Dionne's Chart Performance

[Dionnefan]

I have often wondered why Dionne did not perform more strongly on the charts (Billboard specifically). She is a living legend with only 2 number one hits in her decades long career, although she has sent I believe 31 songs into the top 40.

What is surprising is the fact that Dionne never really had more top 5 hits with Bacharach, especially in the '67-'70 heydey. I believe the highest chart position she achieved with Burt during the Scepter years was #4 ("Say a Little Prayer") and it is ironic that her biggest Scepter hit at #2 was the non-Bacharach "Valley of the Dolls". So why was Dionne not the top-10 machine like Aretha or Diana? Aretha was an absolute monster on the R&B charts, where Dionne fared even less strongly there than on the pop charts.

Some possible reasons?:

-Black artists, especially female black artists still had not achieved the easy crossover appeal that came later on
-As an artist on an independent, small label, Dionne did not have the promotion machine that some of the bigger labels had
-Dionne's subtlety and sophistication didn't have as broad an appeal with the teeny bopper and younger crowd that bought most of the singles that drove the chart positions

Of course, none of this makes a difference when it comes to the quality of the music, but I am a chart trivia junkie, so this stuff always fascinates me. Dionne, especially as she got older, just had a certain style that was usually appreciated by more discriminating listeners. She did not have the broad appeal of Ross or Franklin. Would love to hear your thoughts....

I guess this all goes back to how much it frustrates me that Dionne is so underappreciated!

[An Enormous BB Fan]

Obviously, my feeling is that most of Dionne's songs should have gone to #1. And I'm astounded and shocked that any number of them did not go to #1. If San Jose or Say A Little Prayer aren't #1 songs, then I don't know what is.

Okay, now that I've said that, let me give you my thoughts on why her songs didn't go to #1.

1.) I think that quality and sophistication do not necessarily make a #1 song.

2.) A good dance record, I suppose, will sell a lot more copies than, say, a song like "Paper Mache" or "The Windows of the World".

3.) Competition. I think there was a golden age of songwriting when Dionne was at her most popular. It was very hard to compete against The Supremes, The Beatles, etc. etc. etc.

[BachtoBacharach]

Aretha charted 2 #1's as well...Respect and I Knew You Were Waiting...Dionne placed 12 songs in the top 10 versus 17 for Aretha. Dionne's appeal was much broader than Aretha's. Dionne appealed to older folks, teenagers, young adults, blacks, whites, etc...she was selling out arenas in the late 1960s when even the great Aretha was not. If you study the R & B charts, you should note that Dionne places very well there in comparison to both Ross and Franklin...belying the fact that some younger listeners who weren't alive in the 60s want to rewrite history and say that Dionne had little R & B appeal. Based upon R & B chart experience alone she ranks very highly...many folks assume these days that she was too sophisticated to appeal to African Americans...what a crock...and sort of racist to assume that!!! Black folks loved her music and the R&B chart definitely backs that up. It is popular to dismiss her these days but when you look at the artists she's influenced, she's, dare I say it, possibly more influential than Aretha. She also placed highly on the Adult Charts and often Franklin and Ross (who was in a singing group called the Supremes and not a solo vocalist...if you compare Diana as a solo vocalist which she is not, she whups everyone's behind and leaves even Aretha in the dust) in the 1960s didn't cross over too often. There is no comparison...chart placement is not always good indication of how well a single sells and how popular it is...Deja Vu sold a million but placed at #15. Alfie never charted higher than #15 but sold a million. And, if Billboard magazine says you are the #2 female vocalist of the rock era second only to Aretha, that's damn good. If you want an eyeopening experience, look at Dusty Springfield's chart action in the US and also Petula Clark...and compare that to Warwick...interesting, isn't it! Aretha burned brightly from 1967 to 1970 and then began to peter out. Warwick enjoyed sustained success from 1962 through 1970. Dionne's dry spell ended in 1979 and Aretha's ended in 1984 (with a brief reprieve during the Blues Brothers). But then again, look at Barbra Streisand's single discography...a few big hits but she has far from the singles chart cred that Dionne has...but then again why compare anyway? And, what do you make of Aretha hitting only #10 (ONLY # 10...what a failure!!!???LOL) with I Say A Little Prayer? All that to say they are entirely two different artists and it helps to have a little historical context when comparing apples and oranges.

[BachtoBacharach]

When you compare Aretha to the Beatles and Elvis, she falls far short but then why would you compare? It's just not relevant.

[Blair N. Cummings]

Another factor that may skew the interpretation of chart success is that in the era we`re mostly concerned with, the Top Ten or Top Forty encompassed everything from the Yardbirds, Kinks, and Stones through Dionne et al into Percy Faith and Andy Williams. Younger people don`t recall the pre-segmentation of the airwaves which didn`t occur until well into the `70s.
I believe that we baby boomers ultimately benefited from the exposure to all these different and conflicting styles (despite the near-fascistic arguments to the contrary that occured at the time).
Who was better? The Stones or Frank Sinatra? The Beatles or Sergio Mendes?
It`s like the "awards" discussion we just had. I find chart success irrelevant, but those who don`t need to consider all of the parameters including the history of inclusion and therefor "competition."

[Dionnefan]

BtoB, I guess now that I think of it, Dionne charted better than I realized. I guess growing up in the late 70's and through the 80's and 90's, I was seeing people like Michael Jackson score 5 #1's off of a single album and compared to that, Dionne's success seemed much less. And then Dionne's own cousin Whitney scoring 10 number #1s (with songs that pale in comparison to Dionne's). And it disgusts me to think of all the number #1's Mariah Carey has scored (what a dropoff in the quality of popular music through the years!) Doesn't she have the most of all time now?

Believe me, I am the biggest Warwick fan out there, and it just annoys me so that her musical talent and legacy is so ignored today. I guess since I wasn't around in the sixties, I just don't know how popular she really was.

[Dionnefan]

Oh, and of course I know that chart success doesn't have anything to do with the quality of the music. In fact, I oftentimes prefer the minor hits (stuff that made it to say #27) to the big well known songs that can get kind of old from having heard them so often.

Hearing things like Natalie Cole and Whitney Houston refer to "I Say a Little Prayer" as Aretha's song just makes me sick! It's like Dionne's own blood is dissing her! And it seems to me like Cissy in her book thought of her work backing Aretha as more important than her work backing her own niece! Dionne just don't get no respect!!!

[BachtoBacharach]

ISALP didn't become "Aretha's song" until the 1990s when folks started rewriting history and oldies stations started to treat Aretha and Motown as the be all and end all. Aretha's version never, until then, received near the airplay that Dionne's original did. If one's exposure to the music of the 1960s is based upon what is heard on oldies radio and read in the press these days, it seems that you might conclude that it was all Aretha, Motown and the Beatles. Top 40 radio in those days was so damn diverse...and it is a fact that Warwick was overall the most programmed female vocalist heard on the radio from about 1964 through about 1971. You would never guess that in a million years by listening these days to oldies stations and Sirius and XM who fall far short in trying to recreate that experience...and that's sad and terribly inaccurate but history is being rewritten and I am glad there are enough of us oldsters around who can "set the record straight"!