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

[Kristjan Saag]

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/2/eeca345e-8de1-11de-93df-00144feabdc0.html

Another good example from this excellent article is the author's distinction 
between "Standard" and "Oldie", and his description of how the latter 
concept became dominant:

Radio stations being more and more dependent on recorded music

New recording techniques making it possible to create sounds that were not 
easily duplicated live (I'm surprised he doesn't mention Les Paul's efforts 
that predated Miller's work with Columbia)

The personality factor (which was also quite influential very soon after the 
WW II)

What he could have added is a pure musical observation: when popular music 
became less jazz orientated with the 1950's, focus moved away from 
improvisation and interpretation - interpretation, after all, being a more 
"structural" bit in swing music. True: stock arrangements of hit songs were 
frequently used and  jazz musicians even copied each others solos, but the 
top orchestras, AFAIU, preferred to make their own arrangements and create 
their own profile. The various recorded versions of an average pop song in 
the 1950's and early 60's, in contrast, often  sounded similar - nonetheless 
every artist hoped to record THE hit version.

But isn't the word "Standard" limited to jazz use? Wouldn't the universal 
equivalent for older types of popular music be: Evergreen?
BTW: For classic operetta-tunes we use the word "Oerhaenge" in Swedish - 
"Earring" or, literally, "Eardrop". Is there any equivalent in English?
Kristjan