A whole story (although a good one) about Chad & Jeremy without a single mention of Peter & Gordon? It's like a book about surf music with not a word about Dick Dale...
Well, this is a book (chapter?) about Chad & Jeremy, not about nerdy guy pairings with hush-hush voices in general. And I couldn't force myself to get immersed in two such pairings at once, so I chose Chad & Jeremy over Peter & Gordon.
I mentioned Peter & Gordon not because of them being another nerdy duo, but because Chad & Jeremy having been called their imitators, even clones. Since the 1960s there have been jokes like "Chad & Jeremy, a duo forned by Peter Asher and Gordon Waller".
That's odd, considering that Chad & Jeremy had their first hit almost half a year before Peter & Gordon ('Yesterday's Gone' = September '63; 'A World Without Love' = February '64).
Very interesting. (A Google search I did told me C&J's first hit was in December not September, but earlier than P&G's first hit anyway.) I infer that C&J have been stereotyped as P&G clones because the latter met with much more worldwide success - not unlike Pet Sounds having been called a Sgt. Pepper imitation by benighted writers...
It may have peaked on the charts in December, but it was released in September (and recorded even earlier, in July); and Chad & Jeremy were performing as a folk duo since around 1962, anyway.
As for commercial success, Chad & Jeremy were bigger than Peter & Gordon in the US, but flopped terribly in their own country. Maybe the Brits preferred Peter & Gordon because of their connection to Jane (or because the Beatles wrote songs for them in general).
It's not part of this album, - it's on the previous one, but I really like their version of The Cruel War. I think maybe for these sort of artists that have professionalism and melodic sensibility, but not much in the way of genius, turning these traditional folk tunes into pop songs is a good bet, and is a better fit for them than trying their hand at the Blues. Like how the Byrds struck gold with Turn Turn Turn and Bells of Rhymney. But they need to find the right songs, not the same bunch of Dylan covers that have already been done by superior artists.
OK, I sat through 3 minutes of I Don’t Want To Lose You Baby, well not all the way. it felt more like 3 hours. Please be over, my ears said. Anyway, I suppose their music was made to sell a few records, much like the music of today. If they buy, we make more. But nothing like the Taylor Swift money machine of course. They have music monetizing down to a billion dollar science these days.
Did you sit through 3 minutes of the album or the song? Because the song sounds like almost nothing else on the album. No matter how mediocre it is, it wouldn't be fair to judge it based exclusively on the title track.
Also, pretty much all music was made to sell back in 1965. The difference is not between commercial and non-commercial, it's between those who led and those who followed. The problem of Chad & Jeremy is, of course, that they were pathologically unable to lead in whatever they did, only to follow. But as far as lapdogs go, they were far from the worst.
A whole story (although a good one) about Chad & Jeremy without a single mention of Peter & Gordon? It's like a book about surf music with not a word about Dick Dale...
Well, this is a book (chapter?) about Chad & Jeremy, not about nerdy guy pairings with hush-hush voices in general. And I couldn't force myself to get immersed in two such pairings at once, so I chose Chad & Jeremy over Peter & Gordon.
I mentioned Peter & Gordon not because of them being another nerdy duo, but because Chad & Jeremy having been called their imitators, even clones. Since the 1960s there have been jokes like "Chad & Jeremy, a duo forned by Peter Asher and Gordon Waller".
That's odd, considering that Chad & Jeremy had their first hit almost half a year before Peter & Gordon ('Yesterday's Gone' = September '63; 'A World Without Love' = February '64).
Very interesting. (A Google search I did told me C&J's first hit was in December not September, but earlier than P&G's first hit anyway.) I infer that C&J have been stereotyped as P&G clones because the latter met with much more worldwide success - not unlike Pet Sounds having been called a Sgt. Pepper imitation by benighted writers...
It may have peaked on the charts in December, but it was released in September (and recorded even earlier, in July); and Chad & Jeremy were performing as a folk duo since around 1962, anyway.
As for commercial success, Chad & Jeremy were bigger than Peter & Gordon in the US, but flopped terribly in their own country. Maybe the Brits preferred Peter & Gordon because of their connection to Jane (or because the Beatles wrote songs for them in general).
It's not part of this album, - it's on the previous one, but I really like their version of The Cruel War. I think maybe for these sort of artists that have professionalism and melodic sensibility, but not much in the way of genius, turning these traditional folk tunes into pop songs is a good bet, and is a better fit for them than trying their hand at the Blues. Like how the Byrds struck gold with Turn Turn Turn and Bells of Rhymney. But they need to find the right songs, not the same bunch of Dylan covers that have already been done by superior artists.
OK, I sat through 3 minutes of I Don’t Want To Lose You Baby, well not all the way. it felt more like 3 hours. Please be over, my ears said. Anyway, I suppose their music was made to sell a few records, much like the music of today. If they buy, we make more. But nothing like the Taylor Swift money machine of course. They have music monetizing down to a billion dollar science these days.
Did you sit through 3 minutes of the album or the song? Because the song sounds like almost nothing else on the album. No matter how mediocre it is, it wouldn't be fair to judge it based exclusively on the title track.
Also, pretty much all music was made to sell back in 1965. The difference is not between commercial and non-commercial, it's between those who led and those who followed. The problem of Chad & Jeremy is, of course, that they were pathologically unable to lead in whatever they did, only to follow. But as far as lapdogs go, they were far from the worst.