# Why are live musical songs referred to as 'Numbers'?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274>\
**Category:** Factual Questions\
**Created:** [June 21, 2014, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274 "2014-06-21T06:29:43Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 12\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chacoguy](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/50afbb/32.png) [@chacoguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chacoguy)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 6:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/1 "2014-06-21T06:29:43Z")

</div>

As in: _This is a catchy number by the Beatles_.

What’s up with that?

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 7:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/2 "2014-06-21T07:44:48Z")

</div>

In old vaudeville acts, the acts were numbered in the bill

I. Some catchy song  
II. You’ve heard this before  
III. This one’s okay  
IV. Boooooring

To “do a number” was to do an act from the numbered section in the bill, then it got predictably extended to other music.

Edit: [cite](http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?allowed_in_frame=0&search=number&searchmode=none) It’s from 1885-ish

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![MostlyUseless](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@MostlyUseless](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MostlyUseless)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 10:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/3 "2014-06-21T10:47:47Z")

</div>

SEE! SEE! this is why I love the SD. I didn’t ever wonder about that and NOW I know!!!  
Isn’t that seriously cool?

Thanks for that. Ignorance averted and I just had to read!

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![aldiboronti](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/9fc348/32.png) [@aldiboronti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/aldiboronti)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 12:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/4 "2014-06-21T12:33:52Z")

</div>

It predates vaudeville, first being used for arias, etc in opera.

> [@](#):
>
> number, n.
> 
> 1. 
> 
> a. An item in a programme of (musical) entertainment; (sometimes) spec. each more or less distinct section of an opera, oratorio, etc. Also (more generally): any song or tune.
> 
> 1865 tr. L. Spohr Autobiogr. I. 72, I now expected that…all those ‘Numbers’ in which Titus has to sing, would be omitted.  
> 1874 Catholic World Sept. 787 The director of the music should…sacrifice even the most admirable musical numbers to the exigencies of the ceremonial.  
> 1891 Guardian 23 Sept. 1531 The names of the singers of all the solo numbers.

This sense harks back to an older sense.

> [@](#):
>
> 17
> 
> b. In pl. Musical periods; groups of notes; (gen.) melodies, musical strains. Also in extended use with reference to birdsong, etc. Now poet.
> 
> 1595 B. Barnes Divine Cent. Spirituall Sonnets sig. Cv, Why turne you not your numbers musicall To God aboue mans praise which ruleth all?  
> a1625 F. Beaumont & J. Fletcher Philaster v. i, in F. Beaumont & J. Fletcher Comedies & Trag. (1679) , The god that sings His holy numbers [1620 Number] over marriage beds, Hath knit their noble hearts.  
> 1671 Milton Paradise Regain’d iv. 252 The secret power Of harmony in tones and numbers hit By voice or hand.

As you can see it has nothing at all to do with the numerical order on a vaudeville bill.

All cites and definitions from Online OED.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Jragon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/e19b73/32.png) [@Jragon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jragon)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 3:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/5 "2014-06-21T15:08:02Z")

</div>

Fair enough, I got my info from etymonline which has a pretty good reputation, but the OED has cites of previous usage so it wins.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Ranger\_Jeff](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ranger_jeff/32/2065_2.png) [@Ranger\_Jeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ranger_Jeff)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 4:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/6 "2014-06-21T16:13:14Z")

</div>

I just figured it got boring introducing every song with “Here’s a song by…” or “This song’s by…” and the word “number” is just a bit of a change up.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Zeldar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/b77776/32.png) [@Zeldar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zeldar)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 4:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/7 "2014-06-21T16:34:39Z")

</div>

Add to the previous reasons the possibility that there are others (besides myself) who cling to the notion that “song” requires “singing” and that “tune” suggests some sort of melody. A “number” avoids either trap and might include soft shoe, backflips and fooling around with a puppet.

“Number” is also a good catchall similar to do-hickey, thingamajig and other assorted “whatsit” utterances.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 7:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/8 "2014-06-21T19:03:31Z")

</div>

There can be more than one reason for a term being in use. That is, an older cite wins as first usage, but doesn’t necessarily explain current popularity.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![chrisk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/6de8d8/32.png) [@chrisk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chrisk)\
**Post date:** [June 21, 2014, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/9 "2014-06-21T19:19:19Z")

</div>

> [@Zeldar](#):
>
> Add to the previous reasons the possibility that there are others (besides myself) who cling to the notion that “song” requires “singing” and that “tune” suggests some sort of melody. A “number” avoids either trap and might include soft shoe, backflips and fooling around with a puppet.
> 
> “Number” is also a good catchall similar to do-hickey, thingamajig and other assorted “whatsit” utterances.

Yes, as Michael Flanders of Flanders & Swann put it:

> [@Flanders](#):
>
> In the summer of 1953, at the time of the coronation, we put in a song for Max–a number: in reviews you always call them numbers if you’re not quite certain if they’re songs, a number for Max Adrian. That’s when the singer can’t sing, like me…

(From the intro to ‘Excelsior’ on “And Then we Wrote”.)

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![drewtwo99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/d07c76/32.png) [@drewtwo99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/drewtwo99)\
**Post date:** [June 22, 2014, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/10 "2014-06-22T12:18:47Z")

</div>

Also a fan of the word “diddy” (or is it ditty?) as a subsitute for a song, a piece, a number, etc.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![sbunny8](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@sbunny8](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sbunny8)\
**Post date:** [June 22, 2014, 3:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/11 "2014-06-22T15:19:20Z")

</div>

When I was a kid (circa 1970), we attended a small church in rural Texas. We didn’t have printed bulletins. There was a board up front with removable 6" numbers, and every week they’d put up three sets of numbers, like:  
154  
302  
287  
And we’d all know that the first hymn we’d sing was number 154 in the hymnal, and then later we’d be singing hymn number 302, and finish up with hymn number 287. AFAIK, these exact same hymnals were used by thousands of other Baptist churches all over the south.

I’m not claiming this is the origin of the term but it illustrates the usefulness of it.

---

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Learjeff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/94ad74/32.png) [@Learjeff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Learjeff)\
**Post date:** [June 22, 2014, 3:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/why-are-live-musical-songs-referred-to-as-numbers/691274/12 "2014-06-22T15:33:00Z")

</div>

Yeah, I can hear the pastor saying, “And for our next number …” 🙂
