Part of the reason David Ruffin was fired by the Temps was because he started to demand that the group's name be changed to David Ruffin and the Temptations.
Does anyone out there think that his demand was justified? He did, after all, sang lead on most of the group's hit records during the 60s.
As a lover of The Temptations and Ruff, no. Of course David was the man during the time he was in the group but there was jus too much talent to have one member outshine the other (even though that basically happend when David joined) Eddie had his leads and so did Paul. and even though My Girl was their first number 1, im pretty sure Eddie's voice helped them get there. to have David's name in the Title jus seems unfair
*Aint Nothin Like The Real Thing*
Nah... That wouldn't have worked. David Ruffin was phenomenal, and possibly the best lead singer in the LONG history of the Temptations, but there was just too much talent in that Classic 5 line up to justify a name change. Even if you argue he was the best, Eddie and Paul could always be considered a close second at lead, with Eddie being an extraordinary falsetto, and with Paul always being noted for outstanding live performances. And what about Melvin with his rare gems at lead? Can you imagine what would have happened if they had made that name change, and then they had to deal with the new direction of music in the 70's where shared lead parts were hot? And what about in the late 70's when the most popular soul groups had falsetto leads? If the Classic 5 line up had survived through that time, they probably would have had to change the name back to the Temptations anyway.
shareI'm probably biased. As I consider David Ruffin one of the best singers of all time. Thus, I feel a name change would have been justified.
shareWell, I'm glad someone agrees. All of the Tempts were very talented vocalists and performers, but I think few would argue that Ruffin was the most talented.
The truth of the matter is that the Tempts didn't become successful until after Ruff joined the group. For the first two years of their existence, they were unable to generate a hit record. However, the first song Ruff that sang on, "The Way You Do the Things You Do," became the group's first hit record. Even though Eddie sang lead on that song, I think that Ruff's presence was integral in changing the group's fortunes. Thereafter and with the exception of the hit song "Get Ready," also sung by Eddie, the lead vocal on EVERY hit song for the next several years was sung by Ruff.
Also, it was the norm at that time, particularly for Motown groups, that the lead singer had specific-name billing in the group's moniker (Smokey Robinson and the Miracles, Gladys Knight and the Pips, Martha Reeves and the Vandellas, and Jr. Walker and the All Stars). Most significantly, at the time Ruff demanded a name change, circa 1967, Motown had just changed the name of the Supremes to "Diana Ross and the Supremes." Ruff probably figured that if Motown could do this for Diane--on the grounds that she sang the lead on all of the group's hit records--he should have been given the same privilege.
The fact of the matter is that Ruffin was THE MAN.
David Ruffin will always be the man. I had one of my friends watch his "Common Man" video on Youtube as a solo artist. They had never heard of him and were blown away by his vocals.
shareWhat I never understood is why Otis never had a problem with the groups being called "Otis Williams & The Siberians" & then "Otis Williams & The Distants" but was offended that David Ruffin would suggest calling the group "David Ruffin & The Temptations".
shareExcellent point. It was rather ironic--not to mention mention hypocritcal--for Otis to feel this way. It's also ironic that he had name billing during the early days and he was the least talented member of the group.
shareI wouldn't say he was the least talented. But he was a great deal responsible for getting the group together. The other guys looked to him as the leader, and that was why his name was out front in the earlier days.
Bear in mind that this same thing happened with Harold Melvin and the Blue Notes. Teddy Pendergrass was not Harold Melvin, even though everyone thought he was just because he sang lead. That was part of the reason the group was destroyed; Harold was jealous, so Teddy struck out on his own.
And we all know the story of The Supremes. (And now it's still going to this day with the name change of The Pussycat Dolls featuring Nichole Scherzinger.) One person getting top billing over the rest of the group only creates animosity and unrest within the group. Egos will eventually take hold.
========
D, *beep* D! Learn to speak English first!
"I wouldn't say he was the least talented. But he was a great deal responsible for getting the group together. The other guys looked to him as the leader, and that was why his name was out front in the earlier days."
________________________________________________________________________________
I agree that you don't have be the lead vocalist to be the group leader. You cite Harold Melvin who's a good example, but the same could be said for "Kool" of Kool & the Gang ("Kool" was actually the bass player)
But I would have to say that Otis was the least talented member of the Temps. Another poster listed a few songs on which Otis sung the lead, but I agree with the other poster that these songs were unmemorable and insignificant. I vividly remember one of these tunes, "Don't Send Me Away," which was a B-side to a hit Temptation's record. As evidenced by the record, Otis' voice is rather listless and mundane, and he obviously didn't have the strong talent to be a lead vocalist. If anyone is familiar with the old days, they would know that B-sides of 45 RPM records were usually the most dispensable recordings, and this song, sung by Otis, was no exception.
Otis Taylor was the least talented and least memorable member of the Temptations. He never had a lead vocal part, while the others exchanged leads. Melvin had the deep bass voice. I was fortunate to see the original 5 in concert with the Supremes bill as Diana Ross and the Supremes. They both were fabulous but the Temps blew me away.
shareThe reason Otis Taylor never had a lead vocal part is because he was playing wide receiver for the Kansas City Chiefs. Now, Otis WILLIAMS is a different story...
shareOtis Taylor was the least talented and least memorable member of the Temptations. He never had a lead vocal part, while the others exchanged leads. Melvin had the deep bass voice. I was fortunate to see the original 5 in concert with the Supremes bill as Diana Ross and the Supremes. They both were fabulous but the Temps blew me away.
shareBut why change the name of the group? They had always been the Temptations, and Ruffin, whose talent was undeniable, wasn't even part of the original. Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones? Nah.
That's my new favorite camel.
"But why change the name of the group? They had always been the Temptations, and Ruffin, whose talent was undeniable, wasn't even part of the original. Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones? Nah."
________________________________________________________________________________
Actually, there have been occasions when the Stones have been announced as "Mick Jagger and the Rolling Stones," although it was never the group's official name.
Then of course when the Jackson 5 first came into national prominence, there was the famous incident that took place on the old TV show "Hollywood Palace" in which Diana Ross, much to the chagrin of Papa Joe Jackson, introduced the group as "Michael Jackson and the Jackson 5" to the national TV audience.
I love David Ruffin and he is one of my favorite male singers. However, I think there is one reason that he couldn't be billed as a separate entity "David Ruffin and the Temptations"--for the simple fact that he was not an original member. He was not one of the founders of the group. Otis and Melvin were the founders.
shareI'm glad that the name stayed "The Temptations". David, Paul and Eddie shared leads, so it wouldn't have been fair to just give him top billing. Well in my opinion anyway.
Otis Taylor was the least talented and least memorable member of the Temptations. He never had a lead vocal part, while the others exchanged leads.
You had to look long and hard to find songs that Otis sang lead in. However you confirmed that all of those songs were not hits nor were they memorable.
sharePerhaps it was Ruffin's bad behavior that prevented him from getting top billing?
shareI will preface this by saying that I am not old enough to have been alive during the glory days of the Temptations. That being said, it would not seem right for them to have ever been "David Ruffin and the Temptations." You couldn't even call them "Eddie Kendrick and the Temptations" or "Otis Williams and the Temptations". The group was successful because it was made up of 5 distinct voices that formed an amazing sound. This is evident by the fact that they continued to have hits after Ruffin left, and after Eddie, Paul, and Dennis all left at their own times.
As for the argument that it was because of Ruffin that they got their first hit, thats debatable. You have to wonder if it was the voices, the music, or the lyrics that created success. The Temptations were only responsible for 1/3 of that combination. It was Smokey Robinson and other members of the Motown staff who created the music and lyrics. So, were the Temptations a hit because Smokey gave them a great song, or was it a hit because the Temptations supplied amazing vocals to those lyrics? There is no way to be 100% sure on the answer. And if you eliminate one of the voices from that song, you probably do not have a hit. Therefore, no one should have been billed above the group.
----- Quo Vadimus ----
And not one hit among the songs you listed. I think THAT was the point the other poster was making.
shareI'm a whole decade and some change late to this party but whatever. I've read this goofy-a$$ thread from top to bottom and the other party in particular never even specified whether they were talking about singing lead on hits, they just said he never sang lead period. Songs were listed by someone else which proved otherwise (which were not then nor are they now very hard to find contrary to edgehillcm's attempt at being dismissive of the findings). Gotta love when stans try to shift the goalposts.
Also, no way in hell this group should've been called David Ruffin and The Temptations. Yes he was a phenomenal singer and performer, but the Temptations were a GROUP of multiple lead singers (yes even Mr. Williams, hits or not), and to put him as top billing, just completely sh*ts on the efforts of everyone else in the group.
It's also a twist of cruel irony how his solo career —promising as it was— never exactly panned out, whereas the group that everyone swears needed HIM, continued to chart long after his departure. Funny how that happened.
I know everyone in this thread is long gone by now, but like I said, whatever.
@cclub I agree with this. But had he been an original member, they still wouldn't call it David Ruffin and the Temptations. He wasn't the only lead singer, you had Eddie and sometimes Paul. Like someone else said it just wouldn't work.
Another reason I think they didn't want to have David's name out front is because Otis felt David was only "using" the group as a stepping stone for his solo career.
Oh, and Otis and Melvin founded the Temptations with Paul and Eddie. Two groups that came together.
"He wasn't the only lead singer, you had Eddie and sometimes Paul."
__________________________________________________________________________________
True, Eddie did sing lead on two hit records by The Temps in the 60's-- "Get Ready" and "The Way You Do the Things You Do." But what hit records did Paul sing lead on? Sure, he did sang lead on a few of their records, but these songs didn't become major hits and were dispensable.
Didn't they get their first grammy from Dennis Edward's vocals? I'm from Detroit and all of the Temps were favored in the city. Eddie, David and Dennis were also strongly admired as solo artist in the city but the Temptations were always viewed as the Temps. I don't think that anyone at Motown (or in Motown) would have sided with David's idea to rename the Temps. It was so sad when Eddie and David died. Eddie had that sexy falsetto and always put on a great show. Actually saw Otis still holding the Temps down last summer in a Detroit performance that also included the latest version of the 4-Tops.
shareDavid wasn't fit to be billed first at the time. He had a good voice and everything fine but he was a junkie. And the last thing you need to do is give a junkie the spotlight and put him out there.
shareTrue, the Tempts did receive their first Grammy after Dennis joined the group.
But what's interesting about the Temptations (and it's confirmed by their discography featured on following Web site--http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Temptations_discography) is that during the 70s, after Ruff was replaced by Dennis Edwards, the group's vocal arrangement was modified, and each member shared lead vocals on most of the records, including "Cloud Nine."
During the 70s, Motown purposely changed the vocal arrangement of the group's songs to avoid the type of dilemma they experienced when Ruff sang the lead vocals on most of the Temps' records. They had to have known that if Edwards monopolized the lead vocal, then it would only be a matter of time before Dennis, similar to Ruffin, would have demanded a name change, more money, etc., believing that he was the group's most indispensable member, like Ruffin did.
During the 70s, when the group shared all of the lead vocals on most of the songs, I think the group name "Temptations" was fitting. But during the 60s when Ruff sang the lead on the vast MAJORITY of the Temps' hit records, I think he was justified in demanding specific name billing. I don't blame him at all. Had I sang on all of the lead vocals on virtually all of the songs that became the group's major hits, I would have demanded a name change too and a higher salary than the other members of the group.
Groups dont work that way. David wanted top billing because he was stuck on himself and he was an addict. He had a big head and it needed to be bust. In more ways than one.
shareIt worked that way for Diana Ross when she was a Supreme. Not to mention Smokey, Gladys Knight, Jr Walker, and Martha Vandella.
"Ain't nobody comin' to see you Otis!"
-David Ruffin
Yeah that may be all true but to my knowledge they weren't junkies and unreliable like David was. You couldn't count on David to do what he needed to do and thats not the hands you need to put your group in.
shareI disagree; they started out as The Temptations and it was right that it stay that way. David was talented true, but then again so were the other members of the group. It was his big ego to match his growing head that did him in; that and the drugs....sad regardless.
shareActually, they started out as "Otis Williams and the Distants," and that speaks volumes to Otis' hypocrisy in regard to his statement, "No one man is bigger than this group."
All of the Temps were talented, true, but Ruff was by far the most talented Temp of all time, original or nonoriginal, in terms of both vocalizing and performing. That was the reason why he was the group's frontman during the 60s.
That's right he did; I forgot about that, and you're absolutely right. I just think it's too bad David's ego got in the way (Diana Ross comes to mind), but he was by far the most talented.
shareO I AGREE.
and that is what i think respectfully people still do not,at ALL understand.
night!
going back to see it tonight,on VH-1
Thank GOD for dvr!
adios! So hooked on this incredible true to life biopic...
Incredible group,NOT DAVID RUFFIN AND THE TEMPTATIONS...
BUT LOVE THE TEMPTATIONS RIP.
LOVE THEM SO MUCH,FOR ALL THEY HAVE DONE AND LEFT BEHIND FOR ME BEING BORN DURING
SEVENTIES,INCREDIBLE MUSICA,DID NOT GROW UP WITH THEM,MY OLDER SIBLINGS 3 did and my folks,just a 1 of a kind group best ever.
adios.
Night!
~Para;
Bella~
LOVE BEV HILLS 90210 Por Vida!
One Tree Hill.LIL HOUSE.
Giving Ruffin top billing would've been a terrible idea, for the exact reasons that s_johnson07 laid out. Yes other groups, at the time, gave their lead singers top billing, but so what? Why not think do something different? So what if Otis gave himself top billing in the past? That was a few years before they became big. They were younger and practically nobodies, during that time. I know, that much time hadn't passed, but a lot can change in a matter of even just a few years, including people's viewpoints. Obviously the "no man is bigger than the group" thing came after he'd matured, and lived life a little more. Forgive my tangent, but all the Anti-Otis stuff gets a little tiring after while. Dude certainly had his flaws and faults, but I don't get the impression that he's this devil, that people like to make him out to be. Having worked in the industry, I've seen people who make him look like Jesus, in comparison...
shareWOW! Difficult decision to make. Ruffin's voice is a masterpiece and so many of the arguably BEST music came in his era. Only thing is that if you listen to a lot of their big hits, Eddie Kendricks later Kendrick, also sang the lead with or without Ruffin on many great hits. Paul Williams did some lead work early on as well. I liked Dennis Edwards' sound quite a bit and I thought he brought the group into the psychedelic sounds of the early 70;s as the Iseley's and Sly was doing. I have a friend who felt the Temps were never the same without Ruffin and I agree, his lead was great for the group, but in summary, again, there were other members who contributed as lead singers over the years just as much. Had Ruffin stayed with the group, perhaps longer, it might have helped me make a decision in his favor. Good question!!!
shareIf Motown's Four Tops, who had the same personnel for 40-50 years with only death as a reason for leaving the group, and for whom Levi Stubbs sang lead on every song, didn't change their name to "Levi Stubbs and the Four Tops", then the Temptations should always remain "The Temptations"".
share