Diana Ross & the Supremes / 50th Anniversary: The Complete Singles 1961-1969,

RossHolloway · 08-26-2011, 10:25 AM

Skooldem1- I agree with your point. While I love Motown, there are some songs and artist that do nothing for me. I've just never felt the need to go piss in a thread where people are talking about these artists or songs. I mean what's the point? It creates too much negativity. One of the things that I use to like about this site was the sharing of information, but lately its turned into too much of a bitchfest [[like this thread for instance). Everyone is entitled to his or her own opinion, but good Lord, nobody wants to have to read thru all the griping and complaining. Or maybe its just a sign that I just need a break from this site.

**marybrewster** · 08-26-2011, 11:31 AM

I'm obviously in the minority when I say that I am excited for this release and will be purchasing it. Not because I think buying it will bring other "rare" Supremes releases to light, but because I think it's actually a really cool concept, and when releases are affordable, I like to have them all.

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 11:43 AM

Allow me to interrupt this cat-fighting with this thought: perhaps Motown is starting a new singles reissue campaign for all of their major classic Motown artists, and they just happen to be kicking it off with The Supremes.

Now, back to your bitch-fest...

RossHolloway · 08-26-2011, 11:47 AM

Just a point of clarification of an earlier point that I wrote; my point was not that the suits want the Motown fan/collector to buy this type of release [[greatest hits), but rather the HippoSelect type releases, the Lost & Found Series or the Expanded Edition of albums. If we fans show an interest in those type projects and BUY them, then that shows the "suits" that there is still an interest in putting those type projects out there. I'm sure they would love for us to all buy the GHs packages [[they are a business after all) but they probably know we already have those songs from prior releases. My point was for us fans to really get behind the other releases, that are really done for us specific Motown fans: the Cellarful series, The Complete Motown Single Series, the Anthology series, or the Expanded Edition of albums. That was the point I was trying to make.

**Penny** · 08-26-2011, 12:11 PM

RossHolloway, you are much too adult and sane for this thread therefore you will be yelled at my someone.

LOLOL.

Penny

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 12:37 PM

There is no point in buying something just because it's there. For me, I have to have a reason to buy a comp. I don't buy for the artist, I buy because of the content. I will have to pass on the Supremes set because I already have a nice singles collection of them. Same with The Temptations, Martha & The Vandellas, Jr. Walker & The All-Stars, The Marvellettes, and Smokey Robinson & The Miracles, and they all sound fantastic.

If they want my business, they will come up with singles packages for The Jackson 5 and Stevie Wonder, and they will be mastered well.

**Kamasu_Jr** · 08-26-2011, 01:54 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

There is no point in buying something just because it's there. For me, I have to have a reason to buy a comp. I don't buy for the artist, I buy because of the content. I will have to pass on the Supremes set because I already have a nice singles collection of them. Same with The Temptations, Martha & The Vandellas, Jr. Walker & The All-Stars, The Marvellettes, and Smokey Robinson & The Miracles, and they all sound fantastic.

If they want my business, they will come up with singles packages for The Jackson 5 and Stevie Wonder, and they will be mastered well.

i AGREE. I DON'T NEED THIS RELEASE.

RossHolloway · 08-26-2011, 02:06 PM

Originally Posted by Kamasu_Jr

i AGREE. I DON'T NEED THIS RELEASE.

This release was not meant for you and soulster.

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 02:17 PM

Originally Posted by RossHolloway

This release was not meant for you and soulster.

If I didn't already have a singles collection by the Supremes, i'd buy it. So, it is meant for people like me, just that I don't need it now.

**marybrewster** · 08-26-2011, 02:23 PM

The joy is: if you don't want it, don't buy it. And on the other hand, if you want it, buy it.

I have all of these songs a thousand times over, but I'd still like all of the A and B sides in one package, so I'm buying it. Simple as that.

RossHolloway · 08-26-2011, 02:37 PM

Originally Posted by marybrewster

The joy is: if you don't want it, don't buy it. And on the other hand, if you want it, buy it.

I have all of these songs a thousand times over, but I'd still like all of the A and B sides in one package, so I'm buying it. Simple as that.

Thank You! A voice of sound reason.

**carlo** · 08-26-2011, 03:16 PM

Originally Posted by marybrewster

The joy is: if you don't want it, don't buy it. And on the other hand, if you want it, buy it.

I have all of these songs a thousand times over, but I'd still like all of the A and B sides in one package, so I'm buying it. Simple as that.

Exactly! Totally agree. I'll be purchasing this package too, even though I have all of those songs many times over. I also like the concept.

There are far too many cranky people on this forum. I can't believe we've come to the point where we're correcting people's spelling and grammar.

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 04:46 PM

I'm not cranky. I'm only responding, mainly to RossHolloway, that the fan thing doesn't work with me.

Like Carlo, I have these songs many times over, and I have the mono mixes a couple of ways as well. For some of us, we are collectors, but as an audiophile, the sound quality and mastering is a BIG issue.

The sound quality on the previous 1995 2-CD set is excellent, and contains several popular B-sides. It's all I need. But, I also realize that it's long OOP, and only available if you look around on Amazon, or used. I have been mostly disappointed in the mastering of classic 60s Motown material over the last decade, so I am iffy about getting this new one. Money is tight these days too. I'd have to read the reports from other audiophiles first before deciding. For those of you who either don't have the aforementioned collection, or don't care too much about the sound quality, that's fine too. Some people just have different priorities.

I dig good packaging and liner notes, and having rare or unreleased photographs are fine, but not too important for an audio release. If I ever wanted classic and unreleased photos, I would find a book. I like the Supremes' music, but not to the point of having to own everything they burped.

Putting out singles collections that have not been made available before would be preferable to me.

I hope this clarifies my position.

And, get it through your skulls, people: not everyone who reads and posts on this forum is a Diana Ross & The Supremes fan! This place is for everybody who loves soul music. It is even OK to not like Diana Ross or the Supremes, or Mary Willson.

As for correcting peoples' spelling? I get tempted because I am a former English major. I get mighty frustrated when I see bad spelling and improper grammer. However, it is considered rude forum etiquette to go around correcting, or pointing out someone's bad spelling. Don't you guys use spell-check?

**marv2** · 08-26-2011, 04:59 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

I'm not cranky. I'm only responding, mainly to RossHolloway, that the fan thing doesn't work with me.

Like Carlo, I have these songs many times over, and I have the mono mixes a couple of ways as well. For some of us, we are collectors, but as an audiophile, the sound quality and mastering is a BIG issue.

The sound quality on the previous 1995 2-CD set is excellent, and contains several popular B-sides. It's all I need. But, I also realize that it's long OOP, and only available if you look around on Amazon, or used. I have been mostly disappointed in the mastering of classic 60s Motown material over the last decade, so I am iffy about getting this new one. Money is tight these days' too. I'd have to read the reports from other audiophiles first before deciding. For those of you who either don't have the aforementioned collection, or don't care too much about the sound quality, that's fine too. Some people just have different priorities.

I dig good packaging and liner notes, and having rare or unreleased photographs are fine, but not too important for an audio release. If I ever wanted classic and unreleased photos, I would find a book. I like the Supremes' music, but not to the point of having to own everything they burped.

Putting out singles collections that have not been made available before would be preferable to me.

I hope this clarifies my position.

And, get it through your skulls, people: not everyone who reads and posts on this forum is a Diana Ross & The Supremes fan! This place is for everybody who loves soul music. It is even OK to not like Diana Ross or the Supremes, or Mary Willson.

As for correcting people's spelling? I get tempted because I am a former English major. I get mighty frustrated when I see bad spelling and improper grammer. However, it is considered rude forum etiquette to go around correcting, or pointing out someone's bad spelling. Don't you guys use spell-check?

I believe Carlo was referring to "Stopinthenameoflove" who was correcting Rossholloway needlessly!

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 05:33 PM

Originally Posted by marv2

I believe Carlo was referring to "Stopinthenameoflove" who was correcting Rossholloway needlessly!

Yes. Still...

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 05:45 PM

Originally Posted by skooldem1

If I don't have interest in some geeky boring conversion about snares and distortions, and compressions, I would NEVER insult a person that does. But that's just me.

Dude, i'm just surprised that some people here do have an interest in sound. That's a lot of what Motown was all about. Motown would never have been what it was without it.

Some of us are old enough to have grown up with Motown music from the first time around in the 60s, so we may like quite a bit of the music we heard back then. I don't like everything the company released, but I do like a lot of the big-hitters.

If I mention that I like the Supremes, but don't get all fanatical about them, I do it to counteract the obnoxious fans on this forum. These fans seem to have no variety in their tastes. It's all Ross, Ros,s Ross, Supremes, Supremes, Supremes,...whatever, and they rarely mention any other artists, well, maybe Mary Wilson or the other Supremes. It got old a long time ago.

I will take it down a notch if the obsessive DR & The Supremes fans take it down a notch. I'm also not a hater. I grew up with the music. After all, I did start a couple of Ross-related threads [[God help me).

And, if I want to start a thread about sound quality or mastering, it's my right to do so. If you don't care about that stuff, fine. I don't care. Man, run off and do your tea-bagger thing with Ron Paul or something.

**skooldem1** · 08-26-2011, 05:50 PM

Must you go there? I've told you time and time again what the deal is. Can we keep it to the music please?

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 06:11 PM

Originally Posted by skooldem1

Must you go there? I've told you time and time again what the deal is. Can we keep it to the music please?

I went there [[politics) because you do all the time. And, you were the one who decided to chew us all out about how you don't like certain things here. Oh, you have made it abundantly clear how you have no interest in "geeky boring" things.

I don't like all the bitch-slapping every time the topic of certain music arises. That's all.

**144man** · 08-26-2011, 06:36 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

As for correcting peoples' spelling? I get tempted because I am a former English major. I get mighty frustrated when I see bad spelling and improper grammer. However, it is considered rude forum etiquette to go around correcting, or pointing out someone's bad spelling. Don't you guys use spell-check?

I'm glad you raised the issue of spelling and etiquette. As an Englishman posting on an American forum, I never know whether it is permissible for me to use the English spelling when this differs from the American, e.g. "favourable" instead of "favorable".

As far as grammar is concerned, I am quite relaxed. Because we are having a conversation, the rules should be applied less rigourously [or rigorously] than in formal written English. Specifically, I can't get excited about the sentences above that begin with "And". Surely that's just another way of saying "Also" or "Furthermore". And of course in one of the greatest works in the English language, William Blake's "Jerusalem", the whole poem begins with the word "And".

**carlo** · 08-26-2011, 08:47 PM

Originally Posted by soulster

As for correcting peoples' spelling? I get tempted because I am a former English major. I get mighty frustrated when I see bad spelling and improper grammer. However, it is considered rude forum etiquette to go around correcting, or pointing out someone's bad spelling. Don't you guys use spell-check?

I'm glad you recognize that it is rude to correct other people's spelling and grammar. Not everyone here is an english major. Not everyone was given the opportunity to obtain some sort of higher education.

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 08:58 PM

Originally Posted by 144man

I'm glad you raised the issue of spelling and etiquette. As an Englishman posting on an American forum, I never know whether it is permissible for me to use the English spelling when this differs from the American, e.g. "favourable" instead of "favorable".

As far as grammar is concerned, I am quite relaxed. Because we are having a conversation, the rules should be applied less rigourously [or rigorously] than in formal written English. Specifically, I can't get excited about the sentences above that begin with "And". Surely that's just another way of saying "Also" or "Furthermore". And of course in one of the greatest works in the English language, William Blake's "Jerusalem", the whole poem begins with the word "And".

It's why I usually don't say much about typos, because this is an informal forum, and people do make mistakes. I know I do!

**soulster** · 08-26-2011, 08:59 PM

Originally Posted by carlo

I'm glad you recognize that it is rude to correct other people's spelling and grammar. Not everyone here is an english major. Not everyone was given the opportunity to obtain some sort of higher education.

I find that the worst offenders are those who have had higher education and/or are executives.

**snakepit** · 08-27-2011, 06:35 AM

It seems to me that a collection of any artists full 45 history on one compilation makes sense to me. However, if like me , you have them all on other sets, it's a case of how much you want it and at what price. I would buy this set IF I saw it cheap......second hand, or reduced on a web site.
That also applies to things like the new 70's Supremes album CDs..........
However I will buy the IVY JO CD like yesterday...it's all relative...no big deal.
IF however UMG only issue the same songs at the exclusion of other Motown items then we have reached a sad point.
But I don't think we are there quite yet

**144man** · 08-27-2011, 06:49 AM

Originally Posted by soulster

I find that the worst offenders are those who have had higher education and/or are executives.

That's because they expect their secretaries to correct them!

**mysterysinger** · 08-28-2011, 06:40 PM

Well, some folks are clearly looking forward to this release - I hope it sells well and that there are more of this type of set on other artists. Personally, I don't think I need it but, if I should see it going cheap enough in HMV or on Amazon then I will probably be too weak to resist.

**Penny** · 08-29-2011, 11:06 AM

I will purchase this product and I look forward to it.

Diana Ross should record an tribute album to the 70's Supremes and record their songs. I would buy that one, too.

Penny

**thisoldheart** · 08-31-2011, 05:43 AM

both up for pre-order at amazon:

http://www.amazon.com/50th-Anniversa...4783542&sr=1-1

http://www.amazon.com/50th-Anniversa...4783717&sr=1-2

out october 24, current undiscounted price: $50.23 each ...

**lakedistrictlad1** · 08-31-2011, 06:06 AM

$50.23!!!!!! Are they mad???? What are the discs made of...solid gold?

To put this into perspective. The Matt Monro estate [[yes I know he has nothing to do with Motown) have just issued a 4cd box set for $16.17.
http://www.amazon.com/Singers-Singer...4784996&sr=1-1

Now that's what a call value for money!

**thisoldheart** · 08-31-2011, 06:28 AM

they will be reduced before the release date. it always happens. the undiscounted price of the just posted premium version of the beach boys "smile sessions" is currently something like $170! that will change, too. i hope ...

**snakepit** · 08-31-2011, 09:48 AM

"To put this into perspective. The Matt Monro estate [[yes I know he has nothing to do with Motown) have just issued a 4cd box set for $16.17."

Does that include his version of "Baby Love" ?

**marybrewster** · 08-31-2011, 09:55 AM

Wow; I may be eating my words. I didn't anticipate it would be in the $50.00 range. Not when the Supremes "Gold" is in the high teens, low twenties. Maybe I will be sitting this one out afterall, because if given the choice to afford this 50th set or "More Hits", I'll go for "More Hits".

That price needs to come WAYYYYY down. No "casual" fan is even gonna touch it at that dollar amount. In my opinion.

**BobC** · 08-31-2011, 10:09 AM

I know these are all great pop songs, but seriously if I hear "Stop in the Name of Love" one more time I will hurl myself from the nearest skyscraper.

**aarondillon2011@gmail.com** · 08-31-2011, 12:15 PM

26 songs are available for preview if you go to the MP3 section. I am assuming those 26 songs are disc 3.

**carlo** · 08-31-2011, 12:24 PM

I am not really surprised to see that price. I'm sure it will come down. From what I was told about these two releases, it seems somewhat reasonable. Hopefully someone from Universal can post here and go into further detail. I don't want to spill the beans.

**longtimefan** · 08-31-2011, 03:47 PM

There must be something unique about the packaging, but I cannot imagine what it could be. The trend has been toward more minimal packaging, i.e., digipacs, smaller-sized box sets, jewel cases that hold more than one CD, etc. I can undestand becasue that helps keep prices of production and shipping down.

**longtimefan** · 08-31-2011, 03:57 PM

Actually, the track listings for all three discs are now posted at Amazon's MP3 section [[available for purchase on September 13).

1. I wonder if that is the actual cover art????

2. Why are there two versions of "Buttered Popcorn," "Your Heart belongs To Me," "No Matter What Sign You Are" and "I'm Living in Shame?"

3. Why is there an "alternate version" of "Love Child?"

honest man · 08-31-2011, 04:08 PM

hello tried to paste cover from amazon,no luck,but it;s there cheers.

**aarondillon2011@gmail.com** · 08-31-2011, 04:12 PM

Here is the link: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00...819725&sr=1-25

**psychedelic jacques** · 08-31-2011, 04:59 PM

4. Why is "The Way You Do the Things You Do" included as a Supremes single?

- it's with the Temptations - it was the B side to I'll Try Something New.

**carlo** · 08-31-2011, 05:44 PM

Thanks for the link. The cover looks ok, but not fantastic. Why is Mary's lipstick so purple? That pic looks like it was touched up too much by the art department. It looks like she just finished drinking some Welches' Grape Juice.

**carlo** · 08-31-2011, 05:53 PM

The original photo looks much better to me...with no Welches' Grape Juice...

**carlo** · 08-31-2011, 06:08 PM

...But I guess I should be thankful that everyone's heads are shown in full on the cover.

ladonna · 08-31-2011, 06:10 PM

Yes; please stay positive.

**johnjeb** · 08-31-2011, 09:40 PM

Release date October 24th!!! Why is everything coming out at once?

I really want "More Hits" and The Marvelettes "Forever More" due out in November so I will just put this collection, and possibly The Temptations collection, on my Christmas list.

I like the addition of the foreign-language releases in this collection. Might be nice having them alongside the US releases. Maybe I'll gift this collection to a few friends and/or loved ones.

Hopefully, the cover might look better than the reproduced image on Amazon. Diana's hair is a bit poofy, always thought that of this picture of her. Florence looks great, as does Mary. They should have used the original picture full-length. Got to love those shoes! Never noticed them before.

Are these the dresses that they wore on Red Skelton when they sang "Rock-A-Bye Your Baby With A Dixie Melody"? I only saw that show in B&W. All pics that I've seen from that performance have been B&W. The pics of them singing "Mother Dear" in the orange paisley dresses from the same show are in color.

**longtimefan** · 08-31-2011, 10:54 PM

This is NOT a complaint ... just a "thought!" LOL

If the picture is DMF .... well, the title should be THE SUPREMES 50th Anniversary. Flo was never a part of "Diana Ross and The Supremes." I guess I am a purist! :-)

Of course, I know that the 70s Supremes are not on this release [[nor should they necessarily be), but like the 2000 Box Set, I would have LOVED to see this new set titled "The Supremes."

NO disrepsect to Diana, in the least!

**Jimi LaLumia** · 08-31-2011, 11:59 PM

everything is coming out at once because it's the holiday season, when people are most likely to splurge on themselves and others...I know that I will!..one of everything..

Ramone Verona · 09-01-2011, 12:14 AM

Originally Posted by longtimefan

This is NOT a complaint ... just a "thought!" LOL

If the picture is DMF .... well, the title should be THE SUPREMES 50th Anniversary. Flo was never a part of "Diana Ross and The Supremes." I guess I am a purist! :-)

Of course, I know that the 70s Supremes are not on this release [[nor should they necessarily be), but like the 2000 Box Set, I would have LOVED to see this new set titled "The Supremes."

NO disrepsect to Diana, in the least!

Wasn't DRATS "Greatest Hits Vol. 1 & 2" the wonderful album with an insert of Flo, Mary and Diana?
And wasn't most of the REFLECTIONS LP recorded with Flo?

**longtimefan** · 09-01-2011, 12:51 AM

Yes, the "Reflections" LP was recorded with Flo, but she was not pictured nor did she perform with that billing. In actuality, they re-designed the cover art work, eliminating her pictures and inserting Cindy's pictures.

That being said, I was merely trying to indicate -- in a positive way -- that although it is a technicality, I would personally love to see this 50th anniversary effort be titled "The Supremes." As part of their legacy, this is an important release. It was just my "thought" -- not a complaint.

**Jimi LaLumia** · 09-01-2011, 02:17 AM

the billing lets everyone knows that these are the Ross-led hits[[and the everyday consumer knows the name Diana Ross just as powerfully as they know The Supremes,if not more so,so there's a 'sales' plus there);
with all the 70's re issues recently , "The Supremes" could mean a lot of things; The Beatles was always The Beatles, but The Supremes...different story[[and I love all versions, but I'm just saying)