If I Had You

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Sorry if this has been discussed but I can't remember.

This song on the Karen Carpenter solo CD is different than the same song on Lovelines.

Yes I understand that Richard re-arranged several of Karen's tracks from her solo album to Richard's Lovelines album.

But...This song, If I Had You was re-recorded??? I never knew that Karen re-recorded it with Richard. I always thought that it was just done for her solo album. If you listen to Karen solo version of this song at approx 1:26-1:28 when she sings, 'So say that you believe in second chances" On the word second chances, she pronouces that very different on her solo version than when you listen to the Lovelines version. On Lovelines it is at approx 1:27-1:28 she sings it faster "second chances" and not the same vocal sound.

So she had to have re-recorded this song with Richard.

On the liner notes inside for Lovelines, Richard says that Her remembers Karen calling him from NY about how much effort went into this track, Richard never says this was re-recorded, He makes it seem like it was the same exact reading as from her solo album version. But I don't think it's the same.

Anyone agree?

 

[Chris May]

No, Rich just used different vocal takes that were saved during the solo sessions to put that together when he went back to the 2" tape to remix.

You'll also notice that on the solo album, the song fades. However, on Richard's remix (Lovelines), the instrumental 'track' drops out at the end and all you hear is Karen's vocal harmonics. This is just a mixing trick to spice up the song a bit. Also, he replaced the original electric bass track with Joe Osborn's at the time of remix.

But to answer your question, no, this was not re-recorded. Just pieced together a little differently than Phil Ramone did it. -Chris

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

What do you mean by "different vocal take" are you saying that Karen used alot of overdubbing on this track so instead of taking Karen's line "second chances" on her solo version, Richard used a overdubbing or background vocal (of Karen's) & he used that one as the forefront vocal line on his version? Cause when you hear Karen sing those 2 words "second chances" they are 2 different voices pronouncing those 2 words.

 

[Chris May]

Oh no, not at all. It is common when recording a master lead for the artist to sing the same phrase several times, and in most cases saving alternate takes of the same phrase. I can most guarantee that there was more than one take saved on that master of Karen's vocal, and when Rich disected it for the remix, found that he preferred a different recorded phrase in the section you are talking about than the one you hear on the solo album.

It's the same concept with the alternate take in the opening of "Sleigh Ride" (orig. versus remix) as well as "Maybe It's You" (i.e. lyric : "...maybe it's just that I've never been the kind who can pass a lucky penny by...") -Chris

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Wow, to me..this is really interesting about how the recording process works. It sure can make the song seem different just by changing little phrases or vocal patterns within the song.

Do you think that Richard & Karen did that on most all of there songs? So you think there is a master tape for alot of there songs that has more than one take on a track and Richard picked the one he felt was the better take but that alternate take is still on his master tapes?

...do you see where I'm going

To think that Richard has this stuff, of course it's not for us to hear but it sure would be cool to know that there are different takes to there songs that we have not heard & something that could make the song sound totally different, almost like getting a new song from Karen.

 

[Chris May]

Well, I don't know personally to what degree Karen's alternate lead vocal takes were saved. However, what I do know is that the first few albums were recorded on 16-track analog tape ('Offering' having been recorded 8-track) and so that limited the luxury of being able to save 'alternate' takes so-to-speak

Due to the limited technology back in those days, the producer/engineer might leave a few tracks open for vocal takes, mix a piece of this with that, and do a composite sub-mix down to one track to get the overall master lead edit down to their satisfaction. The remaing tracks were generally recorded over either by an instrument or backing vocal, etc...

Nowadays with the unlimited number of tracks due to the digital age, you can keep as many takes as you like and still have plenty of room for all of the overdubs. I would have to believe that the Carpenters probably have several tapes that either still have a portion or all of the work lead and/or an alternate track with vocal takes scattered on them. -Chris

 

[newvillefan]

Hey

I watched this post with interest, and I have to add, there will undoubtedly be hundreds if not thousands of outtakes vocals by Karen, just snippets of a line of a song here and there. She used to repeat individual lines over and over if they thought it wasn't quite right - how much of this is saved on tape, I don't know, but knowing Richard, I would say as much as possible. He recorded almost every concert they ever performed, for his personal collection.

Another recent comment I saw, was that during re-recording the stereo piano to accompany Karen's original vocal on 'From This Moment On' (for Interpretations), people in the studio watched on as he belted out 30 or more takes, trying to get the piano to match her voice exactly.

That's the kind of perfection we're talking about here!

Stephen

 

[Chris May]

Yeah, it's possible there could be that many outtakes. However, I tend to doubt it, only because unless they used another separate reel of tape every time they tracked just for the lead vocals, there would be no place to save them. Twenty-four tracks fill up real quick and the general rule of thumb is that you record over a phrase or word if it isn't quite right and/or can be easily re-captured, unless it is a potential keeper and absolutely should be saved for later reference or use during mix-down.

I think as much as the Carpenters were studio animals, they too were ultimately a bit limited in what they could do in terms of saving stuff. -Chris

 

[newvillefan]

Hi Chris

I wonder where these little extra alternate vocal takes came from then? Did Phil Ramone keep more back than Richard would have, (re. If I Had You)? How about the alternate vocal take on Sleigh Ride?

Fascinating!

Stephen

 

[engineer]

With regard to takes, remember that Phil Ramone had access to the most state-of-the-art equipment in New York in 1979. He could very well have had 48 or even 72 tracks with which to work. So Phil Ramone could conceivably have kept dozens of vocal takes.

An interesting fact about the "black box" 13-CD set from Japan is the reproductions of the track logs from the original master tapes at the end of the book. That shows you, for the specific songs listed, what each track contains. You'll see that from those early years, there weren't a lot of tracks eaten up by repeated vocal takes -- there are two leads at most, usually only one.

I'd be curious to know the number of tracks Karen and Richard were working with by 1978. I don't know what A&M had by then, but I would imagine it was pretty advanced since they were one of the top studios in the country. Does anyone know if they were still working on 24 tracks then, or if they'd upgraded to more?

Dan

 

[Chris May]

Well, I do remember reading that during the "Made In America" sessions in '80, A&M upgraded to 48-track (two-2" machines), making it not only a costly album, but a bit noisy according to Richard and Karen.

Apparantly the cost was also an issue due to the fact that the synching mechanism continued to act up, making it a bit strenuous as well. There might be a clipping of an interview regarding that very thing in Randy Schmidt's book if I'm not mistaken. -Chris

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Can someone explain in layman terms what exactly it means by 48 or 72 tracks (that Phil would have had) and 8, 24 that Richard had to work with in the younger years.

What does this really mean. the higher the # track the more that can fit on the track? I admit I know nothing about how music is made & I'd like to understood what a 48 or 72 track meant. Like if Karen was in the studio recording "If I Had You" with Phil Ramone and he was using say a 48/72 track, does that mean this is one master tape with lots of space (hence the term 48/72 track) on it that can hold many diff lead vocals & diff takes and then after Karen has done all these different takes the producer (Phil would sift through all the tracks & extract what he feel is the best fit sound for the final song? I don't really understand.

This is very very interesting that Phil could possibly have alternate takes left in his vaults.

 

[Chris May]

Ok, let's take the conventional method of multi-track recording, which would have been analog tape. You have a reel of tape that contains a certain number of linear spaces or "tracks" that run just like a cassette tape across a tape head. For the album "Offering", it was the case that they had 8 individual tracks that they could put whatever they wanted to on. (i.e.: Drum kit on one or two tracks, bass on one, piano on one, strings, additional keyboards, backing vocals, lead vocals, etc...)

Now, the trick is (remember we are talking about 8 tracks only here), somehow they have to fit all of these instruments, vocals, backing vocals on to the a total of 8 individual tracks on the tape. Each individual track is routed to a "channel" on a console full of individual faders and equalization switches that the engineer uses to blend each of these tracks together to get the tightest and most even sound possible.

With regards to overdubbing, look at it as a process of elimination, whether you have the capacity to record the master on 8-track, 16-track, 24-track and so on. You (the producer/artist) have to decide what instrumentation you want overall in the song and how you want to record it (i.e. a stereo piano versus mono which means tracking the piano on 2 tracks--left and right stereo as opposed to just 1 track/mono). Or, with the case of the Carpenters, they had all of these vocals to overdub.

How did they manage to cram all of that onto...let's say a 16-track master like on the "Close to You" through "Now and Then" albums?

Well, they were limited in their tracking space, so as you look for instance on the master logs found in the "Black Box" set as mentioned in an earlier post, you see the piano only had one track (that's all they could afford to give it), the bass, the drums mixed down to two tracks, strings on 2 tracks, additional keyboard/electric piano on one track.... Then you see usually (4) tracks for backing vocals, then Karen's lead on one (or two if doubled) and so on. All of this gets blended together in mixdown to create the Carpenters sound.

How did they manage to get the 12 voice, 4-part harmonies on "Close to You" to fit into a total of (4) tracks on the master? Do you remember in the Karen Carpenter Story where Richard talks about "ping-ponging"? This is how they did it. They would take empty tracks that had nothing on them and begin recording the parts together. Then, playback the recorded backing vocal take they JUST did and either double that part, or add the next part in the harmony to the existing one. They would do this a few times over several open tracks, then mix the partial harmony down to just one track (combining the several parts they just recorded). Then, start on another fresh track, part by part, and dump the combination of a few backing vocal tracks over to an empty one, and so one. This happens until (4) individual tracks have nothing but 12 to 16 or more 'Karen and Richards'. This makes up the backing vocal sound. You blend those in with the lead vocals, the bass, piano, drums, strings, horns, electric piano and so on, and you get what we all hear today. -Chris

P.S.: Read the post slowly and you'll understand it

 

[Jeff]

Now this is the type of discussion I find fascinating. Recording techniques, inside studio buzz, album production costs, most challenging moments etc... I would also appreciate a studio wizard's detailed acct of K&R's overdubbing and just how the magic was produced. For instance, how in the world did the artists manage to sing every overdubbed vocal with such precision? What's this thing about Karen preferring to record lead twice. According to Karen this was standard procedure within CarpenterS. If in fact Karen did double her lead, how is it done with such perfection? Upon thousands of listenings I've never detected a breath, note nor hint of this practice. Why did Karen double her lead? I've always assumed that the majority of the lead was a one take thing. Here it is commented that songs can be diced and spliced flawlessly, routinely. Who are the geniuses and what formal education is required to exhibit such skill? Specifically where was Karen's hand in all of this?

Now that's what I'm talkin' bout,

Jeff

 

[Chris May]

well, one thing I have found is that not every artist is good at doubling themselves. The remark that Phil Ramone made with regards to Karen liking it when there were "2 of her singing together" makes reference to that. And how she said that it was "easy" for her.

This is just something that happens. There are certain algorhythms that only YOU can reproduce with yourself, PROVIDED you have the ear and technique. Richard and Karen certainly did, and the fact that they were brother and sister just added to it. I often times wonder how God created the whole universe. I then stop, accept the fact that He did and reflect on it's beauty and move on. The same I feel goes for Richard and Karen Carpenter. -Chris

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Chris, thank you for taking the time to write that. I think I am begining to understand a little more. Although I do admit to reading that 3 times.

I got my black book out and was looking at the pages at the back. Before I just glanced at the pages not really understanding what all that scribble was on them, looking at them closer now, I think it's getting a little clearer.

I noticed that most of the pages show 16 tracks on the master tapes with I Need To Be In Love showing 24. Interesting.

For example on the page for Master Reel on:
"Hurting Each Other"
Shows these items on these tracks

1. BG One (me writing-what is BG?)
2. Piano
3. Bass
4. Perc (me is that percussion?)
5. Drums
6. Kick
7. Electric Piano
8. Karen's 2nd Lead
9. BG Two
10. BG Three
11. BG Four
12. Violins
13. Viola-Cello
14. Tymp-FR Horn
15. Organ
16. Karens Lead (M)

I think I typed this right please correct me if I'm not reading this correctly, the writing is sooo small in the black book (straining my eyes to read it)

So this means that Hurting Each Other was a 16 track master tape?

...learning more about the recording process of Karen & Richard, online...

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Oh I also wanted to add, on the Master Reel Page for

I Need To Be In Love

It says in writing, "Maybe Bounce the BG's to One Track so as to Accomodate Choir" But then it has a big X on it like Richard decided against that.

Is this what you were referring to as Ping-ponging?

Maybe there was not enough tracks to do all they wanted on this songs like they needed a 48 track accomodation but they only had a 24?

...still learning....

 

[engineer]

BG = background vocal

This all takes me back. Back in the '80s I did some work for a few months in a studio that had an 8-track 1/2" tape synrchonized with a 4-track 1/4" deck, both of which were synchronized with a U-matic video tape machine. We were doing post-production audio sweetening on a video project and needed as many available tracks as possible... except it almost never worked right. The synchronization equipment was far more trouble than it was worth -- we ended up ping-ponging the audio (most of which was foley work) onto fewer tracks in order to use just the 8-track machine. It was a total nightmare, and it took three months to do a project that should have been completed in about one.

I imagine the big studios that had three 24-track decks synchronized together must have had the technicians pulling out their hair much of the time!

Dan

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

So when Richard goes to remix a song that had a master tape of 8 or 16 tracks, could he have essentially made it into a 24 track when he is done re-mixing the song?

Such as adding a diff piano, adding choir, adding harmonica, toy piano & adding various other instruments.

A song that somes to mind is The Rainbow Connection, Richard added alot of instruments & stuff to that track, he had to have increase the # of tracks to that song.

 

[Murray]

Modern recording/mixing is done on digital equipment, so assuming that the original analog master tapes were transferred to a digital medium, a virtually unlimited number of tracks could be added. Richard undoubtedly added several new tracks to his remixes.

I'm absolutely amazed at how complex the early Carpenters recordings are, given the limitations of the equipment they had to work with. Heck, even my home computer, with amateur recording software, allows for more tracks.

 

[Jeff]

Finally got it. Thankyou CM. It used to be my dream to sit in on a C's recording session. Have any of you had that opportunity? Or, do you know of anyone who has? I'm curious how the mood, melancholia and/or happiness was created. Did Karen entrance herself say for Solitaire? On the VOTH Make Believe... Karen says " I have to get into a serious mood here". How'd she do that? This is probably going to be all speculation unless someone here was a bug in the corner. The brief clip on the Only Yesterday video, Karen is in the sound booth expressing pathos. I wish that the clip was shown in its entirety. It's edgier than a convoluted production.

Jeff

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

I have to admit to learning alot more than what I knew prior to Chris's post of explanation.


Didn't Karen & Richard record a majority of the Christmas songs during July or the summer months and wasn't Karen known for decorating to get into the Christmas spirit. I thought I either read something about that maybe Coleman book? or maybe someone wrote that here that I read. Not sure.

:bigsanta:

 

[Murray]

Wouldn't it be wonderful if Richard would write a detailed book about the recording sessions (with complete studio logs)? He's provided a little information of this nature in some of the CD booklets, but it's just not enough. I've been told by people who've had the opportunity to talk to Richard, that he just loves talking about all this technical stuff, so perhaps he would be receptive to the idea of a book.

Murray
...daydreaming late at night...

 

[PJ]

Unsure how many studio takes / alternate versions exist from A&M recording years

Richard has used different takes on various tracks, Bless The Beasts was mentioned as Richard felt this track was rushed into mix / master too soon and needed more work completed

CertainlyRichard has thousands of Demo / Live / Rehearsal & Rarities tracks in his archive and these could / would be fascinating to listen to for variations .....

Peter

 

[coolvox]

Hey All! This has been some very
interesting reading on recording
techmnichques. I am slowly piecing
together a home recording system.
Todays computer software produces
some decent sounding reproductions.
I Emailed Phil Ramones website
once with some questions regarding
the complex overdubbing from the
Karens solo album but no response.
If I Had You is a truly mezmorising
studio masterpiece.
JIM