Off Topic Messages

Mon Jan 30, 2006 12:31 pm

yes i know what your saying about bing some of his old movies are good but his music has not lasted the test of time and is so camp.but elvis music was the start of the modern era which is why it has lasted the test of time,bing was for parents elvis and rocknroll was for the kids and teenagers.

Mon Jan 30, 2006 5:56 pm

Camp???

Bings songs have been covered so many times, perhaps you should do some research first.

Lets start with the song...Young At Heart for openers. How about a little "campy" song like White Christmas??? 1,700 recordings with 41 #1's. With 23 Gold albums BEFORE 1958 when the RIAA came about and Bing was retiring.

Most of Bings songs are known to be in use from other artists. The reasong that the songs haven't made the test of time is because they have only been in print through 78's!!!! They have simply not been available for 30 years to anybody but a collector.

But lets get real here and talk about who he influenced...Frank, Dean Martin, Andy Williams, Arti Shaw...hmmm do those ring a bell on a Elvis board?

At least give the man respect for being the godfather of Magnetic tape recordings.

Here is some comparisons that I stole..This is not to start a Bing vs Elvis fight cause I too feel that Elvis is much bigger.

Though take this quote into scope:


Concerning the Economic, Technological and Political Differences Between Bing's and Elvis' Eras:

This admittedly long topic intends to address why if Bing was so popular he didn't have more million-selling records, gold records, and platinum records. It will sound like I'm making excuses for Bing. I'm not. The Great Depression and World War II are factors that had a profound effect on what people were able to buy. This article is an attempt to put the situation at the time into perspective. The information came from my mother, father-in-law, and step-father who lived through this period.

Regarding gold records, the most important is the fact to consider is that the first gold record for a song selling one million copies wasn't awarded until Bing was three-quarters the way through his career. It is unfair to say Elvis is better because he won more golds when gold records weren't awarded during the majority of Bing's career. Bing was selling million-copy recording a decade before this and they never got counted. Also, in 1989 the RIAA cut the number of sales required for gold a platinum records by half, making it even easier to earn them.

There were profound differences between Bing's and Elvis' eras. Elvis was at his zenith during times of prosperity. People had surplus money to spend. During the fifteen years of Bing's greatest popularity the US was first crippled by the great depression then followed by World War II. Simply put, these two facts meant that people did not have the money to spend on luxuries such as record albums... they were too worried about scraping enough together to buy a loaf of bread. This is not an exaggeration. The unemployment rate during much of the depression was 25 percent. The effect on record sales was staggering. They dropped from 140 million in 1927 to 6 million in 1932.

During Bing's time, the average age of record purchasers was ten years older than Elvis' era. This means that the people controlling the money were also those responsible for feeding and housing families. As such, record purchases would rate a lower priority than they did for the more youthful purchasers on the 1950s.

Additionally, there were 50,000,000 fewer people in the US during Bing's time. A smaller population means less demand and hence, fewer sales.

Technology is also an issue. In much of Bing's time there was only one record system: the 78 rpm record. During Elvis' era there were two: records and tape. Also, very few portable record players existed in Bing's era. The vast majority of players were large console units. Elvis enjoyed the benefit of having small, easily portable players. Ease and comfort of use increases demand. Music quality also plays an important part in demand. During Bing's time the fidelity of recorded music was much poorer than that available in Elvis' time. People aren't going to be interested in laying out a lot of money for something that doesn't sound good. And while we're on the topic of cost, the average record player in the 1930s cost over $100 (Adjusting for inflation that's $500 in the 1950s or over $1000 today). A 78 rpm record with two songs averaged $1.00 (That's 50-cents per song. When corrected for inflation, that means a fifteen song CD today would cost $50.00.) Additionally, during much of Bing's career, records were looked down upon as "music in a can." The more popular mode of listening to music was via the radio, which had the advantage of being free.

I believe that the combined effects of high cost, different population demographics and scarcity of money for luxuries are the principle reasons why Bing's record sales weren't high enough to earn him as many million sellers as Elvis. Let me attempt to put this into perspective. Imagine that instead of one Enron scandal, one hundred companies just as large had failed back in 2000. Also imagine that the impact of this was enough to send America into a second great depression starting in 2001. By 2002, one-quarter of the working force would have lost his or her job. The stock market would have collapsed and one hundred million people would have had their life savings wiped out. There are long lines of people waiting to receive free food from the government because they don't have the resources to feed their families. These aren't the homeless or poor we occasionally see today, but college graduates who had successful careers just 12 months ago. There is no work. There is no money. Worst of all, there is no sign that the situation is going to get better, ever. Now increase the price of a CD player to $1000 and a CD to $50. Finally, cut the population in half and take all of the money away from teenagers and put it in control of the 25 year old and older age group, the people responsible for their family's survival. Imagine being in that situation and ask yourself how much you'd be willing to spend on music. These were the conditions during the major part of Bing Crosby's career. I think they go a long way toward explaining why he didn't earn as many million sellers as Elvis.



Here is a facinating link comparing the two!:

http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/elvisbing.html


Crosby 1931-1957 and Elvis 1956-1977
THE NUMBERS:


...........................................ELVIS PRESLEY................BING CROSBY

Number of Top 30 Hits.................... .85................................383

Number of Top 10 Hits......................38.................. ............ 203

Number of Number 1 Hits........... ..... .18................................ 41

Longest Consecutive Run
at the #1 Position --.......................-16 weeks (1956) --------- 23 (1944)

Total Weeks at #1..................... ..... 80.............................. 173

Most Top 30 songs in 1 Year........ ..... 10 (1956)............. .........27 (1939)

Total Number of Recordings............. .665....................... ......1700

Total Popularity Number
(Billboard System) ----..........-..---- 7,190 --------...........--.27,465

Total Popularity Number
(My System) ----..........-..--........-33,415 -----.....-........--125,899


ELVIS PRESLEY................BING CROSBY

Grammy Lifetime Achievement Award..............yes................................yes

Grammy Hall Of Fame Awards....... ................. 5...................................5

Golden Globe Awards....... ............................ 0...................................2

Hall of Fame Inductee....... .... Rock and Roll, Gospel, Country.........Radio, Popular Music



(The following movie data provided by IMDb.)

........................................................ELVIS PRESLEY................BING CROSBY

Number of Movies.(credited and noncredited).....33..................................79

Number of Movies Receiving
Academy Award Nominations ....... ................... 1..................................26

Total Number Academy Award
Nominationsss........................ ................... 0 .1..................................70

Total Number Academy Awards Won
by Movies they were in.....................................0.................................19

Academy Award Nominations
For His Acting and/or Singing............................. 0..................................8

Academy Awards Won...................................... 0..................................5

Number of Years Ranked #1 Box Office Draw..........0..............................5 (1944-49)

Number of Years in the Top 10 Stars
Based on Box Office Earnings..............................0.............................15 (1934, 37, .......................................................................................................40, 43-54)

Number of Years he was the lead star
in that year's #1 box office grossing movie............0...............................3

Total Box Office Movie Gross
Corrected for Inflation to 2005 dollars........$438 million......................$2,444 million
..........................................................................................(That's $2.44 billion.)

................................................ELVIS PRESLEY................BING CROSBY

Total Record Sales.......................... .1.1 billion....................... 900 million


Greatest Single Song Sales..............310 million ........................45 million
..............................................(It's Now or Never)........... (White Christmas)

XXXXXXXXXXXXXXX

Here is some more for you

Decade.................total box office.............Adjusted to 2005

Bing Crosby:

1930s.......................$3.0 million................ ......$143 million

1940s.....................$75.0 million................ ....$2,991 million

1950s.....................$73.0 million.....................$1,529 million

1970s.....................$19.0 million.................. ......$89 million

Total...........................................................$4,752 million


Elvis Presley:

Based on decade
centered on 1964......$67.0 million................ ......$708 million


What these adjusted numbers imply is that in his time, as a move star Bing Crosby was 6.7 times more popular than Elvis Presley was in his. This is easy to understand because Bing Crosby had three movies that were the top money makers the years they were released and many of his other films were in the top ten for their years. The highest-earning movie Elvis ever had was Viva Las Vegas, which only made it to 11th place.

To be fair to Elvis, it has to acknowledged that he made half as many movies as Bing. While Elvis fans may request that this requires Bing's total to be halved for comparison (reducing it to $2.351 billion, indicating that he was still well over 3 times as popular in the movies as Elvis), it needs to be acknowledged that the number of movies Elvis made was partially determined by their success. If he had starred in several #1 box office hits then the movie companies would have supported him to make more. I leave it to the reader to determine for themselves what is fair.

UPDATE!!! After receiving several emails from Elvis fans who claimed the comparison above was unfair because Elvis' movies had to compete against televison whereas Bing's didn't, I undertook an extensive study of all the issues that effect the per capita ticket purchasing trends for every year from 1929 to 2004 and posted them on the page: BOX OFFICE DATA. The per capita ticket purchasing values indicate that television had an enormous effect on how many times the average person went to the movies. In 1946 the average was 34 times a year, by 1961 that had dropped to 7 times a year and eventually to 5 by 2004. Applying the data from that page can only be done for specific years or movies. To compare Elvis to Bing, I selected their top two movies in which they were the main star: Viva Las Vegas and Blue Hawaii for Elvis, The Bells of St. Mary's and White Christmas for Bing. Here's how the numbers cook out:


Elvis:

Viva Las Vegas,.1964,.$9M,.adjusted for inflation, population and purchasing trends to 2004 = $94 million

Blue Hawaii,.1961,.$10M,.adjusted for inflation, population and purchasing trends to 2004 = $104 million


Bing:

The Bells of St. Mary's,.1945,.$21M,.adjusted for inflation, population and purchasing trends to 2004 = $138 million

White Christmas,.1954,.$30M,.adjusted for inflation, population and purchasing trends to 2004 = $233 million


Summing the values for each man suggests that Bing was still at least twice as popular as Elvis in the movie venue.



XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXXx

I love this guy...check out this link

http://www.waynesthisandthat.com/musichits.htm

Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:10 pm

Geno -

No one can argue that Bing Crosby had a pretty glittery career.

But rolling off a list of his achievements just doesn't resonate today.

It's like saying Rudee Vallee or Al Jolson were bigger than Elvis.

Their achievements were from another age entirely and simply irrelevant to the scene today.

This is true of all artists who were famous before the 'rock era'.

The advent of rock 'n' roll drew a line under all that had gone before.

Until another such line is drawn...... Elvis rules !

Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:23 pm

Genesim -

Elvis was ranked in the top 10 of film box office draws for several years.

Elvis On Tour won the Golden Globe for best documentary.

Mon Jan 30, 2006 7:46 pm

Umm...how many people flock to Bing's home every year?

Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:23 pm

like i said bing is camp i will give you white christmas its a classic still played today (well 4 weeks out of the year) . i does not matter who covers bings songs they are so out date.i must say though i love the movies going my way & the bells of st marys.but this is allso down to personal taste as i said at the start of this topic i am a big johnny horton fan 8 out of ten people on this board wont have heard of him and his songs are allso dated and camp but because i am a fan i like them but he is not in the same ball park as elvis.

Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:37 pm

Did anybody bother to read the paragraphs explaining the relevance of Bing today?? This might explain the same "ballpark" arguements or the "flocking to homes".

I suggest actually reading...then criticizing.
Blind faith, thats what I call it. Gee just maybe all of us have missed out on an important era.

Kind of like the Marx Brothers in Vaudville. A time gone yes....but one that transcended to influence our comedy of today.

The fools that say Bing didn't have the influence and then turn around and bow to Elvis have competely forgotten who the hell influenced him!!

The first couple of paragraph quotes say it all and Bings immense popularity have been overshadowed by depression...entertainment interfaces..etc. This is completely unfair in all regards. Think about it.

Mon Jan 30, 2006 8:49 pm

P.S.

Elvis rules Rock N Roll yes...but he also shares most of the crown with other acts. He didn't dominate music like Bing did in his time and I dare say that he wasn't the first to introduce whites to black music in that big of a way.

Oh sure it is PC to say it now, but Bing was doing it years before E and in a much much bigger way.

Again it is the time period that hurts Bing.

Mon Jan 30, 2006 11:44 pm

and yet, my familiarity with bing crosby comes from one song (white christmas) and the narration of disney's legend of sleepy hollow.

'nough said.

and i think i accurately personify today's young people, with the added plus that i'm much more favorable to old artists than nearly everybody else in my generation.

if you accurately count in my generation, you might even want to drop off the familiarity with sleepy hollow. it's one of the disney classics that hasn't exactly made it.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:11 am

What a maroon!!

I agree with Genesim that Bing is a true legend who is definitely underappreciated by today's music listeners. Although I prefer listening to Sinatra and Dino from the era prior to R&R, Bing can't be understated.

jeff R

Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:49 am

WORD! :D

Someday I will collect all his works. I love how the Chronological Crosby collection is laid out and it is what FTD should have been!

Tue Jan 31, 2006 1:56 am

Bing Crosby And David Bowie classic rock moment on TV. Even though it was a X-mas song! :)

Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:13 am

JLGB wrote:Bing Crosby And David Bowie classic rock moment on TV. Even though it was a X-mas song! :)


You're putting us on, right ?

In that video, Crosby looks like he never wanted to be there and Bowie doesn't even remember he was !

Bing's expression looks just as if, right before the filming, someone said to him:

"Hey, Bing, you realise this guy's bisexual, don't you ?"

Poor Bing tries to struggle through the piece without any eye contact whatsoever with young David !

Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:23 am

Geneism, you're such a boring bastard.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:45 am

ColinB wrote:
JLGB wrote:Bing Crosby And David Bowie classic rock moment on TV. Even though it was a X-mas song! :)


You're putting us on, right ?

In that video, Crosby looks like he never wanted to be there and Bowie doesn't even remember he was !

Bing's expression looks just as if, right before the filming, someone said to him:

"Hey, Bing, you realise this guy's bisexual, don't you ?"

Poor Bing tries to struggle through the piece without any eye contact whatsoever with young David !
It has been on VH1 for years as that.
Last edited by Juan Luis on Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:19 am, edited 1 time in total.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 2:48 am

Tits(did I just say that :twisted: ),

For such a "boring bastard" I sure do rouse up a stir with some of you people. :lol:

Colin B,

Opinions vary, but I actually think it is a very cool performance. Bing was getting along in age, but it was a damn good duet.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:38 am

genesim wrote:Colin B,

Opinions vary, but I actually think it is a very cool performance. Bing was getting along in age, but it was a damn good duet.


Actually, I quite like the record !

But that video....................

Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:56 am

Yes...Bing could have looked better, but it was poignant that it was his swan song. Didn't he die mere weeks later?

Bing may have been a terrible father, but he was such an entertainer that it is sad he doesn't get the recognition he so deserves.

His voice is so near perfect. He IS the Crooner. Always preferred him over the high pitched Frank. Even though I am a big fan of "the voice" as well!

Here is a link to the classic duet!

http://hometown.aol.com/jesusandsue2/Page7.html

Tue Jan 31, 2006 3:04 pm

here we go we are on to sinatra now as i have said before on another post i can not stand him i hate his voice he had nothing but contempt for rocknroll music and elvis there is not even one of his songs i like.but i do like dean martin and i can see and hear why he is one of kings heros the guy had a great voice and was as cool as can be. but again it down to musical tastes i have friends who love sinatra and can not get it round there heads why i dislike his music and him so much i am getting the same with robbie williams but thats another story.but i guess the point is everyone has there place in musical history but elvis just stands aloan at the top.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:31 pm

rocknroller wrote:here we go we are on to sinatra now as i have said before on another post i can not stand him i hate his voice he had nothing but contempt for rocknroll music and elvis there is not even one of his songs i like.


:shock:

A fellacious post perpetuating negative MYTH....

1) Sinatra was originally VERY disparaging of Elvis and this new brand of "rock n roll" that had firmly displaced Sinatra in the cultural pecking order, but over time, aided in no small part by the Timex special where Elvis and Sinatra performed together, Sinatra came to see Elvis as a true friend.

Sinatra's original remarks:

"His kind of music is deplorable, a rancid smelling aphrodisiac. It fosters almost totally negative and destructive reactions in young people." -- Frank Sinatra, 1957

Sinatra's later remarks:

"There have been many accolades uttered about Elvis' talent and performances through the years, all of which I agree with wholeheartedly. I shall miss him dearly as a friend. He was a warm, considerate and generous man." -- Frank Sinatra, 1977

Read and learn!

2) While you are entitled to your puzzling opinions on Sinatra's voice and songs, I do find your remarks somewhat.... abrasive and misguided... to say the least. EP was a great admirer of Sinatra and covered "My Way" to stupendous effect. He didn't fare too badly at singing "Withcraft", either.

I'll leave you to wallow in your swirling spitball of hatred, now.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 5:49 pm

I don't deny that Bing had enormous influence, nor that he had a good voice, but I've yet to hear a performance that I wouldn't place in the 'bland' category - and I've heard a lot because my uncle is probably one of the biggest Bing fans on the planet. Even when sharing the stage with Louis Armstrong in High Society on "Now You Has Jazz" he manages to bore me to tears. This has nothing to do with lack of appreciation of the era or the crooning style. I love much of Dean Martin's output and some of Sinatra's. They just both bring something else to the party. Dean Martin and Frank Sinatra have a hipness (for want of a better word) that Bing can't match. That said, I do think Bing should be remembered and respected for his contribution to popular music.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:02 pm

Sinatra came to see Elvis as a TRUE friend ?

Do a few meetings and phone calls equal true friendship ?

Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:26 pm

There are several Bing songs that Sinatra later covered that just turned to WHINEY.

First off, there is Young at Heart. Though covered several times, nothing compares to the masterful 1954 version by him.

Lets compare Whats New. This used to be a favorite Sinatra off the album Only The Lonely...till I heard Bing's version. I cannot stand again the whiney...reaching....vocals from Sinatra(anymore).

I'll Be Seeing You-yet another that I thought was Sinatra's signature...till

Stardust is another...maybe someday I will find a way to post a link, and we can do the pepsi challenge. Which version is better kind of thing. Lol

Bing is to me the original Baritone and I laugh my ass off how people compare Dean and Elvis when they are basically mimicking what Bing was doing first. There are some songs that actually sound the same!!

Elvis does a great impression of Bing when he screams "you dirty son of a b*tch" on a studio outtake in the 60's. Many of these alternates were coming into people's hands and it was becoming some what of a gas to make fun of Bing's blowups. This was no exception.

When people talk about Bing's "hipness" or that "he just hasn't got sound I enjoy", again revert back to the post that I pasted.


Tj,

On a side note. I admit Bing isn't a easy first..second..third listen. Why, because it is a different time and most of us have been conditioned. But keep this in mind. I was a Sinatra fan first and had blown so much money on buying everything he ever had. I had all the Capital, Reprise, Tommy Dorsey, The V Discs, 60 Hours of Radio Shows, Harry James Orchestra(the last thing I aquired)..and had not finished the Columbia years...when I really discovered Bing.

It was through that appreciation, not just passive listening, but real in depth album after album listening to phrasing, listening to the lyrics..etc. Only then did I appreciate how Bing kicked ALL THEIR ASSES!

It is perspective though and I myself am still learning. Some of his stuff is ultimately dated, and like with Elvis in the 60's, one has to appreciate the fads of the times. But still a careful listen to say Too Rah Loo or Just One More Chance or Where The Blues Of the Night...hell half the Bing songs that never even made it past the Radio Shows!!! There is such a wealth of material. That and the fact that he was a GREAT entertainer.

Most people on here, I believe have only skimmed the surface.

The thing about Bing that hurt him..he got lazy. He didn't care about being the best in the 50's and Sinatra took over. Still, damn, how long should a King rule???

Tue Jan 31, 2006 6:45 pm

"The thing about Bing that hurt him..he got lazy. He didn't care about being the best in the 50's and Sinatra took over. Still, damn, how long should a King rule???"


Very unfair to say the old groaner got lazy Gen. Every dog has his day, and Bing`s lasted a very long time. He got old and times and tastes changed, that`s all.

Tue Jan 31, 2006 7:03 pm

Here is a excellent quote. Though I don't agree that Sinatra is a better singer by a long shot. Also I believe that Bing should of had a second career as Sinatra did in his old age. The problem, he put out utter dreck like Hey Jude Hey Bing. He never took advantage of "the album" and that is why most people today are clueless about the original crooner.

Crosby and Sinatra were similar in that both achieved success as singers even though they were not formally trained as singers. Neither could read music. Each became successful movie stars and radio personalities as well. But the differences are more interesting.

Crosby was casual and unpretentious -- almost self-deprecating. Sinatra was intense, rowdy, with little humility.

And though Crosby may have sold more records during his lifetime, Sinatra became the better singer. Sinatra would have settled for nothing less. He would work until he was the best. He had to be the best. Crosby, on the other hand, preferred spending his time playing golf or fishing. He practiced as little as possible and became known as "one-take Crosby."