[78-L] FW: Look at this! Another 'rock historian' telling us about the 1930s

[Harold Aherne]

His most problematic statement: "The one place where records ruled was on jukeboxes".
It may be true for the mid/late 30s, when coin-operated phonos became common but 
before record sales to consumers had fully recovered. It is very far from accurate for 
earlier and later years, obviously. Less-informed readers might read into the statement 
that few people owned records prior to the rock years and that old records are, inter alia, unusually rare or valuable.
 
I also have reservations about his statement concerning local bands. A glance through
Rust's ADBD reveals that dozens, maybe more than a hundred non-national bands did
record, even if not for major labels and not profusely. Some of their recordings, like 
Bernie Schultz's for Gennett in 1927, in fact reveal a unique "personality" and not just 
mimeographs of popular hits. Since we *do* lack recordings for so many other bands, 
I'm not quite certain how Wald assumes that their arrangements were the same as Ellington's or Lombardo's. In the immortal words of Jack Pearl, "Vass you dere, 
Sharlie?" 
 
If I were an editor, I would've rejected this article and sent it back for adjustments. Wald
may not be purely a historian of rock, but his assumptions about music history are largely
calibrated on the era he grew up in, it seems to me (notice his use of terms like "pop 
records" and "pop fans"), and there is some sloppiness around the edges. That's largely
what compels me to read further or to avoid an author's work (although my jury is still out
on Wald, having never examined or read one of his books). 
 
And yet, it's not quite as bad as a series of historical reference books I once found in a university library. They looked beautifully published and very expensive...and their credibility
went into the dumpster when the 1920s volume categorically stated that record changers
hadn't been invented yet.
 
-Harold