| Author |
|
jimct
MusicFan
Joined: 07 April 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3906
|
| Posted: 03 June 2008 at 11:05pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
My commercial 45, which is stereo, has a listed time of (2:48), but an actual time of (2:45).
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Brian W.
MusicFan
Joined: 13 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2507
|
| Posted: 03 June 2008 at 11:49pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Really? I always assumed this would be mono. Great news. Thanks!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 5:15am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Jim, my commercial 45 matches your timing findings, but it is mono. At the time I bought this copy in 1969, the black printing font immediately caught my eye, because it was unlike any RCA font I'd ever seen before.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 5:27am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Yah Shure wrote:
Jim, my commercial 45 matches your timing findings, but it is mono. At the time I bought this copy in 1969, the black printing font immediately caught my eye, because it was unlike any RCA font I'd ever seen before.
|
|
|
Yeah, it almost looks like the font Captiol was using around that time. Maybe they used one of Captitol's pressing plants to handle unexpected demand?
BTW, my (promo) copy is mono as well.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
bwolfe
MusicFan
Joined: 24 May 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 193
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 6:47am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just looking the scan of that one makes me smile.
1969 what a great year of diverse music.
I would flip it over and play "Melody Hill" too.
Correct on the lettering, its new to me.
__________________
the way it was heard on the radio
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
jimct
MusicFan
Joined: 07 April 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3906
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 9:26am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just pulled out my "Sugar, Sugar" promo 45. It is mono, has the exact same print font as my stock 45 does, and looks much different than Yah Shure's 45 scan. My promo also has a listed time of (2:48), but an actual time of (2:45). My promo 45's deadwax is a machine-typed "XYKM-3908--3S". My stock 45 turning out to be stereo was a surprise to me, as my past experience has always been that if an RCA (or associated label, like Calendar/Kirshner) 45 was in stereo, "STEREO" would always appear on the 45's label, and that is not the case here. My stereo stock 45's deadwax is a hand-written "XYKS - 3908".
Edited by jimct on 04 June 2008 at 9:26am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
eriejwg
MusicFan
Joined: 10 June 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3509
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 9:52am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Kirshner Entertainment...would that be Don Kirshner? If so, he had a hand in not just the Monkees but the Archies too.
And, a few years later, Don Kirshner's Rock Concerts on TV!
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
jimct
MusicFan
Joined: 07 April 2006
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3906
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 10:30am | IP Logged
|
|
|
It's the same guy, John. Kirshner had become so frustrated having to deal with the increasingly strongly-opinionated, "against-his-original-vision-for-the-group" backtalk from Dolenz/Nesmith/Jones/Tork, to the point that Kirshner, the project "founder", had now been personally ousted from anything to do with the Monkees. He then decided, being "very down on moody musicians" at the moment, that his "next big pop thing" project would involve "far-easier-to-control, fictional cartoon characters". Kirshner knew that a couple of his loyal, long-time "anonymous voices for hire", Ron Dante and Toni Wine, would simply do what they were told by him, and, most importantly, do it with no attitude/complaints/backtalk. (I personally interviewed Ron Dante, about 6 years ago, and all of the above came directly from my conversation with him). Kirshner had thought the Monkees situation would also work out that way, too, but he soon discovered otherwise. And since the longtime "Archies" comic strip was currently red hot, in 1968, due to its current hit Saturday morning network cartoon show, Kirshner had found his next project. He then launched his "Calendar" label, which, like the Monkees' label he started, Colgems, was also a sudsidiary of Kirshner's employer and parent company, RCA. Calendar got its name in honor of his good friend, and early Don Kirshner-assisted success story, Neil Sedaka, and his song "Calendar Girl". But, ego soon must've won out, though, according to Dante, and the "Calendar" label, while initially even keeping the same design, was soon transitioned into "Kirshner" records. From then on, Kirshner would use his last name for his projects, like the 70's "Don Kirshner's Rock Concert" series that John mentions.
Edited by jimct on 04 June 2008 at 1:57pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 5:41pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
jimct wrote:
| But, ego soon must've won out, though, according to Dante, and the "Calendar" label, while initially even keeping the same design, was soon transitioned into "Kirshner" records. |
|
|
Indeed, weren't "Sugar Sugar" & "Bang Shang A Lang" the only singles released on Calendar? The label had become Kirshner when "Jingle Jangle" was released in late '69.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Roscoe
MusicFan
Joined: 18 July 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 333
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 6:00pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
jimct wrote:
| My commercial 45, which is stereo, has a listed time of (2:48), but an actual time of (2:45). |
|
|
Is your 45 on the Calendar label? If so, then they must have issued both stereo and mono versions, because my Calendar 45 is mono.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Yah Shure
MusicFan
Joined: 11 December 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1317
|
| Posted: 04 June 2008 at 7:52pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I have a second stock copy of "Sugar, Sugar" (deadwax machine-stamped XYKM-3908--2S) that sports the usual RCA font, but it, too is mono. The label is a deeper orange, and the Calendar logo is purple, rather than the pink on the copy posted above with the title listed first. Hykker, the first copy is definitely an RCA pressing (machine-stamped deadwax XYKM-3908--4S) so they may have run short on Calendar labels and had them printed elsewhere.
Calendar's first five 45s were by Steve Lawrence, Eydie Gorme and Steve Lawrence and Eydie Gorme. Numbers 1006-1008 were all Archies: "Bang Shang-A-Lang," "Feelin' So Good" and "Sugar, Sugar." #1009, the Archies' "Sunshine," came out on Kirshner in 1970, after two 5000-series Archies singles had already charted. Other odd Kirshner numbers included 1010 (Ron Dante), 1011 (Carr & Co.), and 1012 (James Darren.)
Perhaps the label name and numbering confusion stemmed from Kirshner's expansion into television, which was more likely the reason the Calendar name was phased out in favor of one more suitable for Kirshner's expanding corporation (and his own increased visibility.) Maybe Don was looking for the kind of unified brand identity that Dick Clark had successfully established with Dick Clark Productions.
The only non-Archies Calendar/Kirshner 45 from the RCA period that I still hear on the radio (XM's '50s channel) is "Rainy Day Bells" by The Globetrotters, the other 'toon group on the label. It may have been a 1970 record, but it sure fits the format.
Edited by Yah Shure on 04 June 2008 at 8:05pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndrewChouffi
MusicFan
Joined: 24 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1092
|
| Posted: 05 June 2008 at 7:17am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Hi people,
Does anyone out there involved with Top-40 radio in the Summer of '69 know an answer to this question?
How could a picture-perfect pop record such as the Archies "Sugar Sugar" need 6 weeks of 'Bubbling Under' to make its first week of the Hot 100?
Was it not promoted at radio for its first two months? Was the Archies cartoon off the air during the summer so radio (initially) dismissed the song? Was radio desperately trying to artificially limit the amount of Bubblegum-flavored records coming through the pipeline and almost sabotaged this classic?
Anyone have the real story?
Andy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
aaronk
Admin Group
Joined: 16 January 2005
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6514
|
| Posted: 02 December 2018 at 2:56pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
I noticed that "Sugar, Sugar" on Fun Rock is mastered from vinyl. Pat, you may want to make a note of this in the database.
__________________
Aaron Kannowski
Uptown Sound
91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
EdisonLite
MusicFan
Joined: 18 October 2004
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2237
|
| Posted: 09 December 2018 at 12:56pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
AndrewChouffi wrote:
Hi people,
Does anyone out there involved with Top-40 radio in the Summer of '69 know an answer to this question?
How could a picture-perfect pop record such as the Archies "Sugar Sugar" need 6 weeks of 'Bubbling Under' to make its first week of the Hot 100?
Was it not promoted at radio for its first two months? Was the Archies cartoon off the air during the summer so radio (initially) dismissed the song? Was radio desperately trying to artificially limit the amount of Bubblegum-flavored records coming through the pipeline and almost sabotaged this classic?
Anyone have the real story?
Andy |
|
|
Wow, I had no idea it bubbled under for 6 weeks. That's crazy. I'd like the answer to this, too. I wonder if this holds a record - in terms of any song that was the #1 song of the year, or #1 for at least 4 weeks, has there ever been one that bubbled under the hot 100 for 7 or more weeks??
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndrewChouffi
MusicFan
Joined: 24 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1092
|
| Posted: 10 December 2018 at 9:11am | IP Logged
|
|
|
To EdisonLite:
Yes, "crazy" is the word!
I remember when I first received an early Whitburn "Bubbling Under" book I read it like a novel and I didn't notice any other hits that ultimately had that type of trajectory! That's why I'm still looking for some "lived thru it" opinion.
there have certainly been some smashes that were on the Hot 100 for quite a while before breaking into the top-40, but to bubble under the Hot 100 for six weeks and then a smooth climb to #1 is uncommon, to say the least!
Andy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
PopArchivist
MusicFan
Joined: 30 June 2018
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1524
|
| Posted: 10 December 2018 at 8:02pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
Andy,
I don't think any song had that trajectory and got to #1 eventually. I know some songs have come in at 90's chart position and then shot up to #1 the next week, but no one outside this song stayed below the Hot 100 for 6 weeks and eventually made it to #1. A record that probably won't be broken.
Edited by PopArchivist on 10 December 2018 at 8:03pm
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Santi Paradoa
MusicFan
Joined: 17 February 2009
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1118
|
| Posted: 10 December 2018 at 8:43pm | IP Logged
|
|
|
This is the very first 45 I ever purchased with my own cash. I was eight years old. Had no idea it bubbled under for six weeks either. Still my all time favorite song even five decades later. Best three minute pop tune ever.
__________________
Santi Paradoa
Miami, Florida
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Paul Haney
MusicFan
Joined: 01 April 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1743
|
| Posted: 11 December 2018 at 4:41am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Just a quick clarification.
"Sugar Sugar" actually Bubbled Under for 5 weeks (not 6)
before hitting the Hot 100.
It debuted on Bubbling Under on 6/21/69. Here's the
chart action: 124, 123, 110, 102, 101.
It's certainly unusual for an eventual #1 hit to Bubble
Under for so long. Off the top of my head, I remember
"The Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia" by Vicki
Lawrence Bubbled Under for 4 weeks before hitting the Hot
100.
Since I was only 3 years old at the time, I can only
speculate as to why "Sugar Sugar" took so long to catch
on. Looking at the radio charts posted in ARSA, it
appears that the song took awhile to build. By the end of
July 1969, it was starting to hit the Top 10 and really
exploded around the middle of August. I'd have to guess
it was a combination of smaller label, no real group and
a glut of bubblegum records that all contributed to the
slow start.
Edited by Paul Haney on 11 December 2018 at 4:59am
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
AndrewChouffi
MusicFan
Joined: 24 September 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1092
|
| Posted: 11 December 2018 at 6:28am | IP Logged
|
|
|
To Paul Haney:
Thank you for your input!
I just pulled out my old RR 'Bubbling Under The Hot 100 1959-1985' book to refresh in my mind the chart action of "Sugar Sugar". You're right, "Night The Lights Went Out In Georgia" is also an anomaly.
I've kept that old 'Bubbling Under' book because it's the only Whitburn book I know of that has that "Hot 100 Bound" section!
Andy
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Hykker
MusicFan
Joined: 30 October 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1386
|
| Posted: 11 December 2018 at 7:36am | IP Logged
|
|
|
Paul Haney wrote:
I'd have to guess it was a combination
of smaller label, no real group and a glut of bubblegum
records that all contributed to the slow start. |
|
|
I'm not sure that "smaller label" was much of a factor,
given that Calendar was distributed by RCA at the time.
One other possibility that you didn't mention was
corporate group policy. I don't know if it was a
company-wide policy or not, but WRKO in Boston, one of
the more influential stations in New England at the time
played almost no bubblegum. Even big hits like "Simon
Says" or "Yummy Yummy Yummy" were absent from their
surveys. It may have taken a lot of "persuading" by the
RCA promo reps to get the song on the bigger stations.
|
| Back to Top |
|
| |
Active Topics 
Memberlist 
Search 
Help
Register 
Login
Top 40 Music on Compact Disc : Chat Board
Topic: Archies-"Sugar, Sugar"
