›

Did The Stooges have "hits"?

hogginthefogghogginthefogg 6,098 Posts
edited April 2008 in Strut Central
REALLY OLD HEAD STRUT ALERT! I was listening to "Fun House" today and wondered which songs from that album, if any, were "hits." I put that word in quotes because I'm pretty sure that The Stooges weren't getting tons of airplay in 1970. I'm playing a private party in a few weeks for a tattoo shop and I know that the owner is a big Stooges fan. I was thinking of playing "Down on the Street." Is there another track that would be more of "single"?
«13

  Comments

  • RockadelicRockadelic Out Digging 13,993 Posts
    No "hits"....some stuff that the most underground of FM stations would play....."1969"...."I Want To Be Your Dog"
  • dstill808dstill808 704 Posts
    Yeah, I mean, I think all three of the records were pretty much spectacular failures at the time. Don't think there was anything in the way of real airplay outside of the underground.

    The "hits" for them (ie songs people would sing along to in a bar in the present day) I think would mostly come from the first album, ie "I Want To Be Your Dog," "1969," "No Fun," etc."TV Eye" would probably be the closest thing to this on Fun House. That said, "Dirt" is my jam.
  • dstill808dstill808 704 Posts
    No "hits"....some stuff that the most underground of FM stations would play....."1969"...."I Want To Be Your Dog"

    Haha, yep. We pretty much said the same thing at the same time.
  • edith headedith head 5,106 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.
  • SnappingSnapping 995 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls and the Velvet Underground[/b] in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.
  • luckluck 4,077 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    Well, the Ramones had enough of a niche market since their first LP that they didn't really have to do any embarassing comeback/reunion tours. Since their 1976 debut, they didn't go more than two years between LPs until Adios Amigos (and if you want to count their ensuing two live albums, then that's a span of more than 20 years).

    The VU comparison seems apt. Without any evidence to back it up, Iggy Pop seemed to do well enough solo (a la Lou Reed) that people began to re-assess their old groups' importance in The Canon.
  • bobbydeebobbydee 849 Posts
    My parents had "raw power" in the collectron. And they are VERY middle class/middle of the road listeners (read: whitey white mcwhite)
  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    since when do "hits" define importance in underground rock music? All those bands were definitely influential, very original, changed the game from a music making standpoint and more important than say the rock hit makers of their day, I mean how people did BJ Thomas influence? Who sits around and talks about the cutting edge song "Raindrops keep Falling on my Head"? Although not having hits did hurt those bands initial careers...but last time I checked Iggy, David Johansen and Lou Reed still have careers...Last time I saw Burton Cummings, he was on PBS rehashing a limp dick version of "American Woman" to a bunch of 50 and 60 year olds...Ramones would still have a career if they werent all dead, although Tommy Ramone plays ukelele gigs...
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls and the Velvet Underground[/b] in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    The Velvet Underground have already been mentioned. See the second paragraph in the first post.
  • deejdeej 5,125 Posts
    'search and destroy' is the HIT as far as how i remember coming into contact with these dudes

    love all three records but to be fair they had cachet pretty early even if they werent straight up popular, lester bangs was an early champion and he was 'known'
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    since when do "hits" define importance in underground rock music?

    Since never! I'm gonna play my Ramones/Dolls/etc. records anyway, regardless. But I just find that kind of geeky Billboard chart info interesting.

    I mean how people did BJ Thomas influence?

    Well, he's influenced me to play his rekkids at home... (((grin))) B.J. was no protopunk or anything like that, but as far as plain ol' 1960's AM radio pop goes, he's every bit as unfuckwitable as Tommy Roe and Billy Joe Royal.
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    'search and destroy' is the HIT as far as how i remember coming into contact with these dudes

    love all three records but to be fair they had cachet pretty early even if they werent straight up popular, lester bangs was an early champion and he was 'known'

    nah, lester was "known," but he was considered just as much of an outsider as iggy
  • SoulOnIceSoulOnIce 13,027 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls and the Velvet Underground[/b] in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    Right, but think of more modern bands like Fugazi ... in a way,
    they were "mega-stars" and sold a very respectable amount of records
    without airplay or major label backing. I always assumed VU, the Stooges
    and the Dolls were the same way - they had a core base of fans, were able
    to get their name our there by touring, and were influential on bands that
    came along so soon afterward that they were able to enjoy some fame not
    long after their "failed" major label efforts. Bear in mind also that
    records considered "failures" by major labels in 1968-1971 could easily
    still sold as many copies as, say, a Misfits record did in 1980, and could
    therefore acheive the same level of notoriety/fame.
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls and the Velvet Underground[/b] in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    Right, but think of more modern bands like Fugazi ... in a way,
    they were "mega-stars" and sold a very respectable amount of records
    without airplay or major label backing. I always assumed VU, the Stooges
    and the Dolls were the same way - they had a core base of fans, were able
    to get their name our there by touring, and were influential on bands that
    came along so soon afterward that they were able to enjoy some fame not
    long after their "failed" major label efforts. Bear in mind also that
    records considered "failures" by major labels in 1968-1971 could easily
    still sold as many copies as, say, a Misfits record did in 1980, and could
    therefore acheive the same level of notoriety/fame.

    Those bands definitely weren't unknown...the typical rock concert goer from the late sixties probably knew the Velvets even if they didn't like them. And in cold hard statistical terms, the albums did make the charts (towards the bottom, but still...). So they had their niche. But I could see how some younger rock fan coming up would think that these bands were more famous than they were, based on how they're portrayed.
  • luckluck 4,077 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    since when do "hits" define importance in underground rock music? All those bands were definitely influential, very original, changed the game from a music making standpoint and more important than say the rock hit makers of their day, I mean how people did BJ Thomas influence? Who sits around and talks about the cutting edge song "Raindrops keep Falling on my Head"? Although not having hits did hurt those bands initial careers...but last time I checked Iggy, David Johansen and Lou Reed still have careers...Last time I saw Burton Cummings, he was on PBS rehashing a limp dick version of "American Woman" to a bunch of 50 and 60 year olds...Ramones would still have a career if they werent all dead, although Tommy Ramone plays ukelele gigs...

    Well, since the discussion was initially about The Stooges having hits, then that's why we were talking about, well, The Stooges having hits. Face it: Pop & Co. weren't very big in their day and probably would have broken up after Fun House and been forgotten without the Thin White Duke's say. Their second LP really didn't sell very well.

    Additionally, the intelligent over-marketing of CBGB kitsch-culture did a lot for the reflexive pop-cultural value of the groups that played there.
  • DocMcCoyDocMcCoy "Go and laugh in your own country!" 5,917 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    The Velvets comparison is a valid one, I think. Their artistic re-evaluation started in real earnest in about 1976/77, when the first-gen UK punk acts started namechecking them as key influences, but at that point their records were unavailable over here. I was aware of them as a teenager, mainly due to writers like Nick Kent and Lester Bangs enthusiastically cheerleading for them, and I vaguely remember 'Raw Power' getting a few stellar reviews upon release, but I never really heard their music until 'The Stooges', 'Fun House' and 'Raw Power' all got reissued in 1977. Since then, and as Iggy's increased his profile, successive generations of rock bands have been citing them as artistic touchstones.
  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    since when do "hits" define importance in underground rock music? All those bands were definitely influential, very original, changed the game from a music making standpoint and more important than say the rock hit makers of their day, I mean how people did BJ Thomas influence? Who sits around and talks about the cutting edge song "Raindrops keep Falling on my Head"? Although not having hits did hurt those bands initial careers...but last time I checked Iggy, David Johansen and Lou Reed still have careers...Last time I saw Burton Cummings, he was on PBS rehashing a limp dick version of "American Woman" to a bunch of 50 and 60 year olds...Ramones would still have a career if they werent all dead, although Tommy Ramone plays ukelele gigs...

    Well, since the discussion was initially about The Stooges having hits, then that's why we were talking about, well, The Stooges having hits. Face it: Pop & Co. weren't very big in their day and probably would have broken up after Fun House and been forgotten without the Thin White Duke's say. Their second LP really didn't sell very well.

    Additionally, the intelligent over-marketing of CBGB kitsch-culture did a lot for the reflexive pop-cultural value of the groups that played there.

    Well it seemed that some people were sort of implying that since they and their ilk didnt have "hits", that somehow this diminishes their importance and greatness...which is silly. Ill go back to my Guess Who reference, yes huge "hits" but not so much more than that...The Stooges, Dolls, etc are a 1000 times more important than them...and rightly so.
  • finelikewinefinelikewine "ONCE UPON A TIME, I HAD A VINYL." http://www.discogs.com/user/permabulker 1,416 Posts
    Just out of interest, does MC5's "Kick Out The Jams" qualify by your standards as a hit record?
  • funky16cornersfunky16corners 7,175 Posts
    Just out of interest, does MC5's "Kick Out The Jams" qualify by your standards as a hit record?

    By no standard....

    I always marvel at how bands like the Velvets, the MC5, the Stooges or Big Star (all hugely influential and important) got to keep making records. It was a combination of a limited amount of good taste at the record labels with a whole lot of trying to secure underground cred at the time (less so in the case of Big Star). None of these bands was selling records in any meaningful way.
  • Birdman9Birdman9 5,417 Posts
    Just out of interest, does MC5's "Kick Out The Jams" qualify by your standards as a hit record?

    By no standard....

    I always marvel at how bands like the Velvets, the MC5, the Stooges or Big Star (all hugely influential and important) got to keep making records. It was a combination of a limited amount of good taste at the record labels with a whole lot of trying to secure underground cred at the time (less so in the case of Big Star). None of these bands was selling records in any meaningful way.

    An important part of the equation here is how there were always people in Iggy's corner who REALLY believed he could not only have hits, but become the Superstar that they saw in him. From guys like Danny Fields to David Bowie and Ray Manzarek, people were constantly attempting to re-introduce him into the mainstream despite horrible press (some deserved, most probably not so much) for his antics. I think that guys like James Williamson really thought they were going to go nuclear huge with Iggy, but couldn't make it work. Some great music resulted, but Iggy was always a little bit(a lot, actually) too much too soon. So there was always AWARENESS of Iggy/Stooges, but it was barely commercially viable, let alone successful.

    There is a funny anecdote (I think from the punk history, 'Please Kill Me')about a concert where the Alice Cooper Band were opening up for the Stooges early on in Detroit (Cooper's adopted city). Here's Iggy, barely coherent, fighting off an OD of smack, needle in his arm, blood spurting everywhere in the bathroom where he is fixing up. The next room over, Alice Cooper Band are applying their make-up dillegently, preparing for the evening in a most relaxed, professional manner. It kind of summed up the roads these two acts (in Cooper's case, he took a lot of grief over the years for 'stealing' a lot of Iggy's act) would take, commercially speaking. It also applies well to the NY Dolls and Kiss. One blazes a trail, smart cookies fly the flag behind them, get rich and cultivate their addictions AFTER they've made it.
  • SnappingSnapping 995 Posts
    i was surprised that "search and destroy" was a song choice on guitar hero. i think they might be similiar to the velvet underground where hardly anyone saw them when they came out but retrospectively people now jock their brains out and consider them important/value their contribution to rock history.

    I'd put the Ramones and the New York Dolls and the Velvet Underground[/b] in the same situation...no hits, yet people talk like they were megastars.

    The Velvet Underground have already been mentioned. See the second paragraph in the first post.

    me read bad
  • bull_oxbull_ox 5,056 Posts
    Just out of interest, does MC5's "Kick Out The Jams" qualify by your standards as a hit record?

    By no standard....

    I always marvel at how bands like the Velvets, the MC5, the Stooges or Big Star (all hugely influential and important) got to keep making records. It was a combination of a limited amount of good taste at the record labels with a whole lot of trying to secure underground cred at the time (less so in the case of Big Star). None of these bands was selling records in any meaningful way.

    I think "Kick Out the Jams" made a certain splash upon arrival and was like "Heroin" around that same time, as they both had that controversy/notoriety attached to them that could've equated to success/record sales - but the withdrawal of both LPs from the market also probably ended up contributing to the lack of commercial impact which ended up haunting both group's careers...

    And what I'm saying is that if the 45 of "Jams" got played anywhere it would be at a college station and probably late night, but a lot of people were certainly aware of it... this was before FM took over because the AM stations were not playing the rock songs that were the "hits" those who bought records were actually listening to from what I understand...
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    Just out of interest, does MC5's "Kick Out The Jams" qualify by your standards as a hit record?

    By no standard....

    I always marvel at how bands like the Velvets, the MC5, the Stooges or Big Star (all hugely influential and important) got to keep making records. It was a combination of a limited amount of good taste at the record labels with a whole lot of trying to secure underground cred at the time (less so in the case of Big Star). None of these bands was selling records in any meaningful way.

    I think "Kick Out the Jams" made a certain splash upon arrival and was like "Heroin" around that same time, as they both had that controversy/notoriety attached to them that could've equated to success/record sales - but the withdrawal of both LPs from the market also probably ended up contributing to the lack of commercial impact which ended up haunting both group's careers...

    I don't think either album was "withdrawn," per se, but remember, there was a censored version of the song "Kick Out The Jams" (with "brothers & sisters" in the place of "motherfuckers"). Later pressings had this doctored rendition, and this is what you heard on the single.

    And what I'm saying is that if the 45 of "Jams" got played anywhere it would be at a college station and probably late night, but a lot of people were certainly aware of it... this was before FM took over

    No, it wasn't either. FM rock was already off and running by '69. ABC even had a chain of 'em - "Love Radio."

    because the AM stations were not playing the rock songs that were the "hits" those who bought records were actually listening to from what I understand...

    Nope...more like the AM stations were servicing a slightly different audience. While the AM had mainstream pop acts like the Archies and B.J. Thomas and Glen Campbell, FM was taking care of business with the more progressive, "heavy" acts. Any airplay that the Velvets, the MC 5 and the Stooges got was definitely coming from the FM sector.
  • bull_oxbull_ox 5,056 Posts
    Check this out:

    The first LP starts off with Brother J.C. Crawford doing a rap
    introduction to the band in a style he copped off James Brown's MC. I
    think it's him that says "Its time to kick out the jams
    motherfuckers" which was changed for the single release to 'brothers
    and sisters' but left intact on the LP version, until various record
    stores refused to stock the LP because of this and it was withdrawn.
    Much like the first Velvets LP this happened at an inopportune time.
    Unlike the Velvets though, this was because it was actually getting a
    great deal of chart response. It reached #40 on the Billboard chart
    and was then withdrawn. There was also some trouble over the use of
    the word "fuck" in manager John Sinclair's liner notes.

    (The VU LP was withdrawn due to that whip guy suing them over his pic appearing on the sleeve cuz he was broke, however... so they had to pull it off the market and redo the sleeve w/o him - Malanga, I think?)
  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    Check this out:

    The first LP starts off with Brother J.C. Crawford doing a rap
    introduction to the band in a style he copped off James Brown's MC. I
    think it's him that says "Its time to kick out the jams
    motherfuckers" which was changed for the single release to 'brothers
    and sisters' but left intact on the LP version, until various record
    stores refused to stock the LP because of this and it was withdrawn.
    Much like the first Velvets LP this happened at an inopportune time.
    Unlike the Velvets though, this was because it was actually getting a
    great deal of chart response. It reached #40 on the Billboard chart
    and was then withdrawn. There was also some trouble over the use of
    the word "fuck" in manager John Sinclair's liner notes.

    (The VU LP was withdrawn due to that whip guy suing them over his pic appearing on the sleeve cuz he was broke, however... so they had to pull it off the market and redo the sleeve w/o him - Malanga, I think?)

    there is an Elektra "motherfucker" single...it was actually a giveaway at their Fillmore gig when the LP was being released...goes for loot.
  • pickwick33pickwick33 8,946 Posts
    Check this out:

    The first LP starts off with Brother J.C. Crawford doing a rap
    introduction to the band in a style he copped off James Brown's MC. I
    think it's him that says "Its time to kick out the jams
    motherfuckers" which was changed for the single release to 'brothers
    and sisters' but left intact on the LP version, until various record
    stores refused to stock the LP because of this and it was withdrawn.
    Much like the first Velvets LP this happened at an inopportune time.
    Unlike the Velvets though, this was because it was actually getting a
    great deal of chart response. It reached #40 on the Billboard chart
    and was then withdrawn. There was also some trouble over the use of
    the word "fuck" in manager John Sinclair's liner notes.

    What this blurb doesn't tell us is that the album was re-pressed WITHOUT the liner notes and WITH the censored brothers-and-sisters "Kick Out The Jams." That's the version I have.

    And according to the Billboard chart book, the album made #30 (not #40) and the "...Jams" single made #82...

    Where did you get that info from, BTW?
  • The_Hook_UpThe_Hook_Up 8,182 Posts
    Check this out:

    The first LP starts off with Brother J.C. Crawford doing a rap
    introduction to the band in a style he copped off James Brown's MC. I
    think it's him that says "Its time to kick out the jams
    motherfuckers" which was changed for the single release to 'brothers
    and sisters' but left intact on the LP version, until various record
    stores refused to stock the LP because of this and it was withdrawn.
    Much like the first Velvets LP this happened at an inopportune time.
    Unlike the Velvets though, this was because it was actually getting a
    great deal of chart response. It reached #40 on the Billboard chart
    and was then withdrawn. There was also some trouble over the use of
    the word "fuck" in manager John Sinclair's liner notes.

    What this blurb doesn't tell us is that the album was re-pressed WITHOUT the liner notes and WITH the censored brothers-and-sisters "Kick Out The Jams." That's the version I have.

    And according to the Billboard chart book, the album made #30 and the "...Jams" single made #82...

    Where did you get that info from, BTW?

    i have both versions now, but I only had the censored one when I met Wayne Kramer...here is what he wrote on it:
  • Birdman9Birdman9 5,417 Posts
    Check this out:

    The first LP starts off with Brother J.C. Crawford doing a rap
    introduction to the band in a style he copped off James Brown's MC. I
    think it's him that says "Its time to kick out the jams
    motherfuckers" which was changed for the single release to 'brothers
    and sisters' but left intact on the LP version, until various record
    stores refused to stock the LP because of this and it was withdrawn.
    Much like the first Velvets LP this happened at an inopportune time.
    Unlike the Velvets though, this was because it was actually getting a
    great deal of chart response. It reached #40 on the Billboard chart
    and was then withdrawn. There was also some trouble over the use of
    the word "fuck" in manager John Sinclair's liner notes.

    What this blurb doesn't tell us is that the album was re-pressed WITHOUT the liner notes and WITH the censored brothers-and-sisters "Kick Out The Jams." That's the version I have.

    And according to the Billboard chart book, the album made #30 and the "...Jams" single made #82...

    Where did you get that info from, BTW?

    i have both versions now, but I only had the censored one when I met Wayne Kramer...here is what he wrote on it:

    I saw him on that tour...still one of the greatest shows of my life.
  • deepbrntdeepbrnt 241 Posts
    I like Raw Power. Title song is cool, I like the lyrics. Gimme Danger definitely the standout. Does Lust For Life count? When was that made?
Sign In or Register to comment.