Cindy

[blueskies]

Does anyone know when Cindy was chosen to replace Florence in The Supremes....was she selected on 'looks' and availability only....or, what she sounded like vocally played into it? I'm wondering if they even knew what she sounded like [[did she audition?) or they weren't particularly interested in her voice? Just wondering.

[luke]

I read in one of the books she did sing for Berry--possibly a Supremes tune and he reallly liked her voice. It has been said that a main factor was she sought Diana's advice on makeup, hair...when Cindy was a Bluebelle and visited the Supremes and Diana liked her. When she got the call she thought it was a joke and hung up the first time!

[mowest]

Cindy's physical resemblance to Florence was, supposedly, one reason she was chosen.
When she once subbed for Florence at the Hollywood Bowl, it is said, and no one was any the wiser.

[Roberta75]

Cindy's physical resemblance to Florence was, supposedly, one reason she was chosen.
When she once subbed for Florence at the Hollywood Bowl, it is said, and no one was any the wiser.

I've heard that too mowest. Poor, poor Flo.

[randy_russi]

Well, you have to take into consideration that at the Hollywood Bowl performance the audience wasn't all that close to
the stage. Cindy resembled Florence, however, how do we know no one knew? If anyone in the audience DID know,
who would they say something to? The box office?

[BayouMotownMan]

Diana started talking to Berry about Cindy in mid to late 1966. This was after Berry decided to hold off on pulling Diana out of the group when he wisely realized it was too soon. So by her staying, they had to start dealing with Flo's problems.

When Flo missed the New Orleans shows, which I believe was early 1967 [[I'd have to research the exact timeline), Cindy was first called. She knew for some time that she was being considered but never told her fellow Bluebelles at the insistence of Gordy and his advisers as there were legalities with contracts Cindy signed with Patti's group. She did audition for Berry. Then she subbed fro Flo and was put on salary. Then, the decision was made that Flo would play out the dates in Vegas and Cindy was to join. But, Flo never finished the Vegas gig. Cindy was sent to Vegas because this had been anticipated. She had pretty much been traveling with the group for a couple of months.

Cindy didn't resemble Flo in the face that much, but they were both voluptuous, tall, bigger girls. Cindy, I think, may have been prettier than Flo but not as good a singer. In any event, as long as she could handle the top harmony, which she had done with Sarah Dash, then that was good enough.

Andy Skurow could likely fill in a better timeline, but this is the way I remember it, from talking with Mary, Randy and others who were around at that time.

[marv2]

Well, you have to take into consideration that at the Hollywood Bowl performance the audience wasn't all that close to
the stage. Cindy resembled Florence, however, how do we know no one knew? If anyone in the audience DID know,
who would they say something to? The box office?

Randy you always make good sense. I think it was an exaggeration to say that no one knew the difference.....Jules Podell of the Copa sure knew the difference. Also, too much has been made of the resemblance between Florence and Cindy. To me, they look nothing alike. Perhaps they were close in height and build, but that's all.

[marv2]

Diana started talking to Berry about Cindy in mid to late 1966.

So Diane was trying to get rid of Flo as early as 1966? That wasn't too cool.......

[luke]

I have near heard or read anywhere that Cindy was called that early. She said she was called, then flew to Detroit, did Hollywood Bowl...

[Roberta75]

Diana started talking to Berry about Cindy in mid to late 1966. This was after Berry decided to hold off on pulling Diana out of the group when he wisely realized it was too soon. So by her staying, they had to start dealing with Flo's problems.

When Flo missed the New Orleans shows, which I believe was early 1967 [[I'd have to research the exact timeline), Cindy was first called. She knew for some time that she was being considered but never told her fellow Bluebelles at the insistence of Gordy and his advisers as there were legalities with contracts Cindy signed with Patti's group. She did audition for Berry. Then she subbed fro Flo and was put on salary. Then, the decision was made that Flo would play out the dates in Vegas and Cindy was to join. But, Flo never finished the Vegas gig. Cindy was sent to Vegas because this had been anticipated. She had pretty much been traveling with the group for a couple of months.

Cindy didn't resemble Flo in the face that much, but they were both voluptuous, tall, bigger girls. Cindy, I think, may have been prettier than Flo but not as good a singer. In any event, as long as she could handle the top harmony, which she had done with Sarah Dash, then that was good enough.

Andy Skurow could likely fill in a better timeline, but this is the way I remember it, from talking with Mary, Randy and others who were around at that time.

I think Cindy was an excellent choice to replace Florence in the Supremes. She brought a sense of glamor and fun to the group IMO.

Diana, Mary and Cindy is my favorite grouping of Supremes.

[BayouMotownMan]

Marv, where did I say "Diane" was trying to get rid of Flo as early as 1966? This is why you are so unpopular on boards.

Diana Ross NEVER wanted Flo to leave, if for no other reason than the repurcussion this change would have on a group that she was lead singer of. Diana sympathized with Flo, but no one, especially Gordy or his colleagues, had the capability of dealing with nor the patience to deal with it. The Supremes were white hot. They were in demand all over the world. I would have to say that Motown was as patient with Florence as they could economically be. When a person is angry, exhausted and on a substance, it is enormously difficult to deal with this.

Perhaps if you, Marv, would honor an artist's announced wish not to snap photos of her in concert, then you wouldn't be escorted out and be so bitter 20 years later.

[BayouMotownMan]

Luke, Cindy wasn't called that early, she was being spoken about is all. So was Barbara Randolph and a host of other ladies. Cindy was simply Diana's preference when those talks began. It was hoped that Flo would pull herself together. And she did off and on. But my the winter of 1967 it was becoming apparent that a change was going to have to happen. And it was risky.

[BayouMotownMan]

Gratefully I just figured out how to put people on ignore.

[dianesfan_1965]

Marv, where did I say "Diane" was trying to get rid of Flo as early as 1966? This is why you are so unpopular on boards.

Diana Ross NEVER wanted Flo to leave, if for no other reason than the repurcussion this change would have on a group that she was lead singer of. Diana sympathized with Flo, but no one, especially Gordy or his colleagues, had the capability of dealing with nor the patience to deal with it. The Supremes were white hot. They were in demand all over the world. I would have to say that Motown was as patient with Florence as they could economically be. When a person is angry, exhausted and on a substance, it is enormously difficult to deal with this.

Perhaps if you, Marv, would honor an artist's announced wish not to snap photos of her in concert, then you wouldn't be escorted out and be so bitter 20 years later.

[luke]

Why is such negativity necessary? Myself and many others including Ralph think highly of Marv. Here we go again. Maybe I will get attacked for saying this but one book says "Diana was almost giddy " when Flo left and Cindy came in room. She is also quoted in books as wanting Flo out earlier-for whatever reasons-earlier than 1967 but Berry told her to hold on.

[dianesfan_1965]

Why is such negativity necessary? Myself and many others including Ralph think highly of Marv. Here we go again. Maybe I will get attacked for saying this but one book says "Diana was almost giddy " when Flo left and Cindy came in room. She is also quoted in books as wanting Flo out earlier-for whatever reasons-earlier than 1967 but Berry told her to hold on.

[BayouMotownMan]

Luke, things are published in books to sell the books; it doesn't make them true.

Both Diana Ross and Berry Gordy were keenly aware of what a change in the group's lineup would mean to the group's future as well as Diana's. This had to be done with great care.

While Flo, in her last years was bitter towards Diana she also had nasty remarks about Mary. These are in her own words now available. It was Berry Gordy that she was most angry at, and not so much about putting her out but for not securing her future as she thought she should have.

In a situation like this, there is always going to be one person who is going to take the blame. Diana being the most visible, got that. I think it quite notable that the last person Florence Ballard spoke with, about two months before her death, was Diana. They had a long phone conversation and Diana wanted to help Flo get her career back on track. It was Diana Ross who tried to save Florence's house, with Flo's husband insisting the check be made out to him rather than the bank. Diana wisely refused this.

Decisions about the Supremes, and Diana Ross, during this period were entirely made by Berry Gordy. One of the reasons he wanted to pull Diana out as early as 1966 was because of the frictions in the group. Diana felt she deserved special considerations and Gordy gave her that. She was the voice that sold the records. Her look and image became the Supremes look and image. If Gordy had pulled her out after You Can't Hurry Love, he would have issued You Keep Me Hangin' On [[already done) as a Diana Ross record. It probably would have worked to a degree, but it was just entirely too soon. Therefore he opted to change the name to Diana Ross and the Supremes first. That was HIS decision, not Ross's. It was in 1962 that he decided Diana had the more commercial voice and all leads would be done by her. The other Supremes agreed. They had not bargained for the enormous success that would occur because of this. Could Diana have been more generous to her Supremes? Quite possibly. But these were three young ladies who never sat down and discussed very much between them for whatever mysterious reason. Berry Gordy is an astute businessman. He knew the money was on Ross. Their personal relationship did not occur until Motown toured Europe in 1965. This relationship bothered Florence intensely. Some say it is because she had had a previous relationship of her own with Gordy, but this has never been proven. More likely, she suspected Gordy's motives and was trying to protect her friend from heavy involvement.

As far as your defense of your friend, it is admirable but obviously not carefully researched. For over a decade he has spread malicious unfounded rumors about performers, usually in defense of his idol Mary Wilson, that were cruel and slanderous, such as what he has just done. He misquoted me. This individual has NEVER conducted an interview with these artists, done a tv show, does not have direct contact with these performers yet wants to give the illusion that he has. Until a month ago Mary Wilson did not know who he was until a representative of the FLOS obtained a photo of him, which he stupidly posted online, and now Mary knows who he is. This will change his dynamic with her greatly. All he ever did was show up backstage at her shows for autographs and a photo opp.

Diana, Mary and Florence were nearly worn to death in the mid-60s. Gordy worked them like dogs. Often it was a 7 day week, 18 hour days. It's a small miracle that all three survived with only the baggage they had. Florence Ballard never stopped caring about Diana Ross, which was why she decided not to go through with the book she was planning. They had their problems, but they also had an enduring affection for one another.

It is possible you know.

[rod_rick]

Didn't Florence state in her interview with Peter Benjamin that someone was being groomed to replace her as early as 1966? Just asking.

[bradsupremes]

They had their problems, but they also had an enduring affection for one another.

Exactly my thoughts! I feel this was the way it was between all of the ladies.

[juicefree20]

Though I honestly wish that the group had remained in tact, no matter who made the decision to put Diana upfront, taking into consideration the direction in which Berry was trying to go [[Pop, Supper Clubs, Vegas), placing sentiment aside, then I have to say that Berry made the right choice & history bears that out.

There may have been more soulful, more powerful singers out there & that can't be disputed by anyone gifted with the sense called hearing. However, when you think back to those days & the type of singers whom were playing Vegas, seen on The Ed Sullivan Show & Hollywood Palace & playing the Copacabana's of the world where the big money was & the long chitlin' circuit bus trips WEREN'T, you have to be honest & say that Diana's voice, enunciation & package fit perfectly.

The people with the big money loved entertainers like Diana & whether it's popular to say this or not, the truth is that back then there were a whole lot of ladies who could've blown Diana away vocally, I mean totally overpowered her without a mic in their hands & despite that, a whole lot of them came, then exited the scene just as quickly as they appeared.

I love Flo & Mary dearly & I adore them, but despite the fact that they had fine singing voices, Diana voice was distinctive & unique. It's really as simple as that & it took me years to accept that fact. I would guess that if we were calling the shots back then & basing our decisions on having a group that could be stars or having a group that could be MEGASTARS, unless we didn't like the idea of being able to keep the doors to our company open, or like the idea of struggling to pay the bills, more than likely we'd have followed the trail that led to the money. Especially when that road requires you to work as hard as you already were, but with the ability to play dates which paid you well, didn't require you to run yourself into the ground while zig-zagging across the country in buses & cars, sleeping in dives, while hardly getting enough food or sleep.

We can say whatever we want to say nearly 50 years after the fact, especially since we didn't have to make those types of decisions. I understand ambition & I understand ego & I understand that it couldn't have been easy for Mary & Flo to have to take a back seat to anyone. But purely from an business & economic standpoint, in the years 1963/1964, Diana was perfect for the vision that Berry had & it worked perfectly. And despite the fact that I've always been partial to Mary & Flo, I simply don't believe that they would've been as successful with either as lead over Diana. Not at that point in time. Remember, it wasn't until 3 years later that Aretha kicked down the Pop doors for a woman doing straight-up ballsy soul singing. I simply don't believe that the voices of Mary nor Flo were distinctive enough to grab that audience & spin it on its collective ear.

I used to think so & I'd always heard that was the case, but a listen to the CD The Supreme Florence Ballard answered that question for me. What I heard was a good enough singer, but I didn't hear anything that was much different than I heard from a lot of other female vocalists of that period. As much as I wanted to be knocked out by that CD, the truth was I just didn't hear spectacular & at times, barely good. I wasn't knocked off of my seat & after having read & heard so much about how I was going to be floored by what I'd hear, the sad truth is that I just didn't hear that & that was a huge disappointment.

I don't know if it was the lousy production qualities which had her purring like Mae West on some songs & others with arrangements which drained her of any semblance of spark or fire. Whatever, it was just a huge disappointment. While I was happy to have finally heard those songs & bought the CD for the sake of completion, I didn't hear that strong, fiery & sassy voice that I had been told about for more than 20 years.

And frankly, neither did anyone whom I played the music for who wasn't already a hardcore Supremes fan. No one could believe who it was whenever I played that CD & some told me that I had to be lying when I told them. It simply didn't go over well with anyone whom I knew & that too, was disappointing.

I know that it's damn near heresy to some, but I don't believe that the magic that was The Supremes could have been pulled off by anyone other than Diana on lead. Perhaps a few years later when that particular audience was ready to get a little hipper & embrace Soul music in its own right, perhaps it might've worked. But certainly not back in 1963 or 1964. At that point & time, her sound was the sound that was getting over where the big money was. Most deep-throated or straight R&B singers just weren't getting over with them, as they were accused of "shouting' or being "TOO Black" for that particular audience.

Again, just think about the majority of the Black singers whom were considered to be Pop or MOR & playing for that particular audience in those days. Sammy, Harry, Pearl, Louis, Nat...THOSE were the singers who you always saw on Sullivan, Hollywood Palace & getting the gigs in those clubs & making the money. How many straight R&B belters were getting those types of gigs back then?

I'll wait...

It was a business decision & history records it as the right call at the right time.

So as for the charge that anyone was sold-out, I simply don't agree with that. Berry was shooting for the stars & he definitely succeeded. I guess that the phrase is not necessarily realistic, but rather totally subjective.

Keeping it real, I've seen people sell people out right here on this forum for less than the price of a Happy Meal.

[ajk93]

Keeping it real, I've seen people sell people out right here on this forum for less than the price of a Happy Meal.

HAHAHA!!! I loved that Juice!

Your entire post was very well spoken! I like your style of thinking!!

[ajk93]

Gratefully I just figured out how to put people on ignore.

Whatever hang-ups you have on other members do not to be brought into our conversations about the music.

[motony]

Juice is right and ofcourse history proves it. I don't think Florence Ballards records were made with her best interest[[ABC)I think they were done to satisfy a contract.Wasn;t her husband her manager?Mary Wells got rid of Herman Griffin, Aretha got rid of Ted White.I don't think singers letting their spouse handle their profesional career is a good idea.

[juicefree20]

AJK

Good evening & thank you very much. Sadly, in both cases, I've discovered this to be true.

What I've never understood is how the fans of this much beloved group could harbor such hatred for ANY member of the group.

Maybe it's simply that I was 4 years-old when they finally scored that first big hit & simply was too young to be caught up with favorites. But as a child I liked Mary, then Flo & then Diana. But that was more a visual thing because those women were gorgeous & even at that age I would've loved to have been hugged by either of them.

For years I heard all of the stories about who did what to whom, whom was horrible & I formed opinions based on that. But when I became an adult, I understood that there are 3 sides to every story. And after discovering that most of the feel-good stories that we had been fed about groups, movie stars & athletes were anything but the truth, I began to understand that just because someone makes accusations against another person doesn't necessarily make it the truth. I've learned that the fact that I know & like someone doesn't mean that they won't lie to me or tell me a half-truth.

And another truth is that while so many are praying for a reunion, they fail to understand that their constant bickering, picking old sores & constantly playing one side against the other virtually guarantees that there will NEVER be the reunion that they so desperately hope for. They're so consumed with hate for their "enemy" who are fans of the "other side", that they can't grasp the fact that they're working as their own worst enemy. Frankly, I don't even think that they care. Just so long as they can get off their insults & blaming folks for things that not only happened 40 years ago, but truthfully didn't affect them in the least, it's all good.

I would hazard a guess that the constant bickering has set back any hopes for a possible reunion at least 20 years.

And that possibility won't prevent even one future argument.

[jobeterob]

Very thoughtful posts Bayou and Juice.

I always thought the Florence Ballard album was pretty weak and definitely not something Motown would ever have released on anyone. Some of it was "small bar" or "karaoke" quality - like It's Not Unusual.

Did any of you listen to Andy Skurow last week on Nightflight? He talked about the "salacious" talk about The Supremes and how he avoids that and how all 9 Supremes are very good people? And he also said the name was "Diana" in 1960 and that other than Mary, Smokey and Berry, it is not appropriate to be calling her "Diane".

Juice is totally right about the fans and these negative posts having dashed any chance of a reunion. They've also dashed all hopes of awards being given to the Supremes as a group. Some of the Supremes have family members that would now vigorously oppose Diana being involved in any thing like that. And Mary Wilson has asked that this kind of talk stop as well.

[carlo]

Whatever hang-ups you have on other members do not to be brought into our conversations about the music.

Well said. In my opinion, it's fine to have a simple disagreement, but to add in all sorts of other things such as "this is why you're so unpopular on this forum" or "you were kicked out of a Diana Ross concert" is really over the top.

[marv2]

Marv, where did I say "Diane" was trying to get rid of Flo as early as 1966? This is why you are so unpopular on boards.

Diana Ross NEVER wanted Flo to leave, if for no other reason than the repurcussion this change would have on a group that she was lead singer of. Diana sympathized with Flo, but no one, especially Gordy or his colleagues, had the capability of dealing with nor the patience to deal with it. The Supremes were white hot. They were in demand all over the world. I would have to say that Motown was as patient with Florence as they could economically be. When a person is angry, exhausted and on a substance, it is enormously difficult to deal with this.

Perhaps if you, Marv, would honor an artist's announced wish not to snap photos of her in concert, then you wouldn't be escorted out and be so bitter 20 years later.

That was a bad idea for Diane to try to encourage Mr. Gordy to get rid of Florence in 1966. The Supremes never really recovered from it. Are you serious? I don't even go to Diane's shows to be escorted anywhere. However I wished that had've happened, I would have been rolling in dough! LOL!

[marv2]

Why is such negativity necessary? Myself and many others including Ralph think highly of Marv. Here we go again. Maybe I will get attacked for saying this but one book says "Diana was almost giddy " when Flo left and Cindy came in room. She is also quoted in books as wanting Flo out earlier-for whatever reasons-earlier than 1967 but Berry told her to hold on.

Thank you Luke and I always enjoy your posts and the threads you start. They are always interesting. I don't know why this guy always attempts slur me here. I've been on this forum at least nine years and enjoy most of the people I communicate with at SDF. This guy just seems to have a bad disposition along with his handful of buddies.

[marv2]

Why is such negativity necessary? Myself and many others including Ralph think highly of Marv. Here we go again. Maybe I will get attacked for saying this but one book says "Diana was almost giddy " when Flo left and Cindy came in room. She is also quoted in books as wanting Flo out earlier-for whatever reasons-earlier than 1967 but Berry told her to hold on.

Oh and you are right! Diane nearly had an embolism she was so happy and excited that Flo would no longer be in the group. That is part of what caused her and Mary to fall out somewhat. It was also quickly known around Detroit what the deal was.....

[Roberta75]

Though I honestly wish that the group had remained in tact, no matter who made the decision to put Diana upfront, taking into consideration the direction in which Berry was trying to go [[Pop, Supper Clubs, Vegas), placing sentiment aside, then I have to say that Berry made the right choice & history bears that out.

There may have been more soulful, more powerful singers out there & that can't be disputed by anyone gifted with the sense called hearing. However, when you think back to those days & the type of singers whom were playing Vegas, seen on The Ed Sullivan Show & Hollywood Palace & playing the Copacabana's of the world where the big money was & the long chitlin' circuit bus trips WEREN'T, you have to be honest & say that Diana's voice, enunciation & package fit perfectly.

The people with the big money loved entertainers like Diana & whether it's popular to say this or not, the truth is that back then there were a whole lot of ladies who could've blown Diana away vocally, I mean totally overpowered her without a mic in their hands & despite that, a whole lot of them came, then exited the scene just as quickly as they appeared.

I love Flo & Mary dearly & I adore them, but despite the fact that they had fine singing voices, Diana voice was distinctive & unique. It's really as simple as that & it took me years to accept that fact. I would guess that if we were calling the shots back then & basing our decisions on having a group that could be stars or having a group that could be MEGASTARS, unless we didn't like the idea of being able to keep the doors to our company open, or like the idea of struggling to pay the bills, more than likely we'd have followed the trail that led to the money. Especially when that road requires you to work as hard as you already were, but with the ability to play dates which paid you well, didn't require you to run yourself into the ground while zig-zagging across the country in buses & cars, sleeping in dives, while hardly getting enough food or sleep.

We can say whatever we want to say nearly 50 years after the fact, especially since we didn't have to make those types of decisions. I understand ambition & I understand ego & I understand that it couldn't have been easy for Mary & Flo to have to take a back seat to anyone. But purely from an business & economic standpoint, in the years 1963/1964, Diana was perfect for the vision that Berry had & it worked perfectly. And despite the fact that I've always been partial to Mary & Flo, I simply don't believe that they would've been as successful with either as lead over Diana. Not at that point in time. Remember, it wasn't until 3 years later that Aretha kicked down the Pop doors for a woman doing straight-up ballsy soul singing. I simply don't believe that the voices of Mary nor Flo were distinctive enough to grab that audience & spin it on its collective ear.

I used to think so & I'd always heard that was the case, but a listen to the CD The Supreme Florence Ballard answered that question for me. What I heard was a good enough singer, but I didn't hear anything that was much different than I heard from a lot of other female vocalists of that period. As much as I wanted to be knocked out by that CD, the truth was I just didn't hear spectacular & at times, barely good. I wasn't knocked off of my seat & after having read & heard so much about how I was going to be floored by what I'd hear, the sad truth is that I just didn't hear that & that was a huge disappointment.

I don't know if it was the lousy production qualities which had her purring like Mae West on some songs & others with arrangements which drained her of any semblance of spark or fire. Whatever, it was just a huge disappointment. While I was happy to have finally heard those songs & bought the CD for the sake of completion, I didn't hear that strong, fiery & sassy voice that I had been told about for more than 20 years.

And frankly, neither did anyone whom I played the music for who wasn't already a hardcore Supremes fan. No one could believe who it was whenever I played that CD & some told me that I had to be lying when I told them. It simply didn't go over well with anyone whom I knew & that too, was disappointing.

I know that it's damn near heresy to some, but I don't believe that the magic that was The Supremes could have been pulled off by anyone other than Diana on lead. Perhaps a few years later when that particular audience was ready to get a little hipper & embrace Soul music in its own right, perhaps it might've worked. But certainly not back in 1963 or 1964. At that point & time, her sound was the sound that was getting over where the big money was. Most deep-throated or straight R&B singers just weren't getting over with them, as they were accused of "shouting' or being "TOO Black" for that particular audience.

Again, just think about the majority of the Black singers whom were considered to be Pop or MOR & playing for that particular audience in those days. Sammy, Harry, Pearl, Louis, Nat...THOSE were the singers who you always saw on Sullivan, Hollywood Palace & getting the gigs in those clubs & making the money. How many straight R&B belters were getting those types of gigs back then?

I'll wait...

It was a business decision & history records it as the right call at the right time.

So as for the charge that anyone was sold-out, I simply don't agree with that. Berry was shooting for the stars & he definitely succeeded. I guess that the phrase is not necessarily realistic, but rather totally subjective.

Keeping it real, I've seen people sell people out right here on this forum for less than the price of a Happy Meal.

Very well said Juice.

Fondly Roberta

[carlo]

Juice is totally right about the fans and these negative posts having dashed any chance of a reunion. They've also dashed all hopes of awards being given to the Supremes as a group. Some of the Supremes have family members that would now vigorously oppose Diana being involved in any thing like that. And Mary Wilson has asked that this kind of talk stop as well.

I disagree. While the negativity created by the fans is all too ridiculous, I don't believe it is the reason why there are no reunions or no awards/tributes. In my opinion, most of the drama and craziness that is associated with Supremes fans only occurs on the internet for the most part. I usually make a conscious effort to meet fans at the different concerts I have attended and most are every day civilized people. I guarantee most of them would not say the things they post on the internet in public. These overzealous fans you see on the internet make things seem worse than they really are. They only account for a small fraction of the fan base, which is why I believe that they are not the main reason for dashing all chances of a reunion or any sort of honourary awards or tributes.

I've been to plenty of concerts and I've never seen a Diana Ross fan and Mary Wilson fan getting into a full out physical altercation or argument. Most people are nice. Some have expressed their dislike for one Supreme or the other in conversations I have had with them, but there's never any exchange of harsh words or anything of the sort. Just speaking from my own experience...

[Roberta75]

Luke, things are published in books to sell the books; it doesn't make them true.

Both Diana Ross and Berry Gordy were keenly aware of what a change in the group's lineup would mean to the group's future as well as Diana's. This had to be done with great care.

While Flo, in her last years was bitter towards Diana she also had nasty remarks about Mary. These are in her own words now available. It was Berry Gordy that she was most angry at, and not so much about putting her out but for not securing her future as she thought she should have.

In a situation like this, there is always going to be one person who is going to take the blame. Diana being the most visible, got that. I think it quite notable that the last person Florence Ballard spoke with, about two months before her death, was Diana. They had a long phone conversation and Diana wanted to help Flo get her career back on track. It was Diana Ross who tried to save Florence's house, with Flo's husband insisting the check be made out to him rather than the bank. Diana wisely refused this.

Decisions about the Supremes, and Diana Ross, during this period were entirely made by Berry Gordy. One of the reasons he wanted to pull Diana out as early as 1966 was because of the frictions in the group. Diana felt she deserved special considerations and Gordy gave her that. She was the voice that sold the records. Her look and image became the Supremes look and image. If Gordy had pulled her out after You Can't Hurry Love, he would have issued You Keep Me Hangin' On [[already done) as a Diana Ross record. It probably would have worked to a degree, but it was just entirely too soon. Therefore he opted to change the name to Diana Ross and the Supremes first. That was HIS decision, not Ross's. It was in 1962 that he decided Diana had the more commercial voice and all leads would be done by her. The other Supremes agreed. They had not bargained for the enormous success that would occur because of this. Could Diana have been more generous to her Supremes? Quite possibly. But these were three young ladies who never sat down and discussed very much between them for whatever mysterious reason. Berry Gordy is an astute businessman. He knew the money was on Ross. Their personal relationship did not occur until Motown toured Europe in 1965. This relationship bothered Florence intensely. Some say it is because she had had a previous relationship of her own with Gordy, but this has never been proven. More likely, she suspected Gordy's motives and was trying to protect her friend from heavy involvement.

As far as your defense of your friend, it is admirable but obviously not carefully researched. For over a decade he has spread malicious unfounded rumors about performers, usually in defense of his idol Mary Wilson, that were cruel and slanderous, such as what he has just done. He misquoted me. This individual has NEVER conducted an interview with these artists, done a tv show, does not have direct contact with these performers yet wants to give the illusion that he has. Until a month ago Mary Wilson did not know who he was until a representative of the FLOS obtained a photo of him, which he stupidly posted online, and now Mary knows who he is. This will change his dynamic with her greatly. All he ever did was show up backstage at her shows for autographs and a photo opp.

Diana, Mary and Florence were nearly worn to death in the mid-60s. Gordy worked them like dogs. Often it was a 7 day week, 18 hour days. It's a small miracle that all three survived with only the baggage they had. Florence Ballard never stopped caring about Diana Ross, which was why she decided not to go through with the book she was planning. They had their problems, but they also had an enduring affection for one another.

It is possible you know.

Bravo Rick. Bravo. Keep spreading the truth.

[Roberta75]

I disagree. While the negativity created by the fans is all too ridiculous, I don't believe it is the reason why there are no reunions or no awards/tributes. In my opinion, most of the drama and craziness that is associated with Supremes fans only occurs on the internet for the most part. I have met a lot of fans at the different concerts I have attended and most are every day civilized people. I guarantee most of them would not say the things they post on the internet in public. These overzealous fans you see on the internet make things seem worse than they really are. They only account for a small fraction of the fan base, which is why I believe that they are not the main reason for dashing all chances of a reunion or any sort of honourary awards or tributes.

And yet you constantly defend one of the more overzealous fans here who wouldn't know civility if it hit him between the eyes. Astounding. Simply astounding.

[Roberta75]

Well said. In my opinion, it's fine to have a simple disagreement, but to add in all sorts of other things such as "this is why you're so unpopular on this forum" or "you were kicked out of a Diana Ross concert" is really over the top.

Well it certainly explains the said persons constant viciousness towards Diana Ross.

[marv2]

Luke, things are published in books to sell the books; it doesn't make them true.

Both Diana Ross and Berry Gordy were keenly aware of what a change in the group's lineup would mean to the group's future as well as Diana's. This had to be done with great care.

While Flo, in her last years was bitter towards Diana she also had nasty remarks about Mary. These are in her own words now available. It was Berry Gordy that she was most angry at, and not so much about putting her out but for not securing her future as she thought she should have.

In a situation like this, there is always going to be one person who is going to take the blame. Diana being the most visible, got that. I think it quite notable that the last person Florence Ballard spoke with, about two months before her death, was Diana. They had a long phone conversation and Diana wanted to help Flo get her career back on track. It was Diana Ross who tried to save Florence's house, with Flo's husband insisting the check be made out to him rather than the bank. Diana wisely refused this.

Decisions about the Supremes, and Diana Ross, during this period were entirely made by Berry Gordy. One of the reasons he wanted to pull Diana out as early as 1966 was because of the frictions in the group. Diana felt she deserved special considerations and Gordy gave her that. She was the voice that sold the records. Her look and image became the Supremes look and image. If Gordy had pulled her out after You Can't Hurry Love, he would have issued You Keep Me Hangin' On [[already done) as a Diana Ross record. It probably would have worked to a degree, but it was just entirely too soon. Therefore he opted to change the name to Diana Ross and the Supremes first. That was HIS decision, not Ross's. It was in 1962 that he decided Diana had the more commercial voice and all leads would be done by her. The other Supremes agreed. They had not bargained for the enormous success that would occur because of this. Could Diana have been more generous to her Supremes? Quite possibly. But these were three young ladies who never sat down and discussed very much between them for whatever mysterious reason. Berry Gordy is an astute businessman. He knew the money was on Ross. Their personal relationship did not occur until Motown toured Europe in 1965. This relationship bothered Florence intensely. Some say it is because she had had a previous relationship of her own with Gordy, but this has never been proven. More likely, she suspected Gordy's motives and was trying to protect her friend from heavy involvement.

As far as your defense of your friend, it is admirable but obviously not carefully researched. For over a decade he has spread malicious unfounded rumors about performers, usually in defense of his idol Mary Wilson, that were cruel and slanderous, such as what he has just done. He misquoted me. This individual has NEVER conducted an interview with these artists, done a tv show, does not have direct contact with these performers yet wants to give the illusion that he has. Until a month ago Mary Wilson did not know who he was until a representative of the FLOS obtained a photo of him, which he stupidly posted online, and now Mary knows who he is. This will change his dynamic with her greatly. All he ever did was show up backstage at her shows for autographs and a photo opp.

Diana, Mary and Florence were nearly worn to death in the mid-60s. Gordy worked them like dogs. Often it was a 7 day week, 18 hour days. It's a small miracle that all three survived with only the baggage they had. Florence Ballard never stopped caring about Diana Ross, which was why she decided not to go through with the book she was planning. They had their problems, but they also had an enduring affection for one another.

It is possible you know.

Are you serious? Is Diane paying you to write this stuff? Why do you not mention the 5 pieces of blank paper that Diana Ross' lawyers wanted Florence to sign before releasing any money?

But more importantly this nonsense and made up BS you keep telling your buddies about ME and I don't even know you. I do know you have a very bad reputation and I am not talking about with your little fan club you brought with you to this forum. First you don't me or who I know. It must kill you that NO ONE is going share their true business or info about friendships and long standing relationships they built over the years with you.... A stranger! That includes celebrities! Obtain a photo of me? Shit there have been all kinds of pictures of me posted right in here at SDF and in the group I moderate. Now you know I would not come to a gunfight with a knife....do you feel lucky or should I unload everything about you here? My advice is that you'd better stick to just talking about what you think you know about the Supremes and leave the hard stuff alone because you will be playing with a fire you will not be able to put out. Why I am being nice to you is beyond me at this moment!

[marv2]

Juice is right and ofcourse history proves it. I don't think Florence Ballards records were made with her best interest[[ABC)I think they were done to satisfy a contract.Wasn;t her husband her manager?Mary Wells got rid of Herman Griffin, Aretha got rid of Ted White.I don't think singers letting their spouse handle their profesional career is a good idea.

Florence was produced all wrong at ABC Records. It also did not help that she was pregnant during those sessions.

[marv2]

Well it certainly explains the said persons constant viciousness towards Diana Ross.

He [[Bayouman) was referring to me and he was lying about me. Now if I were to tell the truth in this open forum about this guy and why he has such a chip on his shoulder when it comes to me, not many would be able to take it and this thread would get zapped! If I told the truth with the details,[[and it has nothing at all to do with the Supremes, Ross, Motown ...any of it), you'd freak completely out! I am sure of that! .

Bayouman, so what you want to do?

[carlo]

And yet you constantly defend one of the more overzealous fans here who wouldn't know civility if it hit him between the eyes. Astounding. Simply astounding.

Uh huh. Whatever you say.

You call it "defending", I call it being fair when it's warranted.

Roberta, if I may suggest from one Christian to another...just let it go. Try to forgive this person and move on...like I am.

[rod_rick]

Though I honestly wish that the group had remained in tact, no matter who made the decision to put Diana upfront, taking into consideration the direction in which Berry was trying to go [[Pop, Supper Clubs, Vegas), placing sentiment aside, then I have to say that Berry made the right choice & history bears that out.

There may have been more soulful, more powerful singers out there & that can't be disputed by anyone gifted with the sense called hearing. However, when you think back to those days & the type of singers whom were playing Vegas, seen on The Ed Sullivan Show & Hollywood Palace & playing the Copacabana's of the world where the big money was & the long chitlin' circuit bus trips WEREN'T, you have to be honest & say that Diana's voice, enunciation & package fit perfectly.

The people with the big money loved entertainers like Diana & whether it's popular to say this or not, the truth is that back then there were a whole lot of ladies who could've blown Diana away vocally, I mean totally overpowered her without a mic in their hands & despite that, a whole lot of them came, then exited the scene just as quickly as they appeared.

I love Flo & Mary dearly & I adore them, but despite the fact that they had fine singing voices, Diana voice was distinctive & unique. It's really as simple as that & it took me years to accept that fact. I would guess that if we were calling the shots back then & basing our decisions on having a group that could be stars or having a group that could be MEGASTARS, unless we didn't like the idea of being able to keep the doors to our company open, or like the idea of struggling to pay the bills, more than likely we'd have followed the trail that led to the money. Especially when that road requires you to work as hard as you already were, but with the ability to play dates which paid you well, didn't require you to run yourself into the ground while zig-zagging across the country in buses & cars, sleeping in dives, while hardly getting enough food or sleep.

We can say whatever we want to say nearly 50 years after the fact, especially since we didn't have to make those types of decisions. I understand ambition & I understand ego & I understand that it couldn't have been easy for Mary & Flo to have to take a back seat to anyone. But purely from an business & economic standpoint, in the years 1963/1964, Diana was perfect for the vision that Berry had & it worked perfectly. And despite the fact that I've always been partial to Mary & Flo, I simply don't believe that they would've been as successful with either as lead over Diana. Not at that point in time. Remember, it wasn't until 3 years later that Aretha kicked down the Pop doors for a woman doing straight-up ballsy soul singing. I simply don't believe that the voices of Mary nor Flo were distinctive enough to grab that audience & spin it on its collective ear.

I used to think so & I'd always heard that was the case, but a listen to the CD The Supreme Florence Ballard answered that question for me. What I heard was a good enough singer, but I didn't hear anything that was much different than I heard from a lot of other female vocalists of that period. As much as I wanted to be knocked out by that CD, the truth was I just didn't hear spectacular & at times, barely good. I wasn't knocked off of my seat & after having read & heard so much about how I was going to be floored by what I'd hear, the sad truth is that I just didn't hear that & that was a huge disappointment.

I don't know if it was the lousy production qualities which had her purring like Mae West on some songs & others with arrangements which drained her of any semblance of spark or fire. Whatever, it was just a huge disappointment. While I was happy to have finally heard those songs & bought the CD for the sake of completion, I didn't hear that strong, fiery & sassy voice that I had been told about for more than 20 years.

And frankly, neither did anyone whom I played the music for who wasn't already a hardcore Supremes fan. No one could believe who it was whenever I played that CD & some told me that I had to be lying when I told them. It simply didn't go over well with anyone whom I knew & that too, was disappointing.

I know that it's damn near heresy to some, but I don't believe that the magic that was The Supremes could have been pulled off by anyone other than Diana on lead. Perhaps a few years later when that particular audience was ready to get a little hipper & embrace Soul music in its own right, perhaps it might've worked. But certainly not back in 1963 or 1964. At that point & time, her sound was the sound that was getting over where the big money was. Most deep-throated or straight R&B singers just weren't getting over with them, as they were accused of "shouting' or being "TOO Black" for that particular audience.

Again, just think about the majority of the Black singers whom were considered to be Pop or MOR & playing for that particular audience in those days. Sammy, Harry, Pearl, Louis, Nat...THOSE were the singers who you always saw on Sullivan, Hollywood Palace & getting the gigs in those clubs & making the money. How many straight R&B belters were getting those types of gigs back then?

I'll wait...

It was a business decision & history records it as the right call at the right time.

So as for the charge that anyone was sold-out, I simply don't agree with that. Berry was shooting for the stars & he definitely succeeded. I guess that the phrase is not necessarily realistic, but rather totally subjective.

Keeping it real, I've seen people sell people out right here on this forum for less than the price of a Happy Meal.

Juice
You said what I felt about Flo Ballard solo recording. The best thing I heard from Florence was her version of "Silent Night". Production has a lot to do with the recording process, not just voice. Aretha did quite a few albums for Columbia records that didn't do much. Once she got with Atlantic records, with right production, Aretha blew up. I've always felt that if Diana was not the lead singer, it would have been Mary. Mary Wilson's sound was simular to Mary Wells. It's funny how, as much as Florence was touted as the best singer in the group, but yet it was Diana and Mary on the first Primette recordings.

[Roberta75]

Uh huh. Whatever you say.

You call it "defending", I call it being fair when it's warranted.

Roberta, if I may suggest from one Christian to another...just let it go. Try to forgive this person and move on...like I am.

As a fellow Christian I do forgive this person Carlo. I saw the hateful cruel threatening homophobic comments this person wrote on youtube that were posted here earlier this summer before the thread got deleted and yet I forgive him.

My Christian beliefs extend to him forgiveness, happiness and hopefully great peace someday. I just get astounded by all the free passes he gets here. Sorry but I do. We have to answer for our actions Carlo.

Roberta

[juicefree20]

Thank you motony, Rob & Roberta.

Rod_Rick, Thank you. you know, what that LP really serves to illustrate to me is that it seems to undermine the idea that motown could've taken that music, stuck anyone's voice on it & The Supremes still would've become as huge as they did. I hate to say it but the truth seems to be that the success of the Supremes was due to the music & arrangements being specifically tailored to the voice of Diana & the great harmonies of Mary & Flo & elegant, sophisticated aura of the ladies as a unit.

It's similar to making a great dish. Mix the proper ingredients together & you have something truly wonderful. However, sometimes when you change just one of the ingredients, that same meal loses its flair & that quality which makes it special. Considering that The Supremes sound was constructed around the unique voice of Diana, I believe that that is what separated The Supremes from the pack. There were many excellent lead singers out there, some very spectacular voices out there. But it's completely possible that considering where Berry was trying to head, as well as the tonal quality of the lead vocalists whom were most popular in the setting that he was aiming at, he could've put Flo, Mary or even Aretha on lead & have totally crapped out.

No matter how great the voices of Mary & Flo were, they simply werent as distinctive as that of Diana's. Now if one can be totally objective, I would ask but one question, if you closed your eyes & listened to 100 other vocalists of that era, would you really be able to distinguish between them & Mary or Flo, or would you say that the majority of the 102 of them would have a similar vocal quality? Now close your eyes again with those same 100 women & as regards enunciation, timing & those very tangible intangibles [[if that makes sense) tell me whom amongst them sounded like Diana Ross.

Despite their formidable vocal skills & pleasant qualities, there simply wasn't enough of a distinction which separated them from the other ladies whom were plying their trade during those times. There's a certain sameness about most of them. And that's the key to it all. No one else sounded quite like Diana & that fact shouldn't be a call to war, nor should it be regarded as a slight to Mary nor Flo. All that it means is that Diana had the sound that Berry was looking for at that particular point in time & she had the right sound to pull off what he wanted at exactly the right time.

And that shouldn't be regarded as a slap to either Mary nor Flo, but rather as a function borne out of necessity due to the realities of that particular period of time.

One of the others may have had a sound which was a little too demure that wouldn't have cut through the mix in quite the same way. Or perhaps the other would've overpowered the subtlety of the mix. Of that, I guess that we'll never know. But what we do know is that 3 young girls from Detroit took the world from storm, a fact which no matter how much I wanted to marry Mary or how foxy that I thought that Flo was [[yeah, I wanted to marry her too), their phenomenal success would indicate that Berry made the right choice as regards what he was trying to acheive. Here it is nearly 50 years later & they're still being discussed, they opened doors which had previously been closed to equally talented ladies AND men.

Hell, I say that rather than arguing about them, we should be rejoicing over their success. A success story which was unpredecented & rarely, if ever repeated. And nearly 50 years later, their impact hasn't been surpassed & as evidenced through groups such as EnVogue, SWV, Destiny's Child & even MoKenStef, their influence hasn't waned. Their DNA is firmly stamped on every girl group who's come along after them.

By any measure of the word, I call that a success.

[juicefree20]

Carlo,

Let me try to explain further by giving you scenarios which serve to cause friends & even families to be separated, all because of the power of a body part which The Bible identifies as one of the most dangerous things in existence...the tongue.

People lose jobs because of the power of the tongue & the spoken word. People divorce, friends are lost, family members become estranged & often, people even have lost their lives due to the power of the tongue. A few examples for you to consider...

How often have you seen one friend or acquaintance take an orherwise innocent remark & blow it out of proportion? How often have you seen that when someone attempted to be a peacemaker, that ONE individual drege up the oroginal situationwith the sole reason of keeping those fires burning? We've seen that scenario played out here quite often & in the real world, it often has terrible consequences.

Have you ever known sisters, brothers or cousins whom have petty gripes that were continually stoked by other family members or friends? Instead of trying to bring peace to people whom share the same blood, these people constantly pick at old wounds by constantly reminding the person how horrible the person treated them & why they should NEVER forget, much less forgive the offense, no matter how minor.

How many times have you read about someone being beaten to a pulp, if not killed because of some gossip & he-said, she-said nonsense? Then too, I think back to the days when I was a kid in a playground, when kids had a minor disagreement that they really didn't want to fight about, with that one damn voice in the background egging them on. That was the kid who when things weren't escalating quickly enough would then either push one of the kids into the other, or tell one of the kids to hit him so that he could punch the other kid, hopefully getting the fight started in the process.

Well, that how most of these arguments are. Imagine that you're a family member or a friend of either Diana Ross or Mary Wilson & imagine that you read things just to see what people are saying & preferable, you're hoping that it's good. But in the process, you're reading a bunch of people reading about how your mother, sister or friend did what to whom, how they're terrible & so on & so forth. How do you think that goes over?

Then on the other side, you have another group of people who constantly bring up what so & so said in their book & how so & so trashed your friend or relative publically. If you were to continually read this & if the person being talkedabout got wind of it, fans at live ashows notwithstanding, do you truly believe that this has no negative residual effect? If even on a subconsious level, do you really believe that years of processing this kind of talk & having it as a constant reminder doesn't attach itself to a person's consciousness in some shape, form or fashion?

If you believe that, then it defies the way that most of us are wired, as our natural tendency seems to be to forget the 99 good things that people say about us, but we take to heart & never forget that ONE negative thing that is said about us. Observation has shown me that that seems to be the way that most of us are wired.

Then you also have to consider that the behavior which you see in concert is just that...behavior at a concert. Everyone who was in attendance at the shows of which you speak were there to see one or the other, not both. As such, I would expect Diana Ross fans to come to a show as Diana Ross fans & Mary Wilson fans to attend her shows as Mary Wilson fans. The twain doesn't necessarily meet on those occasions becuase the people attending the shows of either know exactly what theyre coming to see & it's not a reunion.

Remember the saying that the squeakiest wheel gets the oil? Well while it's the genteel & decent fans whom are appreciated, don't kid yourself for even one moment that the arrows of the "overzealous" & "rabid" fans don't hit their mark, because they do far more than you may imagine.

It's hard for most of us to move forward when there's a lot of people whom have made it their appointed duty to make sure that you'll never be able to completely divorce yourself from the past. There seem to be a lot of fans & not just those of The Supremes, as I've seen the same viciousness directed at Stephanie Mills, Jody Watley & other members of Shalamar from opposing factions of Shalamar fans. I've seen the same level of vitriol directed toward Val Young & both camps of Klymaxx from their respective fans, as well as JoJo from the opposing factions of The Mary Jane Girls, to name but a few. So the Supremes are certainly not alone here.

And in each of the cases that I've mentioned above, you can bet that the behavior of the fans has only served to make the cuts just a little deeper & the resultant wounds just a little more infected. And you'll also notice that none of these groups are likely to ever walk onto a stage as a unit ever again, not even for money. And I can tell you that with the same certainty that I can tell you that a 100 degree day is hot.

Aside from the fact that life often leads us down different roads, we all have different visions that we want to pursue, the truth is that old slights die hard & are rarely, if ever forgotten. Especially if you feel as though your career & life was negatively altered forever & that someone is responsible for "robbing" you of our just rewards. And how much more difficult would it be if that same person has gone on to even greater success, or perhaps didn't?

What I'm saying is that festering wounds either untreated, or constantly picked at, take longer to heal or can become gangrenous. And it seems to me that everytime that it seems as though there may be some thawing of the ice, someone pops open their big mouths & the crap starts all over again. It'ssometimes hard to move into the future when so many people want to drag you back into your past.

I still believe that all of this nonsense has had a cumulative effect which has been decidedly negative & harmfull. And if you honestly believe that these folks DON'T pay attention to what is said about them, or that people whom they know don't monitor the buzz, then I'm telling you that you'd better think again. More people keep tabs on these types of forums than you may be led to believe. And very little gets past them without being relayed in some form orfashion to their friend or relative.

And memories can be as long as that of elephants, just as words can be quite hurtful & the passage of years doesn't reduce their sting, not one bit.

[juicefree20]

Let me offer up one suggestion which may help these discussions run a bit smoothly. While i dont believe for one moment that they'll be considered, it's merely food for thought.

Perhaps we'd have a lot less friction if we'd simply focus our responses on the points rased during a particular discussion. Constantly raising old arguments do nothing to advance these discussions & I believe that it leads to a complete inability to discuss anything effectively & often lead to some pretty good points being lost amongst the fighting.

Is it remotely possible for there to simply be a discussion of the thread without the need to resort to individual personal attacks & simply stick to the discussion-at-hand?

By now we all have a pretty good idea of whom said what about whom, whom did what to whom & constantly referring to past practices & deeds only guarantees that yet another potentially thoughtful & informative discussion will slip downthe tubes...

AGAIN

So if we could simply refrain from taking potshots at one another, as well as referring to what Supreme did what to whom, we could one day have a serious & thoughtful discussion about this group of young ladies who accomplished things far beyone their wildest dreams.

We often speak about how groundbreaking The Supremes were & that's nothing but the truth. But I have to say that I find it more than a little ironic that almost every discussion about 3 young ladies whom brought the world together through their music & bridged such a huge gap, serves as grist that divides a segment of a forum consisting of people whom love them damn near every time.

Am I the only one who sees the irony in this?

Either way, despite any previous wrongs done by anyone, i'd rather have proof in the archives that it was them whom fired the first shot in order to support my position about them, than to be the one whom fires the first shot by being the first one to bring up their past misdeeds if it wasn't done at that particular time in that particular thread.

What I'm saying is that it's one thing to call someone out right where & when they commit an offense. In that case, whatever they get, they get & rightfully so. But to dredge up those offenses when they aren't being committed, or were done in the past isn't helpful. In a court of law, that would be akin to double jeopardy & the law doesn't support that.

I understand the players & I understand the level of mutual dislike.After 8 years, I totally get it. But putting all of that aside for even a brief moment, does anything that I said in this post sound reasonable?

[ejluther]

I used to think so & I'd always heard that was the case, but a listen to the CD The Supreme Florence Ballard answered that question for me. What I heard was a good enough singer, but I didn't hear anything that was much different than I heard from a lot of other female vocalists of that period. As much as I wanted to be knocked out by that CD, the truth was I just didn't hear spectacular & at times, barely good. I wasn't knocked off of my seat & after having read & heard so much about how I was going to be floored by what I'd hear, the sad truth is that I just didn't hear that & that was a huge disappointment...I didn't hear that strong, fiery & sassy voice that I had been told about for more than 20 years....I know that it's damn near heresy to some, but I don't believe that the magic that was The Supremes could have been pulled off by anyone other than Diana on lead.

Very nicely put and my experience/thoughts, too. And while I think your advice is also nicely put, I'm afraid my limited experience here tells me that you're preaching to the choir and that it's best to just ignore those who want to turn every Supremes discussion into a throw-down. But, as a member of the choir, I say, "Hallelujah!"

In my opinion, most of the drama and craziness that is associated with Supremes fans only occurs on the internet for the most part.

Again, that was my experience. I really had no idea some of the fanbase was like this until I found SDF and asked a Supremes question - I was just someone who loved the Supremes all my life and reconnected with that love during a recent trying medical time when I had a lot of time on my hands and things on my mind. I found that revisiting their music and video clips simply made me feel better and that was a miracle. Anyway, when I did come here and ask a question [[about Motown 25 and the US magazine coverage I'd read about), thankfully, some level-headed posters here jumped right in to warn me how it would go down so it wasn't a total shock, but it still was off-putting to say the least. I, for one, am very interested in the Supremes story and enjoy discussing it and learning about it with other civil and engaging people who can look at it objectively and with perspective. Happily, SDF seems to have plenty of posters like that so that's great...

[smark21]

Juice
You said what I felt about Flo Ballard solo recording. The best thing I heard from Florence was her version of "Silent Night". Production has a lot to do with the recording process, not just voice. Aretha did quite a few albums for Columbia records that didn't do much. Once she got with Atlantic records, with right production, Aretha blew up. I've always felt that if Diana was not the lead singer, it would have been Mary. Mary Wilson's sound was simular to Mary Wells. It's funny how, as much as Florence was touted as the best singer in the group, but yet it was Diana and Mary on the first Primette recordings.

I agree. IMO, Flo was the weakest singer in the original Supremes. She had the loudest voice, yes, but it takes more than volume to make a strong singer.

BTW, I bet this thread will be deleted by this evening.

[Roberta75]

Let me offer up one suggestion which may help these discussions run a bit smoothly. While i dont believe for one moment that they'll be considered, it's merely food for thought.

Perhaps we'd have a lot less friction if we'd simply focus our responses on the points rased during a particular discussion. Constantly raising old arguments do nothing to advance these discussions & I believe that it leads to a complete inability to discuss anything effectively & often lead to some pretty good points being lost amongst the fighting.

Is it remotely possible for there to simply be a discussion of the thread without the need to resort to individual personal attacks & simply stick to the discussion-at-hand?

By now we all have a pretty good idea of whom said what about whom, whom did what to whom & constantly referring to past practices & deeds only guarantees that yet another potentially thoughtful & informative discussion will slip downthe tubes...

AGAIN

So if we could simply refrain from taking potshots at one another, as well as referring to what Supreme did what to whom, we could one day have a serious & thoughtful discussion about this group of young ladies who accomplished things far beyone their wildest dreams.

We often speak about how groundbreaking The Supremes were & that's nothing but the truth. But I have to say that I find it more than a little ironic that almost every discussion about 3 young ladies whom brought the world together through their music & bridged such a huge gap, serves as grist that divides a segment of a forum consisting of people whom love them damn near every time.

Am I the only one who sees the irony in this?

Either way, despite any previous wrongs done by anyone, i'd rather have proof in the archives that it was them whom fired the first shot in order to support my position about them, than to be the one whom fires the first shot by being the first one to bring up their past misdeeds if it wasn't done at that particular time in that particular thread.

What I'm saying is that it's one thing to call someone out right where & when they commit an offense. In that case, whatever they get, they get & rightfully so. But to dredge up those offenses when they aren't being committed, or were done in the past isn't helpful. In a court of law, that would be akin to double jeopardy & the law doesn't support that.

I understand the players & I understand the level of mutual dislike.After 8 years, I totally get it. But putting all of that aside for even a brief moment, does anything that I said in this post sound reasonable?

Juice, your responses are well written, fair, truthful and so on point. You are a brilliant orator. I hope you do public speaking as you have a great gift that should be shared beyond this forum.

Thank you so much.

Fondly.

Roberta

[soulballad]

I agree. IMO, Flo was the weakest singer in the original Supremes. She had the loudest voice, yes, but it takes more than volume to make a strong singer.

BTW, I bet this thread will be deleted by this evening.

I'll add my two cents and then I'm outta here for a while, because the Supremes [[and Motown in general) cause too much of an uproar on these boards.

Here we go pitting one lady against the other again even if it is just a personal opinon.

Just because Mary and Diana did the leads on the Primette's song doesn't mean anything other that it just happened that way. Martha Reeves didn't sing lead on the Vel's first recording and she ended up being THE ONLY Vandellas singer. Flo got a single release with "Buttered Popcorn" and Mary did not. Again it means nothing. It just happened that way. Here's my opinon on Diana. We all know that she was talented and fabulous etc.etc.etc. Diana's trump card was that she didn't have a traditionally black sounding voice which was a cross over dream. Her leads along with Flo and Mary's ability to work those harmonies on the standards is what pushed them to the Copa and all of the other white supper clubs. It was a time when everthing was held to a "white standard" and anything black was looked down upon as low class. That's why Nat Cole and Ella and sammy were excepted. They were able to bend and reshape themselves into what the masses wanted at that time. It's not a bad thing but it was what it was. Commercial sounding equaled a sound that was palatable to whites. All of that was great for in 1964 and 1965 but it got old really quick. This is where I think it was a bad idea not having the others do more leads because with the late 60's black power movemment sounding black and being black became a welcome thing and anything else was considered a sell out. It's all water under the bridge now and I suppose things happened as they were meant to. At some point you have to just let it all go. Diana needed the Supremes and the Supremes need Diana. One would not have worked without the other.

I just don't understand the pettiness and the anger and bitterness from a lot of the posters. The fans have more issues than the actual people involved. This stuff occured 50 years ago and these people were just entertainers, it NOT that serious people!

[marv2]

I'll add my two cents and then I'm outta here for a while, because the Supremes [[and Motown in general) cause too much of an uproar on these boards.

Here we go pitting one lady against the other again even if it is just a personal opinon.

Just because Mary and Diana did the leads on the Primette's song doesn't mean anything other that it just happened that way. Martha Reeves didn't sing lead on the Vel's first recording and she ended up being THE ONLY Vandellas singer. Flo got a single release with "Buttered Popcorn" and Mary did not. Again it means nothing. It just happened that way. Here's my opinon on Diana. We all know that she was talented and fabulous etc.etc.etc. Diana's trump card was that she didn't have a traditionally black sounding voice which was a cross over dream. Her leads along with Flo and Mary's ability to work those harmonies on the standards is what pushed them to the Copa and all of the other white supper clubs. It was a time when everthing was held to a "white standard" and anything black was looked down upon as low class. That's why Nat Cole and Ella and sammy were excepted. They were able to bend and reshape themselves into what the masses wanted at that time. It's not a bad thing but it was what it was. Commercial sounding equaled a sound that was palatable to whites. All of that was great for in 1964 and 1965 but it got old really quick. This is where I think it was a bad idea not having the others do more leads because with the late 60's black power movemment sounding black and being black became a welcome thing and anything else was considered a sell out. It's all water under the bridge now and I suppose things happened as they were meant to. At some point you have to just let it all go. Diana needed the Supremes and the Supremes need Diana. One would not have worked without the other.

I just don't understand the pettiness and the anger and bitterness from a lot of the posters. The fans have more issues than the actual people involved. This stuff occured 50 years ago and these people were just entertainers, it NOT that serious people!

Very good post with good points. Thank you Soulballad. It is true in my opinion that these fans out there cause most of the trouble. Some of them are so hardcore into an artist that if you say anything that they disagree with, they begin with personal attacks. The worst are the ones that don't even know one another, so lies get made up and told to try to score points. It's not the artists I have problems with, it is their fans that feel they can say anything and everyone is suppose to just accept it.

[marv2]

Let me offer up one suggestion which may help these discussions run a bit smoothly. While i dont believe for one moment that they'll be considered, it's merely food for thought.

Perhaps we'd have a lot less friction if we'd simply focus our responses on the points rased during a particular discussion. Constantly raising old arguments do nothing to advance these discussions & I believe that it leads to a complete inability to discuss anything effectively & often lead to some pretty good points being lost amongst the fighting.

Is it remotely possible for there to simply be a discussion of the thread without the need to resort to individual personal attacks & simply stick to the discussion-at-hand?

By now we all have a pretty good idea of whom said what about whom, whom did what to whom & constantly referring to past practices & deeds only guarantees that yet another potentially thoughtful & informative discussion will slip downthe tubes...

AGAIN

So if we could simply refrain from taking potshots at one another, as well as referring to what Supreme did what to whom, we could one day have a serious & thoughtful discussion about this group of young ladies who accomplished things far beyone their wildest dreams.

We often speak about how groundbreaking The Supremes were & that's nothing but the truth. But I have to say that I find it more than a little ironic that almost every discussion about 3 young ladies whom brought the world together through their music & bridged such a huge gap, serves as grist that divides a segment of a forum consisting of people whom love them damn near every time.

Am I the only one who sees the irony in this?

Either way, despite any previous wrongs done by anyone, i'd rather have proof in the archives that it was them whom fired the first shot in order to support my position about them, than to be the one whom fires the first shot by being the first one to bring up their past misdeeds if it wasn't done at that particular time in that particular thread.

What I'm saying is that it's one thing to call someone out right where & when they commit an offense. In that case, whatever they get, they get & rightfully so. But to dredge up those offenses when they aren't being committed, or were done in the past isn't helpful. In a court of law, that would be akin to double jeopardy & the law doesn't support that.

I understand the players & I understand the level of mutual dislike.After 8 years, I totally get it. But putting all of that aside for even a brief moment, does anything that I said in this post sound reasonable?

What you said, you said perfectly clear and anyone reading it should have ability to understand it. What you witnessed in this thread happens over and over again. You get a guy who is some sort of self-proclaimed "Motown expert" that whenever someone disagrees with what he says as gospel, he goes into his smear campaign made up of lies generally about myself. I have held back telling the truth about why this person always responds like that towards me. He feels threatened, but that is his issue to deal with, not mine! There are other issues that he evidently has not resolved in his own mind that again is his problem to deal with.

I never knew until the internet age that there were people that were so hardcore over the Supremes or Diana Ross. It has been more than an eye opening experience for me and others. Mary had some good "public" advice and that was to leave her and Diane out of the petty talk. I've asked this guy and his few buddies to leave me out of the petty talk as well, but that gets ignore when I can routinely open up a thread and find my name being tossed around like I am the subject of discussion. She's given me some good advice over the years and she has not been wrong yet. So Juice you are being more than just reasonable, you are making damned good sense!

Marv

[BayouMotownMan]

There is a difference, and a big one, between disagreement and misquoting me. That I will never allow