Could a shellac 78 rpm be called a single?

"Tennessee" Ernie Ford* - The Ballad Of Davy Crockett / Farewell was listed as a single. I edited that out believing no shellac 78 rpm could be called a single. Now I have been asked to revert. Now I think the 45 was a single (I dimly having this one on 45). Your thoughts?

Thanks. Yes, 78s can be singles. However I think it should be the same artist. For example, Tip Toe Thru The Tulips was recorded many times in the 1920s. Much later Tiny Tim had a hit with the song. Agree?

Singles get their name from the printed music of individual songs so the term goes back to the early part of the century before 78s were 78s (they were 80s, 90s, etc.) So, yes, 78s can be singles but they were also sold as sets in large book-like covers that resembled those used to hold photographs. Such things were called record albums.

I see you are American. Here in the UK, we started the Singles chart on 14th November 1952. This is one of the main criteria for using the Single tag RSG §6.10c.

Often, especially before 1956, the record was not released on vinyl/7"/45 (whatever you want to call it), at all. Shellac/78 only for many releases. Sometimes because it was more modern technology, the 7" would be released long after the 78 single was selling on the chart run.

Therefore, the only format to hit the Singles chart, is the 78. Therefore, whenever a record hits the chart and it's released on 78, that 78 is a single. 78s kept selling here (UK) until well into 1960, although from 1957-60, most would be accompanied by a 45 release. Like I say, sometimes this would be long after the chart run of the 78. The more recent ones could get released simultaneously. It wasn't until 1961 when all the hit singles of the year were released on vinyl-only.

From memory, only 198 shellac singles hit the UK chart (i.e. before April 1960), but that doesn't include represses or label variations, of which there could be many. Davy Crockett, above has about 4 of them.

I gather US had vinyl singles right from the start (1948), therefore probably won't be familiar with the fact of shellac singles in the 1950s.

Here is the official data homepage (previously available in print by Guinness, as Guinness Hit Singles)
https://www.officialcharts.com/

The first chart week
https://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-chart/19521114/7501/

All 4 hit versions of Davy Crockett were simultaneous hits on this week's chart:
(23rd February 1956) at positions 5, 14, 16 and 20 - all on 78.
https://www.officialcharts.com/charts/singles-chart/19560217/7501/

Paul Pellettier also has published some label Singles guides in the early 80's documenting the full label catalogue of singles, including many on 78, and all that also failed to hit the chart linked to above. His books have been referenced in some of the sub histories of the releases in question.

There was a rather recent debate on the matter (and almost certainly discussions before that ...). Don't know if it clarified anything, though ...

https://www.discogs.sie.com/forum/thread/1087316

I thought (from various threads) that single tag (as album) should be ed by a source (eg. Charts) …
Is there such a source for these shellacs?

borderes
Is there such a source for these shellacs?

I've already posted 3

Discogs requires an official source for the Single Tag to be used.

cellularsmoke
Discogs requires an official source for the Single Tag to be used.

Official Charts (clue's in the name)
Guinness Hit Singles / And Albums before that, in print.
Paul Pellettier's label catalogues.

djcarbines
Here in the UK, we started the Singles chart on 14th November 1952.

davidfiskum
"Tennessee" Ernie Ford* - The Ballad Of Davy Crockett / Farewell was listed as a single. I edited that out believing no shellac 78 rpm could be called a single. Now I have been asked to revert. Now I think the 45 was a single (I dimly having this one on 45). Your thoughts?

Then we have countries like India where the shellac era lasted well into the 1960s, with for example several Beatles releases being released on that format there, which would unambiguously be called Singles for any other country. So there cant just be a blanket "shellac records cant ever be tagged Single" rule, because in many cases pop singles (eligible to chart in pop singles charts) were released on shellac as well as vinyl. So a Single is a Single whether it be vinyl single, CD single, cassette single, or indeed shellac single.

Im not suggesting that all shellac records are Singles of course, far from it, just that there cant be a blanket rule that prohibits shellac records from being tagged as Single.

There was a short period of time into the early 1950s where Singles were released both on 45 vinyl and 78 shellac because people had no fully converted to the new LP players with the smaller needle, catering to the 'still own my old record player' crowd.

Like any transition period any given thing could exist in multiple formats. So yeah, totally possible for a shellac record to be a Single. Especially if it was released as "Single 45s" were becoming the big thing, in the US at least.

I just found a 7" 78RPM vinyl record in my "to go through" box, people were definitely doing things like converting 78RPM players to new needles... equipment wonks going all the way back.

GroovingPict
there cant be a blanket rule that prohibits shellac records from being tagged as Single.

As demonstrated by djcarbines on the aforementioned example

cellularsmoke
I just found a 7" 78RPM vinyl record in my "to go through" box, people were definitely doing things like converting 78RPM players to new needles.

Doc Evans And His Band - Traditional Jazz Vol.2 (Not an EP, because an EP was a specific 7" 45 RPM format in the 50's). (A number of these were originally submitted as using 1 mm needles, incidentally.)

Before the LP, the vast majority of records had one song per side. Under these circumstances, the term single, as applied to records, would have been pointless, because such records weren't in any way special. Once 10" LPs, 12" LPs, and 7" EPs became common, a term identifying records with one song/side as a subgroup of records became useful, and the single was born. Things with multiple tracks/side released before the LP, such as RCA Victors 33 RPM standard-groove (3-mil) long-playing records (prepared for use in funerals) and V-Discs (not commercially released) were uncommon, and the average person would have no need for a specific term to distinguish a standard 78 RPM record from them.

So 45 RPM and 78 RPM records released after the birth of the modern microgroove LP can be singles. 78 RPM records released before the LP were standard records.

ThomasP64
78 RPM records released before the LP were standard records.

In fact, I have some contemporary literature (UK) showing that they were still termed 'standard records' after LP for some time.
Presumably because any vinyl format (LP/45 etc.) were the new 'non-standard', while 78 'standard' were still the best selling format.

That said, also, because there was no such thing as an 'album' yet (before 1956), some LPs did actually make their way onto the 'singles' chart. Simply because there was no other type of chart.

Most 78s that are not part of an album are singles.
But some way along it was decided not to add the tag.

A single is a release which contains one song, or one song/side.
Only after Albums on a single disc (as opposed to 78 albums on multiple discs) came, the term seems to be explicitly used for records (although I'm not sure about that either). But as often, the introduction of a term comes after the actual thing was there.

Being a single or album, has nothing to do with charts. Single & album charts were created because both existed and demanded a different chart.
Albums were there long before 1956. At least since 1918.

(And we're not taking sheet music in here, as this was a much earlier form to record music, which also came in albums or single work sheets.)

Dr.SultanAszazin
Albums were there long before 1956.

Albums existed prior to LPs because some sets of records were released in physical albums with each record in a separate pocket. The term album was only applied to LPs because labels d LPs as "a full album on one record" or suchlike. "Album" was originally only applied to a single record as a comparison to multi-disc albums.

Dr.SultanAszazin
But as often, the introduction of a term comes after the actual thing was there.

If 99% of records have one track/side, and most of the remainder would not be purchased by of the general public, then there is no need for anyone to use a term such as "single" to describe commercially available records.

Aren't we mixing up marketing vs the actual thing?
Albums (synonym for bundle) and singles exist a long time before it was used as a term in the marketing of records.
This doesn't mean 78s couldn't be singles, as most of them are. It means it wasn't explicitly marketed as such.

Here we don't use the tag because of that approach.
But it's 100% correct to apply the term to 78s in normal speaking , or at other places.

There is as much need to for the term "single" for a 78, than for a 7" 45. 99% of them are singles.

Personally, I have never been a lot into the marketing thing. A thing is what it is, I don't care what the ad says.
But it is correct, Discogs applies a lot of format tags based on marketing. For that reason I never tag a 78 as Single here. (But I do elsewhere, as it is an accepted practice outside Discogs.)

Dr.SultanAszazin
Being a single or album, has nothing to do with charts.

But the charts have everything to do with it being an album or single. Or later, a compilation.
The first one was simply a record chart because LPs didn't sell enough to be in the top 12 (or 20 as it became) for most weeks.

No album of 78s ever hit the UK chart. I don't think it would have been eligible if it was. The UK album chart began exclusively as LP. And even then, the 1956-58 Top 5 charts remained forgotten for decades until they were rediscovered in 2003 to be published for the first time in over 40 years, by Guinness in the final t Singles and Albums book (17th to 19th editions).

Dr.SultanAszazin
Aren't we mixing up marketing vs the actual thing?

I'd argue marketing IS the actual thing.

djcarbines
I'd argue marketing IS the actual thing.

Nope, it isn't. Marketing doesn not trump the meaning of a term.

djcarbines
But the charts have everything to do with it being an album or single. Or later, a compilation.

Not at all. Charts didn't invent the single, the album or the compilation.
Charts came after those concepts. Most music even isn't relevant to charts, and a lot of singles, albums or compilation exist completely outside the chart world.
The charts are only relevant to a small segment of musical releases anyway. The only relevance of the charts on discogs is that if a release charted as either single or album, we can use that as a valid reference to use the tag.
Apart from that, charts are just that, a chart where you can see what sells best. Little musical value overall...

Dr.SultanAszazin
Charts didn't invent the single, the album or the compilation.

I never claimed they did. But they do define it. Although the specific definition has changed a lot over that time, especially in these early days when there was only one chart and only 2 formats that hit it.

Dr.SultanAszazin
The charts are only relevant to a small segment of musical releases anyway.

Maybe so, but a HUGE amount of non-hit material conforms to the standard and definition set out by it. Often intentionally - either to actually chart and not sell enough to get there, or by convention that that's the historic standard now. e.g. no marketing intention to chart, but the artist will refer to the release as 'single' or 'album'.

In the UK, Music Week used to publish the intended 'albums'. It was about 6-7000 releases a year, and 2-4,000 singles (not including different formats for each one). The "out next week" type list of announcements. I think 1997 has the most hit singles at around 1,000. Most years it's around 200-400.

Dr.SultanAszazin
Marketing doesn not trump the meaning of a term.

In these cases, the meaning of the term, is the marketing.
e.g. what is a 'single' ?
Answer:
A record that conforms to these criteria
-
-
- etc.

Criteria for a large part, that the chart eligibilty defines.

djcarbines
But they do define it.

Well, they don't really define it, but they use the term as defined in various flavours.

djcarbines
the standard and definition set out by it.

But if you look at how 78s were released prior to the charts, I think the charts follow the definitions as used before the ever officially occurred in how records were marketed.

It's a bit of a chicken-egg question.
But no chicken without egg the chicken comes out (even if the egg was laid by what was not fully a chicken yet, or not called a chicken yet.)
No album chart without albums, no single chart without chickens already existing.

djcarbines
In these cases, the meaning of the term, is the marketing.

No, a single can easily be defined, just like an album.
Single is short for "single track" (or "single work/composition/song/flower/...)
Album is short for "bundle of tracks" (or bundle of works/compositions/songs/flowers/...)
These are rather generic, and simply are applied to records, they're not at all defined by the record industry or the charts.

Discogs works that way.
The world overall is far more open to when a term can be applied to something.

But tl;dr -> In discogs we are supposed to only tag a record "Single", if there is a reference somewhere, such as the charts. For most 78s, it's hard to impossible to find something like that. So we don't tag 'em as such.

Dr.SultanAszazin
These are rather generic, and simply are applied to records, they're not at all defined by the record industry or the charts.

Oh they really are. The definitions are VERY long. 30-odd pages each, defining things like number of tracks, formats released, dealer price, total duration, type of tracks (e.g. live, studio, remix etc.) to name just a few.

Dr.SultanAszazin
Discogs works that way.
The world overall is far more open to when a term can be applied to something.

Discogs really does have it's own way with things. Ever more and more irrelevent to the real world with each iteration.