I thought I posted a reply to Joe F hours ago, but I must not have submitted after previewing. Lemme try again:

I've never considered The Weavers to be in the same category as the Limelighters, Kingston Trio, Brothers Four, etc. The Weavers are from an earlier era, and (thanks at least in part to the blacklist, I suppose) did NOT share the sudden early-60s success of those other quartets and trios. Far be it from me to call them "inauthentic,"or even "commercial"; on the contrary, I always regarded the Weavers as legendary and above reproach. Of course, I heard more *about* them than I ever actually heard them -- I'm too "young" (at 56!) to remember the Weavers' heyday.

While I'm sure that many exceptions can be easily cited, I still stand by my assertion that the shift of public interest from "commercial" to "traditional" folk music (around '63 to '65) saw -- IN GENERAL -- a lot more attention go to solo artists and less to singing groups.

PS: In my private classification system, Peter Paul & Mary, like the Weavers, also avoid being put into the same bag with those other folkie groups. I don't know that I can explain or justify this logically -- I just continued to like them so dang much, even while I was rapidly losing interest in so many other groups who were superficially similar.

Like the Weavers, of course, PPM had that political commitment; their absolute sincerity and intensity may be more obvious now than ever before, since it may be the only explanation for their continued longevity.