Talk:Yakety Sax

Yakity Sax

Deleted the Yakety Sax in Internet popular culture section.

Just two links to two very unknown wrestling related videos that happen to have the song in them. By no means would I consider them part of internet pop culture or worth mentioning.

tribute.wmv

tribute.wmv is a very well known internet video. to deny it a reference on the yakety sax page is a travesty.

I added a reference to it in the entry.

Passion of Benny Hill

I agree about the PSP videos having nothing to do with the song, but the Passion parody was hilarious and built entirely around the song, as well as being a perfect example of the best of the internet humor which has come from this song.--Sean 01:21, 10 August 2006 (UTC)

Not a song

The word "song" is used repeatedly and inappropriately instead of "instrumental" or "tune" MansLaughter 19:02, 21 October 2006 (UTC)

Worst semantic argument ever. 70.50.199.74 (talk) 22:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC) Joe Caron

Manslaughter made a valid and important point. An article that uses the term song to mean any piece is not just un-encyclopediac; it's an embarrassment. TheScotch (talk) 21:46, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Year of release?

This page says 1961, but Randolph's page says 1963, as does an obit. --Calair 05:24, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it was his version for Monument that was released in 1963, as you've indicated (and the entry was corrected to reflect this). That version was recorded in December of 1962, based on the matrix numbering system Monument used then (A12W- was the matrix prefix, the code as follows: A = 1962; 12 = December; W = 45 RPM). Within the page, a reference to his earlier 1958 recording for RCA Victor was added. –Wbwn 09:47, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Benny Hill

Re: "It is probably best known for its frequent use in the sketch comedy program, The Benny Hill Show, to accompany otherwise silent, rapidly paced comedy bits (frequently involving a chase scene).":

I object to this sentence on several grounds. In the first place, the recording was very well known long before this television show, and it is very well known to many persons who have never seen this television show. In the second place, there is far too much irrelevant detail about the television show here anyway. In the third place, it apparently was not even the theme song of the television show. Any reference to the television show in this article belongs in a trivia section, and the phrase "it is probably best known for" should be deleted. 71.90.26.140 06:10, 12 August 2007 (UTC)

While I agree with most of what you said, your "Re" fails to be effective. Why? Because in 2007, that's EXACTLY what it's remembered for. And while we should give note on the song's history pre-Benny Hill, it is definately a valid point in where it's best recognized. Case and point - Marlon Brando. Best known for his portrayal as Vito Corleone, the Godfather, albeit he was well known before this playing Stanley in "A Streetcar Named Desire". —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.50.199.74 (talk) 22:29, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

It's understood that this was not "the theme song." That said, to Americans anyway, this music is almost synonymous with Benny Hill. It's a bit like Sousa's "Liberty Bell," which few people could identify by name but, once heard, is immediately recognized as the "Monty Python" TV theme. To many people, "Yakety Sax" is "that crazy music they play at the end of every Benny Hill show." Priceyeah (talk) 09:22, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Those "many people" are much deceived. I suppose I'd better check the Marlon Brando article for Godfather POV. TheScotch (talk) 09:26, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

Trying to label someone or something as "best known for" is a slippery slope. How many 21-year-olds have ever heard of either the song or the Benny Hill Show? Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

If they have heard of neither, then your point is moot. The question is, of those 21-year-olds who HAVE heard of the song, how many of them know it from any source OTHER than the Benny Hill Show?? My guess: ZERO.

Worse yet, the article implies that it is used as a backdrop for various chases b/c it is somehow inherently comical. That could perhaps be said for Benny's people selecting the song; after that, every other comical use of this song is in direct homage/parody of Benny. Nothing more; nothing less. 216.50.220.11 (talk) 06:20, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

I don't see how they are "deceived" if they happen to get to know this music through the Benny Hill show. Are the people who refer to Sousa's "Liberty Bell" as "the Monty Python theme song" to be described as "much deceived"? I say no. Maybe these people are not such big saxophone fans as other people -- being an expert in "Yakety Sax" is not a prerequisite for claiming a given association. To be clear, how things are regarded is completely different from a point of fact. If these Benny Hill fans insisted that Louis Armstrong were the chief interpreter of the music, then they would be "much deceived." As I am merely reporting a highly common association that you choose to disparage, deception doesn't enter into it. Priceyeah (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

You said it yourself: "Point of view". It's reasonable to say it was known or well-known in the Benny Hill Show. To say "best known" requires a citation in a case like this, as it is not at all intuitively obvious. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 16:56, 30 December 2007 (UTC)

The piece would have been very famous and would have had its own wikipedia article whether or not Benny Hill had ever used it. Its composition, recording, publication, and original fame had nothing whatsoever to do with Benny Hill. I watched an episode of "The Simpsons" recently with protacted enacted biographies of various historical figures including Mozart and Henry VIII. It's quite possible that many young persons were introduced to Mozart or Henry VIII or, say, Salieri (who figured prominently in the Mozart sketch) from this episode, but clearly that circumstance has nothing to do with the figures themselves, and should not appear in the main body of any wikipedia article devoted to any of these figures.

Re: "Are the people who refer to Sousa's "Liberty Bell" as "the Monty Python theme song" to be described as "much deceived"?":

They are much deceived if they think the name of the piece is "the Monty Python theme song", that the piece was composed for the show, or that Sousa's fame or notability has anything to do with Monty Python--or for that matter if they consider this a song at all. It so happens that I myself am only familiar with the piece through Monty Python (although I was aware that it was Sousa's), which means I am not qualified to assess the piece's notability, just as someone who is (or, more likely, thinks he is) only familiar with "Yakety Sax" through Benny Hill is not qualified to assess "Yakety Sax" 's notability. (As I've pointed out before, however, "Yakety Sax" was not even Benny Hill's theme music, which in and of itself makes this a poor analogy). TheScotch (talk) 11:51, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

A little strange, then that a majority of TV & film usage of the piece "is frequently used to accompany comedic chases." And they're usually sped-up chases. If you really want to prove otherwise, watch some Benny Hill, and watch the other sequences mentioned. And then try convincing yourself that Benny Hill's chases and the other chases just happen to be directed the same way, and are accompanied by the same music.

Like it or not, certain things just become more famous only in the second round. OJ Simpson, for instance. Yes, he was a football player, but people don't really associate him with that as much as he'd like. It's the way the world goes. More people watch TV than listen to early 1960s saxophone records. Deal with it. 122.162.138.210 (talk) 23:55, 26 September 2008 (UTC)

Re: "...try convincing yourself that Benny Hill's chases and the other chases just happen to be directed the same way, and are accompanied by the same music":

Benny Hill's use of this music was highly cliched and very old schtick at the time he used it. The piece would nevertheless be very famous had no one ever used it in this manner. Your inability to recognize this is the measure of your ignorance and nothing else. The point of Wikipedia is to educate not to perpetuate ignorance.TheScotch (talk) 17:51, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Not necessarily. It depends on whether or not that ignorance is properly cited. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 22:53, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Yakety-Sax-45804.jpg

Image:Yakety-Sax-45804.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:20, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Writing credits?

Just wondering why people keep removing Randolph from the songwriting credits. He is clearly credited on the record's label, and I'd like to know what information people are using to assert that he didn't have anything to do with the authorship of the song. Anothermelbournite 13:06, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I am also wondering why my Dad is not credited for the writer of Yakey Sax. Spider Rich did assist but Boots wrote it himself. When it hit the billboard charts in 1963 Dad wanted Spider to get some of the credit but not all of it. lonealtn@yahoo.com —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.153.44.46 (talk) 14:59, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Original research, true or not, cannot be used. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 15:49, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Sheetmusicplus.com names Boots Randolph as co-author, and as Anothermelbournite points out, Boots Randolph is clearly credited on the record's facimile in the the infobox. I haven't noticed that any explanation has been proffered for the deletion of Randolph's name in this connection, and it continues to be deleted.

I think it's time to consider disciplinary action. TheScotch (talk) 21:51, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

If it happens again, post a complaint about the user(s) who are doing that, on WP:ANI, on the grounds of persistent vandalism. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

And by the way, I didn't do it. Currently, at least, the deleter is this IP address [1] whom I have now warned to Stop It. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 23:20, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

well... who gets the royalties? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.139.202.77 (talk) 06:49, 7 June 2010 (UTC)

• I have reinstated Randolph as the co-writer based upon the label. Anyone who wants to remove it is required by Wikipedia rules to provide a source indicating he didn't write it, plus also address this in the article itself. 70.72.223.215 (talk) 12:30, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Royalties don't necessarily indicate authorship. (See: The Beatles catalog as owned by Michael Jackson) It doesn't look to me like Boots Randolph currently profits from this.. but others certainly do. (See my edit in the public dominan section below for details) --Jmejia (talk) 19:27, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Public domain?

Is this song in the public domain? I researched for an answer and it looks like it is. However I'm not sure. Anyone know? --Fez2005 (talk) 03:59, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

I don't know for sure, but since it's not that old, I don't see how it could have got into the public domain unless the copyright owner failed to renew it. Considering how consistently popular it's been over the decades, that would have been a financially devastating oversight. In other words, I would be very, very surprised to discover that it's in the public domain. TheScotch (talk) 17:12, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

The "Year of release" section of this discussion page suggests that the piece was first recorded in 1958, and it's likely that it was composed and copyrighted shortly before it was first recorded. This is from the U. S. Copyright Office Circular 15a:

"Works originally copyrighted between January 1, 1950, and December 31, 1963: Copyrights in their first 28-year term on January 1, 1978, still had to be renewed in order to be protected for the second term. If a valid renewal registration was made at the proper time, the second term will last for 67 years. However, if renewal registration for these works was not made within the statutory time limits, a copyright originally secured between 1950 and 1963 expired on December 31st of its 28th year, and protection was lost permanently."

If it were copyrighted in 1958, it would have been subject to renewal in 1986. Presumably it would then have been renewed and would not go into public domain until 2053. Don't hold your breath. TheScotch (talk) 06:27, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

• Note that all the above refers to US copyright. Yakety Sax - or to be more precise the original Randolph recording - may well fall into the blanket public domain sweep that occurred with many US recordings from the 1950s a few years back in Europe, meaning the original recording may be public domain in places like the UK. 68.146.81.123 (talk) 01:00, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Facebook considers it a copyrighted work, which apparently means this half-century-old song still enjoys U.S. copyright protection. Copyright law is awesome! Or not. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 50.134.210.214 (talk) 03:43, 18 February 2015 (UTC)

Facebook is not a copyright authority. This is the current copyright record: http://cocatalog.loc.gov/cgi-bin/Pwebrecon.cgi?v1=22&ti=1,22&Search_Arg=Yakety&Search_Code=TALL&CNT=25&PID=LsjqFKauLJycN7ZqShk9mE4f0&SEQ=20170320151156&SID=1 Although ASCAP attributes it to Frank Ricotti: https://www.ascap.com/repertory#ace/search/title/yakety --Jmejia (talk) 19:22, 20 March 2017 (UTC)

Pop Culture References

There are probably several hundred, if not a few thousand, TV shows, movies, Looney Tunes shorts, plays, etc that have used Yakety Sax in silly scenes of some variety. This list would literally extend for dozens of pages if we included all of them. I think that the statement "Yakety Sax is often used on television as a soundtrack for outlandishly humorous situations. It is frequently used to accompany comedic chases." is sufficient to serve the purposes of this page. Beyond that, there should be at most a few, well-sourced samples. As Wikipedia:"In popular culture" articles states: "Detailing the impact in popular culture can be a quality part of a topic when this kind of content is properly sourced and consistent with policies and guidelines. However these lists can attract non-notable entries and should be carefully maintained...Exhaustive lists are discouraged, as are passing references to the article subject." Niremetal (talk) 04:06, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

You omitted the very-well-known Benny Hill usage that occurred in pretty much every show, yet you retained a single isolated occurrence in the Jon Stewart program and on My Name Is Earl. And in an earlier attempt, you had retained an item that mentioned how it referred back to the Benny Hill usage, while removing the Benny Hill reference itself. Therefore, I conclude that your slash-and-burn is arbitrary and capricious. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:12, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

If you go to Google, there are endless references to the tune's use in the Benny Hill Show (many people actually think its name is "The Benny Hill Show Theme"), and I've cited a couple. I assure you that no one associates this tune with the two isolated cases you left in the article, and which in fact are too trivial to be there if you're going to omit the other trivial references also. Try not to make wikipedia look so stupid. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:23, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

The Youtube clip is not intended as a citation, but only as an example, so I don't see where there's a problem with it. Baseball Bugs ^{What's up, Doc?} 04:29, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

First, the issue is not whether it is "undisputed;" it is whether it is sourced. This is an encyclopedia not a repository of "accepted" information. Generally, please read WP:HTRIVIA and WP:NOT. Read the same articles for why the YouTube link should go. Links should not be provided as "examples," but only as citations. See WP:EL - and particularly the section on "Links normally to be avoided," as virtually no "example" links (and certainly none to YouTube) would be included on the page if it were a featured article. Also, linking to content on YouTube creates a potential copyright violation problem. Niremetal (talk) 06:24, 15 October 2008 (UTC)

Zydeco???

The infobox says this song is of the Zydeco genre. Since when? It has always been identified as either country/western or, depending on the performer, rock and roll. Is there a source to support this? 68.146.81.123 (talk) 00:46, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Genre(s)

For those readers who don't have access to the four citations given at the end of the first sentence (none of which are currently web-based) could the source(s) of the genres "pop" and "novelty instrumental" be clarified in some way? I had assumed they supported only the composers. Many thanks. Martinevans123 (talk) 18:05, 17 October 2017 (UTC)

Richard Aquila (not that one) calls it a "lively instrumental", DailyDoo-Wop calls it a "pop jazz instrumental" as does Southern Daily Echoo, etc., etc? Martinevans123 (talk) 16:07, 22 October 2017 (UTC) yo Binky??

I don't think this is a "novelty instrumental". It's not meant to be inherently funny or weird, it only got that connotation because it was used ad nauseam to go with outlandish on-screen situations. Pop jazz, though, seems more than accurate. The tune would cause no remark if it appeared as a solo in "When the Saints Go Marching In". In fact, I was surprised to find out that it isn't. Steinbach (talk) 14:22, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

It's an allusion to the humorous song "Yakety Yak" (itself mentioned in the novelty song article, though not explicitly identified as one in its own article), and it humorously adapts phrases from "Entrance of the Gladiators" and "The Girl I Left Behind". Doesn't that suffice to classify it as a novelty piece? Largoplazo (talk) 14:40, 21 November 2020 (UTC)

Intro edit and infobox question

Although the 1958 recording is mentioned further down, the structure of the lead paragraph made it necessary to mention the 1958 recording there too. Infoboxes are generally used for the first release of a song; shouldn't it therefore feature the RCA version, not the Monument version? 136.159.160.5 (talk) 20:12, 6 May 2019 (UTC)

The 1958 "Yakety Yak" was by the Coasters. A source for a 1958 recording by Randolph, on Monument, is needed? Thanks. 86.186.37.251 (talk) 21:20, 6 May 2019 (UTC)