|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 4, 2006 21:42:33 GMT -5
"I'm like a young Marvin in his hey" - Jay-Z, "Brush Your Shoulders Off" (2004)
While many historians nowadays like to focus more on Marvin's standout singles and albums, I think few remember that in the '60s, Marvin Gaye was as lengthy a hitmaker as his contemporaries like the Beatles, the Supremes, Elvis Presley, James Brown, Aretha Franklin and the Beach Boys. Matter of fact, he was one of only a few solo acts to achieve having more than 30 top 40 hits.
In the grandest of things, his success can only be compared to that of another hitmaker, Michael Jackson. Jackson was also a heavy hitmaker throughout the '80s and '90s, though his hit value solo reached around 45 hits between 1971 and 2003, it's said Michael was the biggest-selling artist of the '80s, in a way, and only second to James Brown in solo R&B hitmakers, can it be fair to say that Marvin Gaye was not only the biggest-selling artist of all time in Motown's fabled history but also one of the top 5 biggest-selling R&B artists ever especially in the '60s and one of the top 20 pop acts overall in that decade?
He made history during the periods of 1962-66 and 1967-69 faster than most reached in that period where he extended his diversity as both a solo artist and as a member of several male/female R&B duos with Mary Wells, Kim Weston and of course Tammi Terrell.
Marvin had 20-plus top 40 pop hits, about 15 top 10 pop hits, 30-plus top 40 R&B hits, about 15-20 top 10 R&B hits, a #1 pop hit and six #1 R&B records. I think it's safe to say he surpassed Otis Redding, Sam Cooke and only came second after James Brown in the hit-making department as far as R&B acts go! I think that's a rare accomplishment especially considering his longevity in Motown and how there were actually only a HANDFUL of male solo acts. Stevie Wonder & Marvin Gaye would remain the best-selling male solo acts in Motown throughout the '70s and '80s.
And though I probably can't say the same albums-wise for him (though I had heard his '60s albums were selling at a rapid pace at the time), singles-wise, he was the KING OF POP. I'm just saying, I mean, Marvin may be overlooked in this regard these days but let's face it, Marvin was a consistent hitmaker especially during that period.
What'd ya say? :groomman:
|
|
|
|
Post by Emerald City on Mar 4, 2006 22:34:04 GMT -5
Interesting comparison...I'll be back  |
|
|
|
Post by mpgfan on Mar 4, 2006 22:47:53 GMT -5
That IS interesting. Also you have to look into the fact that back then music wasn't nearly as fragmented in terms of labels for different genres. So in some ways Marvin's success in the 60s probably hit a broader base then pop acts in the 70s and 80s.
I haven't thought of Marvin in that way before but you are pretty accurate to call him the King of Pop for his time.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 0:11:23 GMT -5
Yeah, and really I hit on it like that because Marvin had so many hits, I mean, he hit in more broader areas than even James Brown did at that time. I think he had more top ten pop hits than James did if I'm not mistaken during the '60s: "Pride & Joy", "How Sweet It Is", "I'll Be Doggone", "Ain't That Peculiar?", "Your Precious Love", "If I Could Build My Whole World Around You", "Ain't Nothing Like the Real Thing", "You're All I Need to Get By", "I Heard It Through the Grapevine", "Too Busy Thinking About My Baby" and "That's the Way Love Goes" all registered at the top 10 so that's around 11. Only Stevie had more, I think, I could be wrong though. I gotta check on my Stevie chart info 'cause I used to know it real good, lol. He also had a #1 pop hit, which James NEVER did even in the '60s. He had more top 40 hits than Stevie in the '60s also. In that sense, you know, this is why I came to this conclusion because before the black kings of pop were Fats Domino (between '55 and '60-something), Jackie Wilson (very briefly), Ray Charles (also very briefly between 1959 and 1963) and Sam Cooke (between 1957 and 1964, something like that). Marvin had a total of 25 top 40 hits on the Hot 100 between 1963 and 1969. He had 11 Top 10 pop hits, 3 top 5 pop hits and a #1 pop record. I don't even think James beat him in that department. Marvin had like 30-some top 100 hits in all between '62 and '69. The man was a constientious (sp?) hitmaker throughout this early period singles-wise that he would be albums-wise in the '70s and '80s. I mean, really, think about it. What other soul man out there was really doing as well as he did and did it in almost successive numbers? It's mind boggling to say the least. Not only the way he sung and performed on stage, but also how he managed to stay in the times and do what he did, INCLUDING writing and producing songs for OTHERS including Martha, the Marvelettes, Tammi Terrell & the Originals. I mean, really... do I need to add how much of a musician/session performer/honorary Funk Brother he was in the early days. People don't give Marvin much credit for the stellar work he put off in the '60s plus introducing a dance craze to American and worldwide audiences with the Hitch Hike. I mean, he wasn't just the man who created some of the greatest albums known to mankind, the man had classics coming out of him in the '60s. I think he's sadly underrated in that department. As somebody once said, Marvin was as much a hitmaker as people like Usher and Alicia Keys are now when you think about it. I think he's also sadly mistaken for JUST being a "rock singer" back then. He was a songwriter in that period too. Few people could even grasp that it was MARVIN who help write "Dancing in the Streets". Even if it was a suggestion or changing a few lyrics, people can't grasp that while they go on and on about Smokey this and Smokey that but overlooking what both Marvin AND Stevie did in the '60s. Even back then, they had Smokey's back pocket. :lol: Hopefully his entire career output would be given a full respect than it's getting now. His entire 23-year career needs to be celebrated equally. It may have been short but it felt real long. He earned his legendary stripes after making "Sexual Healing", you know? There's a good reason for that.  |
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 0:34:36 GMT -5
Ok, I tallied up the Top 40s and Top 10s for Marvin between 1962 and 1969 (just seven short years now!): Pop (Hot 100)[/u] 27 Top 40 hits 11 Top 10 hits 3 Top 5 hits 1 #1 hit R&B[/u] 34 Top 40 hits 25 Top 10 hits 14 Top 5 hits 6 #1 hits Overall[/u] Adding several Top 100 hits that didn't make the top 50, Marvin Gaye had a total of thirty-five hit singles between 1962 and 1969! This is just SEVEN YEARS, folks. Seven years in the 1960's, now! Album-wise, he didn't chart as well until much later when his M.P.G. album became his first top 40 pop album ranking at #33 and his first #1 R&B album. Now if this is not a BIG, no not just big, HUGE accomplishment for Marvin, I don't know what else is!!! And guess what, I researched him and James Brown, them two were NECK IN NECK in the R&B department. Marvin whupped him in the POP department. HA HA! LOL |
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 0:38:23 GMT -5
Correction: Marvin HAD MORE top 10 pop hits than Stevie in the sixties. :lol: Stevie had 9, Marvin had 11 at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 1:01:00 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 1:05:29 GMT -5
And basing it on popularity, it's like saying the Supremes were hugely popular and were only second to the Beatles, Marvin Gaye was the most popular artist second only to James Brown. It's funny, but then you base it on POP success and commercially, Marvin had more clout than James. Sure James probably had more because of his influence in dance, funk, and his overall influence, but Marvin had enough in the influence department even back then for just being a great soul singer.  |
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 1:31:55 GMT -5
Ok, Ray Charles and Marvin had 27 Top 40 pop hits each in the '60s, James had 26 Top 40 pop hits in the '60s. Marvin was only second in that department to Elvis Presley.
So if we were to tally the most charted solo male artists on the top 40 in the sixties, this is how the list would look:
1.) Elvis Presley - 55
2.) Marvin Gaye - 27
2.) Ray Charles - 27
4.) James Brown - 26
Looks about right. LOL
|
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 3:10:25 GMT -5
Lawd, this research is difficult so this is how it goes:
Elvis remains at #1 ('60s) but now I see Roy Orbison had 28 Top 40 hits in the '60s so that leaves Marvin & Ray tied at #3 followed by J.B. Lawd... :lol:
But that's real impressive to see Marvin at the top 5 of the biggest male solo singles act of the decade. Impressive especially for a black artist in that decade. As I said, Marvin and others like him did things that few black artists did prior.
|
|
|
|
Post by HitsvilleSoul on Mar 5, 2006 16:36:27 GMT -5
Somebody suuuuuure is doing their homework  The main thing that jumped out at me here was what you said about his 60's work. At times it does seem to be largely ignored compared to the 70's stuff, and truth be told, there really are some gems from that decade. My favorite of his 60's album has got to be Moods Of Marvin Gaye. I still put that one up there with Whats Going On?, Let's Get It On and I Want You because his overall performance IMO cannot be touched  And perhaps what gave Marvin a little more clout than James in the Pop arena was the imagery. Soul Brotha did come off as a bit rough around the edges to that audience |
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 5, 2006 17:10:09 GMT -5
Yep, that's what I think it was too. Marvin was the sophisticated yet strong Brotha (much like Sam Cooke) while James was a little more primal than him, lol. So I can see why Marvin had more clout on James. |
|
|
|
Post by mpgfan on Mar 6, 2006 8:57:43 GMT -5
OYE Lordy! Talk about doing your research Timmy!
|
|
|
|
Post by timmy84 on Mar 6, 2006 12:11:52 GMT -5
As Levi said, "I can't help myself". |
|
|
|
Post by fantagurl on Mar 6, 2006 18:21:34 GMT -5
Interesting comparison...I'll be back Same here!! |
|
:kingtheman:
