If "Heroes & Villains" had been a smash...

[guitarfool2002]

This record went nowhere until Janis was featured on a show called "Inside Pop" in April '67. Leonard Bernstein lavished praise on the song and the artist, and after the song was featured on the show it caught a second wind commercially and became a "hit", which in turn put Janis Ian on the commercial landscape which she probably would not have seen had it not been for that CBS special and Bernstein's high praise for the tune.

My understanding was that the special led to Ian's record company promoting the record more, which led to radio stations playing it more, which led to it being hit rather than all the viewers of the Inside Pop went and bought the album and turned it into a top 10 hit.

Find some people who were working in top 40 radio at that time and they'll point to "Inside Pop" as the primary reason why that record even made a dent in the top 10. The power of TV. The record company can't force people to buy a record or like a record, no matter the promotions behind it. Bottom line - if there were no appearance on Inside Pop, Janis Ian and her record would most likely have sunk like a stone. And Brian Wilson had and could have had a similar "push" for his music at the time, but it unfortunately came at perhaps the worst time in the Smile saga, and there was simply nothing to capitalize (pun intended...) on after the Inside Pop show.

[cablegeddon]

This record went nowhere until Janis was featured on a show called "Inside Pop" in April '67. Leonard Bernstein lavished praise on the song and the artist, and after the song was featured on the show it caught a second wind commercially and became a "hit", which in turn put Janis Ian on the commercial landscape which she probably would not have seen had it not been for that CBS special and Bernstein's high praise for the tune.

My understanding was that the special led to Ian's record company promoting the record more, which led to radio stations playing it more, which led to it being hit rather than all the viewers of the Inside Pop went and bought the album and turned it into a top 10 hit.

Find some people who were working in top 40 radio at that time and they'll point to "Inside Pop" as the primary reason why that record even made a dent in the top 10. The power of TV. The record company can't force people to buy a record or like a record, no matter the promotions behind it. Bottom line - if there were no appearance on Inside Pop, Janis Ian and her record would most likely have sunk like a stone. And Brian Wilson had and could have had a similar "push" for his music at the time, but it unfortunately came at perhaps the worst time in the Smile saga, and there was simply nothing to capitalize (pun intended...) on after the Inside Pop show.

David Leaf also makes the argument that at some point progressive radio (Jefferson airplane, Janis Joplin) became more influential tha top 40 radio. Progressive radio wouldn't play Beach boys.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Find some people who were working in top 40 radio at that time

OK, I'll fit that in sometime today.  

The power of TV. The record company can't force people to buy a record or like a record, no matter the promotions behind it.

Which is why I didn't say that the record company's promotions led to it becoming a hit. In fact, since you so glaringly misread what I wrote, I suggest you read my post again. If you'll do, you'll see that I said that the record company's promotion was connected to a spike in radio airplay and that is what led to the song being a hit. Are you seriously going to suggest that television was so powerful that a one-off special hosted by Leonard Bernstein would make millions of people buy a single, rather than a spike in radio airplay, which is where most of the youth accessed pop music for the first time during that period?

Bottom line - if there were no appearance on Inside Pop, Janis Ian and her record would most likely have sunk like a stone.

Quite possible - but this is altogether a different thing.

And Brian Wilson had and could have had a similar "push" for his music at the time,

Except that the push for Janis Ian was that no one knew her name and her record company wasn't promoting her material. Her appearance changed that as the company began promoting and that allowed for her name to be known. Conversely, The Beach Boys were widely known in pop culture and Smile was being quite heavily promoted with the Beach Boys having one of the key promotors of the 60s rock scene. I am not certain that the appearance on Inside Pop would have inspired Capitol to put even more promotion in an album they were already promoting. But who knows?

but it unfortunately came at perhaps the worst time in the Smile saga, and there was simply nothing to capitalize (pun intended...) on after the Inside Pop show.

True.

[guitarfool2002]

This is a scan of the exact ad mentioned by Janis Ian in her book. This appeared in Billboard May 13 1967, just a few weeks after Janis' appearance on Inside Pop:



The record had been released several times before, and flopped, and was produced by "Shadow" Morton, of all people to associate with a folk record. There was controversy about the song, but ultimately it was a flop of a record.

Now weeks after Inside Pop, and people seeing and hearing the song in far greater numbers than when it was originally released, a major-market radio station issues a public apology in Billboard for not playing it and thanks Leonard Bernstein for "leading the way" with Janis and the song via his television commentary.

This has to be a first, or else a very rare event. I can't think of a station ever apologizing for not playing a record. And if the demand were not intensified by the Bernstein program, I doubt they would have ever played it. Inside Pop was the catalyst, the people watching it drove the demand and led them to ask for the record, and then radio stations jumped on the bandwagon. It wasn't the other way around.

The record company and radio stations would not have bothered if there were not a demand from the public and "the fans" of any given radio station to play it. As much as they crunched numbers and ratings and listened to record-label pitchmen pushing singles every week for them to play and promote, if there were a public demand from listeners and fans to play a certain record, in the numbers that there apparently were after Inside Pop, that station would add it to their playlist. If, however, a larger percentage had called to request that specific song, as the numbers apparently did after Inside Pop, the station, label, managers, etc. would see the benefits of doing so and would absolutely add it to their rotation.

That was the power of Inside Pop, in the spring of 1967. The promotions were jumping on the bandwagon which CBS had already started rolling. I am indeed suggesting this "one off" CBS special had that kind of power in regards to Janis Ian and her song. It did make the record a hit, the people who saw Janis on the show made it a hit, and radio airplay had to catch up with a demand which already existed. The spike in radio airplay was a response to the public asking their stations to play it, and asking their local record shops where they could find it. It was "hitbound", in a way, before stations caught up with that demand.

After rolling the eyes, look up a guy named Ron Jacobs. And someone named "Uncle Ricky" and his website. I think you'll find the information given on the ins-and-out of 60's top 40 radio offered at just those venues well worth the visits. Very, very informative and entertaining reading, I think it's worth a few searches.

[Mr. Cohen]

This all prompts us to raise another question: if the Beach Boys had released "Surf's Up" by January 1967, does that song go to the top of the charts? All Brian had to do was combine the first movement with something similar to what became the second and third movements in '71 (maybe with a few string or horn overdubs this time around). It's a very feasible possibility.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I think the better question here is: what would have happened had PET SOUNDS been a smash!

[guitarfool2002]

I'm also thinking there was a bit of a masterplan at work with Inside Pop. Recognizing it as a great way to promote a new single or album (Smile), don't you think that aspect was in their minds when they signed on to the project and did the filming in late 1966? The timeline for Smile was still, at the time they were being filmed around Dec. 1966, on track for a release sometime in early 1967. You'd have Brian (or the full band if they had used the Columbia studio footage) appearing on the show around the same time their music would have been in the stores. As it happened, Brian was on the show but there was nothing to buy or request afterward.

[Newguy562]

:] i wish vege-tables was a huge hit

[Chocolate Shake Man]

edit

[Quincy]

I think the better question here is: what would have happened had PET SOUNDS been a smash!

Right!   By July 67 with nothing new on  the radio for almost 8 months the general public wasn't that interested and moved on to new things

[guitarfool2002]

Is it a safe bet to say the shelf life of Good Vibrations was over in January 1967? Meaning it had run its course, and the fans who made that a #1 record were waiting for the follow up.

Comparing the length of time between Good Vibrations' run on the charts and July 1967 when the "follow up" was released to the Beatles timeline close to this same period, there was nothing new in the form of a Beatles single or new album from early August '66 to February '67, when Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields was released. Estimate that around 7 months without a new Beatles product or significant musical appearance as a group. At least Brian, almost four months or so after GV ran its course, showed up on Inside Pop singing something new and getting people excited about a follow up to the #1 smash hit everyone was loving at the end of 66. It's unfortunate the only other major publicity around the BB's was the lawsuit, however I don't recall anything close to the rumors of a breakup which dogged the Beatles during their hiatus. So in reality it's not that long between GV and Heroes, in context with other bands.

[Quincy]

Is it a safe bet to say the shelf life of Good Vibrations was over in January 1967? Meaning it had run its course, and the fans who made that a #1 record were waiting for the follow up.

Comparing the length of time between Good Vibrations' run on the charts and July 1967 when the "follow up" was released to the Beatles timeline close to this same period, there was nothing new in the form of a Beatles single or new album from early August '66 to February '67, when Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields was released. Estimate that around 7 months without a new Beatles product or significant musical appearance as a group. At least Brian, almost four months or so after GV ran its course, showed up on Inside Pop singing something new and getting people excited about a follow up to the #1 smash hit everyone was loving at the end of 66. It's unfortunate the only other major publicity around the BB's was the lawsuit, however I don't recall anything close to the rumors of a breakup which dogged the Beatles during their hiatus. So in reality it's not that long between GV and Heroes, in context with other bands.

Good point..But we're talking two different animals here.. in the summer of 67 the Beatles were very in and hip..unfortunately the BB were not

[guitarfool2002]

Is it a safe bet to say the shelf life of Good Vibrations was over in January 1967? Meaning it had run its course, and the fans who made that a #1 record were waiting for the follow up.

Comparing the length of time between Good Vibrations' run on the charts and July 1967 when the "follow up" was released to the Beatles timeline close to this same period, there was nothing new in the form of a Beatles single or new album from early August '66 to February '67, when Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields was released. Estimate that around 7 months without a new Beatles product or significant musical appearance as a group. At least Brian, almost four months or so after GV ran its course, showed up on Inside Pop singing something new and getting people excited about a follow up to the #1 smash hit everyone was loving at the end of 66. It's unfortunate the only other major publicity around the BB's was the lawsuit, however I don't recall anything close to the rumors of a breakup which dogged the Beatles during their hiatus. So in reality it's not that long between GV and Heroes, in context with other bands.

Good point..But we're talking two different animals here.. in the summer of 67 the Beatles were very in and hip..unfortunately the BB were not

They're not two different animals if you measure them side by side: Beatles Late August 66 through February 1967, and Beach Boys January through July 1967. How about Fall 1966 in the middle of the Beatle hiatus? John's "bigger than Jesus" comments were still causing a backlash and turning fans against them in the US, plus the rumors of a breakup were intensified every time word got put of individual members working on a project without the other three. And there were no signs of a tour in sight. I agree with the hip element relating to BB's in July 67, but at the same time I wouldn't say the Beatles were at the top of their popularity between August 66 and February 67. And to make matters worse, they were beaten in the popularity polls in their home country by an American band at the end of 66!

[harrisonjon]

I think this is where The Beatles benefited from having two geniuses instead of one: it meant that Lennon's left-field ventures on SFF and A Day In The Life could be balanced commercially by Paul's Penny Lane, She's Leaving Home, and basslines on tracks like All You Need Is Love. There was nobody balancing Brian's introverted experimentation.

[Quincy]

But then you look at Wild Honey..which only came a few months later.. it was full of great radio friendly songs..but the general audience just wasn't that interested in it...they had their run and now except for a few top 20 singles they weren't in the same game anymore..and the listening audience moved on..

[guitarfool2002]

I think Darlin was a bigger radio hit than assumed, it had a decent chart showing across the US, but overall the Wild Honey album had a less punchy sound than that one single. Darlin was a natural for AM radio, the horns just blasted through the speakers as did Carl's voice, but what other songs, if we could pretend to be a program director in December 1967, would have been good singles off Wild Honey to put on the airwaves?

I'd say the only one that stands out to me as a fantastic would-be single is "Aren't You Glad". It had the Beach Boys new brass-flavored sound, touches or R&B as well as a great melody and hook, and it "could've been" a bigger hit. Where were the other singles on the album? I Was Made To Love Her perhaps was too close to the original Stevie Wonder record, actually apart from Carl's vocal and the detuned piano it's pretty much the same arrangement.

But look how mixed up things were at that time: They put "Here Today" on the flip side of "Darlin'", December 1967, and that makes as much sense as the "Brian and Mike" experiment that failed a few months earlier. Just not a good time for the band, no matter how good the music may have been.

[Quincy]

"Here Comes the Night" would have sounded pretty good coming out of my speakers in my 57 chevy

[cablegeddon]

Good point. There wasn't a follow-up single on Wild honey. But listen the fact that H&V charted higher than Darlin IMO speaks volumes. A) the culture had changed and San Francisco rock was suddenly cool and B) there was a big backlash after Smiley Smile.

[guitarfool2002]

Good point. There wasn't a follow-up single on Wild honey. But listen the fact that H&V charted higher than Darlin IMO speaks volumes. A) the culture had changed and San Francisco rock was suddenly cool and B) there was a big backlash after Smiley Smile.

In Los Angeles, 93 KHJ (Brian's 'home' station), Darlin' spent the month of January 1968, 4 weeks total, in the top 10, peaking at #2. Heroes spent two weeks in the top 10, August '67, peaking at #9.

In the rest of the country, Heroes barely cracked the top 10 in any region except Boston, where it was top 10 throughout August '67, peaking at #3. Elsewhere it spent at the most 4-5 weeks in the top 30, then disappeared.

Darlin fared worse, cracking the top ten on WRKO in Boston in February 1968, peaking at #9. Elsewhere it barely made a dent in the charts, going into top 30, sometimes top 20 for a handful of weeks, then disappearing.

I don't have sales numbers, only chart positions from various regions of the US.

Heroes did slightly better than Darlin, but neither was the hit I'm sure they thought it would have been. Interesting that KHJ in Los Angeles had a much bigger hit with Darlin than Heroes, and Darlin had much greater popularity in Los Angeles than anywhere else save Boston.

Darlin wasn't as much of a trend-setting "new sound" considering the charts were populated at that time with a lot of horn bands and brass-enhanced singles, owing a debt to groups like the Buckinghams who owned the charts in 1967 with that very same brass fueled sound. As good a record as Darlin was and is, it sounds weaker sonically than some of the similar records surrounding it on the charts.