wasn't the argument afterwards about what black people listened to vs. what white people listened to?
No, actually, it wasn't.
"We can extrapolate that it (records) reached a higher sales stratum through the purchases of white consumers who also, presumably, sometimes bought records by white artists, sure. You hardly need a chart to know that.
But how does this differ from the present? Remember the contention is that "records by Black and white artists no longer mingle on the turntables of teenagers in the way that they used to" or some such schitt. How can the data be broken down in a way that meaningfully substantiates that one?"
"f I am not mistaken, none of this huff addresses the basic point that charts/airplay/American Bandstand tell us nothing whatsoever about the proportions in which individual consumers were actually buying and listening to records by Black and/or white artists".
Oh I'm sorry I guess the argument was what records by black people were teenagers listening to vs. what records by white people were teenagers listening to
The idea of splitting people up by colors is defintely not apparent there.
wasn't the argument afterwards about what black people listened to vs. what white people listened to?
No, actually, it wasn't.
"We can extrapolate that it (records) reached a higher sales stratum through the purchases of white consumers who also, presumably, sometimes bought records by white artists, sure. You hardly need a chart to know that.
But how does this differ from the present? Remember the contention is that "records by Black and white artists no longer mingle on the turntables of teenagers in the way that they used to" or some such schitt. How can the data be broken down in a way that meaningfully substantiates that one?"
"f I am not mistaken, none of this huff addresses the basic point that charts/airplay/American Bandstand tell us nothing whatsoever about the proportions in which individual consumers were actually buying and listening to records by Black and/or white artists".
Oh I'm sorry I guess the argument was what records by black people were teenagers listening to vs. what records by white people were teenagers listening to
The idea of splitting people up by colors is defintely not apparent there.
Guzzo, you are out of your element!
I would like to point out only that the grammatically abrasive parenthetical "(records)" that appears in the first quotation was inserted by Guzzle, who apparently does not know how to use brackets.
I had the opportunity to peruse volumes of old mojo, jazz and pop, down beat, and other music mags dating back to the 60s at a friend's house today. I saw a lot more blatant cross marketing in them (especially those from the 60s and 70s) than you see now. Some of the shit that was written - I mean, there was a flying dutchman add for a Blues comp that asked the question in bold print "Can Whites Sing The Blues?" and in smaller text - while extolling the virtues of T-Bone Walker, Otis Spann, and dissing Janis Joplin - answered, "no, they can't."
"how does one know what white or black teenagers were stacking on their turntables back in the '60s?"
By buying old record collections. When some one brings me a stack of grandads 78s from the 30s and 40s there is Basie and Shaw side by side. True for both Black and White grandads. When they bring me a stack of dads 45s from the 50s; Elvis and Ivory Joe Hunter, 60s; Supremes and Hendrix (do they count as Black or White artists?). Let me say 60s; Belafonte and Mathis (opps I'll try again) 60s; Cole and Sinatra, opps, 60s; Pickett and Beatles. 70s; we've all seen this, every rock collection has Wonder, Hathaway, Flack, Franklin and Mayfield. Not to mention Hendrix, Taj Mahal, BB King and Sly. Likewise soul collections are likely to have Steely Dan and Rod Stewart. I think things were about the same in 80s 90s and 00s. People tend to like music. Rock and soul collections of more than 75 records are likely to have country, classical, ez and other musical styles.
The billboard charts will back what I have said.[/b]
Then charts can actually show listening habits, not just marketing?
I'm surprised no one has talked about this. It's incredibly sad and shows just how deep rooted things are.
Believe me when I say that this is nothing compared to some of the findings from the last 5-10 years in social psychology. I've considered posting journal articles on a number of occasions, but have refrained b/c it's just too depressing.
"how does one know what white or black teenagers were stacking on their turntables back in the '60s?"
By buying old record collections. When some one brings me a stack of grandads 78s from the 30s and 40s there is Basie and Shaw side by side. True for both Black and White grandads. When they bring me a stack of dads 45s from the 50s; Elvis and Ivory Joe Hunter, 60s; Supremes and Hendrix (do they count as Black or White artists?). Let me say 60s; Belafonte and Mathis (opps I'll try again) 60s; Cole and Sinatra, opps, 60s; Pickett and Beatles. 70s; we've all seen this, every rock collection has Wonder, Hathaway, Flack, Franklin and Mayfield. Not to mention Hendrix, Taj Mahal, BB King and Sly. Likewise soul collections are likely to have Steely Dan and Rod Stewart. I think things were about the same in 80s 90s and 00s. People tend to like music. Rock and soul collections of more than 75 records are likely to have country, classical, ez and other musical styles.
The billboard charts will back what I have said.[/b]
Then charts can actually show listening habits, not just marketing? Charts show nothing but the info contained in them. The Billboard charts will back what I have said.
I've recently seen some White teenagers ipods and Black and White artists comingle. I have no doubt that same is true for Black teenagers. What is even more true is, individuals listen to whatever they like, without worrying about the race of the artists. This is true for Whites and Blacks, racists and people celebrating divirsity.
you've failed soulstrut
how dare you say that black people and white people don't act differnt based on the color they are born with
next you'll be saying that we should treat them like equals
I've never seen that point made here.
isn't this thread based on an article about black people acting like (white) hipsters?
wasn't the argument afterwards about what black people listened to vs. what white people listened to?
the undertones of many of these race threads are the differences between how black and white people are. What music they listen to, how their parents treat them, etc.
the idea of people being equal (despite of diffences in color) has never been something soulstrut has seemed to perscribe to
don't beleive me, lets just ask about the "real black experience" or how "white" one may sound
As to the initial article, I think we are all fighting over which parts of it are the dumbest.
I think there is universal agreement that race is not an indicator of what music an individual[/b] will listen to.
On the other hand I don't think anyone here would argue that R&B is more popular in White suburbs, and rock is more popular in Black urban areas.
I don't think we have been having an argument about much of anything except how much historical info can be gleaned from Billboard charts.
We have been discussing whether today's teens listen to music from both Billboard's Black and White charts as they did in the 60s.
I think you are mistaken about the discussions being about "the differences between how black and white people are". I think you have confused people with culture.
People tend to be very much the same even as cultures tend to be different. Wouldn't you agree?
slightly related, but i was wondering, is the NYT on LA's ballnuts or what?
i been getting emails from friends about food & leisure articles from nyt dealing specifically in LA.
i sent one to my one hammie and she was like
"if i came all the way out to la from ny and went to all the places that they listed., i would be totally pissed."
some chick in nyt did a road trip taqueria tour of california too. and there was an article about how the sgv has the best chinese food in the country. they were spot on with that one, btw.
Comments
Guzzo, you are out of your element!
I would like to point out only that the grammatically abrasive parenthetical "(records)" that appears in the first quotation was inserted by Guzzle, who apparently does not know how to use brackets.
Then charts can actually show listening habits, not just marketing?
Believe me when I say that this is nothing compared to some of the findings from the last 5-10 years in social psychology. I've considered posting journal articles on a number of occasions, but have refrained b/c it's just too depressing.
Thank you.
Then charts can actually show listening habits, not just marketing?
Charts show nothing but the info contained in them. The Billboard charts will back what I have said.
As to the initial article, I think we are all fighting over which parts of it are the dumbest.
I think there is universal agreement that race is not an indicator of what music an individual[/b] will listen to.
On the other hand I don't think anyone here would argue that R&B is more popular in White suburbs, and rock is more popular in Black urban areas.
I don't think we have been having an argument about much of anything except how much historical info can be gleaned from Billboard charts.
We have been discussing whether today's teens listen to music from both Billboard's Black and White charts as they did in the 60s.
I think you are mistaken about the discussions being about "the differences between how black and white people are". I think you have confused people with culture.
People tend to be very much the same even as cultures tend to be different. Wouldn't you agree?
Things really ARE changing!
Naw man - '80s new wave has been in hip-hop for a hot minute.
'twas a joke.
i been getting emails from friends about food & leisure articles from nyt dealing specifically in LA.
i sent one to my one hammie and she was like
"if i came all the way out to la from ny and went to all the places that they listed., i would be totally pissed."
some chick in nyt did a road trip taqueria tour of california too. and there was an article about how the sgv has the best chinese food in the country. they were spot on with that one, btw.
anyways, back to your whatever this is.