[REMOVE ADS]




Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4
Results 151 to 182 of 182

Thread: One more chance

  1. #151
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie9 View Post
    I am in total agreement Sotosound. Your observations regarding the Bee Gees are also spot on.
    "Chain Reaction" is the perfect pop record and more than deserved it's international (bar usa) success. More of this would have been nice.
    I do partly agree with marv in that during those rca years Diana seldom had her finger on the button as regards music trends and the type of music her fans craved for.
    But you cannot just disregard the USA, the largest market for popular music. Diana Ross even performed "Chain Reaction" and "Eaten Alive" on The American Music Awards, which is nationally televised and still both records bombed. Same thing happened a few years later when she was promoting her "Take Me Higher" album during the half time show of the Super Bowl. The album and all singles flopped in the U.S. The Super Bowl as a platform and they still did not sell? OMG!

    Wasn't her hour long, network television special "Red Hot Rhythm & Blues" used as a vehicle to promote her then current album? With that kind of exposure and it still bombed in America? It should tell you something.

  2. #152
    Quote Originally Posted by reese View Post
    A while back, Barbra put out a cd entitled RELEASE ME, which contained unreleased material from her entire career. It was a great collection. I think her version of HOME was from this project. It would be nice to hear some more.
    I suspect that is what she was referring to when she said she was revisiting canned material in the vault Reese.

  3. #153
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    But you cannot just disregard the USA, the largest market for popular music. Diana Ross even performed "Chain Reaction" and "Eaten Alive" on The American Music Awards, which is nationally televised and still both records bombed. Same thing happened a few years later when she was promoting her "Take Me Higher" album during the half time show of the Super Bowl. The album and all singles flopped in the U.S. The Super Bowl as a platform and they still did not sell? OMG!

    Wasn't her hour long, network television special "Red Hot Rhythm & Blues" used as a vehicle to promote her then current album? With that kind of exposure and it still bombed in America? It should tell you something.
    But what should it tell one??. The RHRAB network special did rather well i believe. The fact that she able to star in her own network tv special in 87 is testament to her enduring popularity...... Hits or no hits
    If America were not biting it most certainly was not a reflection on the quality of music. Chain Reaction is one of the most commercial songs of her career and the TMH set is a solid, classy album that still sounds fresh today
    Perhaps to American eyes Diana was old school. Loyalty to veteran artists is not something their known for. More fool them i say.

  4. #154
    Nobody's disregarding the US - lots of records don't make it there, its just a matter of different tastes - it doesn't make their opinion right or wrong.

    Any record such as Chain Reaction which was a global million seller in 1986 went Gold in the UK and was the fifth biggest selling single of the year and the biggest selling single of the year in Australia going Platinum with chart action in many other countries is a major success.

  5. #155
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    But you cannot just disregard the USA, the largest market for popular music. Diana Ross even performed "Chain Reaction" and "Eaten Alive" on The American Music Awards, which is nationally televised and still both records bombed. Same thing happened a few years later when she was promoting her "Take Me Higher" album during the half time show of the Super Bowl. The album and all singles flopped in the U.S. The Super Bowl as a platform and they still did not sell? OMG!

    Wasn't her hour long, network television special "Red Hot Rhythm & Blues" used as a vehicle to promote her then current album? With that kind of exposure and it still bombed in America? It should tell you something.
    What it tells me is that in the case of RHRAB, the album and it's singles weren't interesting enough to the public to warrant them running out and making purchases. And by the time "Take Me Higher" was out there, the public was rarely giving any attention to old school singers. Diana and her peers were respected legends but considered of the past in favor of a new crop of acts. I'm not sure what else these things are supposed to say.

  6. #156
    Holy hooligan bajayzuz - Ross can sing some. What a gorgeous record.

  7. #157
    The industry's habit of catering to the young started in the 70s. By the time 1986 rolled around, MANY older artists were just not "in" anymore. Some managed to survive the changing trends, most didn't. But technically Diana still had young fans, they were just mostly gay. Same with a lot of the divas from Tina, Patti, Cher on down.

  8. #158
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    What it tells me is that in the case of RHRAB, the album and it's singles weren't interesting enough to the public to warrant them running out and making purchases. And by the time "Take Me Higher" was out there, the public was rarely giving any attention to old school singers. Diana and her peers were respected legends but considered of the past in favor of a new crop of acts. I'm not sure what else these things are supposed to say.
    RHRB was a dreary affair with dreadful singles. I can enjoy a few tracks enough to play occasionally, but, the commercial outlook for this mess was zilch.

    I ‘I do not blame Ross or the new Supremes decline on bad advice as they didn’t have to take the bad advice. They made crap decisions in various ways and paid the price. Ross’ vision was pretty weak as far as her music went, and the New Supremes had no musical, visual or production vision with each new show one step closer to oblivion. Ross, luckily by the 80s, had established herself worldwide as a superstar and played arenas constantly while putting out weak music. The Supremes never got established, never were embraced by a segment of the public large enough to sustain it and so when they started going on TV looking ridiculous and doing shows That had no real direction, they had no Safetynet and were really on a downward spiral within a year of Ross leaving the group that they never got out of - But it was never a question of their vocal talent. The last time I saw JML in Chicago, they were great in spots, but there was a lot of lackluster applause for songs like automatically sunshine, your wonderful sweet sweet love, Nathan Jones and Floy Joy plus they didn’t even do up the ladder. I remember Jean did such a great job on somewhere, and got good applause, but it was awkward to present a 15 year old ballad in the middle of all these fast paced songs that were really really speeded up…… they should have been more current...Their show was a mess, they didn’t have a command over the audience….Jean was kind of weak, Lynda was the best talking to the audience, Mary acted silly and over exuberant...but damn their harmony was incredible and on good hair nights, they were a breathtakingly beautiful sight to behold.

    ‘’Ross took her own advice, and in many ways, so did the girls and both paid for it.

  9. #159
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    But you cannot just disregard the USA, the largest market for popular music. Diana Ross even performed "Chain Reaction" and "Eaten Alive" on The American Music Awards, which is nationally televised and still both records bombed. Same thing happened a few years later when she was promoting her "Take Me Higher" album during the half time show of the Super Bowl. The album and all singles flopped in the U.S. The Super Bowl as a platform and they still did not sell? OMG!

    Wasn't her hour long, network television special "Red Hot Rhythm & Blues" used as a vehicle to promote her then current album? With that kind of exposure and it still bombed in America? It should tell you something.
    sure you can disregard the US market. Mary certainly has. she had limited (at best) track record here but has certainly commanded larger audiences and all in Europe and elsewhere. She even acknowledges this in Sup Faith. the american audience is notoriously fickle and therefore she spent much of her solo time playing theaters overseas. same with the 70s supremes. once the shine on the 70s grouping began to fade, they would tour more overseas because 1) they records were charting higher over there and 2) they could generate more concert revenue. in the US they were sometimes playing to half-sold houses

  10. #160
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMotownManiac View Post
    RHRB was a dreary affair with dreadful singles. I can enjoy a few tracks enough to play occasionally, but, the commercial outlook for this mess was zilch.

    I ‘I do not blame Ross or the new Supremes decline on bad advice as they didn’t have to take the bad advice. They made crap decisions in various ways and paid the price. Ross’ vision was pretty weak as far as her music went, and the New Supremes had no musical, visual or production vision with each new show one step closer to oblivion. Ross, luckily by the 80s, had established herself worldwide as a superstar and played arenas constantly while putting out weak music. The Supremes never got established, never were embraced by a segment of the public large enough to sustain it and so when they started going on TV looking ridiculous and doing shows That had no real direction, they had no Safetynet and were really on a downward spiral within a year of Ross leaving the group that they never got out of - But it was never a question of their vocal talent. The last time I saw JML in Chicago, they were great in spots, but there was a lot of lackluster applause for songs like automatically sunshine, your wonderful sweet sweet love, Nathan Jones and Floy Joy plus they didn’t even do up the ladder. I remember Jean did such a great job on somewhere, and got good applause, but it was awkward to present a 15 year old ballad in the middle of all these fast paced songs that were really really speeded up…… they should have been more current...Their show was a mess, they didn’t have a command over the audience….Jean was kind of weak, Lynda was the best talking to the audience, Mary acted silly and over exuberant...but damn their harmony was incredible and on good hair nights, they were a breathtakingly beautiful sight to behold.

    ‘’Ross took her own advice, and in many ways, so did the girls and both paid for it.
    very spot-on assessment of the 70s sups. at first in 1970, there was an excitement with the return to the name Sups, diana's exit/farewell hoopla, the new group sound, the vision with their songs and lyrics being focused on peace, love and an higher vision of mankind

    but then they thwarted all that by 1) the duets and 2) screwing up the branding of New Ways. the girly pink font and nonsense photos killed the packaging.

    then the group didn't evolve. their shows remained too "cabaret." Mary was too giggly and silly. Jean i think was losing her confidence and also just getting weary of touring. the image was becoming outdated and too plastic. they had a chance to really do something new and different but threw it away

    then when scherrie joined it was unfortunately an ill-advised platform for mary's solo aspirations. big ballgown style outfits, the same old tired shows. and when susaye joined, they didn't bother to update the image more by now having two writer/producers as members. susaye mostly had spot light solos doing He Ain't heavy and people which were leftover musical charts from the Jean era.

  11. #161
    Very good analysis; because in 1970, the Supremes looked reinvigorated but it slipped as soon as New Ways came out.

    If I managed Mary, I would tell her to drop the giggling, drop the interruptions and to be a little more thoughtful in her answers. It is still an issue to this day. It might be that she is always nervous.

  12. #162
    to me, Mary now tries to come across as too "soulful" and it just appears forced. she's always dropping "honey" and similar into her answers and interviews. and today she too is constantly trying to joke and laugh about things. she often doesn't come across as serious or in command of the topic.

    I don't have a problem which someone having this type of persona or style of speech. it's wonderfully informal and inviting. but IMO it just doesn't seem like mary's persona.

  13. #163
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    But you cannot just disregard the USA, the largest market for popular music. Diana Ross even performed "Chain Reaction" and "Eaten Alive" on The American Music Awards, which is nationally televised and still both records bombed. Same thing happened a few years later when she was promoting her "Take Me Higher" album during the half time show of the Super Bowl. The album and all singles flopped in the U.S. The Super Bowl as a platform and they still did not sell? OMG!

    Wasn't her hour long, network television special "Red Hot Rhythm & Blues" used as a vehicle to promote her then current album? With that kind of exposure and it still bombed in America? It should tell you something.
    Tina Turner didn't worry about the States after Foreign Affair though. Why should have Diana, who had 20 years of mainstream pop success, mind you, worry? The reason her RCA albums bombed after 1984 is because the label wasn't behind her and Diana felt neglected. The same reason why after nearly a decade of huge success, Donna Summer fell flat at around the same time. It wasn't just Diana whose fortunes in her recording career suddenly went cold. The reason why Tina, Cher, Barbra and Patti were able to get by is because their labels were smarter in marketing them for a time. RCA and Geffen, least in Donna's situation, didn't help their divas.

  14. #164
    Quote Originally Posted by jobeterob View Post
    Very good analysis; because in 1970, the Supremes looked reinvigorated but it slipped as soon as New Ways came out.

    If I managed Mary, I would tell her to drop the giggling, drop the interruptions and to be a little more thoughtful in her answers. It is still an issue to this day. It might be that she is always nervous.
    If you check Mary's interviews in the 60s, she seemed regal and sophisticated. That may be why the black community considered the Supremes "sellouts" because they weren't considered "earthy" in the era of Aretha Franklin.

    It could explain why it looked like MW overdid the sassiness. It didn't come out as naturally as Flo or even Diana, who was more streetwise than she let on despite the fact her family was middle class (as was Mary's family; Flo's family were the ones living in poverty).

    Mary is also more sophisticated in her music than she let's on too. She could easily do torch albums and jazz records. That's where her heart is. Unfortunately, Motown never helped her develop that sound from her.

  15. #165
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    to me, Mary now tries to come across as too "soulful" and it just appears forced. she's always dropping "honey" and similar into her answers and interviews. and today she too is constantly trying to joke and laugh about things. she often doesn't come across as serious or in command of the topic.
    Although I must say, I love on the "Live in Japan" album when Mary spots Dionne Warwick in the audience and she calls out to her "Konnichiwa Honey!"

    I guess "konnichiwa" means "hello" or "greetings," but I had to look up how to spell it.

    I should add something as well, although I think I've related this story on this forum before. When I saw Mary at an outdoor concert in the Los Angeles area, the lights weren't working right and Mary was joking about it as it became darker outside. At one point she said, "What will we do if the lights go out? I guess we'll have to smile a lot!" I mean, I think the lady is funny!
    Last edited by kenneth; 10-07-2019 at 07:40 PM.

  16. #166
    ^ Now that IS funny lol

  17. #167
    Quote Originally Posted by midnightman View Post
    Tina Turner didn't worry about the States after Foreign Affair though. Why should have Diana, who had 20 years of mainstream pop success, mind you, worry? The reason her RCA albums bombed after 1984 is because the label wasn't behind her and Diana felt neglected. The same reason why after nearly a decade of huge success, Donna Summer fell flat at around the same time. It wasn't just Diana whose fortunes in her recording career suddenly went cold. The reason why Tina, Cher, Barbra and Patti were able to get by is because their labels were smarter in marketing them for a time. RCA and Geffen, least in Donna's situation, didn't help their divas.
    Only Diana's detractors believe that Diana's fall from hit making popularity was due to something other than nature taking it's course or the fact that the music was subpar. I will say I only disagree with you on RCA neglecting Diana. I think she put them in a horrible position, although I guess one could successfully argue that they allowed themselves to be put in the horrible position, by allowing Diana full creative freedom. She was in charge of her career. RCA held her to her contracted obligations, but apparently quality wasn't in the contract. I have to wonder what kind of success might she have had if she had allowed RCA to step in and take the reins.

  18. #168
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    Only Diana's detractors believe that Diana's fall from hit making popularity was due to something other than nature taking it's course or the fact that the music was subpar. I will say I only disagree with you on RCA neglecting Diana. I think she put them in a horrible position, although I guess one could successfully argue that they allowed themselves to be put in the horrible position, by allowing Diana full creative freedom. She was in charge of her career. RCA held her to her contracted obligations, but apparently quality wasn't in the contract. I have to wonder what kind of success might she have had if she had allowed RCA to step in and take the reins.
    I don't know, but I do know that Whitney Houston's debut album "Whitney" released in 1985 sold more copies (25 million) than ALL of Diana Ross' solo albums combined (16.5 million in the U.S. for a total of 20 million when you include Worldwide sales).

    Whitney would go on to sell a total of 128,600,000 albums over her career:

    http://www.classicwhitney.com/info/stats.html

    Compared to Ross' 20 million albums sold.
    Last edited by marv2; 10-07-2019 at 10:46 PM.

  19. #169
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    I don't know, but I do know that Whitney Houston's debut album "Whitney" released in 1985 sold more copies (25 million) than ALL of Diana Ross' solo albums combined (16.5 million in the U.S. for a total of 20 million when you include Worldwide sales).

    Whitney would go on to sell a total of 128,600,000 albums over her career:

    http://www.classicwhitney.com/info/stats.html

    Compared to Ross' 20 million albums sold.
    And what does Whitney Houstonís sales have to do with Diana Ross? Why donít we compare Diana Ross with Mary Wilson? Diana Rossí biggest flop album sold more than all Mary Wilsonís records combined. How many records has Mary actually sold? Less than 5,000 copies. Diana Rossí lowest selling albums have sold at least over 100,000 copies each . So again whatís your point?
    Last edited by vgalindo; 10-08-2019 at 03:13 AM.

  20. #170
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    Only Diana's detractors believe that Diana's fall from hit making popularity was due to something other than nature taking it's course or the fact that the music was subpar. I will say I only disagree with you on RCA neglecting Diana. I think she put them in a horrible position, although I guess one could successfully argue that they allowed themselves to be put in the horrible position, by allowing Diana full creative freedom. She was in charge of her career. RCA held her to her contracted obligations, but apparently quality wasn't in the contract. I have to wonder what kind of success might she have had if she had allowed RCA to step in and take the reins.
    I always forget the RCA period was when she took charge lol

  21. #171
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    I don't know, but I do know that Whitney Houston's debut album "Whitney" released in 1985 sold more copies (25 million) than ALL of Diana Ross' solo albums combined (16.5 million in the U.S. for a total of 20 million when you include Worldwide sales).

    Whitney would go on to sell a total of 128,600,000 albums over her career:

    http://www.classicwhitney.com/info/stats.html

    Compared to Ross' 20 million albums sold.
    Comparing Whitney to Diana is like comparing Janet to Donna Summer. Divas from different generations.

    I wish you stop doing that lol

  22. #172
    Quote Originally Posted by vgalindo View Post
    And what does Whitney Houston’s sales have to do with Diana Ross? Why don’t we compare Diana Ross with Mary Wilson? Diana Ross’ biggest flop album sold more than all Mary Wilson’s records combined. How many records has Mary actually sold? Less than 5,000 copies. Diana Ross’ lowest selling albums have sold at least over 100,000 copies each . So again what’s your point?
    He he he's point, as always, is to try to denigrate Diana! Now that his favorite's 1.5 minutes of fame are up (HEE HEE HEE!) #laughingstock is back to his/their old tricks.

  23. #173
    Quote Originally Posted by midnightman View Post
    Comparing Whitney to Diana is like comparing Janet to Donna Summer. Divas from different generations.

    I wish you stop doing that lol
    They were both recording and performing at the same time. Diane is still performing. When I hear a good record, I don't immediately ask myself "I wonder how old this person is?".

  24. #174
    Wow - amazing traction on a thread about a song that wasnít a big hit

  25. #175
    ^ well jobete needless to say the dialog has shifted to a range of topics. I think the actual discussion of the song OMC stopped on page 2 lolol

  26. #176
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    I don't know, but I do know that Whitney Houston's debut album "Whitney" released in 1985 sold more copies (25 million) than ALL of Diana Ross' solo albums combined (16.5 million in the U.S. for a total of 20 million when you include Worldwide sales).

    Whitney would go on to sell a total of 128,600,000 albums over her career:

    http://www.classicwhitney.com/info/stats.html

    Compared to Ross' 20 million albums sold.
    it's hard to compare total records sold. the industry changed drastically over the decades. That's like trying to say a group like Little Mix (a current pop girl group band from UK) is more successful than the Supremes. apparently Little has sold over 50 million while the sups are around 20.

    now i certainly don't disagree that Whitney was much more influential and successful in the 80s and 90s than Diana was. no disagreement. music tastes had changed and whitney was certainly blessed with an amazing voice. plus she had impeccable management and production during this time. a perfect combo

    But buying power of the youth is a major factor we have to consider. in the 50s and 60s kids did NOT have the discretionary cash that they do today. it was a big deal to spend money on an LP. you really had to want it. by the 80s and 90s, kids were able to buy up practically as much music as they wanted. total record sales for the industry exploded as the middle class in the US gained much more spending power and wealth. so total sales of albums and singles grew with it.

    also look at the crazy charting of singles in the 90s. suddenly so many songs were staying at #1 for 9, 10, 14 weeks. that was unheard of in the 60s. even most of the #1s by the Beatles only topped the chart for a couple weeks

  27. #177
    Marv you'll never be able to reduce Diana Ross to nothing. She's one of the most successful female singers of all time. A global, cultural and fashion icon. She possesses one of the most recognizable voices ever. If she never sells another album or song, she'll still be in the record books and in the histories of music, America, and Black America. You can't do anything about that no matter how hard you try.

  28. #178
    Doesn't Rhianna now have the most #1 Records? And if so, who the hell cares?

  29. #179
    ^according to Wikipedia she's sold over 250M records worldwide and had 14 #1 pop hits

    Beatles still are #1 with 20 #1
    Elvis and Mariah are tied with 18 (and diana would be here if you counted the Sups)
    Rihanna 14
    Michael J 13
    Supremes and Madonna 12
    Whitney 11
    Stevie Wonder and Janet Jackson 10

  30. #180
    1993 Guinness Book Of World Records:

    Diana Ross named "Most Successful Female Singer of All Time"

  31. #181
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    now i certainly don't disagree that Whitney was much more influential and successful in the 80s and 90s than Diana was. no disagreement. music tastes had changed and whitney was certainly blessed with an amazing voice. plus she had impeccable management and production during this time. a perfect combo
    I think your last sentence sums it all up - management & production. Diana didn't have the management. I feel that was true since the moment she left Motown. She was guiding herself but she needed someone who saw a bigger picture. She wanted to expand herself but needed someone who could keep their eye on the ball so it kept rolling at the same time. A star of Diana's magnitude needed to have someone to "make it happen" while taking into consideration the artists wants & needs.

  32. #182
    Quote Originally Posted by marv2 View Post
    They were both recording and performing at the same time. Diane is still performing. When I hear a good record, I don't immediately ask myself "I wonder how old this person is?".
    And the public doesn't?

    Because ALL the kids were all playing the new hits from Gladys and Aretha and Streisand by 89 lol

    Age definitely had a lot to do with it as much as bad career decisions. They both played contributing factors. The only "oldies" that were hanging around by the end of the 80s were Tina, Cher and, on the R&B side, Patti.

    Also we forget that this is America, where attitudes on older performers were way more fickle than overseas. So that was another factor.

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

[REMOVE ADS]

Ralph Terrana
MODERATOR

Welcome to Soulful Detroit! Kindly Consider Turning Off Your Ad BlockingX
Soulful Detroit is a free service that relies on revenue from ad display [regrettably] and donations. We notice that you are using an ad-blocking program that prevents us from earning revenue during your visit.
Ads are REMOVED for Members who donate to Soulful Detroit. [You must be logged in for ads to disappear]
DONATE HERE »
And have Ads removed.