Discussion:
Obscure 1950s Era Recordings - July - Round 1 - Group 8
Add Reply
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 13:37:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Group 8 is now open. Please rank these from best to worst.


Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows


I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones


Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies


Come on Sugar - Little Willie John

SavoyBG
2020-07-18 13:38:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
MY RANKINGS


1. Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
2. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
3. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
4. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
Steve Mc
2020-07-18 14:20:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies

2. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John

3. Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows

4. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
--
Steve Mc

DNA to SBC to respond
Roger Ford
2020-07-18 13:39:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Group 8 is now open. Please rank these from best to worst.
Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones



ROGER FORD
-----------------------

"Spam Free Zone" - to combat unwanted automatic spamming I have added
an extra "b" in my e-mail address (***@bblueyonder.co.uk) Please
delete same before responding.Thank you!
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
DianeE
2020-07-18 13:54:06 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1-Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
2-Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
3-Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
RWC
2020-07-18 14:30:25 UTC
Reply
Permalink
MY RANKINGS

1. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
2. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John - c.May 1963
3. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
4 Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows

I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.

1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
RWC
2020-07-18 14:54:20 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
Okay, apart from these songs :-)

The Beach Boys - 409 - Capitol 4777
The Beach Boys - Ballad Of Ole Betsy - Capitol T1998, 1963
The Beach Boys - Be True To Your School - Capitol 5069
The Beach Boys - Car Crazy Cutie - Capitol T1998, 1963
The Beach Boys - Catch A Wave - Capitol T1981, 1963
The Beach Boys - Cherry Cherry Coupe - Capitol T1998, 1963
The Beach Boys - Custom Machine - Capitol T1998, 1963
The Beach Boys - Dance, Dance, Dance - Capitol 5306
The Beach Boys - Don't Worry Baby - Capitol 5174
The Beach Boys - Farmer's Daughter - Capitol St1890, 1963
The Beach Boys - Fun, Fun, Fun - Capitol 5118
The Beach Boys - Hawaii - Capitol T1981, 1963
The Beach Boys - Heads You Win Tails I Lose - Capitol T1808, 1962
The Beach Boys - I Get Around - Capitol 5174
The Beach Boys - In My Room - Capitol 5069
The Beach Boys - Land Ahoy - Capitol, 1962
The Beach Boys - Little Deuce Coupe - Capitol 5007
The Beach Boys - Little Saint Nick - Capitol 5096
The Beach Boys - Luau - X 301
The Beach Boys - Noble Surfer - Capitol St1890, 1963
The Beach Boys - She Knows Me Too Well - Capitol 5245
The Beach Boys - Shut Down - Capitol 4932
The Beach Boys - Stoked - Capitol St1890, 1963
The Beach Boys - Surfer Girl - Capitol 5007
The Beach Boys - Surfin' - X 301
The Beach Boys - Surfin' Safari - Capitol 4777
The Beach Boys - Surfin' Usa - Capitol 4932
The Beach Boys - Ten Little Indians - Capitol 4880
The Beach Boys - The Man With All The Toys - Capitol 5312
The Beach Boys - The Warmth Of The Sun - Capitol 5306
The Beach Boys - When I Grow Up (To Be A Man) - Capitol 5245
The Beach Boys - Why Do Fools Fall In Love - Capitol 5118

The Beatles - A Hard Day's Night - Uk Parlophone 5160
The Beatles - A Taste Of Honey - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Ain't She Sweet - Uk Polydor 52-317
The Beatles - All I've Got To Do - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - All My Loving - Capitol Of Canada 72144 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - All My Loving - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - And I Love Her - Capitol 5235 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Anna (Go To Him) - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Ask Me Why - Uk Parlophone 4983
The Beatles - Baby It's You - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Bad To Me - Uk Parlophone, 1963
The Beatles - Boys - Parlophone (Holland) Hhr-125 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Boys - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Can't Buy Me Love - Capitol 5150
The Beatles - Chains - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Cry For A Shadow - Uk Polydor 52-275
The Beatles - Devil In Her Heart - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Do You Want To Know A Secret - Vee Jay 587 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Don't Bother Me - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - From Me To You - Uk Parlophone 5015
The Beatles - Hold Me Tight - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - I Feel Fine - Capitol 5327
The Beatles - I Saw Her Standing There - Capitol 5112 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - I Should Have Known Better - Capitol 5222 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - I Wanna Be Your Man - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - I Want To Hold Your Hand - Uk Parlophone 5084
The Beatles - I'll Cry Instead - Capitol 5234 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - I'll Get You - Uk Parlophone 5055
The Beatles - I'm Happy Just To Dance With You - Capitol 5234 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - If I Fell - Capitol 5235 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - It Won't Be Long - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Komm Gib Mir Deine Hand - Odeon 22671 (Germany)
The Beatles - Little Child - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Love Me Do - Uk Parlophone 4949
The Beatles - Matchbox - Capitol 5255 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Misery - Uk Parlophone Pmc1202, 1963
The Beatles - Money (That's What I Want) - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Nobody's Child - Uk Polydor 52-906
The Beatles - Not A Second Time - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - P.S I Love You - Uk Parlophone 4949
The Beatles - Please Mister Postman - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Please Mr Postman - Capitol Of Canada 72133 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Please Please Me - Uk Parlophone 4983
The Beatles - Roll Over Beethoven - Capitol Of Canada 72133 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Roll Over Beethoven - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - She Loves You - Uk Parlophone 5055
The Beatles - She's A Woman - Capitol 5327
The Beatles - Sie Liebt Dich - Odeon 22671 (Germany)
The Beatles - Slow Down - Capitol 5255 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Sweet Georgia Brown - Uk Polydor 52-906
The Beatles - Thank You Girl - Uk Parlophone 5015
The Beatles - There's A Place - Tollie 9001 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Things We Said Today - Uk Parlophone 5160
The Beatles - This Boy - Uk Parlophone 5084
The Beatles - Till There Was You - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206, 1963
The Beatles - Tip Of My Tongue - Uk Parlophone, 1962
The Beatles - Twist And Shout - Parlophone (Holland) Hhr-125 (Uk Lp)
The Beatles - Why - Uk Polydor 52-275
The Beatles - You Can't Do That - Capitol 5150
The Beatles - You Really Got A Hold On Me - Uk Parlophone Pmc1206,
1963
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 15:15:28 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
MY RANKINGS
1. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
2. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John - c.May 1963
3. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
4 Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
RWC
2020-07-18 15:33:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Post by SavoyBG
MY RANKINGS
1. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
2. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John - c.May 1963
3. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
4 Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...

1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.


Geoff
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 15:47:52 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by SavoyBG
MY RANKINGS
1. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
2. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John - c.May 1963
3. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
4 Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period.
Yes, and they usually won't do well, like the Joe Tex I had in there this month.
DianeE
2020-07-18 16:45:19 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do. If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest. We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear anyone
else objecting to it.
RWC
2020-07-18 16:54:54 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do. If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest. We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear anyone
else objecting to it.
Not a nice try, Diane. Roger sucks up to you, you suck up to Roger.

My remarks stand.
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 17:03:24 UTC
Reply
Permalink
FINAL RANKINGS


1. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies - 29
2. Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows - 26

3. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John - 21
4. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones - 14

Diane's 4B wins it with Roger's Glows also advancing. Mark's LWJ takes third and is gone, along with Geoff's Tantones. Surprising that Geoff would nominate anything with a tan!
RWC
2020-07-18 17:23:11 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Surprising that Geoff would nominate anything with a tan!
I don't think most folk here will believe you, Bruce.
DianeE
2020-07-18 20:59:14 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do. If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest. We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear anyone
else objecting to it.
Not a nice try, Diane. Roger sucks up to you, you suck up to Roger.
My remarks stand.
--------------
Ever the conspiracy theorist.
Roger's Battles actually extended into 1964 because we were enjoying
them so much and didn't want them to end. Bruce decided not to include
1964 when he started this tournament. So that should make you happy.
Steve Mc
2020-07-18 22:50:13 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear anyone
else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included in
this newsgroup.
--
Steve Mc

DNA to SBC to respond
DianeE
2020-07-18 23:03:03 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included in
this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days." I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
Steve Mc
2020-07-18 23:12:41 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included
in this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days."  I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
Didn't somebody once make a list of the date of everybody's first post ?
--
Steve Mc

DNA to SBC to respond
DianeE
2020-07-18 23:58:49 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to
make your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.
We agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included
in this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days."  I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
Didn't somebody once make a list of the date of everybody's first post ?
----------
Yes. Sounds like a Ken Whiton project, but I don't remember the
details. I just remember discovering that Roger arrived shortly before
I did. There were several Steves here when I arrived, and about a
hundred Bobs.
Ken Whiton
2020-07-19 04:11:35 UTC
Reply
Permalink
*-* On Sat, 18 Jul 2020, at 19:58:49 -0400,
*-* In Article <iuydnQNaHf4nEY7CnZ2dnUU7-***@giganews.com>,
*-* DianeE wrote
*-* About Re: Obscure 1950s Era Recordings - July - Round 1 - Group 8
[ ... ]
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of
this newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be
included in this newsgroup.
IIRC, it was a few months, or perhaps even a year or two, after
the creation of the groups. It became obvious that the majority of
participants in the '60s group were primarily interested in the mid to
late '60s, and that the years 1960 through 1963 were getting short
shrift over there.
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days." I arrived in February 1998.
These "decade" groups were created in November or December of
1996. My first posts, both here and in the '60s group, were on
Jamuary 5, 1997, but for six or seven months prior to that I had been
a poster in the old alt.rock-n-roll.oldies group that was the
predecessor to these "decade" groups.
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
Didn't somebody once make a list of the date of everybody's first post ?
----------
Yes. Sounds like a Ken Whiton project, but I don't remember the
details. I just remember discovering that Roger arrived shortly
before I did. There were several Steves here when I arrived, and
about a hundred Bobs.
I don't remember such a list, but if there was one I didn't
compile it.

Ken Whiton
--
FIDO: 1:132/152
InterNet: ***@surfglobal.net.INVAL (remove the obvious to reply)
Roger Ford
2020-07-19 04:52:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible
for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to
make your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.
We agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included
in this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days."  I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
Didn't somebody once make a list of the date of everybody's first post ?
----------
Yes. Sounds like a Ken Whiton project, but I don't remember the
details. I just remember discovering that Roger arrived shortly before
I did. There were several Steves here when I arrived, and about a
hundred Bobs.
Modesty forbids claiming ownership of the "FIRST POST" series in 2002
but my very first post on here came on 18 November 1997 and concerned
one Curley Jim Morrison and his "Air Force Blues" single that came out
ovrer here on Starlite. I only got the one response which was a nice
friendly reply to a real "greenie" from a guy I'd never heard of
before---John Wade...a regular (and knowledgeable) poster on here back
in those days.

That post is STILL there in Google Groups archives! :)

ROGER FORD
-----------------------

"Spam Free Zone" - to combat unwanted automatic spamming I have added
an extra "b" in my e-mail address (***@bblueyonder.co.uk) Please
delete same before responding.Thank you!
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Mark Dintenfass
2020-07-19 03:15:05 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included in
this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days." I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
I was here when we started, and, yes, we decided at some point (after
the usual heated debate) that the cusp period was more likely to
interest us than the 60s fans whose interest started with the Beatles
and so should remain on-topic for us. Some of us even go back to the
alt. group that spawned the decade groups, when 50s, 60s, and 70s were
all on topic.

Years ending zeroes may be useful in some way, but are misleading in
others, which is why will find historians saying, for example, that
the 1800s ended in 1914, and others who I'm sure will soon be saying
that the twenty-first century started in 1989.
--
--md
_________
Remove xx's from address to reply
Steve Mc
2020-07-19 04:04:07 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by Mark Dintenfass
Post by Roger Ford
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear
anyone else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included in
this newsgroup.
--------------
I wasn't here in the "very early days." I arrived in February 1998.
Rick was a founding father of this group so he'd be the one to ask.
I was here when we started, and, yes, we decided at some point (after
the usual heated debate) that the cusp period was more likely to
interest us than the 60s fans whose interest started with the Beatles
and so should remain on-topic for us. Some of us even go back to the
alt. group that spawned the decade groups, when 50s, 60s, and 70s were
all on topic.
Years ending zeroes may be useful in some way, but are misleading in
others, which is why will find historians saying, for example, that
the 1800s ended in 1914, and others who I'm sure will soon be saying
that the twenty-first century started in 1989.
Yep, what was it ? ARO ? Alt.rockoldies ?
--
Steve Mc

DNA to SBC to respond
Roger Ford
2020-07-19 05:07:48 UTC
Reply
Permalink
On Sat, 18 Jul 2020 15:50:13 -0700, Steve Mc
Post by Steve Mc
Post by Roger Ford
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by RWC
I, personally, think this contest (newsgroup) should stop at 1962.
1963 opens the contest to early popular hits by the Beatles and Beach
Boys...
No, it doesn't. They were in the battles, so thus, not eligible for the contest.
Regardless, Bruce, many 1963 records *obviously* do not belong to the
sound of the 50s/cusp period. You can be as defensive as you like...
1963 records should not have been allowed in Battle contests, in this
1950s music newsgroup.
----------------
The amount of work and care that Roger put into these Battles, which
went on for years and gave us all a great deal of pleasure and
enjoyment, is something that you could never do.  If you want to make
your own rules, start your own group and run your own contest.  We
agreed at the time that 1963 should be included, and I don't hear anyone
else objecting to it.
But didn't we also, even before that, in the very early days of this
newsgroup, decide after much discussion, that 1963 would be included in
this newsgroup.
Like Diane,I wasn't here in those very early days but I recall the
subject of the time period that this newsgroup should be focused on
coming up several times in the years since.

The general concensus always seemed to be that it should go back at
least to 1947 or so to include the beginnings of rock 'n' roll. And in
the other direction the accepted "cut off" date seemed to coincide
with the advent of The Beatles in the USA.

The period 1960-1963 was thus deemed the "cusp years" and was absorbed
into OUR timelime for discussion---especially since the 1960's group
members didn't seem to EVER discuss (or even be aware of) any music
that was pre-Beatles

ROGER FORD
-----------------------

"Spam Free Zone" - to combat unwanted automatic spamming I have added
an extra "b" in my e-mail address (***@bblueyonder.co.uk) Please
delete same before responding.Thank you!
--
This email has been checked for viruses by AVG.
https://www.avg.com
Mark Dintenfass
2020-07-18 14:38:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Group 8 is now open. Please rank these from best to worst.
Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
--
--md
_________
Remove xx's from address to reply
Carl
2020-07-18 15:04:58 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1-Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
2-Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
3-Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 15:17:23 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by DianeE
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
Out of 7 ballots so far, this is last on 5 of them.
RWC
2020-07-18 16:47:04 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Post by DianeE
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
Out of 7 ballots so far, this is last on 5 of them.
As they say, there is no accounting for taste.

This will be my last tour of duty, leaving future contests to Jim's
'friends'.

But I reserve the right to opine, on occasion, from the sideline.


Geoff
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 17:05:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by DianeE
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
Out of 7 ballots so far, this is last on 5 of them.
As they say, there is no accounting for taste.
This will be my last tour of duty, leaving future contests to Jim's
'friends'.
If you want to bow out now, since you have no records left in the tournament, we can get Dennis back in to finish this month up. Let us know.
SavoyBG
2020-07-18 17:08:40 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Here are our SWEET 16:


She’s Mine All Mine - Arthur Gunter (Carl)
You Are - Nolan Strong & Diablos (Roger)
Freeway Boogie - Robert Smith (Jim)
Honkytonk Hardwood Floor- Clyde Stacy (Steve)
Come On Come On Come On - Tiny Topsy (Steve)
When I Meet My Girl - Tommy Ridgley (Diane)
Blues Before Sunrise - Elmore James (Carl)
My Baby Don't Rock - Luke McDaniel (Steve)
She's Just Old Fashioned - Goree Carter (Diane)
Baby Beat It - Big Duke (Jim)
Cool,Cool Baby - Magic Tones (Roger)
Miss You So - Tiny Topsy (Mark)
50 Dyna-Flow - Jack Cooley (Jim)
Outta Tune - The Big Four (Bruce)
Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies (Diane)
Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows (Roger)

Lightning will not strike twice in a row for Rick, who joins Geoff with nothing remaining.

Here's the count:

Diane - 3
Jim - 3
Roger - 3
Steve - 3
Carl - 2
Bruce - 1
Mark - 1
RWC
2020-07-18 17:27:36 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
If you want to bow out now, since you have no records left in the tournament, we can get Dennis back in to finish this month up. Let us know.
Thanks Bruce, Dennis can now take over.
Jim Colegrove
2020-07-18 20:00:26 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
Post by SavoyBG
Post by DianeE
4-I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
Out of 7 ballots so far, this is last on 5 of them.
As they say, there is no accounting for taste.
This will be my last tour of duty, leaving future contests to Jim's
'friends'.
"Oh, I'm sure it wouldn't interest anybody outside of a small circle
of friends." -- Phil Ochs

It's ironic.
Post by RWC
But I reserve the right to opine, on occasion, from the sideline.
Geoff
Bill B
2020-07-18 20:26:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by RWC
This will be my last tour of duty, leaving future contests to Jim's
'friends'.
Geoff left, bereft.

At least you inspired me to poetry, Geoff.
Jim Colegrove
2020-07-18 15:19:38 UTC
Reply
Permalink
1. Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows

2. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies

3. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John

4. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
Rick Schubert
2020-07-18 15:49:44 UTC
Reply
Permalink
Post by SavoyBG
Group 8 is now open. Please rank these from best to worst.
1. Ooh-Ow - The Four Buddies
2. Fine, Fine Girl - Moonglows
3. I Love You Really I Do - The Tantones
4. Come on Sugar - Little Willie John
Loading...