JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
Bah, humbug!
Santa's got you on his naughty list & won't be stopping by on Christmas Eve!
JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
Maybe it's the powerful nostalgic feel engendered by the song's lyrics, especially in the bridge:
Here we are as in olden days,
Happy golden days of yore.
Faithful friends who are dear to us,
Gather near to us once more.
The same pervasive nostalgic feelings are brought forward in several other beautiful and popular Christmas songs. For example, in WHITE CHRISTMAS there is:
I'm dreaming of a white Christmas
Just like the ones I used to know...
And in MERRY CHRISTMAS, DARLING there's the nostalgic, longing feel of:
Merry Christmas, darling
We're apart that's true.
But I can dream
And in my dreams
I'm Christmasing with you.
One could possibly argue that for a Christmas song to be truly beautiful and classic - and very popular - it must have this nostalgic core within the lyrics...but nostalgia can have either a positive or negative effect on a listener, depending on past Christmas experiences.
BILLSJUKEBOX
Member
Cheer up, There is hope for you yet! You just need to listen to it more. Every year when they pull the plug on Christmas music at midnight on the 25th, I get out my CP cd and throw it in the car player. I listen to it there until about march 17 when I throw an Irish cd in. I have to say that each time I listen to CP it gets better. I do get a little bored after while with the songs being in the same order, so I hit shuffle and then its like a whole new album every time. Its the only album I own that continuously gets better.
Chris
Well-Known Member
I was just thinking earlier today that I'm hearing even less Carpenters on radio this holiday season than last year. Makes me sad, particularly when I hear so many songs and covers played over and over that in my opinion aren't nearly as good.No Carpenters Christmas singles on the charts and Christmas Portrait is #43 and falling
There are so many holiday albums and singles on the charts right now.
BILLSJUKEBOX
Member
Its not all bad. Pop Vortex/iTunes has CP at 21/100 today (where it has been for years) and was 14/100 Monday. XM radio mostly plays it on their classic Christmas channel. but they play it a lot. This time of year it seems that everybody is out looking for whatever is new. After they don't find anything they come back for CP. Another good reason for Richard has to get his new stuff out there and please put give it cover art that has green and red and a large print of the word Christmas on it. The cover of Collection looks like one of their other albums that has been misfiled next to other Christmas albums.
David A
Well-Known Member
This might be a bit out of place on this thread, but thinking about how often I do (or do not) hear Carpenters Christmas songs during the Holiday season reminded me that (this probably makes me old) I define Christmas music by the "pre-run" and "post-run" era - meaning, once the likes of Mariah Carey (a great singer, for sure) made vocal "runs" a big part of their singing style, "vocal gymnastics", as it were, including their Christmas songs, I began to like them less.
I'm sure there are many who are enthralled with those vocal runs, but meh. Hence my preference for Christmas songs recorded pre-90's, for the most part.
@GDBY2LV , thanks for this: Sirius Xm Channel 70’s-80’ Holidays! Xtras Channel - will check this out tonight!
I'm sure there are many who are enthralled with those vocal runs, but meh. Hence my preference for Christmas songs recorded pre-90's, for the most part.
@GDBY2LV , thanks for this: Sirius Xm Channel 70’s-80’ Holidays! Xtras Channel - will check this out tonight!
JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
For a lot of modern singers it's the only way they've ever heard others sing, and think they must conform to become popular.
Others engage in these "gymnastics" as a form of showing off, or as a competition against other singers, or as a way to disguise their shortcomings as a singer.
Most of these singers need loud speaker volumes, and flashing lights and half naked dancers swirling around them - all intended to entertain, but also serving as a distraction from the singer's mediocre voice.
Thank God that Karen (and few others like Ann Murray & Marilyn McCoo) were old school. They had remarkable talent & great voices and could stand alone on a stage and "wow" an audience with their beautiful, straight-up singing. They didn't need gymnastics. In fact, such vocal tactics would have been total distractions from their supreme appeal. They did use some time- honored "jazz-like" inflections in their vocal performances, but these were always very limited, and highly tasteful. As a great example, listen to how Karen sings those Standards in that wonderful duet with Ella - between them they have mastered the fine art of singing a song with feeling, and with style.
JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
As an afterthought consider that many, maybe most, modern singers also need to use the artificial electronic device known as "autotune" to stay on pitch. This is pathetic, but is part of the larger picture of needing a crutch - like using vocal gymnastics - to scam or con an audience into thinking that they're great singers. The "old school" singers didn't have this, so they had to learn to sing in tune (on pitch) and they did.
However, some of them used crutches of a different kind, like reverb and "double-tracking" to allegedly enhance their voices. A singer named Patti Page was notorious for using these during her many hits in the 50s. Some other singers did too. But these were phony vocal/recording techniques of the 50s (and early 60s) and should have died a merciful death then. But, as we all know, they didn't. They were revived again in the early 70s and inexplicably used with singers who absolutely didn't need them - all for the sake of selling records and jockeying for chart position.
Pardon me for veering off into a brief discussion of visual effects ("VFX") in today's superhero films. But in a minute, you'll see the connection to this topic.
One of my pet peeves with films is the overuse of VFX in many of today's films. Instead of serving the story of the film, the effects become the reason for the film. If an effect could talk, it would say: "Hey, look at me! I'm a visual effect!" drawing attention to itself, like a flashing neon sign on the Vegas strip.
In my view, many of the vocal gymnasts are attempting to upstage the story of the song. Sure, many listeners will be thinking: "What an amazing singer! What technique!" But I ask: Shouldn't the singer be serving the song?
Chris
Well-Known Member
So well said. That's a great comparison, Robert.
In music and film now it seems like most everyone wants to start off at "level 10". Where do you go after that? It's all overstimulation. I think it's safe to say that most of us as Carpenters fans appreciate the subtle styles, but it's often is lost today. There's so much depth and nuance to be found if we'd all slow down a bit.
Chris
Well-Known Member
John, you're reminding me of some recent versions of "Do You Hear What I Hear?". You probably are familiar with Whitney Houston's recording of the song from the early 90's. It was a new take on the classic done in a way that was original and in her own style. Since then I've been hearing newer versions basically doing a copy of what Whitney did pretty much note for note. Do people even know what their own style is anymore? I know we are all influenced and inspired in some way by what has come before us, but to do what boils down to copies and imitations of someone else's phrasing and style is sort of pointless and not authentic. No one is going to outdo Karen or Whitney. Producers should encourage and produce something original when possible.
Graeme
Well-Known Member
I know what you mean. For me, I think it's the slightly discordant (and overly loud) orchestration towards the end that seems at odds with the whole having yourself a merry little Christmas somehow.
Mark-T
Well-Known Member
For mr, I just can't put my finger on it. Even today listening to it.
Graeme
Well-Known Member
Just relistened to it. Maybe 'discordant' isn't the right word. There's just something a bit 'off' for me with the arrangement at times, especially the rather ominous sounding orchestra that accompanies Karen towards the end, after the choir have done their thing, when Karen sings "through the years we all will be together if the fates allow." It's hard to explain!
Chris
Well-Known Member
Interesting observations about that part of the orchestration! In the new 2023 mix of the song, that portion struck me as well. Not that it bothers me, but I didn't realize before that the music is like a low chiming clock at that point. Just makes it even more beautiful to me.
The recording of "Have Yourself" has long been my favorite of all the Christmas tracks and I think it's one of Karen's top performances ever. It's in my top 5 favs of all Carpenters recordings. I appreciate that it's not for everyone though. If I had to pick an arrangement that somehow is not so interesting to me, it would have to be "The Christmas Song". For some reason it never worked for me quite like "Have Yourself.." or "I'll Be Home For Christmas". I enjoy it, I just wish it was a bit more inventive somehow. When I compare it to other versions like Nat King Cole or Percy Faith's arrangement for Johnny Mathis, the Carpenters one is just sort of "there". It gets the job done, but it's not that interesting or affecting to me.
JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
I felt the same way about THE CHRISTMAS SONG for the longest time - until recently. Now, I really look forward to listening to it. Maybe I just had to hear it enough times to fully appreciate the arrangement. Loving Karen's vocal has never been a problem. I think the version on the SPECIAL EDITION CD has made a big difference for me - and not just for this song.
It's a song that has been done so many times by so many people over the years that it's probably hard to come up with something "inventive" with the arrangement. Just hearing Karen sing it is more than enough for me. And it's really nice to hear her sing the intro, which isn't heard that often.
It's funny that you mention Nat King Cole. His version was the most popular and has always been the gold standard for this old chestnut (pun intended). And I was thinking today while listening to Karen's version that if Nat could hear her sing this he'd love it and probably give her a standing ovation - and maybe even offer to do a duet with her.
So, maybe like me, you just need to hear it a few more times to fully appreciate its many fine aspects. It's nice to have another song from this great CD that I throughly enjoy.
JohnFB
She was born to belong to the lines of a song...
I just re-listened to that part of the song that you describe as "discordant" or "ominous". Now, I had to replay that section a number of times so that I could finally concentrate on the accompanying orchestration. This was necessary precisely because it's so incredibly hard for me to get past Karen's gorgeous vocal performance here (and throughout the song). Like @Chris I consider this one of her best ever.
As far as the orchestral accompaniment goes I don't hear anything discordant about it, and certainly nothing ominous. In the strings it seems to be a series of 5 cascading notes, repeated several times. This is probably appropriate at this point because we're dealing at this point with the final rising crescendo of the arrangement. I never noticed this before - her wonderful voice is far too appealing and "distracting" (so to speak), and that's the only way I'd want it.
It's curious that you bring this up, because I used to think that there was something slightly off, or discordant, at that point in the first verse when she sings "...from now on our troubles will be out of sight" especially on "out of sight". I blamed it only the orchestration because it couldn't have been Karen since she was never "out of tune" or "off pitch". However, I've since changed my mind about that with close listening and have no problem with that part now.
The song "Have Yourself A Merry Little Christmas" originated in a movie called MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS, one of those "not-a-Christmas-movie" movies where the song became a break-out hit and found itself played at Christmas-time. Sort of like "My Favorite Things".
Here's the original scene from MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS:
Here's the original scene from MEET ME IN ST. LOUIS:
Similar discussions
- Article
