You’re defining the Isley Brothers as “rock”? I’d put them solidly in the R&B category.
Not with (You make me wanna) Shout or Twist and Shout - their first-gen stuff…
I don’t know. I guess the music was more shouty a la Little Richard, but even so, the vocals still sound more R&B than rock to me.
They’re sort of a cross between R+B and rock n roll, but they’re not rock.
If we can add Canadian/American bands, I think Ronnie Hawkins and the Hawks might qualify - they started playing in 1959, doing songs like “Who do you love?” The Hawks later on went on their own and changed their name to “The Band”, one of the great rock bands of all time.
Come to think of it, how about Bo Diddley? “Who Do You Love” was about as rock as it gets, and he recorded that in 1956.
If Bo Diddley doesn’t count, I’d put my .50 in for The Band. Formed in 1958 or 1959.
You’re dating The Band a couple of years too early. Wikipedia says they didn’t exist in full until 1963 since Hawkins hired them one by one starting in 1958 (with Levon Helm) through 1963 (Garth Hudson). I don’t know what Hawkins’ transitional lineups sounded like, so I can’t say if that qualifies as one of the early rock bands. Wikipedia does describe Hawkins as a rockabilly singer.
That to me sounds like the very definition of “rock.” I mean, isn’t that essentially what the Stones and early Beatles did?
What’s fascinating is that the OP’s question doesn’t have a clear answer. The British Invasion combined rockabilly with Motown and Brill Building pop (and other influences) to move to a “rockier” place; but I would argue that it wasn’t until the Brit-blues / Swinging London music of a few years later that the type of music we think of as “rock” began to emerge. Rock has more solid connections to the blues, reaching back further than rockabilly for influence, with a greater emphasis on distorted guitar sounds and guitar-based riffs. I mean, Satisfaction jumps out as a clear “rock” song from '65…
You know you’ve reached silly season in a thread when the topic “which is the first successful American rock band” is answered by citing a Canadian rockabilly group that never charted. 
Have we figured out the difference between “rock” and “rock and roll” yet?
To me, rock and roll is short, compact, catchy and violent, like punk - I think of “Train Kept A-Rollin’” or “You Really Got Me”, whereas I consider “rock” the more bloated, masturbatory electric blooze played by artists like the Allman Brothers or Led Zeppelin or Pink Floyd. Not written in stone, obviously; just my take.
Interesting. I think of early Kinks and Stones as the beginning of Rock, with Rock and Roll being more the like Bill Halley, Elvis, Buddy Holly era stuff. Not that it’s a totally useful distinction, but that’s how I break it down in my mind.
To go further after the 60s I think of things as having splintered into sub-genres. In conversation you probably won’t hear me seriously label a band as Rock or Rock and Roll if they recorded after 1969 or so.
There are a lot of good contenders such as the Byrds and the Beach Boys, but what about Creedence Clearwater Revival? Or is Creedence not early enough, having come along in 1967?
I think 65 or earlier is the range we are looking in now. The Beach Boys, the Byrds and the Doors were all going strong by the end of 65 and Jefferson Airplane had already formed though they didn’t have their first hit until later.
Really? Driving beat, guitars and drums, repetitive lyrics isn’t rock and roll? Hell, they even cited the Funk Brothers and R&B artists as their inspirations.
I would say that Link Wray invented rock guitar (in the modern sense, as distinct from Rockabilly), but there was only one of him, so that doesn’t qualify as a band.
The Band had both Canadian and American members in it, and was often considered an American band. And while Hawkins may have started out in Rockabilly, Ronnie and the Hawks were rocking it pretty hard. Go back and listen to their version of “Who Do You Love?”. In their early days they also performed songs like “Suzi Q”.
Wikipedia notes:
So, he’s American, his band is considered one of the great rock bands of the 60’s and also contained Americans, and he’s noted for being an early influence in ROCK music. He was an American who achieved his greatest success in Canada, but The Band was mostly Canadian, but achieved their greatest success in America. It’s a fine line.
They had three singles that charted in the US, and twelve that charted in Canada - including two songs that charted in the U.S. in 1959.
Yes, it’s a bit of a stretch, but then the OP was ill-defined and half of this thread has been spent trying to figure out the definitions for what does and doesn’t count, so I thought I’d throw them out there. And The Band is considered one of the major influences on American rock music. They were largely formed by 1960, and by 1965 were well enough known that Bob Dylan picked them as his touring band in the U.S. - and getting slammed by the folk crowd because they rocked too hard.
Silly season indeed.
Nope. Sister Rosetta Tharpe. She basically invented lead guitar. The video’s from the 60s, but she’d been doing this for a while. Watch her solo.
Elvis doesn’t count as a band, I suppose. But him, Scotty Moore and Bill Black were pretty darn tight. Bill Haley set off riots after Blackboard Jungle came out.
I’d give it to Billy Haley and the Comets, and then maybe Buddy Holly and the Crickets. Course, that’s a tight line. Elvis was Blues and a little Rockabilly, and Buddy was near-clear Rockabilly.
How about The Shadows?
Paul Revere and the Raiders cut Louie Louie first, if I remember right, but it wasn’t the same as the Kingsmen’s version. (Both of which were cover versions)
Also, I meant the Ventures and said The Shadows. Don’t ask, it’s late.
I’ll take a stab at this. “Rock and Roll” has these driving Eddie Cochran guitar riffs, and it’s white guys trolling in Chuck Berry’s wake. Rock is smooth and about a step removed from its Black and Country roots; it started as guys trolling in Ricky Nelson’s wake.
Another vote for the Beach Boys.