Supremes Songs With Only Diana Ross ??

**Boogiedown** · 08-06-2017, 02:05 AM

Reviewing songs mentioned on the 'songs over five minutes' thread, I was surprised by what I didn't hear when listening to this one:

Five minutes of non-stop vocalizing from one Supreme yet nary a peep out of the other ones the entire time !

Are there other examples of Supremes songs like this ?

**RanRan79** · 08-06-2017, 08:19 AM

"Yesterday", "These Boots" and the very first version of "I Want a Guy" come to mind, in addition to "Billy Joe". Florence has "Oh Holy Night" by herself. I don't think Mary has one.

This version of "Billy Joe" is barely okay, but it could've been so much better. For starters HDH should've had Diana singing in a lower key, which she was perfectly capable of doing. Her high reading of the lyrics takes the dark edge off of this gloomy song. I'm not sure why they made that decision, being so tuned in to producing Diana's voice.

**Jimi LaLumia** · 08-06-2017, 10:08 AM

"Billie Joe" is what kept "Reflections" from hitting #1 on the Billboard Hot 100 in the summer of 1967; "Reflections" remained stalled at #2 behind "Billie Joe" for several weeks

**luke** · 08-06-2017, 11:20 AM

Is Diana on Come and get these memories?

**blackguy69** · 08-06-2017, 11:38 AM

Actually Mary's duet with Eddie on can't take my eyes off of you has no Supremes on it.

**blackguy69** · 08-06-2017, 11:40 AM

Also send him to me is a Mary solo since the background wasn't added

**RanRan79** · 08-06-2017, 06:28 PM

Originally Posted by luke

Is Diana on Come and get these memories?

I used to question it, because I'm pretty sure that in addition to Flo, Mary is also singing background. But now I think it's possible I hear Diana in the back, but I'm not positive. Another good question for George or Andy.

**RanRan79** · 08-06-2017, 06:29 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

Actually Mary's duet with Eddie on can't take my eyes off of you has no Supremes on it.

Yup, you're right BG. I forgot about that one. So all three have solos.

**jobucats** · 08-06-2017, 09:29 PM

How about "With a Child's Heart" from the "Let the Sunshine" album? That one immediately came to my mind.

**RanRan79** · 08-07-2017, 09:19 AM

Originally Posted by jobucats

How about "With a Child's Heart" from the "Let the Sunshine" album? That one immediately came to my mind.

How could I forget that one? It's one of my favorites.

**blackguy69** · 08-07-2017, 10:18 AM

Now we could expand on this topic if we include live concerts
Diana did Didn't we and My man
Mary did A song for you and how lucky can you get plus part of the genie sequence
Cindy did part of the genie sequence
Jean did people then later he ain't heavy
Scherrie did what about today and part of the genie sequence
Susaye did knocks me off my feet and part of the genie sequence
Flo and Lynda never did a solo while being a supreme

**vgalindo** · 08-07-2017, 12:14 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

Now we could expand on this topic if we include live concerts
Diana did Didn't we and My man
Mary did A song for you and how lucky can you get plus part of the genie sequence
Cindy did part of the genie sequence
Jean did people then later he ain't heavy
Scherrie did what about today and part of the genie sequence
Susaye did knocks me off my feet and part of the genie sequence
Flo and Lynda never did a solo while being a supreme

Lynda and Sherrie both had a solo on the RTL tour.

**blackguy69** · 08-07-2017, 12:21 PM

I didn't include the rtf tour. I only included their tenure as a supreme

**imakicola** · 08-07-2017, 03:46 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

Actually Mary's duet with Eddie on can't take my eyes off of you has no Supremes on it.

Really? Is it just Eddie or are there Andantes on it? I can't listen to it right now and I forgot how the background sounded!

**imakicola** · 08-07-2017, 03:48 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

Now we could expand on this topic if we include live concerts
Diana did Didn't we and My man
Mary did A song for you and how lucky can you get plus part of the genie sequence
Cindy did part of the genie sequence
Jean did people then later he ain't heavy
Scherrie did what about today and part of the genie sequence
Susaye did knocks me off my feet and part of the genie sequence
Flo and Lynda never did a solo while being a supreme

What? I thought Flo had a solo in "People" before Diana ended up singing it?!?!

**reese** · 08-07-2017, 03:54 PM

Originally Posted by imakicola

What? I thought Flo had a solo in "People" before Diana ended up singing it?!?!

PEOPLE was never a complete Flo solo. Flo sang the majority of the lead, but there was also a lot of three-part harmony from the girls, as well as a small solo section by Diana. Later, Mary inherited Diana's solo section.

**blackguy69** · 08-07-2017, 04:24 PM

Originally Posted by imakicola

What? I thought Flo had a solo in "People" before Diana ended up singing it?!?!

People was a Flo lead not a solo.

**blackguy69** · 08-07-2017, 04:25 PM

Originally Posted by imakicola

Really? Is it just Eddie or are there Andantes on it? I can't listen to it right now and I forgot how the background sounded!

It's just Mary and Eddie. No Supremes, no temptations, no andantes.

**Boogiedown** · 08-09-2017, 04:12 AM

Originally Posted by RanRan79

"Yesterday", "These Boots" and the very first version of "I Want a Guy" come to mind, in addition to "Billy Joe". Florence has "Oh Holy Night" by herself. I don't think Mary has one.

This version of "Billy Joe" is barely okay, but it could've been so much better. For starters HDH should've had Diana singing in a lower key, which she was perfectly capable of doing. Her high reading of the lyrics takes the dark edge off of this gloomy song. I'm not sure why they made that decision, being so tuned in to producing Diana's voice.

I think barely OK about says it . Pretty straight forward , nothing done with the song to change it out except for dropping the song's vital string accompaniment . Wiki does not as yet mention this particular cover .

Should've started her vocal session over when Diana got lazy and sang
"then she said she got some news thizz mornin'..."
The song is kind of a downer presence too when the Supremes were generally an upbeat proposition.

Here's THESE BOOTS WERE MADE FOR WALKIN':

could've ended that with:
"are you ready girls , start singing!"
and then give the girls some lines to close out with

[[hey it is supposed to be a group effort here !!)

**mowsville** · 08-09-2017, 04:32 AM

As has been mentioned on this site before...there are Beatles songs that only feature 1 Beatle but theres never any questioning why or how...why is it such a drama with the Supremes...i dont get it.

**Boogiedown** · 08-09-2017, 05:07 AM

No drama intended

but as for the comparison , I'd say
the Beatles were a creative collective, writing and performing their own music , and they called the shots on how they wanted to present their songs . The Supremes were just a singing group, collective singers of songs of others, and as such you sort of expect them to sing together , or if not , when doling out solos, doing so in a more equitable way so each member gets a turn at it ..... well unless the intention is to further the career of just one member. In the meantime , they're not headlined as "Diana Ross and Usually The Supremes" ! I guess it begs the question , why aren't they on those songs?

Now that you've brought it up mowsville , you've got me curious, did other Motown groups feature solo songs where the other members were totally absent?

**Jimi LaLumia** · 08-09-2017, 05:30 AM

who cares why? It's done, a million years ago and its not going to be undun[[that was a Guess Who song)

**Jimi LaLumia** · 08-09-2017, 05:33 AM

and The Beatles were NOT a creative collective, not according to George Harrison or Ringo Starr[[George was the combative ,put upon Ballard of The Beatles, Ringo was Mary Wilson) and they have all agreed that Paul was Miss Ross with all those 'Yesterday" "Michelle" solo singles that said Beatles on em; the other three ultimately banded together against Paul towards the end, watch the movie "Let it Be"..

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 07:39 AM

Originally Posted by Jimi LaLumia

who cares why? It's done, a million years ago and its not going to be undun[[that was a Guess Who song)

The Guess Who is one of my favorite bands. I use to keep their greatest hits in my car, LOL!

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 07:41 AM

Originally Posted by Jimi LaLumia

and The Beatles were NOT a creative collective, not according to George Harrison or Ringo Starr[[George was the combative ,put upon Ballard of The Beatles, Ringo was Mary Wilson) and they have all agreed that Paul was Miss Ross with all those 'Yesterday" "Michelle" solo singles that said Beatles on em; the other three ultimately banded together against Paul towards the end, watch the movie "Let it Be"..

Perfect example, analogy or whatever.

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 07:44 AM

Originally Posted by mowsville

As has been mentioned on this site before...there are Beatles songs that only feature 1 Beatle but theres never any questioning why or how...why is it such a drama with the Supremes...i dont get it.

Exactly. I am almost 100% certain there is only one Rolling Stone singing on songs like this.......

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 07:58 AM

Originally Posted by vgalindo

Lynda and Sherrie both had a solo on the RTL tour.

Kaaren Ragland and Lucy Shropshire have had solos on Mary Wilson's tours but just like the Lynda/Scherrie situation, they were not signed Motown artists at the time.

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 08:08 AM

Originally Posted by Boogiedown

No drama intended

but as for the comparison , I'd say
the Beatles were a creative collective, writing and performing their own music , and they called the shots on how they wanted to present their songs . The Supremes were just a singing group, collective singers of songs of others, and as such you sort of expect them to sing together , or if not , when doling out solos, doing so in a more equitable way so each member gets a turn at it ..... well unless the intention is to further the career of just one member. In the meantime , they're not headlined as "Diana Ross and Usually The Supremes" ! I guess it begs the question , why aren't they on those songs?

Now that you've brought it up mowsville , you've got me curious, did other Motown groups feature solo songs where the other members were totally absent?

Just a singing group? I would have loved to see the Beatles try to "perform" all of that specific choreography and harmonies for all of those songs the Supremes recorded!

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 08:11 AM

Originally Posted by Boogiedown

No drama intended

but as for the comparison , I'd say
the Beatles were a creative collective, writing and performing their own music , and they called the shots on how they wanted to present their songs . The Supremes were just a singing group, collective singers of songs of others, and as such you sort of expect them to sing together , or if not , when doling out solos, doing so in a more equitable way so each member gets a turn at it ..... well unless the intention is to further the career of just one member. In the meantime , they're not headlined as "Diana Ross and Usually The Supremes" ! I guess it begs the question , why aren't they on those songs?

Now that you've brought it up mowsville , you've got me curious, did other Motown groups feature solo songs where the other members were totally absent?

A big reason is because Mary Wilson and Cindy Birdsong were living in LA by 1968 while Motown was still primarily recording in Detroit! For albums cuts especially it would have been easier just to use the Andantes for them. Most of the songs recorded between 1968-69 were not that good in my opinion.

**reese** · 08-09-2017, 09:04 AM

Originally Posted by Boogiedown

Now that you've brought it up mowsville , you've got me curious, did other Motown groups feature solo songs where the other members were totally absent?

Off the top of my head, I can think of some Gladys Knight and the Pips recordings that do not feature the Pips, like their versions of VALLEY OF THE DOLLS, FOR ONCE IN MY LIFE, and HELP ME MAKE IT THROUGH THE NIGHT, which became a hit single.

Martha's version of DIDN'T WE has no Vandellas.

**RanRan79** · 08-09-2017, 10:47 AM

Originally Posted by Boogiedown

Here's THESE BOOTS WERE MADE FOR WALKIN':

could've ended that with:
"are you ready girls , start singing!"
and then give the girls some lines to close out with

[[hey it is supposed to be a group effort here !!)

I love "their" version of "These Boots", but I think it would've been better with a great Flo and Mary backup performance. Truth be told, I think it would've been better with Flo singing the lead, but it was a good song regardless. I think your idea about the way the song ended would've really been cool.

**RanRan79** · 08-09-2017, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by mowsville

As has been mentioned on this site before...there are Beatles songs that only feature 1 Beatle but theres never any questioning why or how...why is it such a drama with the Supremes...i dont get it.

Who questioned why? And where exactly is the drama in this thread? What I don't get is why so many folks get their undies in a bunch whenever a Supremes related topic is brought up. Everything said about them [[and their individual members) seems to annoy someone. I swear if I didn't love this group so much I would hate them and all of their individual members after reading the posts in this forum. Y'all take the Supremes waaaayyyy too seriously.

**RanRan79** · 08-09-2017, 10:53 AM

Originally Posted by Jimi LaLumia

who cares why? It's done, a million years ago and its not going to be undun[[that was a Guess Who song)

Yup, because asking "why" [[not that anyone did, mind you) is definitely folks trying to change history. History should be learned but not discussed, right?

**vgalindo** · 08-09-2017, 11:47 AM

Originally Posted by marv2

Kaaren Ragland and Lucy Shropshire have had solos on Mary Wilson's tours but just like the Lynda/Scherrie situation, they were not signed Motown artists at the time.

What?? Sherrie and Susaye were signed Motown artists at one time. Lucy and Kaaraen never were. The RTL tour was licensed by Motown as Diana Ross and the Supremes.

**PeaceNHarmony** · 08-09-2017, 04:09 PM

Didn't really matter; Diana Ross was the voice that the world wanted to hear.

**luke** · 08-09-2017, 04:25 PM

That's sure true Marv. The mass homogenization of The group had begun. Without Flo and Mary they were not distinctive.

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 05:00 PM

Originally Posted by vgalindo

What?? Sherrie and Susaye were signed Motown artists at one time. Lucy and Kaaraen never were. The RTL tour was licensed by Motown as Diana Ross and the Supremes.

You got it wrong. YOU said that Lynda and Scherrie had solos on the RTL Tour [[which had nothing to do with Motown Records as neither were signed to Motown at the time of RTL in 2000). You also have it wrong. The RTL Tour was not licensed by Motown. Motown had nothing to do with that tour. Diana Ross paid Motown to license the name "The Supremes" for a tour she claimed was not a reunion tour!

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 05:12 PM

Originally Posted by luke

That's sure true Marv. The mass homogenization of The group had begun. Without Flo and Mary they were not distinctive.

We know that because the hits stopped coming regularly without Mary and Flo.

**vgalindo** · 08-09-2017, 05:15 PM

Originally Posted by marv2

You got it wrong. YOU said that Lynda and Scherrie had solos on the RTL Tour [[which had nothing to do with Motown Records as neither were signed to Motown at the time of RTL in 2000). You also have it wrong. The RTL Tour was not licensed by Motown. Motown had nothing to do with that tour. Diana Ross paid Motown to license the name "The Supremes" for a tour she claimed was not a reunion tour!

Diana Ross paying Motown to license the name. What's the difference? It was licensed by Motown! And I know Lynda and Sherrie were not signed to Motown at the time. My point is Mary's Kareen and Lucy were never signed to Motown ever!! Lynda and Sherrie are former Motown recording artists.

**marv2** · 08-09-2017, 05:29 PM

Originally Posted by vgalindo

Diana Ross paying Motown to license the name. What's the difference? It was licensed by Motown! And I know Lynda and Sherrie were not signed to Motown at the time. My point is Mary's Kareen and Lucy were never signed to Motown ever!! Lynda and Sherrie are former Motown recording artists.

The difference is that there was no difference between what Lynda and Scherrie were doing compared to what Kaaren and Lucy were doing on Mary's tours. NONE of them were "The Supremes" at the time. Former is just that.......former!

**Roberta75** · 08-09-2017, 07:44 PM

Originally Posted by luke

That's sure true Marv. The mass homogenization of The group had begun. Without Flo and Mary they were not distinctive.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DwBirf4BWew

John G. Stumpf · 08-09-2017, 07:54 PM

Originally Posted by marv2

We know that because the hits stopped coming regularly without Mary and Flo.

The magic was gone. Diana did not hit regularly as a solo act. Every few years she woul have a hit.

**blackguy69** · 08-09-2017, 07:54 PM

Roberta are you jealous of them?

**Roberta75** · 08-09-2017, 07:56 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

Roberta are you jealous of them?

No dear Im happy for them. Defending Mary has brought them together. Its real beautiful.

**blackguy69** · 08-09-2017, 08:04 PM

It's seems like you're trolling them

**vgalindo** · 08-09-2017, 08:09 PM

Originally Posted by marv2

Kaaren Ragland and Lucy Shropshire have had solos on Mary Wilson's tours but just like the Lynda/Scherrie situation, they were not signed Motown artists at the time.

Where in the thread does it say if they had a solo while being signed to Motown? Blackguy69 said he didn't include RTL which is fine. But he didn't say anything about while being signed to Motown!! Kareen and Lucy were just Mary's background singers. They were never Supremes so you can't compare the two. Diana let the Jones Girls have a solo spot during her days with Motown but you wouldn't include them because they would be considered like a Karen and Lucy background singers.

**Roberta75** · 08-09-2017, 08:10 PM

Originally Posted by blackguy69

It's seems like you're trolling them

you may see it that way dear but im far from trolling them. Anyway im bored with this subject now. Have a good evening.

**PeaceNHarmony** · 08-09-2017, 08:12 PM

Originally Posted by John G. Stumpf

The magic was gone. Diana did not hit regularly as a solo act. Every few years she woul have a hit.

Too funny! Even if true, every few years is better than ... NEVER! Best to you and your beliefs. Next to Nora Desmond, Mary Ferrar is the greatest star EVER! And, Mister Gordy, she's ready for her closeup!

**vgalindo** · 08-09-2017, 08:17 PM

Originally Posted by PeaceNHarmony

Too funny! Even if true, every few years is better than ... NEVER! Best to you and your beliefs. Next to Nora Desmond, Mary Ferrar is the greatest star EVER!

So true. People always trying to down play the success of Diana Ross! First solo female artist to have 4 number 1 records! Billboards Entertainer of the Century!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SB7R5Vzy0yw

**blackguy69** · 08-09-2017, 08:18 PM

Both of you were off, the examples I listed were solos, no background vocals whatsoever. So technically Lynda and Scherries' "solos" aren't solos and marv I don't know why you even mentioned Mary's background singers when they shouldn't be