I always felt that the Originals could have been Motown's answer to The Dells. Here they are with an early version of Marvin's "Just to Keep You Satified"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrsfmmh_OLM
Printable View
I always felt that the Originals could have been Motown's answer to The Dells. Here they are with an early version of Marvin's "Just to Keep You Satified"
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rrsfmmh_OLM
I agree,but the problem was that marvin did most of their writing and we know how marvin was.
I've made my love of all things Marvin [[musically speaking) clear in this forum. However, I honestly prefer the Originals version to Marvin's. There's just something about this version that lays me out every time I listen to it. And I agree about the Originals being in the Dells' company. I think the Dells have the edge on those harmonies though.
I think you are right on the money with your observation JAI. They would not been allowed outshine Marvin and definitely would not have gotten his best songs. Still he did a great with the group, but they needed their own dedicated writers to further develop their own unique sound.Quote:
Originally Posted by arr&bee
Do you think had Motown given the Originals more support they could have hit as big as the Dells? The talent was surely there.Quote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
That wasn't Marvin's fault. Motown didn't know what to do with the Originals before Marvin got with them. If Marvin was thinking like a producer, maybe there would have been more productions than they were but they weren't.Quote:
Originally Posted by arr&bee
Like it wasn't Stevie's fault that most of HIS productions on others didn't last as long as it did either.
But Marvin proved he was a great producer with the Originals.
The Originals were good but they were no Dells lmaoQuote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
I equaled their version to Marvin's since, well, Marvin wrote and produced it, duh lol
Plus, I see WHY people prefer the Originals since it keeps most of the original lyrics that were used for the Monitors version:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wVcQKBi3xKA
[[And yes, the music is the early version of the single version of God is Love!)
Marvin was really working hard on the melody of this song and used it for a lot of songs [[most became part of music history!).
So you think the Dells were that far and above the Originals. Why?
The Monitors version is nice too. Richard is singing so loud and clear which always makes a song enjoyable to me. I saw the Monitors perform back in 1990 [[and sat not far behind Warren Harris' VERY loud and proud daughter LOL!). I can say that they were a very hard working group. They even backed up Wanda Rogers on "Don't Mess With Bill" that night.
Absolutely. The Dells were showstoppers, but they never released more than a handful of songs that were "legitimately" successful. The Originals would have had the Motown machine behind them, which included access to writers and producers- like Marvin Gaye- who had their fingers on the pulse of what the public was diggin. The one drawback IMO is their look and their stage presence, which on the one performance I've seen of them, they would definitely get lost among the more lively male groups.Quote:
Originally Posted by marv2
Never really listened to The Originals' version of this song, how fantatsic it is too!!!!
I'm not that familiar with The Dells but I reckon The Originals were on the same level in terms of talent. I think all four [[five!) Originals have absolutely wonderful voices, all distinct from each other but just as good, and all capable of singing lead. I especially love when they each have a lead part, it works so well :)
Maybe they needed a proper mid/uptempo song that was just more "MOTOWN" than the [[beautiful) Marvin ballads they recorded. They got close with "Don't Stop Now"!!!
Hey RanRan did you see The Originals live? Do you think the lack of liveliness may have something to do with the fact their music [[and presumably their live performances) was focused on slow ballads?Quote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
They were way before my time Tom. I wasn't even thought of! Lol So no, I didn't see them live. Only saw them on Soul Train and I think one other show. I'm going to be honest, its possible that the ballads presented them from cutting loose, but I got the impression that these dudes were the type of guys who pulled up seats at a party, grabbed a drink, and sat down for a game of spades or bid whist while everyone else was tearing the floor up. They remind me of a couple of my uncles. LolQuote:
Originally Posted by TomatoTom123
I know what you mean. It was like with the Miracles. People would say some pretty cruel things about how the group looked like the Miracles were pretty boy Smokey Robinson back up by three thug looking dudes LOL! No shit I've heard people say that. With the Originals they were all different heights with made the group look unconventional on stage. The Temptations always prided themselves of having each member being over 6 ft tall.Quote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
I mean, don't get me wrong. The Originals were DOPE but why are y'all comparing them to THE MIGHTY DELLS? I know it's Motown but COME ON!!! LOLQuote:
Originally Posted by marv2
That's because at some point after the '60s, the Dells' label [[Chess) didn't know what to do with the changing sounds. The move to Mercury didn't help either. But come on, you got Marvin Junior and Johnny Carter [[God rest their souls). They definitely should've had more hits in the '70s.Quote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
I wonder if Unsung is gonna do their story.
The Originals had a pretty big Disco hit with "Down to Love Town" in '76:Quote:
Originally Posted by TomatoTom123
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HkXqEQkdCWk
Uh, what, does that make them incomparable? The Dells were fantastic but they can be compared to somebody just like everybody else in the business. Lol To my ears the Originals had the talent it took to be as big or bigger than the Dells were. But as we know, different factors can go into why an artist doesn't attain the heights that their talents suggest they should. That's the way I view this conversation anyway.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightman
Even during the 60s the Dells weren't tearing the charts up [[only 4 top 10 cuts with two of them hitting number 1), and clearly they had the talent to be as big as any of the top male groups. The conversation about the Dells and the Originals isn't meant to be a competition between the two groups, only a conversation about whether or not the Originals could've been bigger successes than the couple of top 10 hits suggests. Unfortunately both groups ran into impediments to reaching the heights they deserved. The Dells lasted longer, inches away from the top 10 in 1991. They definitely had staying power.Quote:
Originally Posted by midnightman
The Originals suffered from the same thing the Spinners suffered from. Motown wasn't gonna do more for them than they did for the Spinners. And both groups started having hits when they reached the autumn of their Motown tenures.
Hey now RanRan, I didn't think you were that old, just old enough to have seen them in the 90s maybe ;) I know the group recorded for the Motorcity label around 1990 so I'm thinking they got back on stage too. In fact I found this live recording of "Don't Stop Now" but I have no idea when it's from... pretty goodQuote:
Originally Posted by RanRan79
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y7hj2lqENVM
Tom: Check your email on the MF. I sent you an email. But you are probably like me and unless you are expecting something and look for it, it could be hidden forever. One has no knowledge when there is an email directed to them. Thanks.
Thanks for the reminder Bill, I almost forgot! :)Quote:
Originally Posted by woodward