Monday, January 11, 2021

Monday Mornin'

>>>Can the Super Charts be any more accurate, if all the info they are taken from is inaccurate?  (Ken Freck) 

>>>My thinking is that The Super Charts help to eliminate the wide discrepancies we keep running into from chart to chart to chart … sometimes position spreads of 20-30 places.  A bonafide Top Ten Hit is going to be a Top Ten Hit on all three charts … but how does “Dock Of The Bay,” for example, top Billboard’s chart for four weeks … and never make it to #1 at all in Cash Box or Record World?  It’s things like these that just don’t make logical sense.  “Hey Jude” was #1 in Billboard for nine weeks … and there is absolutely NO question about how big a record this was … but EVERYWHERE else (including any local chart I’ve ever seen for this time period) also shows “Those Were The Days” reaching the top (and here in Chicago, “Over You” by Gary Puckett and the Union Gap, "Little Green Apples" by O.C. Smith and “Fire” by The Crazy World Of Arthur Brown did, too!)  In fact, "Hey Jude" topped the WLS Chart for exactly one week ... and never even made it to #1 on the 'CFL Chart at all!  Now we all know that THAT'S not exactly accurate reporting either.  One exception to the complete accuracy of The Super Charts might be "Good Vibrations," which reached #1 on ALL of the national charts ... yet never made it to #1 on The Super Chart because it didn't have enough points in any given week to do so ... the record's #1 peak in Billboard, Cash Box and Record World came during different weeks so it wasn't able to accumulate enough points during any single given week to outrank "You Keep Me Hangin' On" by The Supremes ... and thus failed to hit the top of The Super Chart.  (kk)

Do you think a chart that doesn’t list “Good Vibrations” as a #1 hit is accurate? Seems kind of silly.

Hey Jude was obviously miscalculated on the Chicago charts, why I have no idea. Maybe because it sells so many records so quickly. I’m sure it was the biggest seller of the year.

We had that here with “I’m A Believer” by the Monkees. On WRIT, it’s #1 for 6 weeks. On WOKY, it charts at #3! It got beat out by the Blues Magoos and “Bittersweet” by The Robbs. As much as I was glad those two were ahead of it, it was just nonsense.

Sometimes the errors are easy to pick out like that. I’m just not sure anything will ever give a realistic picture of the time, if the info is fairly flawed. Also, dealing with records that were banned by one station, but big hits on the other makes for a tough calculation there. I run in to that stuff when I do my Top Milwaukee countdown shows up here.  


The only thing Randy and I seriously disagreed on when compiling these charts was “Good Vibrations” not making #1 on what we were claiming to be the most accurate charts out there.  I felt very strongly that if a record made it to #1 on all three national charts, it just HAD to make it to #1 on our consensus chart as well in order for the information to be taken seriously.  He argued that doing this would take away a week at #1 for another record that had legitimately earned it … and in order for the Super Charts to remain accurate, the criteria in collecting the data for every week had to remain consistent.  That’s what ultimately convinced me.  My original thought was that if there was “a week to spare,” meaning a song like “You Keep Me Hanging On” was already #1 for two or three weeks, give ONE of those weeks to “Good Vibrations,” which was, without question, one of the most important and revolutionary singles of its time.  (Of ANY time really!!!)

But that logic made it a judgement call, influenced by the benefit of 20/20 hindsight … and, deserving as it might be, distorted the very premise of the accuracy of how this new chart information was compiled.  In effect, we would be fighting another element that greatly impacted the charts over the years … records performing well at different times in various parts of the country, thus creating a longer chart life, perhaps, but also diminishing a higher chart peak because it was never able to accumulate that higher chart status at the same time since momentum varied depending on which cities it was breaking out in at the time.

It kind of goes back to what I had said earlier … a TRUE Top Ten Hit is going to be a Top Ten Hit no matter what … it captured the nation SIMULTANEOUSLY to earn that distinction … and its impact was rarely disputable.

However, if a given record rode the charts in ’67 for sixteen weeks, for example … a long time for a record during this era … and peaked nationally at #20, despite being #5 in six Midwest cities in April, then petering out but going to #5 in six major west coast cities in mid-June because maybe these radio stations were just late on jumping on the record … or perhaps the artist had just toured there and was now drumming up sales because of it … then fizzles out there at exactly the same time the record hits #5 on the east coast for those very same reasons, is it in reality a #5 Record?  I mean it DID peak at #5 on any of those local charts you might look up fifty years later.  Or is it a #20 record because it never had enough accumulated sales at airplay at the same time to make it climb any higher?

As you say, tough call.

“I’m A Believer” was #1 in Chicago on WLS for seven weeks … a HUGE #1 Hit … but across town on WCFL, “Snoopy Vs. The Red Baron,” “Georgy Girl” and “Ruby Tuesday” all hit the top spot during its WLS reign … so yes, we experienced much the same thing.  To me, probably a more logical representation would be for “Snoopy” to be #1 for a week (because it was HUGE when it came out, being such a different and unique record), “I’m A Believer” topping the chart for the next four weeks and then “Georgy Girl” (which totally deserved #1 status) leading the pack for the next two.  (“Ruby Tuesday” would eventually be #1 on both charts anyway a week later, so it, too, still got its deserved spot.)  But that logic takes me back to “Good Vibration” deserving just ONE WEEK at #1 to showcase its true impact on the charts … and now we’re right back to subjective vs. objective … and if you’re compiling the charts AT THE TIME, in REAL time, you don’t have that kind of flexibility.

(For the record, nationally “I’m  A Believer” was #1 for EIGHT weeks in Cash Box, seven weeks in Billboard and only five weeks in Record World.)  The discrepancy weeks were filled in by “That’s Life” by Frank Sinatra (#1 for one week in Record World only), “Snoopy Vs. The Red Baron” (#1 for one week in Record World) and “Georgy Girl” (#1 for one week in both Record World and Cash Box.)  “Ruby Tuesday” would still top all three charts, but only after “Kind Of A Drag” by The Buckinghams reached #1 for two weeks in Billboard and one week in Record World.  Amazingly, this record, by Chicago’s PREMIER local act at the time, failed to hit #1 on either the WLS or the WCFL chart.  (Now how the heck does THAT happen?!?!)  Ah, the magic ... and confusion and frustration ... of the charts!!!  (kk)

Great to see SUPER CHARTS back in action. 
Any chance previous forays for prior years could be archived in a more manageable format, say, CD-rom?
As someone who has self-published my own book, printing a book nowadays is super expensive.

As for the J5 platter- chatter, I was in first grade when "I Want You Back" first hit the airwaves in late 1969.  I was immediately hooked! Yeah, as a 7 year old, I was addicted to the AM radio Top 40. At lunchtime, after scoffing down whatever gunk mom packed for lunch, the "lunch-aide" lady allowed me to roll in the huge califone record player so I could spin 45s I would bring in, along with selections brought by classmates.  We actually danced around - imagine doing that today!
By the time "A-B-C" was bulldozing up the local radio station weekly survey, I HAD to have the 45!  And every J5 & MJ single following, up til 1975.
I admit that I did not care for "I'll Be There" as much at the time, but now it's a solid favorite. The J5 remake versions of older hits are pretty cool by me, especially "Little Bitty Pretty One," a song I wore the groove out on my 45. Whenever I spin or hear Michael's "Got To Be There" I am immediately whisked back to my first ever girlfriend in 2nd grade ... getting butterflies every time she looked at me ... when we were allowed to sit next to each other in class - I couldn't focus on the lessons. And when I raised my hand to go to the bathroom located down the other end of the school hallway, just so I would be alone with her when she returned from her trip to the bathroom. I didn't have to "go," of course - I just waited for her to come out of the girl's bathroom. She saw me and smiled, we walked together as we rounded the corner and headed back down the hallway.  She put her arm around me - I never felt that way I did right then.... and like a total jerk, I slowly removed her arm from around me for fear a teacher would see us.  My biggest life regret EVER, right there. "Got To Be There" ... I so wish I could be, 1971, again.

Mike Markesich

Damn!  That sounds like a pretty serious 2nd Grade Girlfriend memory!!!

We have talked for many, many years about how to market The Super Charts and make them available to the public … and oldies radio in general.  They run from 1955 – 1982.  (1982 is when Record World ceased publication so it was determined early on to stop there … although I personally would love to extend the list thru 1985 using only the Cash Box and Billboard information to create a more accurate representation of The Top 40 Era.  I’ve even suggested a second set of charts, concentrating solely on The Top 40 Charts, leaving The Top 100 lists for the true purists.)

It’s an expensive project any way you look at it … and we would have to sell these discs (either by year, by decade or by complete set) for a pretty substantial amount of money, which I think would seriously reduce the size of our potential buying audience.  That being said, it’s a shame to have done all this work and not have it out there to share with the rest of the world.  (I think we last ran an entire year of Super Charts in 2017 for our fifty year look back at 1967, my all-time favorite year in music.)  Still, outlets like Sirius XM and some of the other, larger Internet Oldies Stations could really benefit from this chart information and create (I believe) FAR more accurate weekly countdown programs.

Hey, I’m open to all suggestions … and I’m sure Randy is, too.  We would LOVE to get these out there and prove their significance.  (Several years ago I even talked to Joel Whitburn about starting such a venture … but his entire publishing career has been based on the actual charts run by the actual trade publications at the time, which is what the people want to see.  However, now that all of this information is out there and available, I still believe that there is a place for The Super Chart as well … the best consensus representing record popularity at the time.)  Joel, if you happen to be reading this, take a look at our 1971 Charts and see what you think.  I really do believe that there is a market for this and piggy-backing this idea into the Record Research library may be EXACTLY the way to go.

(And Randy – if we get a good response to this, I may just have committed you to three more years of additional chart research and compiling!!!  Lol)  kk

Speaking of all of this Super Chart chatter, did you happen to catch Sammy’s LAFOS on Saturday?  What a GREAT show!!!

Featuring the hits of January, 1971 AND 1967 … you couldn’t pick two better years in my opinion.

If you missed it for any reason, the podcast IS available here …

Definitely worth a listen.  (kk)

And, since it sounds like he’s going to be doing these Super Chart tributes for the next several weeks to come, why not email him some of YOUR requests and suggestions?

(Be sure to tell him Forgotten Hits sent you!!!)

Remember … a brand new chart (well, brand new as in fifty years old! Lol) … will be posted every Sunday right here in Forgotten Hits!  (kk)

In Sam’s own words …

You can catch a repeat broadcast of WVKR's January 9th LAFOS spotlighting AM radio hits and a few rarities from January 1967 and 1971.
Forget the chaos of the week gone by and remember some great sounds that helped Americans get through what many considered back then to be pretty tumultuous times.
Thanks to KENT KOTAL of and to RANDY PRICE for his compiling of the Super Charts, from which many of today's 1971 songs were taken Enjoy!

Listen now

I asked Randy Price what HE thought of the show … and this is what he said …


Normally I wouldn't have looked forward to listening to two hours of music from 1971, but as it turns out, Sam did a great job of avoiding the obvious hits and cherry-picking some excellent lesser-known songs from the January 9th Super Chart. Mixing in some songs from 1967 added some spice to the show as well. (Although I must say that it amounts to treason claiming that any version of "River Deep--Mountain High" other than Ike & Tina's is the definitive version!)

– Randy Price

Meanwhile, it seems like EVERYONE is jumping on the 1971 wagon … and I’m lovin’ it!  Everything I’ve seen just reminds me again of what a great year this really was in music.

Here, Best Classic Bands recaps every #1 Single that year, according to Record World Magazine …

The Dumbest Songs Ever:

The list of The Dumbest Songs Ever probably includes some of my most requested ever such as:  Beep Beep by the Playmates.  If I had a nickel for every time someone messaged me and said "My friend doesn't believe there is a song called ‘Dead Skunk In The Middle Of The Road" … Can you play that?"

By the way, we are slowly starting to get more response to our shows online.  The biggest response so far was a while back when we interviewed the guys from Saturdays Children.

Phil Nee – WRCO

I did peruse the Dumbest Songs Ever chart on the train this morning. Thank you for that.

A few quibbles, but yeah, lotsa dumb stuff there.

One man's treasure and all that ...


And in one fell swoop, you have shown how touchy and difficult this is.

Just because a song doesn’t chart makes it dumb?

The first two songs mentioned as “dumb” are referred to as “great” by the author?

You yourself disagree with the list?

In the meantime, people involved with these recordings take an ego bruising.

While we can accept to disagree and change our minds about which songs are best (Hey, any artist can hold their heads high listening to a disagreement about where in the top 50 all time hits their songs belong), it is terribly difficult to argue why a song has no merit, or the least amount of merit. (Where is your measuring cup?)

I actually think this is good news for mankind. Holding up to esteem beats out bullying down.

Shelley Tufano

Every list like this is designed to spur controversy and debate … it’s been that way since the beginning of time and it will never change.

What constitutes a “dumb song” can only be defined by the ear of the listener.  WE all know that a whole lot of these dumb songs were designed with that very goal in mind … and a lot of these made a FORTUNE in sales for the songwriters and artists who recorded them.

I personally take exception with about half the list … some of the titles mentioned are absolute classics … but I ALSO know full well that if we would have pursued this any further, we would have had HUNDREDS and HUNDREDS of titles to consider within a matter of days, which is why we begged off.

“Itsy Bitsy Teenie-Weenie Yellow Polka-Dot Bikini” was the very first record I ever bought.  Now granted, I was only about seven years old at the time … but I’ll tell you what … it’s STILL one of the cleverest and catchiest songs I’ve ever heard … and there was never any doubt that this record would go straight to #1.

And dumb songs aren’t necessarily BAD songs … I cringed for nearly three minutes (and then a couple of hours afterwards) when I heard Rupert Holmes’ 1980 Hit “Answering Machine” on Sirius / XM’s Yacht Rock Channel this morning … oh my God, what an awful piece of music.  (Clever idea … but very poorly executed)  Yet people liked it enough at the time to make it a Top 50 Hit on all three charts … so what do I know.

When I think of a “dumb song,” the the one that seems to always first come to mind for me is “Rocky,” by our old buddy, Austin Roberts.  (Austin was one of the first artists to jump on the Forgotten Hits Train a couple of decades ago.)

An accomplished songwriter in his own right, he thankfully didn’t write this one … but sang it all the way up to #6 in 1975.

The lyrics ate at me every time I heard them:

“She was shy and had a fear of things she did not know” …

Boy, did she ever!

"Rocky I've never been in love before, don't know if I can do it”

"Rocky I've never had a baby before, don't know if I can do it”

"Rocky I've never had to die before, don't know if I can do it" 

And then, later, after Mama was gone, this from their daughter …

"Rocky, you know you've been alone before, you know that you can do it”

I swear I used to listen to this song back in the day and sing,

“Rocky, I’ve never wiped my ass before … don’t know if I can do it”

“Rocky, I never ate an apple before … don’t know if I can chew it”

Etc., etc., etc.

It just annoyed the hell out of me …

But clearly I was in the minority on this one if the song went all the way to #6!  (kk)

Hey, Kent!

Interesting how some songs are so disliked by some ( yes, I could compile my own personal list too! ), while the same songs can be so liked by others.

While Blue Swede’s “Hooked on a Feeling” shows up now and again in such categories, that is a song I’ve always liked because,

One, of it’s Fun, Full High Energy Production …

and Two ~~ well, I still get called by a special pseudo-name on occasion as a result of the attached that I created during its reign as a hit for my radio show in San Francisco!

“Oogah-Chuckah Buell”



More from Chuck ...

Some Acknowledgements from Chuck Buell:

Thanx to Tim Kiley for writing ~

“It's no coincidence the first five letters of the word "chuckle" are "Chuck!"  Great stuff!” 

OK, Tim! Here then! Have some more “Chuckles” on me!

And promise me “Chuckles” is the ONLY derivative of my name you use forgoing such other expressions as “Chuck It Out,” “Upchuck!” and “Chuck Hole!”

However, to you, Kent, your “Chuck’ll” Chuckle is acceptable!

But now, let’s not continue all this nonsense by getting into “How many Chuckles would a Woodchuck Chuckle if a Woodchuck could Chuck Chuckles!” Because then we’d just fall into the abyss of Silliness!

Finally, to Mike Wolston ~ I’m glad you, particularly with your unique background, liked the “Dancing Robots video” as so many others also have!  They knocked my “2020 Socks” off too!

CB ( which stands for “Capitulating Boy!” )

(or maybe this week Convalescing Boy???)

Chuck also captured CLIP OF THE WEEK Honors for this week ... 

Just TRY to watch this without laughing out loud.  (I know I couldn't do it!!!)  Funny as hell and yet just another one of those great, forgotten memories ...

Obsessive Fandom!

Chevy vs. Ford!

Mac vs. PC!

Snickers vs. Butterfinger! 

Pepsi vs. Coke!

As some of you know, I’ve been a Dedicated and Loyal Pepsi Cola and Snickers Candy Bar Fan pretty much my whole Life! 
Back when I was but a promising Young Radio Hot Shot during my first KIMN Denver Days, for guaranteed High Energy Sugar Shock to keep me going throughout the late afternoon, I used to down a full 12-ounce bottle of Fully Loaded Pepsi accompanied by an equally Fully Loaded Snickers Candy Bar pretty much every hour I was on the air doing my show! 
Three Bottles and Bars a Day, Five Days a Week! Yowzer!
But whatever “Camps” you’re in, I thought you might enjoy seeing the Attached Fun Vintage Pepsi Cola 60-second TV commercial again!
CB ( which Stands for “Cola Boy!” )

It’s the hands down Clip Of The Week winner this week …

I literally laughed out loud when I saw this clip again ... and I can't even tell you how many more times I've watched it since!!!

Thank you, Chuck Buell, for making my day!  (kk)