Talk:The Everly Brothers

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject Biography / Musicians (Rated B-class)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Musicians (marked as Mid-importance).
 
WikiProject Illinois (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Illinois, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Illinois on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Chicago (Rated B-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Chicago, which aims to improve all articles or pages related to Chicago or the Chicago metropolitan area.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject United States / Kentucky (Rated B-class, High-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by WikiProject Kentucky (marked as High-importance).
 

Rock'n'Roll?[edit]

I'm certainly not the one best able to judge, but do the Everly Brothers really deserve the title "rock and roll"? Weren't they MOR pop, even for the era? --Robert Merkel

MOR didn't exist at the time; if anything, Perry Como was MOR
I remember being in Ottawa, 1957, hearing a couple of local kids on their front step, strumming their guitar and singing... Claudette, pretty little pet, Claudette.... fantastic. It seems that you only appreciate the genius of music when you hear it performed live.

--Coasting

Was I too harsh in the article, then? I can't imagine parents preventing their daughters from going to an Everly Brothers concert, unlike, say, an Elvis concert, but the operative word here is "imagine" when you're born long after the Beatles broke up :) By the way, I'm not knocking the quality of their music - just because it wasn't as shocking as some doesn't make it inferior. --Robert Merkel
Believe me, it was racy for its time. - Coasting
Speshly when "Wake Up Little Susie" is brought into the equation - very daring for the 50's. Lion King 00:33, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
Yes, "Wake up Little Susie" was banned in Boston (which, in itself, is an illustrative phrase for anything onsidered in the least bit racy). But the term "rock & roll" was meant to illustrate (pardon my redundancy) the tempo of the music - and perhaps what it made people feel like doing.-- FlaviaR (talk) 17:02, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I grew up in that era. They were rock+roll alright. Just not hard rock. "Hard rocks" were tuff guys like Carl Perkins (mean-eyed cats with a razor). Did you have the term "hard rock" for guys where you lived? It sounds funny to me when now that music is often categorized as "pop". Let's say soft rock. That's what rock + roll was. Dean Martin, Billy Vaughn and Jane Morgan were pop. My mother thought the Everlys sounded great. Hello to Kentucky. I took some photos of them in 1967 and could put one in this public domain, once I figure the process. I take it any LP covers can't be used. George Slivinsky 21:16, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

I'd love to see some of your photos added to the article. Have a look at this how-to for instructions. Also, I think you can upload LP covers under fair use. Check out the details here. Acdixon 15:14, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

To give the discussion back its initial topic: No, the Everly Brothers were no rock'n'roll band (I was asking myself the same question, therefore I landed here on the discussion page). Elvis clearly was rock'n'roll, in fact he and his songwriters invented it. Carl Perkins in fact did also rock'n'roll, which was later renamed "rockabilly" - actually just another marketing term which went wrong (because rock'n'roll and rockabilly are the same but the latter is much less known). However, Perkins had nothing to do with hard rock, because hard rock grew out of blues rock - right: Janis Joplin, aso. - including Jimmy Hendrix' guitar playing. Hard rock basically is Janis Joplin's singing plus Jimmy Hendrix' guitar playing, but unfortunately often put into a strange "gothic" religion or satanism (which is just stupid IMHO).

In the other hand, The Beatles even once called themselves "British Elderly Brothers". Therefore it's clear that the Elderly brothers invented a new style of music: rock. It is in fact "soft rock", but this term unfortunately doesn't exist, therefore it's just "rock". However, saying that the Beatles were doing rock and the Elderly Brothers were doing "rock'n'roll" is just a wrong understanding of music history. Still, the term "rock'n'roll" is today often also coined with harder rock like Jon Bon Jovi, aso., so the modern term "rock'n'roll" is as broad as the term "pop" is. Some even say that The Beatles were doing "pop", so why shouldn't the music of the Elderly Brothers not also called "pop"? Well, you may disagree as I do. Both were rock bands, that's the only truth.

These pattern of misunderstanding music went on later on. For instance Queen is often called a rock band - officially "British rock" -, but in fact they were more than that: They were also the first punk band. And the roots of Queen clearly were hard rock, but they created something new out of it, which we may call "vocal rock" - which then turned into modern punk. Now some may disagree and say that Queen's music was too broad for a punk band...yes, they did also include other styles including classic instruments, but still: They invented punk, just listen to some guitar rythms of Queen!

The same did the Elderly Brothers: They've created a new music style: rock. The Beatles were the second rock band, only. Meaning: 1-0 for USA. But since punk was invented in the UK: 1-1. Looks like a draw. --178.197.236.11 (talk) 14:29, 15 July 2014 (UTC)

Interesting explication, but for the purposes of our article, we follow what sources say, and I believe you'll find that the preponderance of sources refer to the Everly Brothers as rock 'n' roll. And what other bands are called in their articles should likewise follow what sources call them. So if it is the case that The Beatles are referred to as rock, that's what their articles would say - that has no bearing, really, on what we say here. Not sure I agree with your premise anyway - but that's not relevant. Tvoz/talk 06:49, 18 July 2014 (UTC)
(And it's "Everly", not "Elderly" of course.) Tvoz/talk 06:51, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Photos for the Article[edit]

(continued from "rock + roll".

I understand copyright fairly well. For example I defend the right to share music between individuals. I've read the Wiki sections, and I feel using an LP cover does not meet fair use. It would not be for "critical review" of the LP or the photo. So if you think, you can easily upload cover art yourself. But convince me if you can. I'll get around to one of my photos. If the Everlys see it they might remember me walking around the stage that time. George Slivinsky 18:28, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

I won't be submitting my photos. I looked and only two are good enough, and I don't want to lose my copyright. But I have published a couple at my blogspot: http://worldjournal-gs.blogspot.com/. I also have closeups, unpublished so far. If any of you in Kentucky are in a position to contact Warner Br re permission, I can provide a scan of WB Golden Hits or suggest other good portraits. If the WB company owns the copyright, I'd say it could only do them good promotion-wise. Cadence gets a lot more attention in reissues. And I prefer their more mature look on WB covers, mid-60s. George Slivinsky 08:42, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I saw a way to include the photo as part of the album discussion. If I pasted two scans I could have included the song titles. What do you think of this portrait compared to others? George Slivinsky 04:51, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
Looks good to me. The article needed something. Thanks for your contribution and your recent work on the article. Acdixon 14:10, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

(undent) I added a fair use rationale. Ling.Nut 18:45, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Tone of article[edit]

I was never a big fan of the Everly Brothers, but the tone of the article seems rather snide to me.

I agree, but things look differently in the rear-view mirror, especially if you weren't alive at the time - Coasting
Well, could somebody else revise this more accurately? I don't think I can write this article fairly, as to me these guys represent the epitome of 1950's white-boy dorkiness for all their undoubted vocal and compositional talents. I *know* that isn't fair or accurate, but I'm simply not in a position to give a fair perspective --Robert Merkel
I don't think the article is snide, nor inaccurate, nor in need of a revision. Thank you, Coasting. However, the disography could do with a minor addition. In 1964, Warner Brothers published a collection of hits, "The Very Best of the Everly Brothers," D 103826. Tom Mehle
If it helps, I adore the Everly Brothers & I don't see anything nasty about the article.-- FlaviaR (talk) 17:03, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Til I Kissed You[edit]

Among singles, i really miss mention of ('Til) I Kissed You Written by - Don Everly Peaked at #4 - 9/59. --Jerzy (t) 06:42, 2005 Apr 3 (UTC)

Now you not only have mention of it but a sample. Hope no copyright issues arise. I agree with your attraction to it. (But bevare the WB rerecording).George Slivinsky 05:27, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Rift[edit]

Should something be mentioned about the fact that they badly fell out and didn't talk to each other for (10?) years. 80.42.144.228 19:12, 19 December 2005 (UTC)

Felice and Boudleaux Bryant[edit]

Could an Everlys expert please add to the songlist at Felice and Boudleaux Bryant? --Design 09:43, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Will do at some point, Design. Thanks for directing me to it - I'll add some more (but by no means all) of their songs to F&B's list at some point in the future. Bobo. 18:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

Discography - Albums[edit]

The album "The Real Ev Br" was not issued in 1958. It must have been a later recent reissue about that period. I have removed it. Allmusic makes mistakes too. Can be added when date is found. George Slivinsky 07:54, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Discography - Singles[edit]

made the Discography - Singles section a sortable wikitable. Removed a few of the less-notable songs. --Ling.Nut 14:52, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Disappointed at omissions. Could you at least put Love Is Strange back? Where are you working from ling nut? George Slivinsky 20:14, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
yes, that one was an accident...should definitely stay in due to its position on UK charts.. Love Is Strange 128US, 11UK. Am putting it back now. :-)
As for where my info is from, it's just the stuff that was previously there. But a few of those did not chart at all.. --Ling.Nut 20:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
Should Don Everly's single "(The Graduation Song) Pomp and Circumstance" (reached #34 in the charts) released under the pseudonym Adrian Kimberly be included in this section? Dgnelson 02:30, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
Do you have a verifiable/authoritative source for this info? --Ling.Nut 02:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
I know of it and do have the single. I say no, firstly because it is not Everly Br. It is instrumental, produced by Don. It might belong in Don's story. Billboard chart books by Joel Whitburn can confirm it.George Slivinsky 05:23, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

"let 'em in"[edit]

Is it not worth a mention that "Phil and Don" are right there in the lyrics of Let_'Em_In by Paul McCartney?

206.248.152.57 03:14, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I think so - I am trying to think of a way to put it in where influences are discussed.-- FlaviaR (talk) 17:04, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Army or US Marines[edit]

Under the early days section, it is noted that the Everly Bros entered the US Marine Corps. Below that, it is stated that "after their army service..." Which branch of the armed services did they enter? It might be interesting to hear a bit about that part of their lives if any others have information on that topic. 74.45.242.100 02:10, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Everly Brothers - Til I Kissed You.ogg[edit]

Nuvola apps important.svg

Image:Everly Brothers - Til I Kissed You.ogg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 21:12, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Citations & References[edit]

See Wikipedia:Footnotes for an explanation of how to generate footnotes using the <ref(erences/)> tags Nhl4hamilton (talk) 04:35, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Removed a disputed 'fact'[edit]

Until 1990, the Everlys were the most successful charting U.S. rock and roll duo on the Hot 100. In 1990, the Everlys tied for that position with Hall & Oates, who in 2005 had their 35th Hot 100 single.

Errr, I count the Everlys as having had 36 singles in the Hot 100, while in 2005, Hall and Oates made just their 34th entry. (That's not counting Sara Smile twice for its two separate chart runs.) Which still gives the Everlys the lead... 172.162.189.226 (talk) 02:23, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

tables[edit]

I'm a bit disappointed that the sortable tables are in such poor shape. Will repair as time permits... in the next few weeks Ling.Nut (WP:3IAR) 00:56, 3 August 2008 (UTC)

Woodstock[edit]

Did the Everly Brothers really play Woodstock, as a widely copied synopsis for the "Woodstock - Director's Cut" documentary claims? If so this should definitely be significant enough to include. Pete3194 (talk) 12:58, 17 October 2008 (UTC)—Preceding unsigned comment added by Pete3194 (talkcontribs) 12:55, 17 October 2008 (UTC)

The break-up of the Everly Brothers[edit]

The entire article needs much more sourcing, but there is a desperate need for sources in "The break-up of the Everly Brothers". There is potentially controversial information in this section that violates WP:BLP. The only source was a link to a Wikipedia article about a book by the ex-wife of Warren Zevon, which is grossly inadequate as a source (for one thing, Wikipedia can't source itself). If someone doesn't begin to clean up this section soon, I plan to remove the entire section, per WP:BLP. 71.77.21.198 (talk) 01:10, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Don Everly's daughters[edit]

It's seems a mystery on the number and names of Don's children. You say he has three daughters..but list only Erin and Stacy! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Patmandy (talkcontribs) 18:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Who is "you" in "you say". Wikipedia is a collaborative project by anyone who edits. Feel free to find a source and change something. 71.77.20.119 (talk) 00:39, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Incorrect photo identification in the article.[edit]

Incorrect photo caption:

The picture that is marked "Everly Brothers in 2009" is not of the Everly Brothers. The person on the left is Charlie Louvin, the surviving brother of the Louvin Brothers, another brother harmony act that was very influential in the 50's and early 60's. I've met Charlie several times including backstage at the Opry. Trust me that is Charlie and not one of the Everly's. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Aep714 (talkcontribs) 13:26, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Phil Everly died you guise[edit]

Get on it. http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/posts/la-et-ms-phil-everly-of-the-everly-brothers-dies-at-74-20140103,0,2091176.story#axzz2pOkRSxY6 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.107.254.65 (talk) 03:55, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Odd that it is not acknowledged. Very odd, indeed. What kind of reference site is this?107.221.229.121 (talk) 04:17, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Can either of you read? Tvoz/talk 04:23, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Duplicated image[edit]

Do we really need two versions of the same image, one in the infobox and the other just a little lower down? Rothorpe (talk) 22:46, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

Who smashed the guitar?[edit]

BBC is reporting that Phil smashed his guitar at Knott's farm. Article currently says Don did, a complete reverse. Strangely, an article version back in 2009 says Phil smashed the guitar, agreeing with the BBC. So who? C'mon, a WWE article would get it straight! Shenme (talk) 04:30, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Good catch. Looks like someone fixed it. I wonder if it was simple vandalism since every source (other than Wikipedia) says it was Phil. Viriditas (talk) 10:00, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

TKE[edit]

Someone added information about TKE to the beginning of the article. Clearly, it does not belong there. If someone wants to incorporate this information into the appropriate chronological location, preferably in a paragraph about their college experience, that would be fine. Otherwise, I'm leaving it here below for inclusion. Viriditas (talk) 10:09, 11 January 2014 (UTC)

Phil and Don Everly were members of Tau Kappa Epsilon (TKE) Fraternity. Both brothers were members of the Gamma-Rho chapter, Indiana State University.

("Frater Phil Everly, of Everly Brothers, Passes Into Chapter Eternal". Tau Kappa Epsilon. January 4, 2014. Retrieved January 7, 2014. )

Good point - I took care of this. Couldn't find more on their college experience at first look, but perhaps that can be expanded. I also separated out the 1950s because it was buried as "early career" which doesn't work given the importance of their work at that time. Tvoz/talk 00:04, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Buddy Holly Funeral[edit]

The article in Rolling Stone does quote Phil Everly as saying he attended the funeral of Buddy Holly in Lubbock, Texas on February 7, 1959. However, the quote also relates that Phil "sat with Maria Elena Holly and Buddy's parents." While memories at times become confused, and details blur with time, numerous sources make a clear reference to Mrs. Holly not attending the funeral.

I don't doubt for a moment that Phil was there, or that he sat with Holly's parents. I do not believe he sat with Mrs. Holly as she was not there. Lubbock Online

It's not earth shattering however it is worth noting. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 72.214.59.201 (talk) 14:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Since there is serious contradiction, and we don't know what is correct, and her presence is not particularly notable to his life, I say we edit it to not say one way or the other if she was there. How important is this to Phil's life? Not very. May be a bigger deal in Buddy's bio. Tvoz/talk 20:35, 13 August 2014 (UTC)

Absolutely, and I saw the edit, which is highly appropriate. Well done Tvoz. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.111.160.3 (talk) 13:32, 16 August 2014 (UTC)