Rock & Roll Hall of Fame: "Carpenters"

[JohnFB]

But wouldn't the music have as much to do with the image as anything. I would think they were considered middle of the road. And people tended to look with disdain at that kind of music. But even so a lot of people seemed to buy it.

They were a fusion band, blending together beautifully all the best of the past with many of the best features of the new music prominent in their own time. If they were "middle of the road" then what was on the left & right of them other than a lot of 3rd rate stuff crashing into the gutter - like a lot of music that came after them. This is reminiscent of what happened in Classical music after Mozart and Beethoven left their immense marks on the music world. It was unlike anything that came before, and nothing could equal it afterwards.

Now, there are 3 main groups of Carpenter reactors: (1) that very small group who, for inexplicable and irrational reasons, actually did disdain their music; (2) a moderate sized group, who out of cowardness, said publicly that they disdained their music - but secretly listened to & loved it, and have since "come out of the closet"; and (3) that very large group who loved their music.

The image "problem" was of their own making, in the sense that they gave it any credence at all, and allowed it to bother them as much as they did or to
any extent at all, instead of just saying "f**k all of that bullsh*t , let's get back in rhe recording studio and make some more great music".

Their career was a very sad case of immense potential unrealized, of a colossal amount of lost opportunity, of genius gone astray. If they had not worried so senselessly and needlessly about something as stupid as image; if they had stayed in the recording studio 90% of the time instead of touring; and if they had recorded everything live and thrown away all of the artificial technical gimmicks that they used to distort and diminish their sound, their history would be unparalleled and untouchable.


They botched their chance at real greatness - as good as they were they never fulfilled their incredible potential - and it's a crying shame, literally.

 

[newvillefan]

If they had not worried so senselessly and needlessly about something as stupid as image; if they had stayed in the recording studio 90% of the time instead of touring; and if they had recorded everything live and thrown away all of the artificial technical gimmicks that they used to distort and diminish their sound, their history would be unparalleled and untouchable.

I agree with everything up to the bit about the technical gimmicks. Without the studio techniques like overdubbing, their signature sound simply would never have existed, their breakthrough hit would never have had the impact it did, and they never would have achieved the success they did.

They botched their chance at real greatness - as good as they were they never fulfilled their incredible potential - and it's a crying shame, literally.

I know where you’re coming from, but 100 million+ sales does equate to real greatness in my book. It was their personal lives that were their undoing in the end - causing Richard to go off the creative boil after 1975 and Karen’s life to be cut short due to her personal battles over many years.

 

[JohnFB]

I agree with everything up to the bit about the technical gimmicks. Without the studio techniques like overdubbing, their signature sound simply would never have existed, their breakthrough hit would never have had the impact it did, and they never would have achieved the success they did.

 

[JohnFB]

That particular signature sound wouldn't have existed, but that doesn't mean that some different, highly appealing signature sound couldn't have been created using, say, 3-5 real, live, talented studio backup singers on most or many of their recordings. It would have been different, but not necessarily worse. There are tons of very talented singers out there, and if you have a chance to sing backup to Karen Carpenter can you imagine how long that line would have been...

These same considerations apply especially to the "signature sound" of Karen's double-tracked lead vocals. There is no proof that using this distorting technique with her ever increased their record sales over what they might have been without it, i.e., with just only her pure, natural, beautiful voice. Millions of fans would have loved to hear the difference - including almost everyone who says there is nothing wrong with that double-tracking.

And I don't think it's justified to say with any degree of confidence that their breakthrough hit wouldn't have had the impact that it did without that original Carpenter signature sound (as opposed to some new, different live technique), or that they would never have achieved the success that they did. There would have been no way to accurately determine this except by comparison over time in the real record-selling world.

 

[newvillefan]

These same considerations apply especially to the "signature sound" of Karen's double-tracked lead vocals. There is no proof that using this distorting technique with her ever increased their record sales over what they might have been without it, i.e., with just only her pure, natural, beautiful voice. Millions of fans would have loved to hear the difference - including almost everyone who says there is nothing wrong with that double-tracking.

Your dislike of the double tracking is well documented (repeated in most of your posts in fact) but the truth is, if it hadn’t been employed on certain songs, the records would have sounded unfinished, and very bare and thin. Karen wasn’t a belter by nature, so Richard chose to reinforce her vocal sound by doubling it. It’s no great crime and actually makes the records sound better.

As an example of what I mean, take a listen to the KC Story movie in the segment where you hear Karen singing the line “sharing horizons that are new to us” as they are laying down tracks. Without the double, Karen’s voice just sounds weak, with nowhere near the impact the finished record has. The fact is, Karen sounded great when the technique was employed, particularly on the early 70s material.

When Karen is doubled, a magical ‘third’ voice appears - similar to when Agnetha and Frida sing in unison. And that’s part of the charm. Remove it, and you kill the finished result. In the same way, remove their sibling overdubs and bring in other backing singers, and you kill the sound that made them famous. You only have to listen to their live records to hear that.

 

[Matthew S]

But, would they have a better chance of getting into the Hall of Fame without the double tracking?

 

[Jack A.]

Personally, I don’t have a problem with double-tracking. I feel it can be used to enhance the sound of what is still a singular voice, or reinforce it, as Stephen mentioned. It does work better in some places than others though - for example, on the chorus of “Rocket Man” I feel it was necessary, as it helped Elton’s voice have more of that belting power above all the backing vocals. For more intimate songs, like those of the Carpenters, it wasn’t always necessary, but it still could have been used strategically.

P.S. The only two songs I can even think of with a double tracked lead are “A Kind Of Hush” and “Sweet Sweet Smile” - are there others? I may just have not paid attention to some.

 

[JohnFB]

..

...but the truth is, if it hadn’t been employed on certain songs, the records would have sounded unfinished, and very bare and thin.

S ounded "unfinished"? Only because you've heard them finished with the DT - if you were used to hearing it without DT you'd think that was the finished sound...

And when did her deep, rich, resonant voice ever sound "thin"?

Karen wasn’t a belter by nature, so Richard chose to reinforce her vocal sound by doubling it. It’s no great crime and actually makes the records sound better.

W asn't a "belter by nature"? Then who was that singing lead on A SONG FOR YOU, SOLITAIRE, DESPERADO, BABY ITS YOU, RAINY DAYS, YOU'RE THE ONE, TICKET TO RIDE, etc.?

Her wonderful voice never needed reinforcement or technical "enhancements".

...The fact is, Karen sounded great when the technique was employed, particularly on the early 70s material.

When Karen is doubled, a magical ‘third’ voice appears ...

No, the fact is that every time that technique was employed Karen no longer sounded like the real Karen, but instead like some strange mechanical/electronic clone of herself & was totally unreal.It was completely artificial and not magical at all.

 

[JohnFB]

But, would they have a better chance of getting into the Hall of Fame without the double tracking?

Probably not, but your enjoyment - and that of millions of others - would have been greatly enhanced...or maybe not if your standards for that are minimal...

 

[JohnFB]

...

P.S. The only two songs I can even think of with a double tracked lead are “A Kind Of Hush” and “Sweet Sweet Smile” - are there others? I may just have not paid attention to some.

Yes, there are others, many others - not complete songs, but in most cases all or part of the choruses of many songs...listen closely.

 

[3Favorites]

Well, I'm happy with the records the way they gave them to us. The sound of Karen's voice is so wonderful, it just gives me chills.

 

[newvillefan]

No, the fact is that every time that technique was employed Karen no longer sounded like the real Karen, but instead like some strange mechanical/electronic clone of herself & was totally unreal.It was completely artificial and not magical at all.

There are millions who would disagree with you.

Yes, there are others, many others - not complete songs, but in most cases all or part of the choruses of many songs...listen closely.

‘I Won’t Last A Day Without You’ is double tracked and she sounds wonderful. It’s one of their most beloved hits.

 

[Nemily]

Well, I'm happy with the records the way they gave them to us. The sound of Karen's voice is so wonderful, it just gives me chills.

I would just add that the question of their greatness should be defined by their contributions to music. Carpenters’ contributions in the early-mid 70’s music history (as well as their MOR cousins) have as much of a strong claim as any genre to great music made during the 70’s and to Pop music in general.

CO (Contemporarily Oriented as K&R used to refer to it in 1970), MOR, soft rock, FM Lite and Pop were all renamed as Adult Contemporary in 1979. Who morphed into who is an ongoing discussion, however there are many intersections of mainstream pop and rock music. I don’t understand where the line is drawn by the HOF. But that does not eclipse Carpenters greatness or mar their significant and many contributions in music history.

 

[Nemily]

(And they have very much remained relevant and in the conversation 55 years later )

 

[Murray]

No, the fact is that every time that technique was employed Karen no longer sounded like the real Karen, but instead like some strange mechanical/electronic clone of herself & was totally unreal.It was completely artificial and not magical at all.

Are you ever going to stop flogging that poor dead, rotting horse?

 

[newvillefan]

Karen no longer sounded like the real Karen, but instead like some strange mechanical/electronic clone of herself & was totally unreal.

Exactly how reviewers described their 1975 album…said nobody ever.

 

[Matthew S]

Probably not, but your enjoyment - and that of millions of others - would have been greatly enhanced...or maybe not if your standards for that are minimal...

Thanks but I don’t need you to tell me what I enjoy. And we all know what you enjoy. And that you like to argue about it. Not sure why anyone else on this forum even tries to debate you on this, your mind is made up. Over and out.

 

[Matthew S]

Thanks but I don’t need you to tell me what I enjoy. And we all know what you enjoy. And that you like to argue about it. Not sure why anyone else on this forum even tries to debate you on this, your mind is made up. Over and out.

And this thread is no longer about the HOF and should probably be closed.

 

[newvillefan]

Thanks but I don’t need you to tell me what I enjoy. And we all know what you enjoy. And that you like to argue about it. Not sure why anyone else on this forum even tries to debate you on this, your mind is made up. Over and out.

If I’ve got the last word before the thread is closed - kudos!

 

[1969]

Seeing that @Chris May originally started this thread back in 2005 and has survived since, it would be a shame to see it closed because it went off the rails a little bit in the last day or two. The discussion can easily be steered back to the HOF as topic.

 

[newvillefan]

To your point about the original topic, I'm not sure there's anything else we add but...why are we still waiting? Who knows.

 

[JohnFB]

Are you ever going to stop flogging that poor dead, rotting horse?

Sure, I can do that - flogging stopped - but I'll never understand why anyone would take the best voice ever in Pop/Rock music and f**k with it, or why those who claim to love hearing it so much aren't raising holy hell about the sonic violation of that recorded voice...it's like playing a Stadivarious violin using chain metal as the bow string.

Yes, this thread needs closed down - and while you're at it some consideration might be given to closing down the entire forum...yes, I'm saying the same thing over and over, but that's generally true of the forum as a whole...

Harry - do what you do best.

 

[Harry]

If you look back a few pages, you'll see that I was the one that essentially re-opened this thread, with my newer ruminations about the RRHOF and Carpenters. I did that rather than open a new thread.

And as a matter of fact, I have since regretted doing so as it seemed that every day a few new posts were added, as if the can of worms was spilling over. It has occurred to me that perhaps this thread had indeed run its course.

So, I think that locking it down might be the best course of action right now. We've all had our say. To JohnFB, I'll say that this action has very little to do with your pet peeve, but way more that the RRHOF doesn't deserve so much attention. John, you have your opinion on the doubling - we've all read it - you've expressed yourself well - and your view should be respected, which I think most of us do. We respect it, but we may not agree with it, and it sometimes gets old reading about it. But the old Forum mantra is, or should be, if you don't like reading something, just leave it be and move on.

And so with the snuffing out of the flame, I declare this thread closed...