[REMOVE ADS]




Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 87
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    814
    Rep Power
    261

    Mary & Cindy-The Supremes

    I did not become a fan until the new Supremes but still as a very young child only remembered Mary and Cindy as the Supremes, it was not until years later that I saw the original trio. To me, during that time I always thought of Mary & Cindy as the Supremes-no disrespect to those who loved the original trio with Florence. They each performed with Diana Ross, Jean Terrell and Scherrie Payne. Each incarnation was something different. With Diana, they were newer together and clearly focused on Diana but still Mary and Cindy clicked, looked and sounded great together. With Jean, they seemed more prominent and visually they became much more of a focus, they even sang a lead line here and there. With Scherrie, Cindy came back but her blend with Mary seemed stronger and with Scherrie such a team player the group look and feel seemed stronger as did their harmonies and look. Which pairing did you prefer, I felt with Scherrie seemed the best although they were all great. I am going to post some You Tube videos after showing them and it reflects how I felt.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    814
    Rep Power
    261
    With Diana Ross[[funny how Diana looks at Mary when she says she doesn't bother with folks that she hates)

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    i agree that vocally, M and C had probably the best blend. especially live. visually they also complemented one another beautifully.

    the DMF lineup is, of course, classic. the girls' blend was also very strong similar to why mary said - their three unique voices really complemented one another. Mary's dusty alto, diana's nasality and piercing voice [[meaning this is a good way) and flo's vibrant and bright soprano. also prior to it really becoming 'the diana show' you had three very intriguing personalities and onstage characters. so the lineup was exciting to watch

    vocally, i think the MSS studio work is probably the strongest. mary was at her best during this phase and S and S are both just masters. plus all vocals were ONLY supremes

    the MJC lineup is also very close, in terms of studio work. but so often additional voices were added so makes the comparison a bit more challenging

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    814
    Rep Power
    261
    Here they are with Jean on Flip Wilson and each has a lead line:

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by jim aka jtigre99 View Post
    With Diana Ross[[funny how Diana looks at Mary when she says she doesn't bother with folks that she hates)
    yeah they did this as part of the routine. similar to what the DMF lineup did in the Copa recording. Flo's ad lib response is 'well she must love us then!"

    also in Queen of House, Diana makes funny motions and all to make it come across that M and F are the expecting ones.

    and in Love Child, Diana would do a head nod to M And C during the line "so afraid that others knew i had no name"

    always enjoyed when there was this level of group interaction in the music

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    814
    Rep Power
    261
    Finally with Scherrie on Sonny & Cher in Scherrie's debut where each had a lead spot. Don't care for the outfits but they look and sound so great together

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    i agree that in the 70s it was great to see M and C taking on more of a role within the group and it's performances. I still think Jean [[and later Scherrie) were best as the primary lead singers. but Mary was able to add more and it was great when Cindy stepped out on occasion.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Posts
    2,036
    Rep Power
    213
    I prefer The original trio because I think they had the best sound, were visually the best looking, and Flos‘s personality was a gigantic asset to the group. I think each girl should have always had a solo in the show and when they took people out in 1967, they should have found something else for Florence to do as a solo if she was going to stay. I think by that time, Barry Gordy had kind of given up on her.

    my next favorite is JML. Lynda was essential to the group because she was the only one that can speak on stage handle dialogue and converse without sounding slightly amateurish. And I loved their voices together. I hate to say this about Cindy because she’s the sweetest person on the planet, but I absolutely do not care for her Voice. To me, there’s just not enough there - hence the use of extra voices.

    I did like the sound of MSC and MSS when they sang together, But often when they were trading lines they seem to be in competition with each other and not working as a unit musically and visually it’s a shame because they had a good sound.
    Last edited by TheMotownManiac; 10-22-2020 at 03:28 PM.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by TheMotownManiac View Post
    I prefer The original trio because I think they had the best sound, we’re visually the best looking, and Flos‘s personality was a gigantic asset to the group. I think each girl should have always had a solo in the show and when they took people out in 1967, they should have found something else for Florence to do as a solo if she was going to stay. I think by that time, Barry Gordy had kind of given up on her.

    my next favorite is JML. Lynda was essential to the group because she was the only one that can speak on stage handle dialogue and converse without sounding slightly amateurish. And I loved their voices together. I hate to say this about Cindy because she’s the sweetest person on the planet, but I absolutely do not care for her Voice. To me, there’s just not enough there - hence the use of extra voices.

    I did like the sound of MSC and MSS when they sang together, But often when they were trading lines they seem to be in competition with each other and not working as a unit musically and visually it’s a shame because they had a good sound.
    with MSS live, it was too much. trying to sing everything in 3 part harmony, the endless tossing around of lines, everyone always singing the melody in unison. it's like they were worried that all 3 had to have tons and tons of stage time. frankly it was too much of a good thing. some 3 part is beautiful and effective. endless 3 part is taxing on the ears

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Posts
    199
    Rep Power
    166
    Quote Originally Posted by jim aka jtigre99 View Post
    Here they are with Jean on Flip Wilson and each has a lead line:
    mary and Cindy move and sound great here but Jean sounds terrible .. totally over singing it. Ouch

  11. #11
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    I like the Scherrie, Mary and Susaye on record but like you don't like them live. It's easier to get a blend on record than it is live on stage. Unlike many I like the Mary and Cindy combo the most. Their blend did not take over from whomever was singing lead. I think Florence sounded better live during their earlier years up till roughly '65. I like her voice on the Copa LP but find it a bit difficult to listen to her on the Roostertail set from the I hear a symphony expanded CD. I think Cindy should have been given the opportunity to try to find the right songs for her to sing. Same with Florence because she didn't sound good at all on some of the songs she recorded after she left Motown. Lynda seems to had a good stage presence but as background singer she is just too loud. She does a rather good job on the Stoned Love version that has been circulating on youtube for years.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by mwmr View Post
    mary and Cindy move and sound great here but Jean sounds terrible .. totally over singing it. Ouch
    You are right. I love this song from their duet album with the tops but live it always sounded a bit like a mess. If they stuck a bit more to the recorded version I think it would have been far more enjoyable.

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    this clip of LTOYW on Flip is an example of how Jean sometimes didn't approach things the right way. I do enjoy most of her singing with the sups and agree she's an amazing talent. so many fans have said that jean would basically never sing the same song the same way twice. which is commendable. to a degree

    her riffs and ad libs here totally destroy the melody of the song. she's just going on and on with no apparent direction. I find that she did that with a lot of the live tracks i have. one of the worst examples is Stoned Love on the Japan lp.

    there's the old cliche about if you have class and money, you don't really need to flaunt it or tell people about it. you're rich so you have nothing to prove.

    Jean was a talented singer but her never ending effort to PROVE that she could riff and improvise and do this and do that actually make her look like less of an accomplished singer. not every song requires wild runs. not every song requires her to go on with things. sometimes a straightly sung melody is the most beautiful.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    Thing is that sometimes it works and sometimes not. I've heard live versions of Stones Love and they sounded better than the released version and others well....not so good. With Stoned Love live in Japan the biggest problem is the backing band. It sounds too weak and it feels as if they are rushing through the song.

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Jan 2020
    Posts
    1,087
    Rep Power
    85
    A singer can improvise and that's fine up to a point. I stopped listening to Patti Labelle when she started to overdo things. One time I listened to her singing You Are My Friend, a song I owned and was very familiar with, and two minutes into the song I didn't even recognize it. I was never a Jean Terrell fan. Don't get mad--I just found her voice screechy on a lot of songs although she did fine on songs like Stoned Love. I love Scherrie Payne too, but live [[I never saw them live), on various Youtube videos, she totally over sings IMO. When she plays it straight, she was amazing!

  16. #16
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    I prefer them to sing the song as they do on the record. Not a huge fan of the improvising etc but on rare occasions it works. I do feel it rather distracts and I then I just stop listening. Like the song or not but Jean does sound good on Everybody's got the right to love and Mary and Cindy are blending very well on the background.

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    Rep Power
    193
    I think DMF had the best blend and the best group unity, hands-down. Listen to their Country, Western & Pop album, songs like "People," or some of their other standards that weren't necessarily pop hits. And their blend really matured over the years. I think the finest example of their blend is on the Rodgers & Hart album. One of my all-time favorite albums from the group.

    When Cindy came along, Mary essentially became what Florence was in the beginning, that is to say the one who overshadowed the other Supreme vocally. I'm not sure if Cindy was feeling intimidated by having graduated up to a more high-profile [[and highly intense) group, but I don't feel like Cindy came into her own until Diana left.

    Studio-wise, I believe JMC were the best following Diana, but live they were a bit all over the place live on multiple occasions, which I believe was due to a lack of proper arrangements and Jean going over the top with ad-libbing.

    And while I appreciate the recordings from the final Supremes line-ups, their live acts just did not hold up, in my opinion.

    Say what you want about Motown's almost militant adherence to their refinement school, but without people like Cholly, Maxine, and Maurice, the iconic polish of Motown acts' live appearances would not exist. The peak of the Supremes' prowess is 1964-1970. However, the peak of the group as a singular unit [[as opposed to a lead singer and backup singers) has to be 1959-1967 - yes, even at the very beginning as the "no-hit Supremes." I firmly believe that although Diana was clearly on her way to a solo career by 1966, both HDH and Flo's departures significantly increased Motown's ability to separate Diana from the "Supremes" as a whole.

    Although I love Cindy, I rarely listen to recordings - either studio or live - from the DMC era. It just doesn't feel like a group to me at this point, aside from some recordings with the Temptations. Even on the Disney recordings Motown utilized outside help on the backing vocals - not even the Andantes were used. And while I love songs like "Love Child" and "Someday We'll Be Together," I do not consider them to be Supremes efforts. Despite the polish of the latter-years Diana-led Supremes recordings, the group unity was lacking and the in-house familial atmosphere of group effort - singers, Funk Bros, and producers - was long gone. To me, DMF will always reign 'Supreme' - although I have significant fondness for the records of the seventies-era Supremes, as well.
    Last edited by antceleb12; 10-24-2020 at 11:14 PM.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,957
    Rep Power
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by antceleb12 View Post
    I think DMF had the best blend and the best group unity, hands-down. I think the finest example of their blend is on the Rodgers & Hart album. One of my all-time favorite albums from the group.
    When Cindy came along, Mary essentially became what Florence was in the beginning, that is to say the one who overshadowed the other Supreme vocally. I'm not sure if Cindy was feeling intimidated by having graduated up to a more high-profile [[and highly intense) group, but I don't feel like Cindy came into her own until Diana left
    Agree. As a group effort, the Rogers & Hart album for me represents the Supremes at their very best. Flo and Mary augment each song perfectly, sounding slick and assured on every track. The personality in Flo’s voice adds considerably to the final result.
    Cindy was always the complete professional, but her voice might have been one of a billion other singers. That’s why the DMF lineup will always reign Supremes in my mind.
    MS&S come a close second, but as you mention their live performances did not always compare favourably with the sophisticated recordings.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie9 View Post
    Agree. As a group effort, the Rogers & Hart album for me represents the Supremes at their very best. Flo and Mary augment each song perfectly, sounding slick and assured on every track. The personality in Flo’s voice adds considerably to the final result.
    Cindy was always the complete professional, but her voice might have been one of a billion other singers. That’s why the DMF lineup will always reign Supremes in my mind.
    MS&S come a close second, but as you mention their live performances did not always compare favourably with the sophisticated recordings.
    the R&H set is truly a masterpiece release for the group. one of the finest of their entire discography.

    my only [[and small) issues are 1) the backing vocals are a bit too low and 2) most 3 part harmony and group work would have been great.

    you do get a bit more of that on the 13 tracks NOT included in the original album. clearly when they cut it to 1 disc, they picked the best Diana tunes.

    but overall the set is marvelous and when you think that they recorded it in just a handful of days and when the girls were so young, it's amazing.

    I'm a huge fan of the Ella Fitzgerald songbooks and the Sup albums stands up wonderful alongside those

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    i think the problem with the groupings is that DMF created a very popular presence on records and also a very popular yet different presence on stage. their pop hits were cute and fun and wonderful - perfect for the mid 60s. their stage act was classy and Vegas-y. Perfect for the time too.

    each subsequent grouping continued to try and achieve the balance and the problem is public tastes change. the cutesy songs of the early 60s were no longer relevant by the late 60s. so ditties like In and out, Composer and Somethings just seem to pale when compared to other material being released. And while the DRATS were able to conquer the mega clubs, their live act was definitely something that would eventually have been an issue. but Diana left before this could happen

    in the early 70s, it's almost as if the group needed 3 personas. record, Vegas clubs and younger concerts. i don't think they were able to really align these. certainly didn't succeed with the younger concerts - the girls still came across phony in their wigs and sequins and singing Cabaret

    in the Scherrie years, they were a Vegas act and trying to push Mary as a solo. the show was constructed mostly around her vocals which wasn't a good idea. from Sup 75, in their shows and on tv they promoted HMM, This Is Why, Early Morning and Where is it i belong. None of the amazing Ivy Woodford tracks with scherrie leads [[color my world, give out, can't stop a girl) were ever promoted live. even Where Do I Go From Here wasn't. then on top of that you have the silly dream sequence, The Way We Were, etc. it was too broadway/vegas and not hip or relevant.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2015
    Posts
    6,060
    Rep Power
    185
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    i think the problem with the groupings is that DMF created a very popular presence on records and also a very popular yet different presence on stage. their pop hits were cute and fun and wonderful - perfect for the mid 60s. their stage act was classy and Vegas-y. Perfect for the time too.

    each subsequent grouping continued to try and achieve the balance and the problem is public tastes change. the cutesy songs of the early 60s were no longer relevant by the late 60s. so ditties like In and out, Composer and Somethings just seem to pale when compared to other material being released. And while the DRATS were able to conquer the mega clubs, their live act was definitely something that would eventually have been an issue. but Diana left before this could happen

    in the early 70s, it's almost as if the group needed 3 personas. record, Vegas clubs and younger concerts. i don't think they were able to really align these. certainly didn't succeed with the younger concerts - the girls still came across phony in their wigs and sequins and singing Cabaret

    in the Scherrie years, they were a Vegas act and trying to push Mary as a solo. the show was constructed mostly around her vocals which wasn't a good idea. from Sup 75, in their shows and on tv they promoted HMM, This Is Why, Early Morning and Where is it i belong. None of the amazing Ivy Woodford tracks with scherrie leads [[color my world, give out, can't stop a girl) were ever promoted live. even Where Do I Go From Here wasn't. then on top of that you have the silly dream sequence, The Way We Were, etc. it was too broadway/vegas and not hip or relevant.
    I was at their 1975 show in Manchester. I know you have a bootleg of that show. I was greatly disappointed by the show. Mary did the majority of the leads and did not perform them at all well. They were promoting the comeback album, but they totally ignored the far superior Scherrie led tracks and concentrated on the Mary led songs. It was almost like a throwback to the DRATS era with Scherrie and Cindy pretty much relegated to the Mary and Cindy roles. The problem with that was Mary lacked Diana's charisma and stage presence and it was a woeful show. They even performed the abysmal Where is it i belong which has got to be hands down the worst song ever recorded by the Supremes in any era. None of the excellent Scherrie leads were performed. I was amazed by this and bitterly disappointed. I vowed never to see the girls live ever again, but of course i was there again the following year when Susaye had replaced Cindy. It was a superior show vocally because Scherrie was given more leads, but the show itself was a hot mess and a visual disaster.
    I saw Jean Scherrie and Lynda as the Flo's in the 80's and that was much better.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    I've heard that performance on Youtube and was disappointed too. Too much Mary. Thats not a bad thing but the songs are only so so and the Dream things, is to me, a complete disaster and too long. I also recall that no Jean era songs were sung and only a quick hits medley of the Diana led songs. Although I like most of the songs from the Scherrie years, the live shows were/are hard to follow and I hardly ever listen to them. Same with Jean and the live in Japan album. Something is missing for me and the song choices are not so good.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    after diana left, the new show with Jean was a refreshing change. they shifted a bit from the MOR standards. for instance the show closer was O Happy Day i believe and they sort of did a revival style approach. perfect for jean

    they seemed to work this show concept through 71 - have a bootleg of the Central Park show. it included:

    Feeling Good/Loving Country/Together we can make
    we've only just begun
    60s hits
    Love Story
    River Deep
    Love the one you're with
    can't take my eyes/quiet nights
    everybody's got the right
    nathan jones
    people
    stoned love
    revival/o happy day

    between the opening medley, Love the one you're with, everybody's got the right, stoned love and the ending, they had a solid concept of peace, love, humanity with a good dose of Jean soul! lol

    not sure how the show evolved with Cindy or the early Lynda shows. but by just a little over a year later, we go the Temps tour which broke back so many of the DRATS songs.

    When Scherrie joined and that early show taped in Japan, it's sort of just a greatest hits show - the 60s medley, 70s medley, stoned love, bad weather, touch, can't take my eyes, love train.

    with Sup 75, they brought in Geoffrey Holder and he redid the act. introduced the Dream segment, Body Heat and the new numbers from the album. but yes, the show was structured far too heavily around mary and, even worse, around Mary-led songs that simply weren't all that great. the best tracks from the Sup 75 album are completely ignored including Mary's lovely You Turn Me Around lead. the content and approach from GEoffrey was just too Broadway.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    I like the in Japan with Scherrie. It's a good show and mostly just their songs. I actually get a bit sick of hearing Mary singing can't take my eyes lol. I think she should have tried another song earlier during her tenure with the Supremes and ditched that song when Jean joined. It's a nice song but just out of place, especially when they more or less just did their greatest and latest songs in that Japan performance in 74 or 75. The love train closing number in that show was very good as well, and Cindy even gets a few lines.

    I agree and would love to hear her sing, You turn me around, live. It's, for me, by far the best Mary lead song on their 75 Album.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by jim aka jtigre99 View Post
    With Scherrie, Cindy came back but her blend with Mary seemed stronger
    Studio wise, I believe that's because Scherrie was singing backup with them, as opposed to Cindy and Mary singing alone.

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    the DMF lineup is, of course, classic. the girls' blend was also very strong similar to why mary said - their three unique voices really complemented one another. Mary's dusty alto, diana's nasality and piercing voice [[meaning this is a good way) and flo's vibrant and bright soprano... you had three very intriguing personalities
    This was, in a sense, an example of the gospel influence on the Supremes. Group harmony in pop music and even gospel at first was usually approached with the idea of every voice blending together to almost make one voice. Roberta Martin was one of the first to pioneer the idea of background singers having their place, retaining their individualism, and allowing each singer's voice to be picked out in the harmony. Now I'm not saying that any of the Supremes thought about it in this way or that deeply, but having been trained by various people during the Primettes days, and no doubt having been exposed to various gospel groups during the golden age of gospel, this could be why there was always this easily picked out personality whenever the group sang, a lot of times even when they were singing backup for someone else.

    Of course that's just my opinion. Don't wanna ruffle feathers.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by TYK1986 View Post
    I prefer them to sing the song as they do on the record. Not a huge fan of the improvising etc but on rare occasions it works. I do feel it rather distracts and I then I just stop listening. Like the song or not but Jean does sound good on Everybody's got the right to love and Mary and Cindy are blending very well on the background.
    I'm the opposite. Well not so much opposite, but my viewpoint is different. I look at singers as artists. Sure, they perform, but it's all an art. I wouldn't expect a painter or a writer to paint the same picture or write the same book twice. The end result is a product of the feeling in any given moment. That's the way I see music, for the most part. I don't think it makes a singer any less an artist if they sing the same song the same way every time, but I do think a singer has to have room for artistic expression in any given moment. Now the result of any of those moments may have a varying effect on the listeners. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't. Personally I prefer Jean's approach. My opinion only.

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    i think the problem with the groupings is that DMF created a very popular presence on records and also a very popular yet different presence on stage.
    I once offered the opinion that all the subsequent groupings would forever live in the shadow of the original trio, and because of that, just about everything they did would pale in comparison, even it were something great. I still feel that way. Now there are very clear inferiorities with each grouping, but ultimately I think the public would always see them as imposters, a term I use very loosely here. For a great many people the Supremes would always be Diana, Florence and Mary. When it gets to the point that only Mary is left, everyone starts checking out. To be fair, I think had Mary left the group before Diana and she was replaced, the public would've thought of the Diana only Supremes as second rate also. The truth is that the Supremes were probably too big to survive losing two original members. Imagine the Beatles continuing with just Ringo. Who would have accepted them, no matter how good they were? The Supremes name probably should've been retired in January 1970. Let JMC continue under a new name.

    Just my thoughts.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I'm the opposite. Well not so much opposite, but my viewpoint is different. I look at singers as artists. Sure, they perform, but it's all an art. I wouldn't expect a painter or a writer to paint the same picture or write the same book twice. The end result is a product of the feeling in any given moment. That's the way I see music, for the most part. I don't think it makes a singer any less an artist if they sing the same song the same way every time, but I do think a singer has to have room for artistic expression in any given moment. Now the result of any of those moments may have a varying effect on the listeners. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't. Personally I prefer Jean's approach. My opinion only.
    I don't think Jean always did a good job with it. She did on some occasions. Her Stoned Love performance in Central Park 1971, if I'm correct, was different but very good. There are others where I find her intro good and others are so so. I actually think it's very good if they can sing the song as they recorded it. I can't sing if my life depended on it lol so maybe that's why.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    2,680
    Rep Power
    193
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I once offered the opinion that all the subsequent groupings would forever live in the shadow of the original trio, and because of that, just about everything they did would pale in comparison, even it were something great. I still feel that way. Now there are very clear inferiorities with each grouping, but ultimately I think the public would always see them as imposters, a term I use very loosely here. For a great many people the Supremes would always be Diana, Florence and Mary. When it gets to the point that only Mary is left, everyone starts checking out. To be fair, I think had Mary left the group before Diana and she was replaced, the public would've thought of the Diana only Supremes as second rate also. The truth is that the Supremes were probably too big to survive losing two original members. Imagine the Beatles continuing with just Ringo. Who would have accepted them, no matter how good they were? The Supremes name probably should've been retired in January 1970. Let JMC continue under a new name.

    Just my thoughts.
    You hit the nail on the head. People sometimes forget that when Flo left, people noticed. Some people wrote into papers, I think as long afterward as when Diana was leaving, if Flo could come back. Unlike other groups at the time, it wasn't just Diana and her backup singers. Each Supreme was a household name in their own right, and losing one original member in their heyday was big enough news, let alone losing two. It's a very interesting "what if" to imagine if Mary had left either with Florence or after and before Diana. Would the group have fallen apart? Remember, Berry reportedly had to bribe people off the street to Diana's first solo show, and for a brief period of time the new Supremes eclipsed Diana on the charts.

  31. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by TYK1986 View Post
    I don't think Jean always did a good job with it. She did on some occasions. Her Stoned Love performance in Central Park 1971, if I'm correct, was different but very good. There are others where I find her intro good and others are so so. I actually think it's very good if they can sing the song as they recorded it. I can't sing if my life depended on it lol so maybe that's why.
    I can understand that. Of course one man's junk is another man's art. I think Jean felt she had to do what she had to do artistically. As listeners it's up to us to judge whether it lands correctly or not. Lol

    As a huge Jean fan, the only consistent problem I have with her voice really isn't even her problem. It's the fact that so much of the live stuff is nearly 50 year old bootlegs. And chances are they are copies of bootlegs, which make the sound mostly extremely inferior. Some of this stuff does give Jean's already natural high voice an even shriller sound, but one can never know whether that's Jean singing too high, or the horrible audio. But typically, Jean can hardly ever do any wrong in my book. She's one of my "can sing the phone book" singers. I can listen to her live or studio all day.

  32. #32
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,957
    Rep Power
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I once offered the opinion that all the subsequent groupings would forever live in the shadow of the original trio, and because of that, just about everything they did would pale in comparison, even it were something great. I still feel that way. Now there are very clear inferiorities with each grouping, but ultimately I think the public would always see them as imposters, a term I use very loosely here. For a great many people the Supremes would always be Diana, Florence and Mary. When it gets to the point that only Mary is left, everyone starts checking out. To be fair, I think had Mary left the group before Diana and she was replaced, the public would've thought of the Diana only Supremes as second rate also. The truth is that the Supremes were probably too big to survive losing two original members. Imagine the Beatles continuing with just Ringo. Who would have accepted them, no matter how good they were? The Supremes name probably should've been retired in January 1970. Let JMC continue under a new name.

    Just my thoughts.
    An interesting scenario to ponder Ran. To suggest the group would be thought second rate had Mary also decided to leave would be underestimating Diana’s appeal and charisma.
    Remember, it was the Ross voice that the public fell in love with and her voice that turned those songs into hits. Flo and Mary contributed much to the overall appeal of the group, but it was Diana’s voice that made them special and separated them from the pack. It’s worth noting that from 67 to 70 the majority of recordings featured Diana with various backing singers. Admittedly the public were not aware of this at the time.
    Having said that, people do like continuity, and to lose two members that record buyers were familiar with would undoubtedly have had a huge impact on live performances and how they were perceived as a group.
    Essentially the records would have sounded much the same, so for me it all comes down to the music. With strong material l think it might have been possible to whether the storm.

  33. #33
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by antceleb12 View Post
    You hit the nail on the head. People sometimes forget that when Flo left, people noticed. Some people wrote into papers, I think as long afterward as when Diana was leaving, if Flo could come back. Unlike other groups at the time, it wasn't just Diana and her backup singers. Each Supreme was a household name in their own right, and losing one original member in their heyday was big enough news, let alone losing two. It's a very interesting "what if" to imagine if Mary had left either with Florence or after and before Diana. Would the group have fallen apart? Remember, Berry reportedly had to bribe people off the street to Diana's first solo show, and for a brief period of time the new Supremes eclipsed Diana on the charts.
    I think had Mary left at the same time as Flo, Gordy would've cut his losses and just sent Diana out as a solo. But until now I had never pondered a situation such as the Martha and the Vandellas, where Betty was gone one year, replaced, and then Roz gone the next. Would Gordy have replaced Mary with a third girl to join Diana and Cindy? I think that scenario is possible, but believe just ending the group at that point more probable.

    But yeah, losing any two ladies from the group during the 60s would've been bad news. DRATS worked because at least there were still two very familiar members. But once Jean comes in, it does feel less like the Supremes and more like something else. Not that the Jean led Supremes were worse, just different. Diana was an obvious huge presence, so her absence was going to trigger a change in dynamic any way you slice it. Same with Flo, but in a different way because Flo wasn't the lead singer. When she left, DRATS didn't have the same feel. I think that's why it's so easy for some of us to even refer to that period of the group as Diana Ross and the Supremes without gagging. Flo left and she took much of what made the original Supremes so likeable with her. Diana wasn't even the same Diana from before. She really was officially the star attraction within the group. So it's kind of fitting that this grouping has a slightly different moniker.

    Once Diana left, I think JMC might have found it "easier" to stay consistently successful if they were their own thing and not Supremes. Of course this opinion doesn't seek to address every issue that the new Supremes had. Gordy's abandonment of the group would've still occurred. Motown's sometimes irrational album and single releases [[both scheduling and actual choice in albums and singles) would've still occurred. But might it have been easier to brand JMC with a new name and image? Sup is right that some of the stuff within the 70s Supremes was just old fashioned and never going to go across well with some people. On the other hand, moving in a completely different direction might have caused others to avoid the group as they had become used to a certain look and sound with a name like Supremes.

    All of this is hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking of course, but looking back I really feel strongly that retiring the Supremes name in 1970 and branding JMC something different entirely might have changed the history of Mary's groups.

  34. #34
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    814
    Rep Power
    261
    To be honest, if Mary had left with Flo or prior to Diana leaving I think it would have been a serious blow to the group. The public may have wondered why both of her singing partners left and even with PR, people would think is Diana difficult and it may have hurt her. Consider the PR when Flo left, she wanted to not travel and settle down yet she went to another record company for a solo career. Once DRATS hit and HDH left, some of the winning formula had lost its appeal except for Love Child and Someday which both were super focuses of the company. The public may not have been aware of the Supremes being replaced in backing vocals but with a new member some might have thought that this was how they now sounded. If Diana was the only voice they fell in love with she would have overrode this and that wasn't true. Even her solo recordings had sporadic chart action at times, much like the Ross-less Supremes. Ross has a distinctive voice but had her singing partners both left maybe the public would not have followed. Mary went along with Diana using the Supremes as a springboard for her solo career during DRATS and at the time of DRATS it was less about recordings and more about pushing Ross as a solo and becoming entrenched in the overall entertainment industry.

  35. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    9,279
    Rep Power
    519
    I always wondered what might have happened if Mary decided to leave as well when Flo was dismissed. Berry probably would have done all he could to keep Mary in the group because she was less argumentative and more importantly, the public probably would have called major BS if two girls left at once. It would have also looked bad for Diana and their plans for her future solo career.

  36. #36
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    If Diana left it meant some people might not follow the Supremes anymore. But in the 70's it was Mary who held the Supremes together and some sort of familiarity with the group. I'm not from the 60/70's but I guess that the casual listener only knew Diana, Mary, Florence and maybe Cindy because they were doing a lot of tv stuff in the late 60's.

  37. #37
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I'm the opposite. Well not so much opposite, but my viewpoint is different. I look at singers as artists. Sure, they perform, but it's all an art. I wouldn't expect a painter or a writer to paint the same picture or write the same book twice. The end result is a product of the feeling in any given moment. That's the way I see music, for the most part. I don't think it makes a singer any less an artist if they sing the same song the same way every time, but I do think a singer has to have room for artistic expression in any given moment. Now the result of any of those moments may have a varying effect on the listeners. Sometimes it'll work, sometimes it won't. Personally I prefer Jean's approach. My opinion only.
    the artistry of singing goes beyond intonation and pitch, beyond how many runs or vocal gymnastics you can do. being able to convey the emotional message of the lyric and the melody is also important. some would say its the MOST important.

    Diana excelled that this. she was always able to find the nuances of the lyric and melody. Jean also excelled at this, at times. her studio recordings are amazing. and often live she was wonderful too. but sometimes she got carried away

    there's another comparison with music. piano and instrumental soloist often go after the huge concertos with the massive pyrotechnics and bombast. big complex Rachmaninov or Tchaikovsky pieces. and yes those are wonderful. they cram millions of notes, runs, trills and the like in. but some of the most difficult music to play and play RIGHT is Mozart. it's might not have the crazy chordal passages or things like that. but if you don't capture the emotion and interpretation correctly, which is very challenging, it's lost.

    another example - the over singing of the National Anthem. You get some young pop star at a sporting event adding all sorts of nonsense. they have a finger swinging up in the air, they're being all dramatic and whatnot. Then go listen to Miss Whitney Houston.

    there ya go! lol

  38. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    1,245
    Rep Power
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    I think had Mary left at the same time as Flo, Gordy would've cut his losses and just sent Diana out as a solo.

    ...losing any two ladies from the group during the 60s would've been bad news. DRATS worked because at least there were still two very familiar members. But once Jean comes in, it does feel less like the Supremes and more like something else. Not that the Jean led Supremes were worse, just different. Diana was an obvious huge presence, so her absence was going to trigger a change in dynamic any way you slice it. Same with Flo, but in a different way because Flo wasn't the lead singer. When she left, [the group] didn't have the same feel. I think that's why it's so easy for some of us to even refer to that period of the group as Diana Ross and the Supremes without gagging. Flo left and she took much of what made the original Supremes so likeable with her. Diana wasn't even the same Diana from before. She really was officially the star attraction within the group. So it's kind of fitting that this grouping has a slightly different moniker.

    Once Diana left, I think JMC might have found it "easier" to stay consistently successful if they were their own thing and not Supremes. But might it have been easier to brand JMC with a new name and image?... Sup is right that some of the stuff within the 70s Supremes was just old fashioned and never going to go across well with some people. On the other hand, moving in a completely different direction might have caused others to avoid the group as they had become used to a certain look and sound with a name like Supremes.

    All of this is hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking of course, but looking back I really feel strongly that retiring the Supremes name in 1970 and branding JMC something different entirely might have changed the history of Mary's groups.
    I agree with a lot you are saying, RanRan. JMC was definitely a new, different group. I'm thinking now that The New Supremes might have been a good way to move forward. I had thought about this from when Diana left the group, but I think I wanted to hold on to the continued existence of "The Supremes" in my universe. The "New Supremes" would have acknowledged the new start and direction for the legendary group and put a spotlight on new lead singer Jean Terrell.

  39. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie9 View Post
    An interesting scenario to ponder Ran. To suggest the group would be thought second rate had Mary also decided to leave would be underestimating Diana’s appeal and charisma.
    Remember, it was the Ross voice that the public fell in love with and her voice that turned those songs into hits. Flo and Mary contributed much to the overall appeal of the group, but it was Diana’s voice that made them special and separated them from the pack. It’s worth noting that from 67 to 70 the majority of recordings featured Diana with various backing singers. Admittedly the public were not aware of this at the time.
    Having said that, people do like continuity, and to lose two members that record buyers were familiar with would undoubtedly have had a huge impact on live performances and how they were perceived as a group.
    Essentially the records would have sounded much the same, so for me it all comes down to the music. With strong material l think it might have been possible to whether the storm.
    you're right that it was diana's voice. given the number of singles and albums sold, it really was about diana. M and F most certainly added to the act but that was more their stage show. even tv appearances were mostly diana since Berry could help direct and control the camera angles and shots.

    most people didn't actually see the Sups on stage. most heard them on the radio, tv and records. those 3 outlets were all, for the most part, 100% Diana.

    By the time flo left, Motown was already heavily shifting things to focus primarily on Diana. Cindy's appearance was also quite similar to flo, so the change was much less disruptive than if they had brought in, let's say, Susaye. a totally different look and sound. To the average public, it was quite seamless. Even here on the board, if there's a slightly blurry pic of the era, we ourselves sometimes have to look very very closely to see if it's flo or cindy. especially when the pic of them in the gowns during that transition period. once we get to the super glam sequins, we all know it's cindy by then.

  40. #40
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by lucky2012 View Post
    I agree with a lot you are saying, RanRan. JMC was definitely a new, different group. I'm thinking now that The New Supremes might have been a good way to move forward. I had thought about this from when Diana left the group, but I think I wanted to hold on to the continued existence of "The Supremes" in my universe. The "New Supremes" would have acknowledged the new start and direction for the legendary group and put a spotlight on new lead singer Jean Terrell.
    while they didn't FORMALLY change their name to the "New Supremes" that is how they were often positioned on tv, radio and in print. sure the label copy still read "supremes" but the marketing was "new supremes"

  41. #41
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie9 View Post
    An interesting scenario to ponder Ran. To suggest the group would be thought second rate had Mary also decided to leave would be underestimating Diana’s appeal and charisma.
    Remember, it was the Ross voice that the public fell in love with and her voice that turned those songs into hits. Flo and Mary contributed much to the overall appeal of the group, but it was Diana’s voice that made them special and separated them from the pack. It’s worth noting that from 67 to 70 the majority of recordings featured Diana with various backing singers. Admittedly the public were not aware of this at the time.
    Having said that, people do like continuity, and to lose two members that record buyers were familiar with would undoubtedly have had a huge impact on live performances and how they were perceived as a group.
    Essentially the records would have sounded much the same, so for me it all comes down to the music. With strong material l think it might have been possible to whether the storm.
    It was Ross' voice coupled with those incredible HDH compositions, the Funk Brothers' incredible musicianship and the beautiful harmony of Flo and Mary that gripped the public. The Supremes were never just about Diana, and there were several times when Gordy- and I suspect Ross- were annoyed to find out that reality. The Supremes were a huge machine. They were a force beyond simply singing. Their story was one of the interesting aspects of their image, and that story and image were strictly tied to the three original Supremes. When Flo leaves and Cindy comes in, the dynamic is different because the history is different. Replace Flo and Mary, and yes, the group becomes second rate. The replacements might be consummate professionals and talented singers, but the initial magic of three friends from humble beginnings striking it big against all odds...is gone. This Diana only group would never have been seen as better than the original trio, thus making them second rate. Sure, just like with DRATS, they might have a few big hits and Diana could continue to test run her solo career, but the DRATS-less Mary grouping would live in the shadow of the original trio, just like all the other incarnations that came after the originals, including DRATS. Second rate.

  42. #42
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    the artistry of singing goes beyond intonation and pitch, beyond how many runs or vocal gymnastics you can do. being able to convey the emotional message of the lyric and the melody is also important. some would say its the MOST important.

    Diana excelled that this. she was always able to find the nuances of the lyric and melody. Jean also excelled at this, at times. her studio recordings are amazing. and often live she was wonderful too. but sometimes she got carried away

    there's another comparison with music. piano and instrumental soloist often go after the huge concertos with the massive pyrotechnics and bombast. big complex Rachmaninov or Tchaikovsky pieces. and yes those are wonderful. they cram millions of notes, runs, trills and the like in. but some of the most difficult music to play and play RIGHT is Mozart. it's might not have the crazy chordal passages or things like that. but if you don't capture the emotion and interpretation correctly, which is very challenging, it's lost.

    another example - the over singing of the National Anthem. You get some young pop star at a sporting event adding all sorts of nonsense. they have a finger swinging up in the air, they're being all dramatic and whatnot. Then go listen to Miss Whitney Houston.

    there ya go! lol
    The artistry of singing is nothing more than the art of singing, and that art's cultivation- or production- is defined by the artist. That's not to say that everybody's art is everybody's art. As I said before, one man's junk is another man's treasure. That's the way it works with art. There isn't a painting, a book, a song, or a singer that everyone who hears agrees about. So if Jean felt that a particular piece in a particular moment calls for deviating from the original, I don't think there's anyway to measure the "wrong" of that interpretation. The "like" or "dislike" of it, sure. But not the wrong.

  43. #43
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by lucky2012 View Post
    I agree with a lot you are saying, RanRan. JMC was definitely a new, different group. I'm thinking now that The New Supremes might have been a good way to move forward. I had thought about this from when Diana left the group, but I think I wanted to hold on to the continued existence of "The Supremes" in my universe. The "New Supremes" would have acknowledged the new start and direction for the legendary group and put a spotlight on new lead singer Jean Terrell.
    Lucky even this I find fault with. I think the name Supremes should've been completely abandoned. Perhaps the closest I would have gone is maybe calling the new group Supreme, but even that's just too close for comfort. Maybe give them a name that's not The XXX. Something along the lines of Glass House or Honey Cone or New Birth. Call them New Ways or something.

    "Ladies and gentlemen, here they are, the ladies you've been waiting for...New Ways!"

  44. #44
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    Lucky even this I find fault with. I think the name Supremes should've been completely abandoned. Perhaps the closest I would have gone is maybe calling the new group Supreme, but even that's just too close for comfort. Maybe give them a name that's not The XXX. Something along the lines of Glass House or Honey Cone or New Birth. Call them New Ways or something.

    "Ladies and gentlemen, here they are, the ladies you've been waiting for...New Ways!"
    see i disagree about the name. that brand of The Supremes was firmly established and that alone attracted record buyers and ticket sales.

    Every group and artist is going to have peaks and valleys in their popularity and sales. the earlier years of the supremes would always be the "peak" years and the group would forever be compared to this. and they would also always enjoy the halo effect of this. The fact that it was the lead singer that left would always be a challenge since only Diana Ross can sound like Diana Ross.

    the New Supremes were still successful for a couple years after Diana's departure. i don't think it was the name or group history that really caused the decline. partially, the decline was nature and would have happened regardless due to public tastes. also motown and group management didn't properly continue to evolve and update the group. poor management decisions were more responsible for declining sales than the group name

  45. #45
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    The artistry of singing is nothing more than the art of singing, and that art's cultivation- or production- is defined by the artist. That's not to say that everybody's art is everybody's art. As I said before, one man's junk is another man's treasure. That's the way it works with art. There isn't a painting, a book, a song, or a singer that everyone who hears agrees about. So if Jean felt that a particular piece in a particular moment calls for deviating from the original, I don't think there's anyway to measure the "wrong" of that interpretation. The "like" or "dislike" of it, sure. But not the wrong.
    very valid point. beauty is definitely in the eye of the behold. or listener as is this case

    i do appreciate Jean's desire to be inventive and explorative.

  46. #46
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Posts
    397
    Rep Power
    160
    It's all about personal taste when it comes to a lot of things. I don't really like the use of second rate either which is also an opinion. Yes Flo. Mary and Diana might have had all the big hits but I skip many of their album songs and I don't even like some of their number 1 hits. I can't stand Love is here for example. Whereas I can listen to most of the Jean led Albums and High Energy. MSS all the way through. Yes the sales and hits dried up but just because of what the majority thinks doesn't make them second rate for me. I do think without Mary the Supremes wouldn't have been the Supremes, for me. I would like to know how Florence would have sound on some of the Drats records. But I have to say that her voice on all her solo recordings, after she left, were not to my liking.

    Fleetwood Mac the same. Every line up without Stevie and Lindsay is second rate. I hear it so often. It's an opinion but not mine. I love loads of the songs they recorded before they joined in 75. Abba's final LP, second rate compared to Arrival. I never listen to Arrival and have their last album, the visitors, in my car all the time.

    And back to the Supremes. Ran you are right. Nothing wrong with how Jean sings a song. It's how she feels she should sing it. Some like it and some don't. I don't always like it, like I mentioned earlier. Diana tended to stick more to the original but after hearing it a thousand times I think it can get a bit boring. With Jean you just never knew what was coming.

  47. #47
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    4,957
    Rep Power
    378
    Quote Originally Posted by RanRan79 View Post
    It was Ross' voice coupled with those incredible HDH compositions, the Funk Brothers' incredible musicianship and the beautiful harmony of Flo and Mary that gripped the public. The Supremes were never just about Diana, and there were several times when Gordy- and I suspect Ross- were annoyed to find out that reality. The Supremes were a huge machine. They were a force beyond simply singing. Their story was one of the interesting aspects of their image, and that story and image were strictly tied to the three original Supremes. When Flo leaves and Cindy comes in, the dynamic is different because the history is different. Replace Flo and Mary, and yes, the group becomes second rate. The replacements might be consummate professionals and talented singers, but the initial magic of three friends from humble beginnings striking it big against all odds...is gone. This Diana only group would never have been seen as better than the original trio, thus making them second rate. Sure, just like with DRATS, they might have a few big hits and Diana could continue to test run her solo career, but the DRATS-less Mary grouping would live in the shadow of the original trio, just like all the other incarnations that came after the originals, including DRATS. Second rate.
    Second rate suggests inferior which might not have been the case.
    The point being would those HDH songs have become the hits they did without the unique and extremely radio friendly Ross voice. I think the Supremes would have been just as successful had Flo and Mary been two other female singers.
    Take Diana out of the equation and what are you left with. I say that not to down play Flo and Mary’s contribution for l think they were great at what they did.
    Having said that it was Diana’s voice alone that was uniquely special. Like many other artists she needed good song writers and a strong support team behind her.
    When all is said and done, she was the key to it all.

  48. #48
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Posts
    8,756
    Rep Power
    391
    Quote Originally Posted by Ollie9 View Post
    Second rate suggests inferior which might not have been the case.
    The point being would those HDH songs have become the hits they did without the unique and extremely radio friendly Ross voice. I think the Supremes would have been just as successful had Flo and Mary been two other female singers.
    Take Diana out of the equation and what are you left with. I say that not to down play Flo and Mary’s contribution for l think they were great at what they did.
    Having said that it was Diana’s voice alone that was uniquely special. Like many other artists she needed good song writers and a strong support team behind her.
    When all is said and done, she was the key to it all.
    i do think F and M made more than an important contribution to the group. Diana certainly had a unique voice and stage presence. If you look at other girl group singers of the era, their faces and expressions are usually pretty dead. even the leads sometimes aren't super engaging. The Crystals, Ronettes, Marvelettes, even MRATV.

    if Diana had been paired with the two other Ronettes, for instance, the Come See About Me episode on Sullivan would have been quite different. Sure diana would pop but the other two are yawns. Also DMF had a better live blend than the Marvelettes or MRATV.

    in 1965, the girls were only 21 yet they handled a very complex and sophisticated stage debut at the Copa. no other girl group could have handled that. and the reason they GOT to the Copa was because of their incredible sales, radio success AND tv success.

    diana with two other girls would certainly have been successful. But they may or may not have become THE SUPREMES or they may not have gone quite as far as quickly as they did. Diana developed considerably through 64 and 65. she grew so much as a stage performer. M and F also had very engaging stage presence with made the act so appealing. plus they were a superbly solid foundation for Diana to be able to experiment and practice and grow on. the consistent performing quality of M and F gave D the freedom to grow.

  49. #49
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by sup_fan View Post
    see i disagree about the name. that brand of The Supremes was firmly established and that alone attracted record buyers and ticket sales.

    Every group and artist is going to have peaks and valleys in their popularity and sales. the earlier years of the supremes would always be the "peak" years and the group would forever be compared to this. and they would also always enjoy the halo effect of this. The fact that it was the lead singer that left would always be a challenge since only Diana Ross can sound like Diana Ross.

    the New Supremes were still successful for a couple years after Diana's departure. i don't think it was the name or group history that really caused the decline. partially, the decline was nature and would have happened regardless due to public tastes. also motown and group management didn't properly continue to evolve and update the group. poor management decisions were more responsible for declining sales than the group name
    But that's just it, the Supremes branding occurred during the original trio's reign. Diana and Mary together were able to stay on brand because they helped create it. Cindy was "forced" into it, as was Jean. So as the years went by and it seems like the groupings kept removing what made the Supremes THE SUPREMES, it's like what's the point of them being the Supremes anymore? I think if Motown had spearheaded a PR event where Diana leaves the Supremes for solo success and Mary and Cindy join Jean in a brand new musical force- New Ways for the sake of this convo- things might have gone a bit smoother. Jean might have been happier because she'd be a founding member as opposed to the new girl joining an existing group recently vacated by a huge talent. Even Mary and Cindy may have found their positions as singers increase, considering that first album was once again a lead singer and two backing singers.

    In other words, the value of the name Supremes decreased where the public was concerned. They never kept that thing that made the name a household name in the first place. Compare them to the Tempts, who also had a revolving door of singers. They too had lulls in the career, but they were always an automatic entertainment fav because even though at a certain point three of the original big five were gone, leaving just Melvin and Otis, the Tempts still kept that thing that made them exciting from day one. The Jean years kept some of the 60s momentum going. By the time Scherrie comes in, the group name should've definitely been changed. There is absolutely no resemblance between MSC and MSS to FDM at all. No value in the name at that point.

  50. #50
    Join Date
    Mar 2017
    Posts
    8,635
    Rep Power
    525
    Quote Originally Posted by TYK1986 View Post
    It's all about personal taste when it comes to a lot of things. I don't really like the use of second rate either which is also an opinion. Yes Flo. Mary and Diana might have had all the big hits but I skip many of their album songs and I don't even like some of their number 1 hits. I can't stand Love is here for example. Whereas I can listen to most of the Jean led Albums and High Energy. MSS all the way through. Yes the sales and hits dried up but just because of what the majority thinks doesn't make them second rate for me. I do think without Mary the Supremes wouldn't have been the Supremes, for me. I would like to know how Florence would have sound on some of the Drats records. But I have to say that her voice on all her solo recordings, after she left, were not to my liking.

    Fleetwood Mac the same. Every line up without Stevie and Lindsay is second rate. I hear it so often. It's an opinion but not mine. I love loads of the songs they recorded before they joined in 75. Abba's final LP, second rate compared to Arrival. I never listen to Arrival and have their last album, the visitors, in my car all the time.

    And back to the Supremes. Ran you are right. Nothing wrong with how Jean sings a song. It's how she feels she should sing it. Some like it and some don't. I don't always like it, like I mentioned earlier. Diana tended to stick more to the original but after hearing it a thousand times I think it can get a bit boring. With Jean you just never knew what was coming.
    Second rate might be a poor choice of wording. So I'll say they would always fall short in the general public's eye when it came to the original trio. Yes, second rate implies inferior, and one thing about the talent, the Supremes never lacked it, from beginning to end. So second rate isn't particularly accurate here. Well, it isn't accurate for every instance. I'm sorry, but the MSC and MSS stage shows didn't hold a candle to the original trio's shows. My opinion of course.

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.