Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
RS
The Commercial Revolution in
American Music
davi d s u i s m an
Prologue 1
1 When Songs Became a Business 18
2 Making Hits 56
3 Music without Musicians 90
4 The Traffic in Voices 125
5 Musical Properties 150
6 Perfect Pitch 178
7 The Black Swan 204
8 The Musical Soundscape of Modernity 240
Epilogue 273
“Where is the song before it is sung?” asked the Russian writer Alexander
Herzen. Nowhere, was his wistful answer. But then Herzen, who died in
1870, did not live in the age of the modern music industry, when songwrit-
ing and music publishing became complex commercial enterprises. In the
decades following the U.S. Civil War, a new musical product transformed
American musical culture. It was amusing, inexpensive, portable, and versa-
tile enough to be enjoyed everywhere from baseball games and street corners
to private middle-class parlors. This product was the popular song, and its
advent marked the beginning of a new era in the political economy of music,
by refashioning one of the most basic and universal forms of cultural expres-
sion—the song—according to the inexorable logic of business.1
“Popular” song did exist before this time, but earlier the term had referred
to vernacular music in a general way. Popular song resembled folk song, in
today’s parlance—“an outgrowth from the life of the people,” as one survey
of American music from 1890 put it.2 In the 1890s, however, popular song
was redefined as a new kind of aural commodity, unapologetically commer-
cial and distinctively American, heard more and more widely across the
soundscape. Other song forms—art song, religious song, work song—did
not disappear completely, but popular song became the cornerstone of a
broad new musical culture, initiating changes not just in the music people
made and heard, but also in the way music was woven into the fabric of peo-
ple’s lives. Popular song was a consumer commodity for the ear. Musically, it
When Songs Became a Business
R 19 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
ited by Booker T. Washington, which was too poor to have a complete set of
eating utensils but which owned an organ. In 1894, a writer in the Leaven-
worth (Kansas) Herald could report, “It’s a mighty poor colored family that
hasn’t got some kind of tin pan called piano nowadays.”4
Under the guiding hand of men like John Sullivan Dwight, a Brook Farm
transcendentalist who became the leading American music critic of the age,
the works of European composers, especially Germans, were exalted as “se-
rious music” and most other forms of music were casually or vigorously
dismissed. By the end of the century, Henry Lee Higginson, Leopold and
Walter Damrosch, Anton Seidl, and Henry Krehbiel were laying the institu-
tional foundations of high musical culture in America. As serious music was
“sacralized” as a genteel accoutrement of the bourgeois social order, it found
a foil in popular music, which was characterized as everything that seri-
ous music was not.5 An 1895 magazine characterized popular music as “the
songs of the day, ephemeral, trivial, and of little or no musical value . . . , sung
and whistled and played for a few weeks or months, and . . . then forgotten.”6
Popular song was not merely the opposite of serious music, though: it was a
distinct historical creation in and of itself.
Despite the roughly concurrent rise of the so-called royalty ballad in the
English music hall and the occasional popularity of English songs in the
United States (“Ta-ra-ra Boom-de-ay” and “Little Annie Rooney” were two
of the biggest sellers), the rise of popular song in the United States owed
more to the “American system of manufactures” than to influence from
abroad or coordinated international initiatives. Although the success of mu-
sic hall songs contributed to the rapid growth of the music economy in En
gland, it belonged to a different order than did the rationalized production of
popular song in the United States. Concentrated in New York City, the in-
dustry that emerged was a new, modern kind of business that turned song-
writing and music publishing into specialized and standardized occupations.
“In the distant past,” wrote Harry Von Tilzer, the era’s most prolific profes-
sional songwriter, “the writing of songs was play, a relaxation from daily
cares, but today it is a business and demands businesslike methods.” Others
in the industry reached the same conclusion, though somewhat apologeti-
cally. As one music publisher put it in the Music Trade Review in 1904, “The
publishing business is like any other line with a variety of goods—pardon the
commercial term, but it applies all the same—to offer.”7
R 20 S
When Songs Became a Business
This industry was nicknamed Tin Pan Alley. Like “Hollywood,” “Tin
Pan Alley” became a metonym for a place, an industry, and a mode of pro-
duction.8 Like Hollywood, it could produce works in a variety of styles, uni
fied by a constant underlying operational aesthetic. The exact origin of the
nickname Tin Pan Alley is now lost, but it involved Harry Von Tilzer and the
songwriter and journalist Monroe Rosenfeld and referred to the cacophony
created in the music publishers’ studios.9 Geographically, the industry was
first concentrated around New York’s Union Square. Then, by the first de
cade of the twentieth century, publishers’ offices lined moved north to
Twenty-eighth and Twenty-ninth streets between Fifth and Sixth avenues
—the industry’s most famous location. At one end of Twenty-eighth Street
stood a combination saloon and Turkish bath, where songwriters and actors
could get free sandwiches or, for the price of a glass of beer, a plate of baked
beans. Inside the publishers’ offices, a reception area could be found, with
pictures of performers on the walls; an office; a stock room; and a small,
parlorlike music studio, or several, each with its own upright piano, some
comfortable furniture, and a carpet or rug on the floor, where songwriters
composed, arrangers wrote out transcriptions, and salaried “demonstrators”
played songs for stage performers and tried to persuade them to incorporate
the songs into their acts.10 Many of America’s most celebrated songwriters,
including Irving Berlin, George Gershwin, and Jerome Kern, worked for Tin
Pan Alley over the course of its storied history, all turning out the light, lyri-
cal, sentimental fare that was the Alley’s signature product.
Tin Pan Alley’s essential impact, however, lay not in aesthetic innovation
but in the relation between aesthetic forms and the industry’s modern cap
italist structure. Indeed, no single musical form characterized the industry;
over time, it incorporated a variety of genres and idioms. As a business,
though, its principles remained constant, clearly embodying the two features
that according to Thorstein Veblen, writing in 1910, defined the modern
business concern. A firm’s production had to rest on the systematic organi
zation and application of knowledge—which Veblen referred to as “the ma-
chine process,” though he emphasized that it could be found in nonmecha-
nized industries as well. And the fundamental motivation of the business
enterprise had to be financial profit, which the modern businessman sought
to maximize by manipulating the supply of goods and by other means. “The
vital point of production,” Veblen claimed, “is the vendibility of the output,
R 21 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
its convertibility into money values, not its serviceability for the needs of
mankind.” What distinguished Tin Pan Alley from other modes of making
music was that the primary motivation for writing a song was to sell it, not to
express some inherently human feeling or musical impulse. Applied to mu-
sic publishing, this principle measured value in a purely quantitative way—
“How many copies of sheet music did a song sell?”—divorced from qualita-
tive (that is, musical or aesthetic) considerations. Songwriters in this regime
were workers, not artists, and their output was a vehicle for the amusement
of others, not for personal expression. The songwriter-publisher Charles K.
Harris advised aspiring songwriters to avoid tunes that were difficult to sing,
because they were less salable. As Von Tilzer put it, the songwriter’s product
was “a commodity, a cash value, and in order to augment the value he must
subordinate his own personal tastes to those of the music-buying public.”11
In many respects, Tin Pan Alley was altogether a different entity from the
older music business that it gradually displaced. For one thing, in the ante-
bellum era, music publishing had generally been integrated into other pro-
fessional activities, not carried on as a livelihood unto itself. Typical was Phil
adelphia’s well-known Septimus Winner (1827–1902), who both engraved
and published music, owned a music store, gave music lessons, arranged
music for others, and served as music editor of the general-interest Peterson’s
Magazine.12 For another thing, by the end of the nineteenth century much
of the nation’s musical capital was consolidated in New York, whereas ear-
lier New York had been only one among many important musical cities in
the United States. When the country’s largest publishers established a trade
organization in 1855, for example, Philadelphia had the greatest number of
members, with seven, New York had six, Boston and Baltimore had four
each, and Saint Louis, Louisville, Cleveland, and Cincinnati had one apiece.13
In this older economy, sales of printed music grew steadily throughout the
nineteenth century, but individual songs had little commercial value. Pub-
lishers did not generally advertise. Songs were financially risky, in that they
were quite labor-intensive (requiring considerable attention to detail) yet de-
livered returns on very small margins at best. For writers, songs might bring
a brief windfall, but they were hardly the basis for a livelihood. The best-
known exception to this rule was Stephen C. Foster, the composer of “The
Old Folks at Home,” “My Old Kentucky Home,” and “Camptown Races”
R 22 S
When Songs Became a Business
and perhaps the first American composer to support himself on the sale of
sheet music. Born near Pittsburgh in 1826, Foster distinguished himself by
crafting remarkably simple songs and by understanding better than any com-
poser before him how much the popularity of a song depended on its being
easily remembered and played even by those with only modest abilities.14
Even so, the income Foster could earn from his songwriting was neither
lavish nor stable, and he is almost as famous for dying poor and broken, a
victim of the Bowery, as for his enduring songs. Although his most success-
ful composition, “Old Folks at Home” (1851), did earn him $1,647 in royal-
ties, a substantial amount of money in the mid-nineteenth century, an analy-
sis of his royalty payments for fifty-two published songs tells a different story.
Excluding his four biggest sellers, his average royalty was $102, and the
median payment for all his songs was only $36.15 For most songwriters, the
situation was even more humbling. Over several years or decades, the work
of a Stephen Foster or a George Frederick Root might sell in the hundreds of
thousands or possibly millions of copies, but as a rule, a writer who could
regularly sell five hundred or more copies of a song was considered a solid
success. As for payment, most writers sold their songs outright, for a flat
price, and in instances where writers chose to receive a royalty, it was not
uncommon for them to be bilked by unscrupulous publishers. Reflecting on
the value of songs before the 1880s, Harry Von Tilzer recalled, “I hadn’t
thought of earning money from them, as at that period one never heard of
song writers making fortunes, and there were not many trying to write
them.”16
The publication of original songs, then, occupied only a relatively small
place in the music economy. Old songs circulated widely and freely, and
among those which sold well, many were imported from Ireland and Great
Britain.17 Indeed, numerous commentators believed that the United States
had yet to develop a distinct musical idiom. Typical in holding this view
was Reginald De Koven, who was born in Connecticut in 1859 and studied
music in Europe before earning a reputation as a composer for musical the-
ater. Notwithstanding the quantitative and stylistic expansion of publishers’
catalogues, wrote De Koven in 1897, “it would be difficult . . . to find in the
entire output even a very small modicum which, by any courtesy or stretch
of the imagination, could be called distinctively or characteristically national
R 23 S
When Songs Became a Business
The commercial turn in music publishing began in the 1880s when firms
began supplying songs for the growing demand from vaudeville, which was
quickly becoming the leading form of musical performance in the United
States. Mixing skits, dancing, acrobatics, and musical numbers, vaudeville
grew out of variety theater, which itself grew out of the minstrel shows. Pio-
neered by the New York impresario (and songwriter and performer) Tony
Pastor, vaudeville was essentially a more wholesome version of variety, aimed
at the “polite tastes” of the middle class. Smoking, drinking, and prostitution
were banned from theaters, and the most ribald jokes were banished from the
stage. At the outset, performers wrote most of their own songs, but as urban
audiences grew sharply, even good performers had difficulty writing or ob-
taining consistently entertaining material.20
Up until this time, song publishing had been essentially a passive activ-
ity: publishers had songs printed up, then hoped people would buy them. It
paralleled, in this way, nineteenth-century print advertising, which was based
more on announcing the availability of goods than on stimulating demand.21
In contrast, the new publishers approached selling with unprecedented ag-
gressiveness. Will Rossiter, whose Chicago firm was established in 1880, be-
R 25 S
When Songs Became a Business
came the first music publisher to advertise in theater trade journals. Carry-
ing bundles of sheet music under his arm, he also journeyed from one music
shop to another to sing his songs, and he began to print decorative illustrated
covers for his sheet music (made possible by developments in chromolitho-
graphic printing), which made his offerings more visually attractive. In the
same years in New York, Frank Harding took over his father’s “serious” mu-
sic firm and reoriented it toward popularizing songs that he and others wrote
for Tony Pastor’s shows. He encouraged local Bowery songwriters to bring
him song material, payment for which usually took the form of a few drinks at
the nearby bar. Within a few years, his office was a well-known hangout for
songwriters.22
Meanwhile, the young firms of T. B. Harms, established by brothers Tom
and Alex Harms, and Willis Woodward & Company began to enlist the lead-
ing performers of the day to introduce and promote their material onstage,
often in exchange for money or other compensation—a practice that per-
sisted and grew in importance in the decades that followed. The idea for this
in all likelihood came from the British music hall, where much of the reper-
toire was made up of royalty ballads, songs for which performers received
a royalty for singing them onstage. The most remarkable, most important,
and longest-lasting of the new firms, however, was M. Witmark and Sons, the
firm begun by the young brothers Isidore, Julius, and Jay Witmark (joined
later by the youngest brothers, Frank and Eddie). Starting out in business
with holiday cards and business cards, the boys had decided to focus their
energies on song publishing after the music publisher Willis Woodward re-
neged on a pledge to cut Julius in on the profits to a song, “Always Take
Mother’s Advice,” that Julius promoted in his act as a minstrel performer. It
was not until 1891, however, that Julius incorporated into his act a song that
vaulted the Witmarks to the level of a major publisher. They had purchased
the song “The Picture Turned toward the Wall” for fifteen dollars a few years
earlier but had initially declined to promote it. When Julius added it to his
act and sang it around the country, however, it sold thousands of copies and
brought the young Witmarks respect from their elder rivals in the business.
Indeed, the song’s popularity inspired another publisher to issue a song with
an almost identical title, “The Picture with Its Face toward the Wall,” to
which the Witmarks responded with a lawsuit for copyright infringement;
R 27 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
Around the same time another of the key architects of Tin Pan Alley was
beginning his career as well. In the mid-1880s an aspiring songwriter named
Charles K. Harris rented an office in Milwaukee, outside which he hung a
sign: “Banjoist and Song Writer. Songs, Written to Order.” The reference
to the banjo signaled his familiarity with minstrelsy, “written to order” sug-
gested his responsiveness to public taste—a quality he capitalized on effec-
tively over the years that followed. Unlike the best-known minstrel songwrit-
ers of that time, however, he was not a performer, and although he was
ignorant of written notation—a fact he boasted of in his autobiography, as a
badge of his divergence from “serious” music—he played well by ear and
showed a creative, energetic drive in cultivating demand for his material.24
Harris achieved modest success by placing some of his songs with travel-
ing performers, and in 1891 he established his eponymous publishing com-
pany. His big break came in 1892–93 with “After the Ball,” a defining mo-
ment in the creation of the new musical culture. In his History of American
Music (1908) W. L. Hubbard, the music critic for the Chicago Tribune, ex-
pressed a typical judgment about the song when he wrote “It may be said
that it was this song which really started the popular song craze as we know it
today.” Indeed, no song had ever sold so many copies so fast and so widely.
Departing from the era when a “successful” song sold hundreds or maybe
thousands of units, “After the Ball” sold hundreds of thousands—perhaps,
as Munsey’s Magazine reported in 1895, more than a million.25 Moreover, it
was truly a national hit. Before this, very few commercially produced songs
achieved real national popularity. What thrilled audiences in one area of the
country did not necessarily excite those in another, and although a song
might enjoy popularity in different regions over a few years’ span, that popu-
larity did not derive from a national infrastructure designed to promote and
distribute music.
The song itself was a narrative ballad, with three verses and a chorus, set
in waltz time. Its melody was extremely simple, its chorus easy to remember.
Its maudlin lyrics were typical of late nineteenth-century ballads, with a sen-
timentality that was common in Victorian life. In the song’s lyrics, a man re-
R 28 S
When Songs Became a Business
counts to his niece the experience of losing the love of his life when, “after
the ball,” he saw her kissing another man. The catch—and story songs from
this era often had one—was learning many years later that the man his sweet-
heart had kissed was only her brother. Grounded in nineteenth-century as-
sumptions about home and marriage, the narrative components would have
registered quickly with listeners; for some they may even have given voice
to their anxiety over conformity with Victorian norms. Cultural resonance
alone, however, hardly accounts for the song’s tremendous commercial suc-
cess. Indeed, the traditional Victorian values running through the song lyrics
in the formative years of the music business obscured the magnitude of the
shift that was taking place in the field of cultural production.
In Harris’s view, “After the Ball” was different not only in degree but also
in kind, part of a new category of music, popular song, that encompassed
numerous styles and genres that were similar in their production and pro
motion. Reflecting a few years later on the rapid ascendance of this kind of
music, Harris explained it as the result of a dynamic change in supply, pro-
motion, and demand: with simpler, singable melodies, songs were more mu-
sically accessible; with increased music education, more people could play
them; improvements in vaudeville enhanced exposure to songs; and within a
few years, phonographs and player-pianos were stimulating demand. “After
the Ball” showed in particular, however, that additional consumers of song
could be systematically produced through intense, repeated, varied musical
promotion. In fact, no song could achieve mass sales without such expo-
sure, Harris claimed in his 1926 autobiography: “A new song must be sung,
played, hummed, and drummed into the ears of the public, not in one city
alone, but in every city, town, and village, before it ever becomes popular.”26
Harris learned that the “popular” element in “popular song” rested on
distribution—aggressive distribution—as much as production, and in the age
before mass communications, the main channel for it was the stage. “The
real start at popularizing a song is to sell it to the performers,” Harris wrote.
“If it strikes their fancy, they will surely sing it for the public. Common sense
tells one that the bigger the reputation and ability of the performer whose
assistance the author and composer enlists, the more chances of its success
in catching the public’s favor.” If necessary, a performer’s favor could also
be curried with a small weekly emolument. Thus, Harris enlisted one of the
R 29 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
era’s most successful traveling singers, James Aldrich Libbey, to help pro-
mote “After the Ball,” in addition to persuading May Irwin to sing the song in
her Broadway show, Dick Jose to sing it on the West Coast, and Helen Mora
to perform it in vaudeville houses around the country. In many cases, this
“enlisting” of performers involved a small weekly payment, and according
to one report, Harris claimed he paid fifty different singers a week five to
fifty dollars each to include “After the Ball” in their acts. Harris did not alto-
gether invent this strategy of using stage performers to promote songs, but he
refined and expanded it. Having James Aldrich Libbey’s image printed on
the cover of the sheet music, for example, he at once capitalized on the sing-
er’s existing reputation and enhanced it, for the mutual benefit of singer and
publisher.27
The song’s most important exposure, however, occurred at the Colum-
bian World Exposition in Chicago in 1893, where it became a fixture in the
repertoire of John Philip Sousa, a musical figure of unrivaled cultural author-
ity in the 1890s, whose adoption of “After the Ball” had far-reaching effects.
As a bandleader, conductor, and composer, Sousa—the “March King”—was
the most revered and influential American musician of the age. Thousands
and thousands of people from all over the country and around the world
heard the performances of the Sousa band on the Midway, and a great many
of them brought copies of “After the Ball” home with them as souvenirs. In
this way the song was disseminated far and wide, including in translation
into many foreign languages.28
“After the Ball” changed the social geography of American music and the
basic relation between music and business. Largely as a result of this one
song, Harris opened up offices in both Chicago and New York, and in mov-
ing to New York shortly after the turn of the century, he personally exempli-
fied the mass migration of songwriters and the consolidation of the popular
music business there. Meanwhile, Harris’s good fortune inspired a number
of other music publishers to try to emulate and build on his success. Impor-
tant Tin Pan Alley firms established in the wake of “After the Ball” included
Joseph W. Stern, Jerome H. Remick, and Howley, Haviland & Co. (all in
1894); Leo Feist (1895); Shapiro, Bernstein & Co. (1896); and F. A. Mills
(1897). The mid-1890s, Isidore Witmark remembered, marked “the indubi-
table beginnings of Tin Pan Alley as a national industry,” and by 1900 only
R 30 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
rarely did a national hit originate in any city other than New York. In Wit-
mark’s estimation, these young publishers neither knew nor cared about mu-
sic, but “they had discovered there was money in popular song.”29
R 32 S
When Songs Became a Business
R 33 S
s el li n g s o u nd s
R 34 S
When Songs Became a Business
groups and from one context to another, and this translation became second
nature. Among German Jews, these skills are likely to have been even more
finely developed than among gentiles, for the Jews belong to three cultural
worlds—German, American, and Jewish—not just two. In addition, other
characteristics of the German American population may have amplified their
transcultural dynamism, including liberal cosmopolitanism, urban orienta-
tion, and relative openness to other classes and groups. Indeed, these condi-
tions distinguish the publishers of Tin Pan Alley from the Jewish movie mo-
guls of Hollywood a few years later. Although the latter had also developed
skills as salesmen before setting out in the movie business, the founders of
the Paramount, Universal, Fox, Metro-Goldwyn-Mayer, and Warner Broth-
ers studios were nearly all first-generation immigrants (only Marcus Loew
and the Warners were second-generation) who came from unhappy, strait-
ened circumstances, in contrast to the relatively comfortable starting point of
the music publishers.34
By the time the Hollywood studios took shape in the 1910s, the Jewish
component of Tin Pan Alley had changed as well, as a result of the influx of
Jewish songwriters from Eastern European, not German, backgrounds, and
from more working-class, as opposed to middle-class, families. Large num-
bers of Jews from Eastern Europe poured into the United States, especially
New York City, around the turn of the century, and these included the fami-
lies of Irving Berlin, George and Ira Gershwin, Irving Caesar, L. Wolfe Gil-
bert, and other leading musical figures. Like the second-generation German
Jews before them, these men too had grown up in circumstances that re-
warded versatility of movement and communication between the home and
the street, the traditional and the modern, the old culture and the new. If any-
thing, however, they achieved an even higher level of dynamism, for they
lived in and among myriad Jewish communities (Russian, Hungarian, Roma-
nian, Galician, and others), each with its own specific cultural codes—as well
as in regular interaction with other immigrant groups (Italians, Greeks, Irish,
and so on).35 As producers of popular songs, neither the German nor the
Eastern European Jews created songs with identifiably Jewish features—anti-
Semitic denouncements notwithstanding—but they emerged from a field of
social relations that rewarded lively, inventive approaches to bridging ethnic
and social divisions.
If together these sociological factors help explain the foundations of the
R 35 S