Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
A&M didn't "recoup" the 100k they invested in the album-that was the standard advance they gave for every Carpenters album.A&M lost that money. The 400K additional tab that Karen ran up was charged against royalties from "Made In America". Technically,Karen didn't lay out any money for the album-she lost future royalties that she would've received from MIA.A&M recouped 100k thru CarpenterS royalties...this plus K's 400k? GD heads would be arollin' if I took it up the a##! Ok so A&M is satisfied. Not out a dime. KC is told what? "That's showbiz"!?
Jeff
The reason MIA took as long as it did is that Karen met Tom Burris, got engaged and married between April and August of 1980. The recording sessions were put on hold while she planned her wedding and then took some time off after she got married.
Karen's solo LP took as long because she was in such poor health - it dragged on for months longer than it should have done as she was back in LA for a lot of this time, hence why Phil Ramone took to recording the latter parts of it at A&M in Los Angeles.
The $400,000 that Karen spent is not in dispute-and there's nothing foggy here.The record label makes a certain allowance for the recording costs of every album.If an artist spends over that amount-they become responsible for the extra tab.That amount is deducted from royalties once the album is released.It has oft been reported that the 400k NOW in dispute was Karen's sole investment apart from A&M has it not? Foggy here but didn't Coleman and Randy clearly indicate this as such? Never been one to buy a pig in a poke...I'm finding it difficult to accept such bold statements as factual rather than grandiose speculation. While having the advantage of Richard's personal response to your questionnaire Mr. J sir, and far be it from me to disparage but many times you report insider info as 1st person and subsequently leaves me to wonder if you are not the proverbial fly on the wall or what? All due respect when I say easy does it. Ya know lets walk softly and carry a big stick.
Jeff
Let's look at it this way: Karen charged up a $500,000 bill for the album.The bills were sent to A&M-which they paid.A&M agreed to cover $100,000.Karen was responsible for the other $400,000-and that became the "debt"-which was charged against royalties from the next album.In a re-reading of the NY Times article , my understanding is--and, please correct me if I am wrong--
The record company allotted $100,000 to the solo effort,that is the amount A&M wanted to recoup through future royalties.
Karen spent $400,000 of her own money, this amount she, in effect, lost.
A&M recoups their money, Karen loses hers.(Coleman p.273-4, "...debt for production charged to future royalties")
This is also how I read/understand the collective source material that I have.
Let's look at it this way: Karen charged up a $500,000 bill for the album.The bills were sent to A&M-which they paid.A&M agreed to cover $100,000.Karen was responsible for the other $400,000-and that became the "debt"-which was charged against royalties from the next album.
A&M gave Karen the $100,000 allowance for the album-that was A&M's money that was lost when they decided to cancel the album.If A&M had charged that amount to future royalties,then it would've been Karen's money and she would've actually spent $500,000 of her own money-instead of $400,000.
If Karen had paid the $400,000 debt upfront or had it deducted from her future earnings-it was still her money,if she was responsible for the debt.
Everyone has brought up some very good points on this issue, but, I must concur that Karen was not treated like A&M's top-drawer vocalist.
I think sometimes A&M took advantage of the fact Karen didn't act like a diva. Maybe too nice for her own good!At that time in her career, with the stature she held at the label due to the revenues she had generated for A&M and her enormous success and achievements, they should have been demurring to her as to whether she wanted it out or not, not calling the shots themselves. Simple as that.
I can understand your confusion-the term "invested" wasn't really an accurate way of describing the situation.On the bottom of page 270, Coleman's book reads:
"Karen had invested about $400,000 of her own money in the album's production costs,
adding to A&M's commitment of $100,000."
(p.274-quoted in part) "..she was not amused...the loss of more than $400,000...was a heavy price to pay.."
I suppose the way I am reading Coleman, or the manner in which it is written in that book, is confusing to me!
Everyone has brought up some very good points on this issue, but, I must concur that Karen was not treated like
A&M's top-drawer vocalist.
Even a cursory re-reading of the Coleman biography brings up more questions than it answers regarding the entire enterprise.
The chapter from which the above quotes are taken contains some insight, but
I am left with a feeling of ambiguity with respect to quotes therein from Richard Carpenter, Herb Alpert and Phil Ramone.
Like any other historical document, many more questions remain unanswered.
I think sometimes A&M took advantage of the fact Karen didn't act like a diva. Maybe too nice for her own good!
Welcome to the Boards, Natesmommy! I always like to see new folks here and get new input! Just thought I'd let you know I am a "mister". Never thought of mstaft as Ms. Taft. Pretty funny!Good point Ms. Taft. Karen-ever the nice girl. I'd conjecture to say the same Karen who wouldn't dare ever challenge her mother was the same Karen who you're speaking of here. I do not mean to imply that Karen was weak or unable to think or make decisions for herself at all. It's just that the nice Karen who sought to please and keep the peace did so at such a high price.
And I certainly do not mean to sound daft by saying this (because I do not claim to know all of the details and I love Richard and respect him), and I often wonder how many times in the last 31 years Richard and/or Herb have thought in hindsight if it had been released would she still be here?
Speaking from experience, I've found that a common thread amongst those who have suffered with an eating disorder (myself included) is that they struggle to feel grown up or their age. I think the solo album was such an attempt by Karen to feel her age. The shelving of it started an unstoppable downward spiral. What a blow to such a fragile, developing ego.
I don't think all of the questions will ever be answered and yet there's something about her life and death that draws me in and intrigues me to the core. When I read Randy's book in 2010, I remember crying wishing there was someway to go back in time and comfort her.
I will never tire of her voice or her story.
Welcome to the Boards, Natesmommy! I always like to see new folks here and get new input! Just thought I'd let you know I am a "mister". Never thought of mstaft as Ms. Taft. Pretty funny!
The only thing I could imagine Richard writing would be a bio of their recording/touring history. I don't think he would even touch the deeper personal issues. Of course many would love to read his insight on their recordings in a bio form.So many wonderful and insightful viewpoints expressed! I enjoy reading everyone's comments!
Jeff, knowing how meticulous Richard Carpenter is, I would rather he wrote --with no intermediary-- an autobiography.
My understanding is that Coleman was a well respected music writer, however his writing of the Carpenter bio suffers greatly.
Not intending to undermine his capabilities as a writer, I simply feel as if Coleman is avoiding the emotional aura.
Randy's bio was riveting and emotionally draining (i.e., it really made me weep at times-and that is uncommon for me).Compelling.
Richard writes very well and could accomplish a thorough, certainly a meticulous, exposition of Carpenters.
I, too, respect and appreciate Richard greatly as my other idol, so it is entirely possible, if not plausible,
that I am being unfair to him and placing him on a pedestal impossible to live up to.
But, that being said, Carpenters legacy deserves a more thorough, historically accurate, well-written, biographical tome.
Publishing, being what it is today, the likelihood of such an endeavor is slim.
Thankfully, there is the Coleman, and Randy Schmidt's books to read and re-read.
"The utility of biography rests on the fact that we can enter by sympathy into situations in which others have found themselves."
(quoted from Westfall's biography of Isaac Newton)
I must concur that Karen's solo effort , when placed alongside anything/anyone else at that time, is at least as good
and often better than , her contemporaries.
I do not feel a comparison to her previous work with Richard is an apt methodology for judging its merits.
The album should have been released at that time.