ve watched John play right up close, and you can see what he’s doing and marvel at it, while Bert’s apparently summoning extra witchy fingers on demand.
FWIW, Colin: I bought the John Renbourn “Unpentangled” box set as a direct result of your review – 2019, I think…
Jolly good. Further boxes could have been created, but the demand wasn’t there.
In that case, I’ll write to the record company, demanding further boxes (I excel at futile gestures)…
Have you read this article, Colin?
https://www.theguardian.com/music/2023/apr/19/ottilie-patterson-the-forgotten-first-lady-of-british-blues
No, but I saw the (annoyingly flawed) TV documentary that I imagine prompted it.
What about Davy Graham? I would guess he’s even more of a hard sell than John Renbourn these days.
You’d think so, wouldn’t you? And yet there might – just might – be some plans afoot. I can say no more.
But Renbourn might have a bit of an uplift in due course. It’s hard to say – all it would take is 5-10 years to pass and one of his instrumentals to appear prominently in a film for a bit of a spike in interest. But I have a feeling the reissue record industry will be a very niche thing by then. Who knows? And who knows how music will be consumed or reappraised or whatever by then?
@ColinH – Even in the late 60s, my memory is that Bert had a much higher profile, and he was a singer/songwriter whereas John was known for his playing. There is only so much great guitar playing that will sell, I guess.
Bert singing voice is also very identifiable and unique. There was always a mystique around him as a personality too.
Chris Barber was very much enamoured of the Black, Blues-derived iteration of American music. While there was an element of Blues in Buddy Holly’s music and that of the Rockabilly crowd, it was mostly White, Country and Bluegrass-derived, to my ears. None the worse for it, IMO.
Yes as said somewhere above Buddy Holly’s influence was and, arguably, is still very strong today.
For anyone who might be interested Allan Clarke (former Hollies lead vocalist) has issued a quite good new album. Especially good when you realise he is into his 80s. Funnily enough one song on the album sums it up in respect of Holly.
I should warn those of you of a nervous disposition that the video also includes Graham Nash!
Not sure that I can do the link thing but here goes : https://youtu.be/pu3-ogcyhMI
Anything but Graham Nash. But, to be fair, he is just singing, right? He’s not speaking, pontificating, justifying, Joni-ing?
Just singing! 👌
The harmonising is good but the delivery is a bit stilted, which is a shame.
I suppose harmony singing is something they barely have to think about, given their immersion in it for so long.
To me this kind of debate is settled by the reflection that much of (white) rock and roll, through to the beat groups of the early sixties, sounds in retrospect like a pale imitation of black r&b recordings. That, however, is not true of Elvis at his best. Mess of Blues and Little Sister still sound like the real thing.
Agreed – reading back my comment above about Elvis I sound a bit sniffy, but at his best he is on fire. I consider Hound Dog to be his best – overfamiliar maybe, but undeniable quality.
Lawdy Miss Clawdy – never mind the rock: just feel the roll!
Your Rock ‘n’ Roll aficionado, few on the ground in 2023, would be bound to contest that opinion…
Jerry Lee Lewis, Carl Perkins, Buddy Holly, Eddie Cochran, Elvis, Gene Vincent et al go head-to-toe with Larry Williams, Little Richard, Chuck Berry, Fats Domino et al.
Does that mean that YOU are contesting that opinion?
Might as well go capitals with you – YES… but then, wouldn’t anyone who listens to Rock ‘n’ Roll beyond That’ll Be The Day and Johnny B. Goode?
True, your Mojo / Uncut / Record Collector subscriber or BBC 6 Music listener would struggle.
Actually, the latter two wouldn’t have a Scooby.
You don’t think Summertime Blues is on a par with Slow Down?
Did anyone make a better Rock ‘n’ Roll L.P. than Johnny Burnette and the Rock ‘n’ Roll Trio?
Summertime Blues – yes! A fantastic record. I love the acoustic guitar sound on Eddie Cochran’s records.
All this rock and roll talk is making me want to listen to all this again. My absolute favourite might be Lucille by Little Richard: that vocal where his voice cracks in the high notes is just magical.
If we are looking at truly obsolete, outdated music I guess we should be looking at between-the-wars caterwauling that was everywhere at the time but not particularly loved now. Here’s Mary Eaton in the Marx Brothers film, Cocoanuts.
This is the kind of song my Granny would screech along to, given half the chance, but as a musical style it’s as dead as she is i.e. very.
Love that little sliver of history – fascinating.