Philadelphia Artist - Keith - 98.6

Post by Uni
Boy, everyone knows this song!!! Even features Brooklyn's - The
Tokens!!! Lay it on 'em, Keith!...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/986.mp3
That was great!! Sounds better than the Mercury Records LP! Take some bows!
Uni

I like Keith's other US Billboard Top 40 hit from 1967, too--that would be
the classic Pop obscurity,"Tell Me To My Face," which entered the charts on
April 8, 1967; spent two weeks in the Top 40, peaking at #37.

My solo, acoustic 6-string guitar version of the Justin Hayward composition,
"Tuesday Afternoon" (#24 for the Moody Blues on the US Billboard charts,
1968. Entered the Top 40 on August 24, 1968--six weeks in the Top 40.
http://members.aol.com/Waucoba4/music/tuesdayafternoon.html

John Walker

2008-06-11 16:28:28 UTC

Post by Inyo

bows!

Post by Uni
Uni

"Tell Me To My Face" is a fantastic re-do of the Hollies original, and
by farrrrrrrr the best thing Keith ever laid down on tape, though
"98.6" is frequently preferred by the tune-deaf. Not tone deaf, that's
something else. And apparently it's an actual defect in some humans. Uni
has it, or can't you tell by now.

Johnny "I'll drink to that!" Walker

Mister Charlie

2008-06-11 17:27:14 UTC

Post by Inyo

bows!

Post by Uni
Uni

"Tell Me To My Face" is a fantastic re-do of the Hollies original, and
by farrrrrrrr the best thing Keith ever laid down on tape, though
"98.6" is frequently preferred by the tune-deaf.

Ain't Gonna Lie is right up there with Face...both songs -far- better than
98.6.

Uni

2008-06-13 02:20:09 UTC

Post by Inyo

bows!

Post by Uni
Uni

I like Keith's other US Billboard Top 40 hit from 1967, too--that would be
the classic Pop obscurity,"Tell Me To My Face," which entered the charts on
April 8, 1967; spent two weeks in the Top 40, peaking at #37.
My solo, acoustic 6-string guitar version of the Justin Hayward composition,
"Tuesday Afternoon" (#24 for the Moody Blues on the US Billboard charts,
1968. Entered the Top 40 on August 24, 1968--six weeks in the Top 40.
http://members.aol.com/Waucoba4/music/tuesdayafternoon.html

I'm going to send this via e-mail to my workplace where it's easier to
listen to!

Didn't you do Red Rubber Ball some time back?

Thanks, Inyo!

Uni

elaich

2008-06-11 14:08:37 UTC

Post by Uni
Boy, everyone knows this song!!! Even features Brooklyn's - The
Tokens!!! Lay it on 'em, Keith!...

Where in the world do you hear the Tokens in this song? There are no
background vocals at all except Keith doubling with himself on the chorus
line.

Uni

2008-06-12 01:58:35 UTC

Post by Uni
Boy, everyone knows this song!!! Even features Brooklyn's - The
Tokens!!! Lay it on 'em, Keith!...

Where in the world do you hear the Tokens in this song? There are no
background vocals at all except Keith doubling with himself on the chorus
line.

No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's not
the case!

Uni

elaich

2008-06-14 02:46:01 UTC

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's not
the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith doubling with
himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again."

You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

Uni

2008-06-14 09:32:57 UTC

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's not
the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith doubling with
himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides, Keith
doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and, finally,
Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.

Uni

John Walker

2008-06-14 14:10:10 UTC

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's
not the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith doubling
with himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides,
Keith doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and,
finally, Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.
Uni

Wake up, stupid! "Performed" as in musically, not vocally.

Johnny "I'll drink to that!" Walker

Jan Dean

2008-06-14 15:53:07 UTC

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's
not the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith doubling
with himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides,
Keith doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and,
finally, Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.
Uni

Wake up, stupid! "Performed" as in musically, not vocally.

The Tokens also performed on He's So Fine.

But I don't think that's them singing "doo lang, doo lang, doo lang."

John Walker

2008-06-14 17:41:06 UTC

Post by Jan Dean

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's
not the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith
doubling with himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back
again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides,
Keith doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and,
finally, Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.
Uni

Wake up, stupid! "Performed" as in musically, not vocally.

The Tokens also performed on He's So Fine.
But I don't think that's them singing "doo lang, doo lang, doo lang."

Exactly. Uni finds English a difficult second language. He still
breaks into a "doo lang, doo lang, doo lang" when asked to "perform"
in bed.

Johnny "I'll drink to that! Walker

DianeE

2008-06-14 20:01:45 UTC

Post by Jan Dean

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's
not the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith
doubling with himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back
again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides,
Keith doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and,
finally, Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.
Uni

Wake up, stupid! "Performed" as in musically, not vocally.

The Tokens also performed on He's So Fine.
But I don't think that's them singing "doo lang, doo lang, doo lang."

Exactly. Uni finds English a difficult second language. He still
breaks into a "doo lang, doo lang, doo lang" when asked to "perform"
in bed.

---------------
It pains me to say this, but he's right about one thing: Joel Whitburn's
_Top Pop Singles_ book does say "The Tokens, backing vocals" (on "Ain't
Gonna Lie" and "98.6").

DianeE

Uni

2008-06-15 03:14:23 UTC

Post by Uni
No overdubbing was EVER done! You might have THOUGHT it, but that's
not the case!

You were there? You know this for sure? I clearly hear Keith doubling
with himself on "Hey, 98.6, it's good to have you back again."
You still haven't told us how the Tokens were involved with this record.

There is a chorus, unless Keith is responsible that, too. Besides,
Keith doesn't have a high enough pitch to do the "doubling", and,
finally, Joel Whitburn states The Tokens performed on that recording.
Uni

Wake up, stupid! "Performed" as in musically, not vocally.

They played no istruments, "stupid".

Uni :-)

Post by John Walker
Johnny "I'll drink to that!" Walker

modern

2008-06-11 14:43:18 UTC

There's an interesting Lesley Gore version from 1969 that combines bits
of this song with a song called Lazy Day. It's only in mono for some
odd reason.

Classic Sixties Fan

2008-06-12 01:47:55 UTC

Boy, everyone knows this song!!! Even features Brooklyn's - The Tokens!!!
Lay it on 'em, Keith!...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/986.mp3
That was great!! Sounds better than the Mercury Records LP! Take some bows!
Uni

Uni

2008-06-12 01:54:39 UTC

Classic Sixties Fan wrote:

Yes, thank you! Might remind John Walker of it!!!!

Uni :-)

Boy, everyone knows this song!!! Even features Brooklyn's - The Tokens!!!
Lay it on 'em, Keith!...
http://www.angelfire.com/empire/abpsp/images/986.mp3
That was great!! Sounds better than the Mercury Records LP! Take some bows!
Uni

Classic Sixties Fan

2008-06-12 23:43:40 UTC

Post by Uni
Yes, thank you! Might remind John Walker of it!!!!

No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.

a little research on your behalf will clarify this. ;-)

Post by Uni
Uni :-)

Uni

2008-06-13 02:22:48 UTC

Post by Uni
Yes, thank you! Might remind John Walker of it!!!!

No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.
a little research on your behalf will clarify this. ;-)

I guess since I'm a slow learner, I'm a slow listener, too, and it
registered a year late! :-)

Thanks!!!

Uni

Post by Uni
Uni :-)

elaich

2008-06-14 02:44:42 UTC

Post by Classic Sixties Fan
No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.

Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January 1967.
So, Uni was right.

Uni

2008-06-14 09:27:54 UTC

Post by Classic Sixties Fan
No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.

Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January 1967.
So, Uni was right.

I had to double check what year I put on my site! :-)

Thanks.

Uni

Classic Sixties Fan

2008-06-14 20:18:10 UTC

Post by Classic Sixties Fan
No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.

Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January 1967.
So, Uni was right.

I had to double check what year I put on my site! :-)

it first entered the top 40 in December 1966. many songs don't automatically
reach their destination on the chart for several weeks.

some were imediate such as the Beatles hit "I feel fine" which took probably
about
three weeks. it was released in late November 1964 and number one before
years end.

some songs released the same month and year did not even appear in the top
forty until January 1965.

I usually go by when the song first received airplay and I do recall hearing
that song before Christmas
1966 so for me it was a hit from that year, not the following year.

you could debate over a song such as "Hello Goodbye" as being from 1968
because it was still in the highest
ranks of the charts during the month of January 1968, but it was released in
November 1967 and that was when
I first heard it.

also, take into account that the charts are published two or three weeks
after the data was originally received so a
song listed at number one for example June 8, 1968 would've probably peaked
by the middle of May.

also, consider that stations in the major U.S. cities and Europe might've
played a song a couple of weeks before it got
played on other stations.

the Easybeats megahit "Friday on my Mind" hit the Australian charts in the
fall of 1966 peaking that year, but it didn't even
get released until 1967 in the U.S.

when stating what year a song is from when corresponding on the web it is
best to use the year the song first charted regardless
of what country you reside in.. in the case of the Easybeats tune I would
use 1966 as the year since that is when it first charted.

hope this clears things up.

Post by Uni
Thanks.
Uni

Uni

2008-06-15 03:50:54 UTC

Post by Classic Sixties Fan
No, I am pointing out to You that you had the year wrong.
it charted in December 1966, not 1967.

Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January 1967.
So, Uni was right.

I had to double check what year I put on my site! :-)

it first entered the top 40 in December 1966. many songs don't automatically
reach their destination on the chart for several weeks.
some were imediate such as the Beatles hit "I feel fine" which took probably
about
three weeks. it was released in late November 1964 and number one before
years end.
some songs released the same month and year did not even appear in the top
forty until January 1965.
I usually go by when the song first received airplay and I do recall hearing
that song before Christmas
1966 so for me it was a hit from that year, not the following year.
you could debate over a song such as "Hello Goodbye" as being from 1968
because it was still in the highest
ranks of the charts during the month of January 1968, but it was released in
November 1967 and that was when
I first heard it.
also, take into account that the charts are published two or three weeks
after the data was originally received so a
song listed at number one for example June 8, 1968 would've probably peaked
by the middle of May.
also, consider that stations in the major U.S. cities and Europe might've
played a song a couple of weeks before it got
played on other stations.
the Easybeats megahit "Friday on my Mind" hit the Australian charts in the
fall of 1966 peaking that year, but it didn't even
get released until 1967 in the U.S.
when stating what year a song is from when corresponding on the web it is
best to use the year the song first charted regardless
of what country you reside in.. in the case of the Easybeats tune I would
use 1966 as the year since that is when it first charted.

How about the year it was recorded? :-)

Thanks!

Uni

Post by Classic Sixties Fan
hope this clears things up.

Post by Uni
Thanks.
Uni

Classic Sixties Fan

2008-06-14 20:06:48 UTC

Post by elaich
Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January 1967.
So, Uni was right.

the song is from the year 1966, not 1967.

check the release date and when it first entered the top 40. it was 1966 so
Uni
is incorrect.

it was still been in the top ten in early 1967, but it's from the year 1966
just like

"Louie Louie" is from the year 1963, but was still in the top ten in early
1964.

both "come see about me" and "I feel fine" are from the year 1964, but were
still in the top ten in early 1965

"sounds of silence" is from the year 1965, but was still in the top ten in
early 1966

"I'm a believer' is from the year 1966, but was still in the top ten in
early 1967

"Judy in Disquise" is from the year 1967, but was still in the top ten in
early 1968

"Everyday People" is from the year 1968, but was still in the top ten in
early 1969

"Venus" is from the year 1969, but was still in the top ten in early 1970
peaking at #1 in January-February

Ken Whiton

2008-06-15 05:43:01 UTC

*-* On Sat, 14 Jun 2008, at 16:06:48 -0400,
*-* In Article 485424d3$0$4268$***@roadrunner.com,
*-* Classic Sixties Fan wrote
*-* About Re: a top ten hit from December 1966

Post by elaich
Actually, the song's highest chart position was reached in January
1967. So, Uni was right.

Most people (including Joel Whitburn, who researches and writes
the reference books generally accepted as the authority in these
matters) date records based on when they peaked and/or spent the
majority of their time on the charts, not on when they were released
or entered the charts. Like you, I prefer to date records based on
when they were released, but unlike you, I'm not so anal as to try to
convince the rest of the world that my way is the only way.

Ken Whiton

FIDO: 1:132/152
InterNet: ***@surfglobal.net.INVAL (remove the obvious to reply)

Will Dockery

2023-01-24 09:51:29 UTC