John Denver - "Calypso"
Printed From: Top 40 Music on CD
Category: Top 40 Music On Compact Disc
Forum Name: Chat Board
Forum Description: Chat away but please observe the chat board rules
URL: https://top40musiconcd.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=7480
Printed Date: 16 June 2025 at 12:39pm
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 12.07 - https://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: John Denver - "Calypso"
Posted By: jimct
Subject: John Denver - "Calypso"
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 8:43am
|
More than anything, this post is simply to "poll the brain cells" of my
fellow T4MOC-ers. #2 has always seemed to me to be *way* too high a BB peak position for this song in 1975. This is nothing personal - I like the record. All of the CT Top 40 stations exclusively played the originally-intended A-side of the 45, "I'm Sorry", and did very well with it. None of them ever officially added "Calypso." (I never even heard them "spike it" on-air.) I first discovered that I thought what was simply a great B-side was becoming a hit in its own right, was when Casey Kasem played it on AT40. If I recall correctly, "Calypso" shared its entire Hot 100 chart run with "I'm Sorry." And, checking the chart sites, there were surely 8-10 US markets where "Calypso" was a big hit, and charted Top 10 on their survey. But, in total, "I'm Sorry" has appeared on over 150 surveys, while "Calypso" shows up on just 52. That jives with my overall gut feeling about the song - that it should probably show as a Top 10 to 20 peaking song. But #2? I am curious how "the chart powers that be" ended up arriving at the "Calypso" ultimate chart position? Was there human judgement involved on this, after the fact? The RR volume I use the most (due to numerous pencil notations I have in it) has "I'm Sorry" as the #32 biggest hit for 1975, with "Calypso" right behind, at #36. I was listening to Top 40 quite a bit back then, and I was certainly aware that "Calypso" was getting solid Top 40 airplay. But, like with all double-sided hits, how do you know which side the buyer is buying it for? An individual 45 side's Top 40 radio airplay was far easier to observe/document. Although I know our buddy Paul Haney had nothing to do with compiling the Hot 100 charts back in 1975 (or ever), perhaps he can chime in on how RR arrived at its ultimate 1975 Pop Annual placing for "Calypso", and how they've determined it to be 99% as big a hit as "I'm Sorry" was. I'm positive there are legitimate reasons for it - I just don't happen to know what they are! No hurry, Paul. Whenever you get time. :) Any other opinions? |
Replies:
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 9:51am
| All I can say is I heard "Calypso" all the time on the radio back in 1975. I listened to Boston and Providence, RI stations (not too far from CT!), where "Calypso" was a big hit. Having not even known about Billboard as a kid then, I would have guessed (if someone asked me) that "Calypso" peaked between #3 and #5, just based on how often I heard it. Certainly didn't feel like a #10-#20 hit. Also, I did my own personal charts (starting in 1974), and on my chart it peaked at #3! Not that my chart was supposed to be a ranking of how often I heard a song on the radio (it was a ranking of how much I liked a song), but ... to get to #3, I think that would only happen if I was hearing it a lot. Of course, I can only react as a person who heard it in my market. If there were other cities in the US not playing it, I wouldn't know. All I can say is ... it felt like a big radio hit to me. And it's true Jim, no magazine can ever predict which side of a 45 a person is buying it for (when both are played on the radio.) Kinda like how Billboard can't determine if people are viewing Rebecca Black's "Friday" on YouTube because they think it's a joke or because they love the song and think it's an amazing piece of songwriting. (And had Billboard had its current chart policies in use back three years ago, I think "Friday" would have been a #1 hit - because no one was buying it but everyone was viewing it as a joke (basically) when checking it out on YouTube. |
Posted By: AndrewChouffi
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 9:57am
|
To Jim:
"Calypso" received a #2 position in Joel Whitburn's books because of Record Research's current policy of assigning a peak position to a nominally tag-along b-side if there was a time when Billboard switched its A-side position. "I'm Sorry" (alone) debuted on the Hot 10 August 16, 1975; made it to #1 without a bullet September 27. Radio stations began to play "Calypso" & RCA began to push it (very similar to "Undun" by the Guess Who). "I'm Sorry" dropped to #2 the following week. By the week of October 11, 1975 Billboard apparently decided that the promotion on "Calypso" was so strong they listed the record as "Calypso/I'm Sorry" where it remained at #2 for four more weeks! Competing chart 'Cashbox' was charting double-sided hits separately at the time and took "Calypso" up to #26. It's always been hard to assign a chart position to a double-sided hit because each side sells the exact same amount of copies! "Calypso" did receive a very decent amount of airplay, as a matter of fact on the 1975 Radio & Records year-end Pop/75 of '75 chart it was listed as "Calypso/I'm Sorry" instead of the other way around. Andy |
Posted By: jono
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 10:16am
|
I remember hearing "Calypso" a lot in the Milwaukee area around that
time, but not sure if it was played more or less than the flip side (I was only 9). I do know that "Calypso" made a bigger impression on me, probably because of the video from his tv special (I think), where there were scenes from being on Jacques Cousteau's ship (first time I heard it). If nothing else, that song is more embedded in my memory than "I'm Sorry", and I would've guessed had a higher chart position (to me, catchier as well, although I wouldn't want to try to sing along). But again I was 9 and a song with a video about a ship would've been more exciting to me than an apologetic, confessional song. My parents had the album, but I would've bought the 45 for "Calypso", for what it's worth. Jon O. |
Posted By: 80smusicfreak
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 11:03am
Quoting you from a George Harrison thread just a couple days ago, but I, too, have always subscribed to that same reasoning. And in this case, I feel that Christopher G. Feldman covered your question quite well in his 2000 softcover book, The Billboard Book of No. 2 Singles (Billboard Books; ISBN no. 0-8230-7695-4). Half a page is devoted to this two-sided hit from '75, and in fact AndrewChouffi's post above almost reads like a more condensed version of Feldman's explanation. Unfortunately, the book is now out-of-print; I obtained mine brand new, directly from Feldman himself on eBay about five years ago. (He also signed it before shipping it out to me, lol.) Definitely a fun read; recommended... And while I lived in Northern California at the time, I definitely concur w/ the first four sentences of EdisonLite's post above... |
jimct wrote:Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 12:58pm
|
Andy/80s music freak/Gordon/jono, thank you. Your
explanations/background was very helpful to me. Jono, I do agree - Calypso *was* the more much memorable side. I especially found the part about when Billboard listed the two as "Calypso/I'm Sorry", in that order, while it held the #2 spot on the Hot 100, to be quite significant. To me, that's a "slam dunk" reason to have it be exactly where it is: Peaking at #2. I did try to present some relevant facts. The best, non-BB, 1975 radio chart info that I know to be available. The 150+ surveys (I'm Sorry), vs 52 surveys (Calypso) is fact, not opinion. It's a large difference. True, it's not a scientifically accurate sample. But it's the best of what's out there. If Calypso was on 150+ surveys, and I'm Sorry only 52, I would've asked the exact same question. That being said, I still think, at some point, that the human element came into play, and made a "which title first, chart judgement call." But then again, I'm sure such things happened every single week, during Hot 100 prep! |
Posted By: TomDiehl1
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 4:53pm
|
I first heard the record in the early 90's when I was a kid. By that, I mean, Calypso. It was on some radio show on NPR, I think..... that side really grabbed me immediately and later when I found the 45, I played I'm Sorry once, and that was it.... I didn't like that side as much, if at all.
However, in all of my years hunting down promo 45s, I've never seen a promo 45 with Calypso on it. I've only come across mono/stereo promos of I'm Sorry, and I might even have one of those in my collection even though I don't care for the song.... ------------- Live in stereo. |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 5:42pm
|
Tom, a "Calypso" promo 45 does exist. I just pulled it for you. It has
"Calypso" on both sides; both sides are stereo. Both sides have a listed time of (3:29), and an actual time of (3:33). Both my stock copies show a slightly different listed time (3:32), but they also run (3:33). |
Posted By: Todd Ireland
Date Posted: 13 June 2013 at 8:35pm
| I can remember hearing "Calypso" for the first time on the radio sometime in the early '80s when I was a kid and quickly fell in love with the song. Funny story... I was a fan of the Smurfs cartoon series at the time and I could swear I thought John Denver was singing "Azraeeeel dooooo doo-doo-doo-doo" during the song's chorus. Azrael of course was the feline nemesis of the Smurfs! :-) |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 5:21am
|
Sorry that I'm late to this "Calypso" party, but Andy pretty much nailed the BB explanation above. It's interesting to note that Mr. Whitburn has since revised his thinking on this one. He always thought that the #2 peak was too high for this particular song, so we now show "Calypso" as a "tag-along" B-side for 10 weeks, with no actual chart position. It's cases like this one where I wish Billboard would've kept the songs separate like Cash Box did at the time.
As for my personal experience, I don't remember hearing "Calypso" much on my local Top 40s at the time (certainly nowhere near as much as "I'm Sorry"). In fact, I was quite surprised when Casey started playing it on AT40. |
Posted By: Hykker
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 6:30am
I'm with EdisonLite on this...I took a cross-country road trip in Sept. '75, and judging by the scoped airchecks I made off the car radio, airplay across the country was about 70-30 in favor of "Calypso", with most play of "I'm Sorry" on AC stations. I disagree with your preference for separate chart positions. Never understood why a chart that ranks sales as a major factor would have A & B sides of a legitimate 2-sided hit charted differently, especially given that airplay spin reports were unreliable at best pre- Mediabase monitoring. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 7:56am
Well, then I guess you didn't like the Hot 100 from 1958-69, because that's the way they ranked hundreds of hits! And who's to say that the sales reports were any more reliable than the airplay reports at that time? |
Posted By: aaronk
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 9:28am
I see your point, but if that were the case, then they could have listed an A & B side for every song that ever charted. After all, sales for both the A & B side would be the same for every song purchased. I don't have a problem with single sides having different chart positions since sales was not the only factor taken into account. After reading this thread, there is a pretty wide variance on what different board members recall being the most played side. I also agree with Paul that airplay and sales reports could have both been equally unreliable. ------------- Aaron Kannowski http://www.uptownsound.com" rel="nofollow - Uptown Sound http://www.919thepeak.com" rel="nofollow - 91.9 The Peak - Classic Hip Hop |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 9:49am
|
I just want to add one more comment to my one above. I mentioned hearing "Calypso" a lot. What I didn't mention is that I didn't hear "I'm Sorry" nearly as much. Like Hykker above, I think "I'm Sorry" may have been played more on AC stations, but it didn't receive a lot of play on the pop stations I listened to. Not like "Calypso" did. I think Mr. Whitburn's earlier publications with the #2 peak for "Calypso" are more accurate than his newest ones without any chart peak and just a tag-a-logn B-side. It was much more than that. And I think Mr. Whitburn should go back to the way he used to list it, as I think that's more accurate.
And I have to agree with all the other members above that "Calypso" is a much stronger (and more memorable) song than "I'm Sorry". I'm sorry - but that's how I feel. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 11:04am
| We can't discount Jim's info above about "I'm Sorry" being listed on way more radio station surveys than "Calypso" (about 3-to-1). At the very least, it's safe to say that "Calypso" didn't start getting major airplay until after "I'm Sorry" had peaked. It's a shame that "Calypso" wasn't released as a follow-up on it's own as it probably would've been a decent-size hit (but I don't think #2 - probably closer to Cash Box's #26). Alas, we'll never know for sure. |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 2:08pm
I will "third" that. My mother listened to KJR Seattle, the main Top 40 station in that city, every single morning, and I can't really recall hearing "I'm Sorry," but I remember "Calypso" VERY well. I just Googled old playlists for KJR and didn't really come up with anything. Radio & Records listed both at one position and ranked it as #1. Sure wish they had divided them into separate songs. http://wweb.uta.edu/faculty/gghunt/charts/jdenver.html - http://wweb.uta.edu/faculty/gghunt/charts/jdenver.html Looks like it had a really low peak in Cash Box, though -- #26 on 11/22/75. |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 2:16pm
Yes, and each magazine had a different method of ranking them. Did anyone else who bought the recent "Record World" book notice that The Beatles' "Revolution" was ranked at NUMBER TWO in "Record World"? |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 2:33pm
|
Paul, it looks like it's Mr. Whitburn, you and I against the world! I think Mr.
Whitburn should keep "Calypso" the way he has it now. I can only pray that someday I will be able to agree with my friend Gordon, on *some* issue on this board. I always seem to take the exact opposite stance, on song after song, and issue after issue. It's uncanny. And then I always end up giving a ultra-successful, award-winning songwriter agita. Once again. :( Unlike the others here, I did hear "I'm Sorry" far more on 1975 radio than I did "Calypso." Not even close. And not just on AC stations. Denver was a *Top 10 hit machine* in 1974 and 1975. He, Elton John, and ONJ come to mind as the three "superstars" of Top 40 radio during that 2-year window. All I know for sure is that here on T4MOC, Pat has the final say. At RR, Mr. Whitburn has the final say. They are the bosses. We're not. All we can do is to offer an opinion. Gordon, I believe both we and several others on Pat's board have just done so. Enjoy your weekend! |
Posted By: The Hits Man
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 4:08pm
|
All I can add is that here in AZ, "Calypso" was in heavy
rotation in the fall of 1975, perhaps a bit more so that "I'm Sorry". ------------- |
Posted By: Santi Paradoa
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 7:05pm
|
All I can add is on the Y-100 playlist (WHYI in the
Miami/Ft. Lauderdale market) for late Oct. 1975 "Calypso" was listed in the top 10 while "I'm Sorry" never even showed up on the list of their top 30 songs for the week. ------------- Santi Paradoa Miami, Florida |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 14 June 2013 at 10:23pm
| All I can add is that I don't really like "I'm Sorry" and I always liked "Calypso," so it could be that I simply took no notice when "I'm Sorry" was played back in the day. |
Posted By: JMD1961
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 2:24am
|
Interesting discussion. I'd just add that my own personal recollection is that both songs got substantial airplay on WBBQ in Augusta, GA. Just at separate times. "I'm Sorry" was played heavily for several weeks, then (after appearing on a TV special) "Calypso" took over. I wasn't a big single buyer at the time and had no access to either Billboard OR AT40, so it wasn't until much later that I found out that the two songs were on the same 45.
What's always bugged me is that Billboard's handling of the tracks has always given the combined 45 an "inflated" historical placement. Let me explain. For years, I've used a personal point system to rank each year's top hits. Using my system, "I'm Sorry/Calypso" ranks as the #3 hit of 1975. The reason is that, because of Billboard's policy of combining airplay points for 45s with both sides getting airplay, it spent a total of 9 weeks in the Top 10 on the chart. Only one other song that year spent more weeks (The Eagles' "One Of These Nights".) I've always felt that Billboard's policy gave the single an unfair advantage on the year end chart, as while both songs were qualified hits, separately neither would have finished the year so high up the chart. (I believe that Billboard later revised this policy and only counted the airplay points for whichever side was getting the most actual airplay in a given week, but don't quote me on that one.) BTW, my way of handling the issue on my personal 1975 ranking was to treat them separately, and only count points for each based on which side was listed as the A-side on the chart. Both still made the year-end Top 100, but neither in the Top 10. Oh, and using that method, "Calypso" out ranked "I'm Sorry". On a separate note, I have no issue with Joel Whitburn's decision to combine the two songs as a single listing in the latest editions of his books. But if he's going to do that, shouldn't he go back and give the combined 45 credit for their 9-week run in the top 10 in Pop Annual? In the past, "I'm Sorry" was only given credit for the 4 weeks it was listed as the A-Side, which made sense with the tracks being separated. If the 45 is now being listed as one position, that should change, and "I'm Sorry/Calypso" should be moved from #32 and up to #13 where it would fall using it's total top-10 run. |
Posted By: Paul Haney
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 3:15am
|
I've been doing some more research on this topic and here's what I've found...
Cash Box had a wonderful little list called "Radio Active" that listed the percentage of stations adding and listing a song for each given week. On 9/13/75 they listed "I'm Sorry" on a whopping 94% of the reporting stations (I think this puts to rest the notion that "I'm Sorry" wasn't huge on Top 40 radio). The ONLY time they mentioned "Calypso" was on 10/4/75 when they showed 10% of the stations adding it and 14% total listing it. I'm very surprised that Record World's "AM Action" column never noted "Calypso" at all. However, Record World did begin showing "I'm Sorry/Calypso" on their Top 100 chart on 9/27/75, as the song was at #5 and headed to #1. All of this makes me wonder how Radio & Records covered this issue. I wonder if they really did show it as a double-sided hit all the way through or if they added "Calypso" somewhere down the line (wish we had the actual back issues from 1975). It's appearing more and more now that most Top 40 stations started with "I'm Sorry" and once that one peaked, some of them started switching over to "Calypso", kinda like a follow-up single. I think the facts that I've cited above (along with Jim's ARSA stats) make a pretty strong case that, despite any personal preferences, "I'm Sorry" was actually the bigger hit. Now, as for "Colour My World" by Chicago...:) |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 9:15am
| Good points, Paul. And the fact remains that the ONLY major chart that listed "Calypso" as a separate single was "Cash Box," and it only ranked it as #26. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 11:48am
|
Jim, it's ok if we disagree. I hadn't noticed it was on EVERY point :) But I feel confident one day we'll agree on at least something. Perhaps some statistician can go through every comment ever made on this board and determine the % Disagree/Agree ratio we actually have.
I don't think it's 100%/0%, though. I think it's closer to the ratio of stations playing "I'm Sorry/Calypso". |
Posted By: jimct
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 1:08pm
|
Really enjoyed your comment, Gordon!
For the record, personally, I liked "Calypso" 100 times more than I ever did "I'm Sorry." But I tried to look at this if I were a doctor, getting ready to operate on a patient. Whether they're a celebrity, or just a "regular Joe", I'm always gonna try to do my absolute best, either way. (Although some recommend I steer clear of sharp objects!) Gordon, based on you last comment, I hold out hope that, someday, we may yet be able to turn you into a statistician! I suspect your "ratio" is likely more accurate than my guess was! Appreciate your good nature on this, my friend! :) |
Posted By: Brian W.
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 4:18pm
| I wish we had a "like" button for that post, Gordon. |
Posted By: sriv94
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 7:33pm
This. + infinity. "Calypso"'s a great song. ------------- Doug --------------- All of the good signatures have been taken. |
Posted By: EdisonLite
Date Posted: 15 June 2013 at 9:20pm
Hey, we're friends, and I'm still very thankful for all the single versions/edits you've turned me on to since day 1. And all the knowledge you've brought to us all! And wow, your "0% Agreement" guess has officially been debunked and thrown out - based on what you said above! Because I like "Calypso" 100 times more than I ever did "I'm Sorry". So there's at least 1 thing we agree on :) |
Posted By: KentT
Date Posted: 26 June 2013 at 4:06pm
|
In Eastern Tennessee, "I'm Sorry" did better. On AC,
Country formats, and on Top 40. ------------- I turn up the good and turn down the bad! |
Posted By: Steve Carras
Date Posted: 19 February 2014 at 10:51pm
Seconded! ------------- You know you're really older when you think that younger singer Jesse McCartney's related in anyway to former Beatle Paul McCartney. |