Latest on MJJC

Jackson 5 vs. The Osmonds

RachelA

Proud Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2011
Messages
35
Points
0
When I was growing up my older sister was an Osmonds fan and of course I was a Jackson 5 fan, we always used to have some nasty arguments about who was the best, I even tore up some of my sister's Donny Osmond posters when she used to get me angry!
During the 70s it was said that the two families had a friendly rivalry because they had so many things in common and were both teen idols, but I know Michael and Donny were good friends and never considered themselves to be in competition with each other. Obviously Michael's fame eventually eclipsed Donny's and they later grew apart.
A few years ago my sister finally dragged me to an Osmond brothers concert and I was all prepared to hate them, but they turned out to be quite good, they're actually very accomplished musicians and some of the Osmond brothers even have stronger voices than some of the Jackson brothers, excluding Michael of course. I know that some people think they're cheesy, and I've sometimes been embarrassed to admit I like them because of the ridicule I receive from some people, but I think they were vastly underrated. The Jacksons will always be my favorite family band, but I've also become an Osmonds fan and it's all my sister's fault! Is there anyone else here who also enjoys their music?
 
RachelA said:
When I was growing up my older sister was an Osmonds fan and of course I was a Jackson 5 fan, we always used to have some nasty arguments about who was the best, I even tore up some of my sister's Donny Osmond posters when she used to get me angry!
During the 70s it was said that the two families had a friendly rivalry because they had so many things in common and were both teen idols, but I know Michael and Donny were good friends and never considered themselves to be in competition with each other. Obviously Michael's fame eventually eclipsed Donny's and they later grew apart.
A few years ago my sister finally dragged me to an Osmond brothers concert and I was all prepared to hate them, but they turned out to be quite good, they're actually very accomplished musicians and some of the Osmond brothers even have stronger voices than some of the Jackson brothers, excluding Michael of course. I know that some people think they're cheesy, and I've sometimes been embarrassed to admit I like them because of the ridicule I receive from some people, but I think they were vastly underrated. The Jacksons will always be my favorite family band, but I've also become an Osmonds fan and it's all my sister's fault! Is there anyone else here who also enjoys their music?
Click to expand...

The Osmonds were not a pop group when they first came out. They used to do shows like the Andy William television shows. They were like real folksy and kind of corney. The all American type of family act that was geared to older Americans if you asked me and more consevative. Being Mormons probably was the reason behind that. They were musically very good with instruments.

It wasn't until the Jackson 5 came out did the Osmond Brothers change their image and went after the young teen audience. They were marketed as the White version of the Jackson 5. The Osmonds came out with "One Bad Apple" after the Jackson 5 had a string of hits like "I want you Back" and "ABC".
 
The Jackson 5 I like, but I don't mind the Osmonds either although compared to the J5, I only like a few songs from them.

And I though I saw an interview with Donny about him and MJ's friendship somewhere.
 
J5 J5 J5!!!!!!!!

ok, just kidding- I don't think I ever heard anything from the Osmonds. But "We dont got nothing against the Osmonds"!!
 
During the 70s I was a huge fan of the Osmonds, and back then I was not crazy about the Jacksons, it was only around 80 I started liking them and especially MJ.....
 
I'm too young to have an opinion on the Osmonds. It seems that the Jackson 5's music is immortal, perhaps because Michael went on to be the megastar that he became. But I like Marie Osmond when she was on Dancing with the Stars. I also would see snippets here and there of the Donny and Marie show and thought they were funny together. They reminded me of Randy and Janet! LOL!

There is a little article about Donny's memories of Michael in the Rolling Stone tribute. He did say that they were friends and they were planning on doing a duet together, but then the 2003 allegations hit and that idea had to be shelved. Donny also said on ET that now that Michael is gone people just need to leave him alone and let him rest in peace.
 
it was always J5 for me, but i like the Donny and Marie show. the osmond family is interesting to learn about as well, i remember seeing them on the oprah show the whole family talking about their lives and everything.

what interesting about michael and donny is they are both soooo nice. donny has this really nice quality to him. you dont see that in many people sadly. i sometimes watch marie on QVC now, she sells dolls, and i like dolls so i watch her sometimes. they both have great personalities.
 
The Osmonds' music was as flat as a pancake. Not even close to being in the same league as the Jackson5. The Osmonds compare to the Jackson5 as the Monkees to the Beatles.
 
I am also an Osmonds fan. All the Osmonds made statements when Michael passed away and they were all lovely. Donny spoke about his friendship with Michael recently on stage in Vegas and he got quite emotional talking about what a special guy Mike was. I was also at an Osmond convention when the accusations were flying against Mike and Donny supported Michael 120%. He even defended him to reporters when they were trying to get him to diss Michael, Donny stood firm as a friend and believer in Michaels innocence. As a young teenager in the 70's when both bands were at the height of their popularity, there was always great respect between both sets of fans. Even today, many Osmond fans are also Jackson fans and many Osmond fans were deeply upset when Michael died.
 
I loved both the Osmonds and the Jacksons, I don't think the families had much head butting (besides Joe) I remember one interview Donny mentioned that Joe was just terrible when he met him. Defintly gave him one cold shoulder.
 
Oh, and I also remember in 1988 when Donny was being interviewed by a reporter at a FSG I was at in London. Michael's career was flying, and Donny's was on the rocks. The reporter was trying to get Donny to analyse why the disparity between the two careers. Donny spoke warmly and without a hint of jealousy about Michaels success. He said what a warm, funny and humble guy Mike was and how much he loved his fans, genuinely loved and cared for each and every one of them. Donny also said Mike was super talented, a genius, but more than that he was a decent, funny guy and Donny was proud of his success and proud to call him a friend.
 
abc123 said:
The Osmonds' music was as flat as a pancake. Not even close to being in the same league as the Jackson5. The Osmonds compare to the Jackson5 as the Monkees to the Beatles.
Click to expand...
I like The Monkees. I have the DVDs of all of their TV show episodes. The Monkees are more creative than people give them credit for (Michael Nesmith & Micky Dolenz in particular), especially considering how they came together.
 
abc123 said:
The Osmonds' music was as flat as a pancake. Not even close to being in the same league as the Jackson5. The Osmonds compare to the Jackson5 as the Monkees to the Beatles.
Click to expand...

ABC123, I don't understand how you can compare The Osmonds to The Monkees, The Osmonds weren't some fake band that was just manufactured for a TV show, they are all real musicians who actually play their instruments and wrote a lot of their own material too. I think that's a ridiculous comment to make, unless you've seen them live, I don't know how you can make a judgement like that. Whether you like their music or not, you can't deny their talent.

Tigerfeet, thanks for sharing that story about Donny and MJ, it was a fascinating read. I've never heard MJ say a bad word about any other artist, so they seem to share that very admirable trait. I was impressed to hear about the amount of time The Osmonds have for their fans, they seem to be so nice and down to earth. Have you personally met the brothers?
 
RachelA said:
ABC123, I don't understand how you can compare The Osmonds to The Monkees, The Osmonds weren't some fake band that was just manufactured for a TV show, they are all real musicians who actually play their instruments and wrote a lot of their own material too. I think that's a ridiculous comment to make, unless you've seen them live, I don't know how you can make a judgement like that. Whether you like their music or not, you can't deny their talent.

Tigerfeet, thanks for sharing that story about Donny and MJ, it was a fascinating read. I've never heard MJ say a bad word about any other artist, so they seem to share that very admirable trait. I was impressed to hear about the amount of time The Osmonds have for their fans, they seem to be so nice and down to earth. Have you personally met the brothers?
Click to expand...
The Monkees aren't a fake band. Michael, Peter, & Micky were musicians and/or singers before being recruited for the show. Even Davy was a Broadway singer/actor. The group toured (Jimi Hendrix opened for them at one point before angry parents had him thrown off the tour as they felt Jimi's act was too sexual), recorded, and filmed a show all at the same time. They made little money compared to what they made for Columbia, Screen Gems, and the show's producers. All 4 reunited in 1995 (after years of Michael Nesmith not participating) and made a reunion album called "Justus". Michael also came up with the concept of MTV.
 
Last edited:
J5 dominates the osmonds in such a way that i almost can't believe it could possibly be debated.
 
The Monkees were a band that was specifically created for a TV show, they didn't exist as a group before that, that makes them as real as The Partridge Family.
 
DuranDuran said:
I like The Monkees. I have the DVDs of all of their TV show episodes. The Monkees are more creative than people give them credit for (Michael Nesmith & Micky Dolenz in particular), especially considering how they came together.
Click to expand...

are you serious!!!! bows down :agree:
Monkees are my favorite band :D
Im seeing Micky in 3 weeks squeeeee so excited!!!!
 
RachelA said:
The Monkees were a band that was specifically created for a TV show, they didn't exist as a group before that, that makes them as real as The Partridge Family.
Click to expand...
The Partridge Family were Milli Vanilli. The only one who actually performed was Davis Cassidy. The Partridge Family wasn't designed to be a group. They weren't musicians. The Monkees actually became a band. They all played and/or sang, and a lot of their songs were written by the group members. Why would Hendrix tour with a "fake" band? He considered them a group, and got along well with them. He didn't have to tour with them as he wasn't trying to reach their main audience. Peter Tork played on George Harrison's solo album "Wonderwall". Michael Nesmith was in the sessions for The Beatles' "A Day In The Life". Micky partied with Paul McCartney. Frank Zappa & Charlie Smalls (who would write The Wiz) appeared on their show. Frank also did a cameo in their movie "Head". The Beatles wouldn't want to hang out with "fake" musicians or have them play on their recordings. Fats Domino, Little Richard, Julie Driscoll, Brian Auger, & Buddy Miles appeared on their special after the show had been cancelled. A lot of girl groups were put together by producers, but they weren't considered fake. How The Monkees came together is irrelevant. Why would a fake band make an album decades later? The Partridge Family didn't do that.
 
Last edited:
Monkees are sooooo under rated. Micky, Peter, Michael, and Davy all very talented as muscians!
 
abc123 said:
The Osmonds' music was as flat as a pancake. Not even close to being in the same league as the Jackson5. The Osmonds compare to the Jackson5 as the Monkees to the Beatles.
Click to expand...

Exactly!

the point and huge misleading perspective is in the meaning of the group - the Osmonds!

The US fans/people still do not realize that the USA/52 states are NOT=do not mean the whole world. :doh:

The jacksons/J5 were global, and the Osmonds can not be compared to the global (US, Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Canada, Mexico...) success and importance of the Jacksons/J5!
 
What does who the Beatles hung out with have to do with anything? They
hung out with that Maharishi Yogi guy and he turned out to be a fake
too. The Beatles weren't infallible Gods, they made lots of mistakes in
judgement. Am I just supposed to accept the Monkees as a real band
because they sat in the same room as the Beatles? Everyone in the world
and his wife's dog were at The Day In the Life sessions, but they didn't play
on it and neither did Mike Nesmith. The Beatles partied with almost
anyone who was around at that time, who cares. Jimi Hendrix only toured
with them to get more exposure and publicity in the US, but that tour
was later considered an embarrassment to him and most critics see it as
a disaster. I have my own opinion and you're not going to change my
mind, it's fine if you enjoy their music and consider them serious
musicians, but I disagree. To me, they were just corporate puppets. How
the group was formed is very relevant and can't just be dismissed, they
were manufactured and to compare them with a real group like The
Beatles, or anyone else who came together on their own, instead of being
put together by some guys in business suits, is just laughable.
 
The difference between the Maharishi & the Monkees is that the Beatles were aware of The Monkees origins. George Harrison said before he died that the Yogi wasn't fake and based their earlier opinions on unproven rumors. What a critic thinks doesn't really mean anything. The average critic said Michael made records that were no good after "Thriller" or that Stevie Wonder didn't make anything good after "Songs In The Key Of Life". An orchestra is put together and didn't "come together on their own". It's not that serious to me if a performer toiled for years in some hole in the wall. Just because they did that, doesn't mean that a group or singer is any good. I go for the quality of the music, not because they didn't go to school together or was a bar band 1st. However a group comes together, in the end they're all just a "product" to the record company, for the suits to use and discard when their shelf life is over. But the labels keep their master recordings to exploit however they like. Most acts wind up broke and/or playing fairs & oldies shows. That's why Prince changed his name to the symbol and started writing "Slave" on his face. Suits rule all acts (unless they release their music themselves), no matter how "legit" they appear to the public. It's not called the music business for nothing.
 
Last edited:
Moonwalker.Fan said:
Exactly!

the point and huge misleading perspective is in the meaning of the group - the Osmonds!

The US fans/people still do not realize that the USA/52 states are NOT=do not mean the whole world. :doh:

The jacksons/J5 were global, and the Osmonds can not be compared to the global (US, Europe, Asia, Africa, South America, Canada, Mexico...) success and importance of the Jacksons/J5!
Click to expand...

I think your post said that people in the US don't know anything about the rest of the world, so I guess you are right and you're more knowledgeable than us Americans, because I always thought there were 50 states, can you please name these two new states you've discovered? The Osmonds were actually more successful in the UK, Australia, Asia etc. than in the US, so, yes, you've definitely made a "huge misleading point" in your post.
 
I was born in the 80s so the J5/Osmond 'rivalry' was before my time. But my mum was talking about it and she said that Donny and Michael were constantly compared to each other. However what she said was that everyone expected Donny to become the huge superstar and not Michael. She said that no one would have thought in the 70s that a black kid could eclipse a white kid.
 
pamarella said:
The Osmonds were not a pop group when they first came out. They used to do shows like the Andy William television shows. They were like real folksy and kind of corney. The all American type of family act that was geared to older Americans if you asked me and more consevative. Being Mormons probably was the reason behind that. They were musically very good with instruments.
Click to expand...
it's called barbershop music, that's what they started to perform with, way before they became regulars on the Andy Williams Show
Anyway, I like them then, in the 60's. but after that...bleh :beee:
jimmy's solo stuff, right from the beginning, was way better than The Osmonds

elmari said:
I'm too young to have an opinion on the Osmonds.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but whenever people say this about music, from before their time, all I can think is, that's the most ignorant explanation EVER. just because you weren't born when they were around, doesn't mean you can't know who they are, or have an opinion about them. I'm too young to remember them as well, heck, I wasn't even born, but I still have an opinion about them. and they still make music to this day, so even IF we only knew about music from our own lifetime, then what would be your excuse for not knowing about them? :lol:
 
Last edited:
I have no anger against Osmonds, but never really ehard much of their music beyond One Bad Apple and Paper Roses by Marie Osmond which I kind of like. I know too that Michael and Donny were friends and them and the Jackson 5 respected each other. I also remember they got a lot of crap over their identical appearance and prominent gleaming teeth (Family guy "If Merril is here, who is in the toilet, well I'll be a son of a gun"

Still I am sure some people chose to listen to the Osmonds because they were white and it was the latest in a long line of white acts ripping off Black music styles and Black musicians (Pat Boone covering Little Richard hits, the British Invasion covering soul and R and B hits). But I have no anger, it is good to enjoy the music which a fluid motion and a talent from God. Like Prince and Michael have both alluded to, they bring the gift forward from God. One Bad Apple their first big hit sounds an awful lot like J5 c. The Love you save and Mamas Pearl. Still there music became more individual sounding later on.

Donny was promoted as the Michael wannabe and later on Little Jimmy had more success than little Randy Jackson. Still my vote is for the Jackson 5/Jacksons by a long shot, they had more hits and a much better sound, I actually like Mamas Pearl, Doctor my eyes, Sugardaddy, Skywriter, Get it together and many of their later songs too.

Plus the musical family concept was hardly new, with the Von Trapplets and the 1970s mania for singing families whether biological or not, Partridges, DeFrancos, Sylvers and later De Barge. Despite being considered Black acts and artists, boit the Sylvers and De Barges were in fact mixed race. Both Mr Sylvers and Mr De Barge were white men married to African American women and their brood were all musicians.

After the Jacksons, I like the Sylvers and De Barge next as musical families and of course some of them went on to single careers (El De Barge, Chico De Barge, who ripped off Prince badly for a while) and of course James De Barge who married Janet Jackson breifly. One of the Sylvers became a producer and one got in trouble for sex offences.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top