• Two exciting new Carpenters releases are in the pipeline! The new book Carpenters: The Musical Legacy will be available on November 16, 2021 and can be ordered here. A big thanks to the authors and Richard Carpenter for their tremendous effort in compiling this book! Also, the new solo piano album Richard Carpenter's Piano Songbook is being released January 14, 2022, and is available for ordering here.

⭐ Official Review Carpenters Royal Philharmonic Review and Comments Thread

How would you rate Carpenters with the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra?

  • ⁕⁕⁕⁕⁕ (Best)

    Votes: 33 35.1%
  • ⁕⁕⁕⁕

    Votes: 43 45.7%
  • ⁕⁕⁕ (Average)

    Votes: 15 16.0%
  • ⁕⁕

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • ⁕ (Worst)

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • Did not listen to this album yet

    Votes: 1 1.1%

  • Total voters
    94

Matthew Smith

Well-Known Member
I think we’ve gotten off the subject of this thread. John, maybe it’s a good idea to start a separate thread for this particular discussion about the double tracking and then people won’t be caught off guard seeing it again in a different topic. Then, that thread could go on and on discussing just that, and those who want to continue that discussion can do so in that thread. Now, maybe we get back to discussion of this particular album.

@Cuyler I almost felt like the vocal on “Hurting Each Other” sounded more like the bare vocal in the beginning especially with no effects, and almost sounded like you could hear the sound being isolated by the vocal booth. Not sure exactly how to describe it, but it definitely sounded different. I, for one, like the interpretation, especially the closing.
 

JohnFB

I was born to belong to the lines of a song...
I think we’ve gotten off the subject of this thread. John, maybe it’s a good idea to start a separate thread for this particular discussion about the double tracking and then people won’t be caught off guard seeing it again in a different topic. Then, that thread could go on and on discussing just that, and those who want to continue that discussion can do so in that thread. Now, maybe we get back to discussion of this particular album.
Mathew - it would be interesting to do some research back through the history of this forum and determine approximately how many "pure" topic threads exist - that is, threads (of any appreciable length) in which absolutely no deviation from the intended topic of discussion occurred, and did so multiple times - I suspect that there would be very few, if any. And in most cases changes back to the thread topic do take place - just as you've done here. This is the normal course of events and most members take it for granted and think nothing of it. Every once in a while someone will complain about this "topic drift" but usually not - they simply change the discussion back to the original topic and it carries on (at least until the next "hijacking"). I also suspect that when the topic of discussion is changed by one of the moderators (which it sometimes is) very few if any complaints are lodged. This is known as "moderator privilege". They even get to make disparaging and sarcastic remarks about a topic while simultaneously joining in the discussion with every intention of being taken seriously.

And nobody is "caught off guard" by coming upon a change in subject - except maybe the subject of the double tracking of Karen's voice on recordings. It seems to be a highly sensitive, almost forbidden topic - and not because it's been discussed too much, but primarily because no one seems able to come up with a reasonable justification for it's use in her case, given her incomparable vocal talent and appeal - as they say the truth hurts and can't be handled easily.

So, my return advice to you is the same as I offered to Michael above (and anyone else) - if you don't like the content of my posts at any point then simply don't read them and move on and change the subject, to either the original or to your favorite diversionary topic.
 

Harry

Charter A&M Corner Member
Staff member
Site Admin
Thread Starter
[Moderator note: please read the whole post]

JohnFB is certainly correct regarding "thread drift." It's a normal occurrence on a message board like this, as we're all human, and all have our own individual ideas and personalities about a wide variety of subjects. When threads do get a bit off-topic and head into a logical "other" direction, it can sometimes be necessary and desirable to split the wayward posts away and make a new topic. This happens occasionally, and makes it easier for future searches and reads on various topics.

Another feature that's available to most of you is the "ignore" feature. If you don't like reading someone's frequent posts on a particular topic - or even if the person seems to rub you the wrong way, then a simple click on "ignore" when you've clicked on that person's avatar (picture icon) will steer you clear of that persons posts for as long as you'd like. What the system does is simply skip over that person's posts in any thread you open. Occasionally, you'll be reading a thread and that person was the last in and you'll see a notice within the box that you're ignoring this member. And it offers to let you see that post, any time, if you're really curious. It's a great feature. I use it elsewhere - but as a moderator, I really can't use it here.

You see, moderators get the thankless job of reading pretty much everything you all write. We have to do that to keep things "proper". So give us a little slack if sometimes we've read the same thing over and over and get a little testy about it. I'm not making excuses for anyone here, just letting everyone know how it is. When you've read everyone's posts here for twenty-odd years, you begin to expect pretty much exactly what some of the regular posters might say.

JohnFB, I think you get a bit of pushback on your hot-button issue because there just aren't very many sympathizers with your position. A silly example would be someone arriving here and stating that they cannot stand it when Richard hits a B♭ on his piano. It irritates their teeth. OK, that's interesting once, maybe twice, but after awhile, it gets repetitive and to most people to whom that B♭ is not a problem, it becomes an irritant.

Most of us absolutely love the idea of double-tracking Karen. Two Karens are better than one, and Carpenters' whole shtick is based on the overdubbing and studio techniques that Richard employed. Most of us love that aspect of them. It's not that you're "wrong". You have your likes and dislikes, and there are some "isolationists" here - those who strive to hear Karen singing all alone with no accompaniment ever - who probably agree with you. I've stated a few times that I don't like it when Karen mangles her syllables when she sings live. Others love that - and I respect their differences of opinion by not hammering my position too often.

Of course, JohnFB is right in that as long as anything that is posted remains respectful and on a topic that this board permits, it's just fine. In this particular case, JohnFB brought up his hot-button issue of double-tracking within the context of the subject of the thread, and there's nothing really wrong with it here. Everyone has the ability to "ignore" him if they feel he's an irritant.

So let's just keep our cool, let the moderators do their thing, and let's be respectful of others opinions.

We return you now to your original thread and the topic is the RPO review and comments.
 

Another Son

Well-Known Member
You definitely echo my sentiments. Hearing "Touch Me When We're Dancing" without the reverb was so refreshing.

If someone could take a listen to "Hurting Each Other" and let me know what you think about Karen's vocals... was she autotuned? Her voice is definitely digitally processed somehow... :\
I’m fairly sure that the vocal is the same as always, although I see from reading what I noticed from when I first listened, I wasn’t sure if one or two lines came from a different take - but I don’t think so. This seems to be what others have felt, too - that the vocal is as always.

First time I heard this mix, I did notice a change in tempo in one spot - almost like a pause for a fraction of a second, which surprised me, as Richard is usually so exact - and the ‘Can’t we stop?’ that finishes the song seems to come in just a fraction of a second too soon, as if it hasn’t been edited on precisely.
 
Last edited:

Another Son

Well-Known Member
I know that’s being finicky about precision and details, but most of us are possibly the type of people who have been drawn to Karen and Richard’s music because of their near-perfection.
 

Cuyler

Bright colored pinwheels go 'round in my head.
I think we’ve gotten off the subject of this thread. John, maybe it’s a good idea to start a separate thread for this particular discussion about the double tracking and then people won’t be caught off guard seeing it again in a different topic. Then, that thread could go on and on discussing just that, and those who want to continue that discussion can do so in that thread. Now, maybe we get back to discussion of this particular album.

@Cuyler I almost felt like the vocal on “Hurting Each Other” sounded more like the bare vocal in the beginning especially with no effects, and almost sounded like you could hear the sound being isolated by the vocal booth. Not sure exactly how to describe it, but it definitely sounded different. I, for one, like the interpretation, especially the closing.

I’m fairly sure that the vocal is the same as always, although I see from reading what I noticed from when I first listened, I wasn’t sure if one or two lines came from a different take - but I don’t think so. This seems to be what others have felt, too - that the vocal is as always.

First time I heard this mix, I did notice a change in tempo in one spot - almost like a pause for a fraction of a second, which surprised me, as Richard is usually so exact - and the ‘Can’t we stop?’ that finishes the song seems to come in just a fraction of a second too soon, as if it hasn’t been edited on precisely.
It's interesting to me because, to me, it sounds like the same take, but that Karen's voice is a little "too" digital. It doesn't have that same warmth that the A Song for You CD has, for instance. Agreed with the tempo. The re-done drums aren't "in the pocket" like the original.
 

Another Son

Well-Known Member
Cuyler, yes, I did notice that the vocal sounded somehow different on HEO, although I hadn’t necessarily noticed that it wasn’t as warm.

I do agree with your comment about the drums. I actually don’t like the new drums, throughout the album. There are just three sounds that, personally, jar on this album, for me. They are the drums, the piccolo trumpet on ‘Goodbye To Love’ and the OK Chorale-style choir - ESPECIALLY the OK Chorale-style choir. But, as has been said, that’s all been discussed before, (just not by me). Everything else on the album is great, I think, to my ears - so Richard did amazingly well.

I must say, I’ve only listened to this album a few times since its release - probably five or six times. I do enjoy the different mix of vocals on ‘Touch Me When We’re Dancing’ - and how ‘For All We Know’, ‘Superstar’ and ‘Rainy Days and Mondays’ are done - the new drums seem to fit in better on RD&M.
 

Cuyler

Bright colored pinwheels go 'round in my head.
Hi all,

Sorry for the "For All We Know" craziness. This is probably my favorite Carpenters TV performance (even if it's lipsynced). The colors, the dress, the fake clouds, it's all so perfect and fitting for the song imho.

I had this *crazy* idea of putting the RPO version on top of the Andy Williams Show performance.


(The link as of posting is not live, but it is unlisted; YouTube is currently processing the video. I will make it live once YouTube has finished processing.)

Upon listening to it again, I'm very, very impressed with Richard's orchestration on the RPO version of "For All We Know."

Some fine details I want to point out:
1) As others have mentioned in the context of other songs on this album, Karen's vocals are not saturated with reverb. (Interestingly, the high-hat sounds like it has more reverb than Karen's voice, which gives the timekeeping mechanism an ethereal feeling.)
2) Unlike my earlier comments about "Hurting Each Other," I think Karen's voice sounds very warm in the RPO version of "For All We Know."

To be quite honest, my only complaint about "For All We Know" is that it wasn't longer! Really happy to have bought the RPO album from Qobuz in 24/192 hi-res.

Cuyler
 

newvillefan

I Know My First Name Is Stephen
I had this *crazy* idea of putting the RPO version on top of the Andy Williams Show performance.

^^^ Nice idea and it gave me the chance to hear this version again for the first time in several months. It’s still basically just a carbon copy of the original arrangement with a couple of new woodwind and violin parts added on.
 
Last edited:

Martin Medrano

Well-Known Member
Hi all,

Sorry for the "For All We Know" craziness. This is probably my favorite Carpenters TV performance (even if it's lipsynced). The colors, the dress, the fake clouds, it's all so perfect and fitting for the song imho.

I had this *crazy* idea of putting the RPO version on top of the Andy Williams Show performance.


(The link as of posting is not live, but it is unlisted; YouTube is currently processing the video. I will make it live once YouTube has finished processing.)

Upon listening to it again, I'm very, very impressed with Richard's orchestration on the RPO version of "For All We Know."

Some fine details I want to point out:
1) As others have mentioned in the context of other songs on this album, Karen's vocals are not saturated with reverb. (Interestingly, the high-hat sounds like it has more reverb than Karen's voice, which gives the timekeeping mechanism an ethereal feeling.)
2) Unlike my earlier comments about "Hurting Each Other," I think Karen's voice sounds very warm in the RPO version of "For All We Know."

To be quite honest, my only complaint about "For All We Know" is that it wasn't longer! Really happy to have bought the RPO album from Qobuz in 24/192 hi-res.

Cuyler
I also baught it on qobuz in 24 bit 192 as well but i downloaded it in WAV. Big files.
Hi all,

Sorry for the "For All We Know" craziness. This is probably my favorite Carpenters TV performance (even if it's lipsynced). The colors, the dress, the fake clouds, it's all so perfect and fitting for the song imho.

I had this *crazy* idea of putting the RPO version on top of the Andy Williams Show performance.


(The link as of posting is not live, but it is unlisted; YouTube is currently processing the video. I will make it live once YouTube has finished processing.)

Upon listening to it again, I'm very, very impressed with Richard's orchestration on the RPO version of "For All We Know."

Some fine details I want to point out:
1) As others have mentioned in the context of other songs on this album, Karen's vocals are not saturated with reverb. (Interestingly, the high-hat sounds like it has more reverb than Karen's voice, which gives the timekeeping mechanism

Hi all,

Sorry for the "For All We Know" craziness. This is probably my favorite Carpenters TV performance (even if it's lipsynced). The colors, the dress, the fake clouds, it's all so perfect and fitting for the song imho.

I had this *crazy* idea of putting the RPO version on top of the Andy Williams Show performance.


(The link as of posting is not live, but it is unlisted; YouTube is currently processing the video. I will make it live once YouTube has finished processing.)

Upon listening to it again, I'm very, very impressed with Richard's orchestration on the RPO version of "For All We Know."

Some fine details I want to point out:
1) As others have mentioned in the context of other songs on this album, Karen's vocals are not saturated with reverb. (Interestingly, the high-hat sounds like it has more reverb than Karen's voice, which gives the timekeeping mechanism an ethereal feeling.)
2) Unlike my earlier comments about "Hurting Each Other," I think Karen's voice sounds very warm in the RPO version of "For All We Know."

To be quite honest, my only complaint about "For All We Know" is that it wasn't longer! Really happy to have bought the RPO album from Qobuz in 24/192 hi-res.

Cuyler
I also baught it on qobuz in 24bit 192 but i downloaded it in WAV.
 

Cuyler

Bright colored pinwheels go 'round in my head.
I also baught it on qobuz in 24 bit 192 as well but i downloaded it in WAV. Big files.



I also baught it on qobuz in 24bit 192 but i downloaded it in WAV.
Yeah! I downloaded WAV files too. Unfortunately, Adobe Premiere Pro hated something about it because the audio post-rendering was choppy. So I had to download redbook WAV files to fix the issue. I hope you enjoy!
 

Martin Medrano

Well-Known Member
Yeah! I downloaded WAV files too. Unfortunately, Adobe Premiere Pro hated something about it because the audio post-rendering was choppy. So I had to download redbook WAV files to fix the issue. I hope you enjoy!
I also own the now and then album from qobuz in flac cd quality. Do you think that WAV would be better
 

Cuyler

Bright colored pinwheels go 'round in my head.
I also own the now and then album from qobuz in flac cd quality. Do you think that WAV would be better
To be honest, I can't tell the difference between lossless file types (AIFF vs FLAC vs ALAC vs WAV). WAV is the biggest filetype (storage-wise) but also WAV is not great with metadata (embedding album name, artist name, cover art, etc.). FLAC is very space-conscious while remaining lossless. Since I use iTunes to organize my music, I go with AIFF or ALAC. But just know that, if you chose WAV, the files will be huge (and many people argue that it's a big cost with little to no benefit).

I would say, when working with source files or for long-term storage, WAV is probably best. But for final products for distribution, convert to another format. :)
 

tomswift2002

Well-Known Member
Lossless mean the data is compressed for smaller size, but when uncompressed by the program all the original data is restored. WAV is more like the "raw" digital audio. There is no different in sound quality, but Lossless saves a lot of disk space.
I would disagree in terms of sound quality. Whenever I’ve heard a FLAC or other “lossless” file, it always sounds off to me when I compare it to a WAV or even a CD version. Even with tv shows & movies, if there’s a PCM track available I’ll play the PCM over a Dolby TrueHD or DTSMA track.

Also, @Cuyler, for video, for most video, the current specs only allow for 16-bit 48 kHz or 44.1 kHz or 12-bit 44.1 kHz audio. Regular & 4K Blu-Rays can offer that, but I don’t think too many do offer it because PCM uses huge amounts of space on the disc, and even Dolby TrueHD & DTSMA, take up a lot of space, and the studio’s want the picture on Blu-Ray & 4K discs to look good. So if you were using 24/192 or 24/96 with Premiere then you are going to have issues with most formats.
 

cam89

Well-Known Member
A great interview, but I've always wondered why that wrong note RC plays at the beginning of Close TO You and KC looks at him like she is saying, What are you doing Rich? Probably rankles him to this day that clip....but of the errors I feel they made was probably 99.9999999 etc....they were both pure geniuses....I was thinking PICK Superstar RC when asked what was his fave song and I personally ALWAYS enjoy that song....the dark lyric, Karen's gorgeous vocals, the arrangement of RC....and when I heard the RPO version I immediately loved what he did to it....if you could CHOOSE a 20 Track RPO of Part 2....what songs would you choose....
1) Aurora
2) Maybe It's You
3) Mr. Guder
4) Another Song
5) Someday
6) I Can't Make Music
7) Those Good Old Dreams
8) I Can Dream Can't I
9) Look To Your Dreams
10) Boat To Sail
11) Solitaire
12) All You Get From Love Is a Love Song
13) Only Yesterday
14) Eve
15) Two Sides
16) Road Ode
17) Sing
18) I'll Never Fall In Love Again
19) One Love
20) Eventide
 

TimeWarp

Well-Known Member
One of my favourite pieces on this album is the orchestral arrangement before "I Just Fall In Love Again". Recently, I noticed that Richard plays a grace note at 0:15. I wanted to post about it on one of my Instagram posts but noticed the grace note was not audible on the version listed as a music selection on the Instagram music feature. At first, I assumed it was simply not audible on Instagram due to quality and can only be heard on the CD or LP, however, a friend of mine listened to her LP and said she couldn't hear it. She also tried listening to the streaming version on Spotify and again, could not hear the grace note. I decided to check for myself and indeed, there isn't a grace note on the streaming version. Seems like there are variations of this song on different pressings. The CD where I can hear the grace note is the Canadian pressing.

I am curious if anyone noticed this subtle difference?
 

tomswift2002

Well-Known Member
One of my favourite pieces on this album is the orchestral arrangement before "I Just Fall In Love Again". Recently, I noticed that Richard plays a grace note at 0:15. I wanted to post about it on one of my Instagram posts but noticed the grace note was not audible on the version listed as a music selection on the Instagram music feature. At first, I assumed it was simply not audible on Instagram due to quality and can only be heard on the CD or LP, however, a friend of mine listened to her LP and said she couldn't hear it. She also tried listening to the streaming version on Spotify and again, could not hear the grace note. I decided to check for myself and indeed, there isn't a grace note on the streaming version. Seems like there are variations of this song on different pressings. The CD where I can hear the grace note is the Canadian pressing.

I am curious if anyone noticed this subtle difference?
The CD version is an earlier pressing of the album and as far as I know has not been updated. However the LP and ITunes versions were upgraded to more complete mixes. Other differences on the CD is the intro to “Ticket” which features the original 1969 mono piano intro but the LP & iTunes features a new stereo piano. Plus there are others. For some reason Richard wasn’t done before the CD was released.
 

TimeWarp

Well-Known Member
The CD version is an earlier pressing of the album and as far as I know has not been updated. However the LP and ITunes versions were upgraded to more complete mixes. Other differences on the CD is the intro to “Ticket” which features the original 1969 mono piano intro but the LP & iTunes features a new stereo piano. Plus there are others. For some reason Richard wasn’t done before the CD was released.
Thank you for this information! This might explain the presence and absence of the harp after the "Overture" and leading into "Yesterday Once More". I haven't noticed the intro to "Ticket" yet but now I'm curious. Going to check it out.
 

tomswift2002

Well-Known Member
Thank you for this information! This might explain the presence and absence of the harp after the "Overture" and leading into "Yesterday Once More". I haven't noticed the intro to "Ticket" yet but now I'm curious. Going to check it out.
Of course I find the best way to listen to the CD is to run it through my surround sound system’s Dolby Digital Pro Logic circuits or even better Pro Logic II music circuits. This CD seems to be encoded in Dolby Surround 2.0 and does it really sound good getting wrapped around you. Even the Beach Boys RPO sounds good in Dolby Surround.
 
Top Bottom