🎧 Podcast Carpenters: Q&A, Ep. 1

Podcasts

Chris May

Resident ‘Carpenterologist’
Staff member
Moderator
Hi all,

I will begin posting video responses related to a number of questions I get asked—either general questions about the Carpenters' recordings and/or production, or questions directly related to the creation of the recently released book, Carpenters: The Musical Legacy.

In this video, I talk about the original demo recordings submitted to Herb Alpert which ultimately got the Carpenters their record deal, and how those recordings contrast with the final master recordings heard on their debut album, "Offering." I also address the issue related to a number of tracks recorded between late-1974 through the end of the decade, and how those recordings were affected as a result of the hearing loss suffered by their recording engineer, Ray Gerhardt.

Part one:

 
Loving this!!
Hi all,

I will begin posting video responses related to a number of questions I get asked—either general questions about the Carpenters' recordings and/or production, or questions directly related to the creation of the recently released book, Carpenters: The Musical Legacy. Here is part one:

 
Thanks Chris.

Regarding "B'wana, She No Home", it is correct to say that the track, in all its iterations is essentially mixed into a very narrow stereo field. There's are digital audio tools that can bring this out. If you use Audacity, there's a plug-in called "Channel Mixer" and if you use it on "B'wana...", there's a pre-installed setting called "Wide Stereo" that will separate the stereo elements more widely than the mix as it exists. If you try this on a pure mono track, you get nothing different, but on "B'wana..." you can now hear the separated elements shifted more right or more left. One particular place to notice this, is as Chris says, on some of the backing vocals, in particular Richard's deep "B'wana". It always was slightly right, but this plug-in really moves it to the right side of the stereo.

When the song was mastered to vinyl originally on both the album and the single as a b-side, the masterer must have added a slight trailing reverb echo to give the song just a bit more stereo. As the track was also new at that point, it also had a bit more high frequency to it that got a bit more muffled in later years as the tape aged.
 
Thanks Chris.

Regarding "B'wana, She No Home", it is correct to say that the track, in all its iterations is essentially mixed into a very narrow stereo field. There's are digital audio tools that can bring this out. If you use Audacity, there's a plug-in called "Channel Mixer" and if you use it on "B'wana...", there's a pre-installed setting called "Wide Stereo" that will separate the stereo elements more widely than the mix as it exists. If you try this on a pure mono track, you get nothing different, but on "B'wana..." you can now hear the separated elements shifted more right or more left. One particular place to notice this, is as Chris says, on some of the backing vocals, in particular Richard's deep "B'wana". It always was slightly right, but this plug-in really moves it to the right side of the stereo.

When the song was mastered to vinyl originally on both the album and the single as a b-side, the masterer must have added a slight trailing reverb echo to give the song just a bit more stereo. As the track was also new at that point, it also had a bit more high frequency to it that got a bit more muffled in later years as the tape aged.
Any chance you could post the wider stereo version, Harry? I know I'd love to hear it!
 
It's so interesting that "Love Me..." and "Sailing..." both sound very good sonically - especially "Love Me...". That "Horizon" album is a total sonic triumph. That Ray's hearing was already going then isn't evident in the least bit. "B'wana" really seemed to suffer though. Heck, even "All You Get..." sounds pretty good to my ears and that's on the same album.

Shame that Richard didn't notice it but how do put someone out to pasture like that? Maybe Richard just couldn't bring himself to do it. Either way, "B'wana" is so good that I can live with the "boxy" sound.

Ed
 
What is an instrument that they both liked that they felt had to somehow be in the song? Like for example the oboe or the steel guitar. I personally like the steel guitar. I think back to that small part that you're just in love and those good old dreams share. Its the same guitar part just a bit slower.
 
It's so interesting that "Love Me..." and "Sailing..." both sound very good sonically - especially "Love Me...". That "Horizon" album is a total sonic triumph. That Ray's hearing was already going then isn't evident in the least bit. "B'wana" really seemed to suffer though. Heck, even "All You Get..." sounds pretty good to my ears and that's on the same album.

Actually, I beg to differ with you. Listen to the drums (for example) on “Love Me For What I Am.” They sound horrible. However, Karen’s leads and the piano tracks in general were rarely, if ever affected simply because it was often Roger Young that recorded the vocals (in particular). As a side note—Ray was never a big fan of drums, which may partially explain this, but not fully, given he also recorded drums on "Close to You" for instance, which sounded fantastic. But again, the hearing loss started to become more apparent later on.

As for “All You Get From Love,” Roger Young recorded that one all the way through, which is why you hear the difference.
 
It definitely opens up here. Nice treble bump. A bit wider too. Nice work!

Ed
I did nothing with that track other than use this "channel mixer" plug-in. The basic track I used was from the old original A&M CD, and this was the result. There was no EQ and nothing else done to the track. I don't know what kind of compression might have been added by YouTube.
 
Thanks Chris.

Regarding "B'wana, She No Home", it is correct to say that the track, in all its iterations is essentially mixed into a very narrow stereo field. There's are digital audio tools that can bring this out. If you use Audacity, there's a plug-in called "Channel Mixer" and if you use it on "B'wana...", there's a pre-installed setting called "Wide Stereo" that will separate the stereo elements more widely than the mix as it exists. If you try this on a pure mono track, you get nothing different, but on "B'wana..." you can now hear the separated elements shifted more right or more left. One particular place to notice this, is as Chris says, on some of the backing vocals, in particular Richard's deep "B'wana". It always was slightly right, but this plug-in really moves it to the right side of the stereo.

When the song was mastered to vinyl originally on both the album and the single as a b-side, the masterer must have added a slight trailing reverb echo to give the song just a bit more stereo. As the track was also new at that point, it also had a bit more high frequency to it that got a bit more muffled in later years as the tape aged.
That doesn’t make much sense when the same effect was applied to LP’s mastered in other countries. Sure they would’ve sent notes, but if those reverbs weren’t on the original master, then how could those mastering engineers have them or recreated them exactly as the American engineer? And there’s also the 45’s. We’re the mastered by the same person or a different engineer?
 
That doesn’t make much sense when the same effect was applied to LP’s mastered in other countries. Sure they would’ve sent notes, but if those reverbs weren’t on the original master, then how could those mastering engineers have them or recreated them exactly as the American engineer? And there’s also the 45’s. We’re the mastered by the same person or a different engineer?
Sometimes mastering brings out—or accentuates certain things (like a reverb trail that was mixed slightly out of center or in full stereo all together).

Another thing to keep in mind is that a wider 2-channel mix can be brought in by a (re)mastering engineer later on. So, depending on whichever issues they may face at the time a track is being remastered, the hard L—>R stereo field can be panned inward to any degree, at the discretion of the mastering engineer. This isn't uncommon, and also helps clarify why we tend to hear these differences.
 
Chris May writes:
"Listen to the drums (for example) on “Love Me For What I Am.” They sound horrible."

So, I do have a question.
If the drums really do "sound horrible,"
how did that song, with that "horrible" sound ever get past a test-pressing stage for the Horizon album ?
How did that find its way on to the finished product ?
That is Jim Gordon on drums and he was a fantastic drummer.
 
Chris May writes:
"Listen to the drums (for example) on “Love Me For What I Am.” They sound horrible."

So, I do have a question.
If the drums really do "sound horrible,"
how did that song, with that "horrible" sound ever get past a test-pressing stage for the Horizon album ?
How did that find its way on to the finished product ?
That is Jim Gordon on drums and he was a fantastic drummer.
This has absolutely nothing to do with Jim's or Karen's drumming.

Listen to the sonic quality of the drums on, say, "Only Yesterday." Roger Young recorded those tracks, Jim played the drums. Now, compare that to "Love Me For What I Am." Ray recorded those, and it was actually Karen that played the drums on that one.

Regardless of who played what, there is a difference in the quality in which they were 'recorded', not performed. To further support the argument, listen to everything recorded on Hush. You have the same issue here as well—sonically.
 
Actually, I beg to differ with you. Listen to the drums (for example) on “Love Me For What I Am.” They sound horrible. However, Karen’s leads and the piano tracks in general were rarely, if ever affected simply because it was often Roger Young that recorded the vocals (in particular). As a side note—Ray was never a big fan of drums, which may partially explain this, but not fully, given he also recorded drums on "Close to You" for instance, which sounded fantastic. But again, the hearing loss started to become more apparent later on.

As for “All You Get From Love,” Roger Young recorded that one all the way through, which is why you hear the difference.
It actually sounds like instead of drums, the drummer is beating on a leather sofa. Totally dead sounding. I never really honed in on that before - no wonder I don't care for the track.
 
Chris May writes:
"it was actually Karen that played the drums on that one (Love Me For What I Am).

I apologize, as I had gotten my information from the
Fan Club Newsletter #66 (January 1980):
Q: On which tracks did Karen play drums on the Horizon album ?
A: Please Mr. Postman and Happy.
 
Chris May writes:
"it was actually Karen that played the drums on that one (Love Me For What I Am).

I apologize, as I had gotten my information from the
Fan Club Newsletter #66 (January 1980):
Q: On which tracks did Karen play drums on the Horizon album ?
A: Please Mr. Postman and Happy.
No problem! Just clarifying, as it likely just got overlooked when Evelyn or Rosina wrote the newsletter. Given that track (as well as "Postman") got recorded in '74, and "Happy" in early-'75, it's not surprising that Karen played drums on all of them. In fact, the first version of "Sailing On The Tide" was recorded the same day as "Love Me For What I Am," with Karen drumming on both.
 
The Legacy book places the rhythm track of Happy as: September 19, 1974 (page 259).
Please Mr. Postman rhythm track is: July 22, 1974 (page 283).
Too bad the Legacy book did not include the info for the rhythm track of Love Me For What I Am.
 
The Legacy book places the rhythm track of Happy as: September 19, 1974 (page 259).
Please Mr. Postman rhythm track is: July 22, 1974 (page 283).
Too bad the Legacy book did not include the info for the rhythm track of Love Me For What I Am.

You're right about "Happy," as I misspoke!

The rhythm track info for "Love Me For What I Am" is listed in the discography—September 10, 1974.
 
I did nothing with that track other than use this "channel mixer" plug-in. The basic track I used was from the old original A&M CD, and this was the result. There was no EQ and nothing else done to the track. I don't know what kind of compression might have been added by YouTube.
Listening to them in small bits one after the other, there is a huge difference. The minimal change you made had a lot of impact, in my opinion. Really freshened it up quite a bit.
 
Back
Top Bottom