Public Broadcasting Exclusive: Carpenters The Complete Singles Release

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

I wonder if it's possible that the shortened version is what Richard wanted all along and that it wasn't shortened later? It would have made a little sense in the fact that the shortened version is more radio friendly, right? I mean having such a long talking intro would not have been good for radio play, right?

However if this is true that still doesn't explain the alternate vocal line.

 

[Harry]

Yep. Shortened would have been better for radio. Which brings up what I just did. I took the long version and attempted to edit it down to the same length as the short version. That was no problem, but the result sounded wrong. Richard's inflection on "Ladies and gentlemen..." doesn't match his starting inflection on "Don't forget to take your place in line...". It sounds edited.

So if the shortened version was done for radio, then it would make sense that Richard would re-do his intro in shortened fashion to sound "whole."

I'm still puzzled by my 1882 over 1 on "Ticket"!

 

[Mike Blakesley]

I have a hard time believing they would have ever thought "Parade" would be a better choice for a single than "Ticket." Plus I've never seen a mention of that even being a possibility before. Could this just have been one of those rare anomalies?

Not including the album title on the single (while including the catalog number) is also kind of weird but I've seen that in other instances. Not just on A&M. I always thought it could have been for two reasons:

If an album wasn't out yet, maybe the title wasn't determined at the time the single label was prepared; or

In the case of Carpenters, they only HAD one album at the time so they just figured the title wasn't necessary?

I know in this case the single was released after the album, so they had the title; and they hadn't yet had a hit with "Close To You" so the idea of retitling the album wasn't in the cards yet. Pretty strange all around.

 

[Harry]

Just for reference, I've taken a scan of my "Your Wonderful Parade" label:



...and here's an attempt to capture the matrix number on the "Ticket" side of the record. It's a little fuzzy, but you can just make out the 2 scribbled over a 1:



Harry

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

That is weird, it's a little fuzzy but it does look like a scratch out.

The only thing that looked odd to me on my ochre Your Wonderful Parade run in is the 1882 (while it has no marks and clearly looks like 1882) the 2 almost looks like an upside down 5, was that common for these run ins to use an upside 5 as a 2

 

[newvillefan]

As I said, the 1881 being the lower of the two would indicate an A-side, meaning that at some point in time, someone thought "Your Wonderful Parade" was the A-side. Whether that was a mistake at the record plant or the record company, I can't say.

I have a hard time believing they would have ever thought "Parade" would be a better choice for a single than "Ticket." Plus I've never seen a mention of that even being a possibility before. Could this just have been one of those rare anomalies?

The doubts around 'Your Wonderful Parade' initially being selected as the A-side confuse me. I thought it was common knowledge that it was seriously considered at one point. John Bettis has even said so in interviews and it's referenced several places online (including this forum back in 2009 by none other than Randy Schmidt, who I assume might have conducted the interview with John Bettis that he refers to below).

http://www.amcorner.com/forum/threads/your-wonderful-parade-b-w-ticket-to-ride-q.9284/#post-86284:

"The following are excerpts from an interview with Bettis:

"Your Wonderful Parade”... he recorded it on that album and it was the first single, and as we were talking about before I think it met with complete apathy with American radio and luckily it was back sided with "Ticket To Ride" which eventually it was turned over and "Ticket To Ride" did a lot of critical good for Richard and Karen; for all of us because that drew some attention but that, unfortunately it wasn't mine that was the first one that drew attention".

http://www.amcorner.com/forum/threads/your-wonderful-parade-b-w-ticket-to-ride-q.9284/#post-86284:

"John Bettis refers to YWP as being first Carpenters single & John Tobler ( UK music writer) also referred to same from several Carpenters associates interviews : though not from Richard interview ......"

http://www.furious.com/perfect/carpenters.html

"The intended single, "Your Wonderful Parade," besides demonstrating Carpenter's taste for vaudevillian spoken-word bits, is mid-Sixties go-go, a clattering confection of Jimmy Webb genuflection that would have well served the 5th Dimension"



Liner notes from this youtube posting:

"This track, according to Bettis, was the original A-side of the (unsuccessful) very first Carpenters single, but was later relegated to the B-side of "Ticket To Ride" which was a minor US hit, peaking just outside the Top 50. The original version of 'Your Wonderful Parade" forms the basic of this recording. The four-track tape from the Osborn session was transferred to A&M's eight track machine, enabling Richard's lead vocal to be re-recorded, and a string section added to the existing bass, drums, piano and backing vocals.

 

[Harry]

Thank you Stephen. At least part of the answer was right here all along. It still doesn't explain the two versions pressed onto different singles.

Harry

 

[W.B.]

Yes Harry, I just doubled checked again for my ochre label

Your Wonderful Parade side run in shows
∆78673-X
A&M 1882-15
circle with MR inside

On the other side is Ticket To Ride and this run in says
∆78673 (there is no X)
A&M 1881-15
circle with MR inside

I have a copy with the exact same lacquer and delta numbers (no -X on "Ticket To Ride"). Only thing is, it's a Columbia Pitman pressing which evidently used Monarch metal parts. Furthermore, the "circle MR" and respective matrix numbers were crossed out, with the "Ticket To Ride" side having an "AM 1882" written in (evidently backwards on the stamper, as it appears embossed) and the "Your Wonderful Parade," an added "AM 1881" likewise etched in. Usually, the higher numbers (between 15 and 18) would indicate lacquers to go to Monarch, while the lower dash numbers (-1 and up) were for the Columbia plants. What's a mystery to me is why Columbia Pitman would have used Monarch stampers, instead of newly-cut lacquers meant for their own plant.

 

[Harry]

Thanks W.B. Does your Columbia-pressed "Your Wonderful Parade" have the shorter or longer intro on it? My copy mimics the longer stereo album version (maybe a fold-down) while Rick's has the shorter version.

Harry

 

[Mike Blakesley]

Wow, I never knew that about YWP and am surprised I missed the previous discussion. Thanks for the clarification.

On thinking about how they could have ever thought of YWP as the A-side...it WAS the 60s, and YWP does have a nice hippie kind of vibe around it, and was an original -- and "covers" were beginning to fall out of favor then as the tide shifted to artists writing their own songs. Plus they were still thinking of Karen as mainly the drummer and just a co-lead vocalist as opposed to the "star" of the act.

 

[W.B.]

Thanks W.B. Does your Columbia-pressed "Your Wonderful Parade" have the shorter or longer intro on it? My copy mimics the longer stereo album version (maybe a fold-down) while Rick's has the shorter version.

Evidently, since both Rick and I have -15 lacquers on both sides, I presume I would have the shorter intro. of "...Parade."

Incidentally, here are the labels for the Columbia Pitman issue if anyone happens upon it:

This would have been one of the first singles issued on A&M after a policy was instituted whereby each Columbia plant did their own label typesetting for new album and single releases (though curiously, the Terre Haute, IN plant used Santa Maria label copy on this one).

 

[Must Hear This Album]

I asked this question a few pages ago and was puzzled to find it had been released in the US as a "Memories" single in 1983 (of all years). I don't think it belongs on this set.

Thanks for this context. I found your Q and Harry’s A (it was the B-side to an “Occupants” rerelease.). Do we know what month it was released in 1983 (or why?)?

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Thanks Stephen, now that you posted that link I do remember (member PJ) writing about that, however it doesn't really tell us why they were pressed differently as Harry mentioned. It's times like this that I wish we had a lifeline to Richard that he could answer questions like this in his spare time.

PJ was right, Richard did mention Your Wonderful Parade in the liner notes of the 40th set, I just looked at them and Richard says the song was a demo from Joe Osborn's garage and that only a "new lead and real strings were added. Since these notes are referring to the album (in the 40th set) it's referring to the album version of the song with Richard's longer intro. However, it doesn't address the shortened version, was that done when the demo was originally done for release as a single and then later Richard added a new lead (which is what we hear on the album version.) That leads me to ask why were 2 versions pressed to a 45 single, the shortened version and the longer new lead version and why did Richard pick the shortened version to be included on this new Singles Collection when we know it was pressed both ways to 45.

To be honest, this was the first single released by the Carpenters and I'm still not any clearer about these questions.

As a side note.....one would think that the first Carpenters single would be more of a collector's item, I'm referring to the original vinyl 45 single...yet I have 2 and they were dirt cheap.

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

I forgot to add...From The Top also contains the demo version of YWP which starts right off with Karen's counting in then the drum beat, there is no audience chatter or Richard lead speaking so I'm assuming this was the actual demo and what we hear on the album (the longer intro) is what Richard is referring to in his notes on the 40th set I mentioned above. However it doesn't answer why another lead shortened intro was recorded on the single and when was that recorded and why were both pressed to a single 45 for release back then?

 

[Mike Blakesley]

Pretty amazing that there are still unanswered questions about Carpenters records over 45 years after the fact!

 

[close2u40]

Mine arrived this week. The sound is amazing BUT....we still get vinyl transfers for Calling Occupants & Santa Claus? The tapes have to be somewhere. How can the Calling Occupants edit be missing?

 

[michaeldila]

Wait....."occupants" and "santa" are NOT from master tape after all??? Seriously?

 

[Mike Blakesley]

From Harry's post on page 8:

All tracks have been sourced from the original single version master tapes with the exception
of Ticket To Ride and Your Wonderful Parade, which have been digitally remastered from vinyl.

 

[Eyewire]

My set arrived today! I'm so stoked I almost did the crunchy elbow dance, lol.

 

[ScottyB]

The 3 CD set and Christmas CD were both sealed and then sealed again as a group. I have opened the CD but not listened yet. I put the CD into my iTunes library and of course gracenotes or whoever Apple uses does not recognize the CD name or titles....so I will need to enter all the information manually...that's a lot of work so this may take me a couple nights.

First impressions, I'm really impressed with the artwork on the CD's, nice showing the different logos for each CD.
Actorman is right, the inner booklet is missing quite a few picture sleeves for the singles. My OCD is kicking in....it's not really complete, if your going to show most of them why not show all of them? Perhaps TJL can provide some feedback why all the single picture sleeves were not displayed in the inner booklet.

It's nice to see an alternate photo of the Made in America sessions, it's similar to the cover on my piano book but not the same, Richard in burgundy shirt and Karen in burgundy pants and she has either purple or gray boots but this one they are sitting side by side and look so relaxed and comfortable. I really like this one.

One other quick note that I noticed...the single for "Because We Are In Love" is not listed as (The Wedding Song) on either the disc or the liner notes or the back cover. I actually have this US Single of Touch Me When Were Dancing b/w Because We Are In Love, however the US single displays it as Because We Are In Love (The Wedding Song) on the picture sleeve and the inner 45 label. I thought it was interesting that they left this off on this set. I can't think of any other CD release where they did not use the full name of this track.

I have some listening to do.....

Maybe it wasn't listed as (The Wedding Song) because it was written for a wedding which turned out to be a failure. Maybe just keeping it Because We Are In Love will distant it from being just a wedding song. Just a thought.

 

[close2u40]

From Harry's post on page 8:

"All tracks have been sourced from the original single version master tapes with the exception
of Ticket To Ride and Your Wonderful Parade, which have been digitally remastered from vinyl."

Harry is quoting what is written on the back of the set. However, both Calling Occupants & Santa Claus are clearly vinyl transfers, slightly cleaner than the Singles Box. The difference may lie in the fact that Ticket To Ride and Your Wonderful Parade were "newly" transferred from vinyl for this set. It's clear they used the Calling Occupants and Santa Claus transfers that were done for the Japanese Singles Box not realizing they were vinyl transfers.

Surprisingly, Calling Occupants is not all that clean with static present in spots and surface noise on the fade (turn it up, it's there). Santa Claus is very clean but the ending is cut quickly to hide the vinyl aspect.

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

Santa Claus has the same ending on the original 45 so it wasn't cut quickly to hide anything. This is the original single mix.

I haven't reach Calling yet on the new set.

 

[Harry]

It's clear they used the Calling Occupants and Santa Claus transfers that were done for the Japanese Singles Box not realizing they were vinyl transfers.

I maintain that it's not "clear" that they used those older transfers, at least not on both songs. See below.

Surprisingly, Calling Occupants is not all that clean with static present in spots and surface noise on the fade (turn it up, it's there). Santa Claus is very clean but the ending is cut quickly to hide the vinyl aspect.

I will agree with you that it does indeed sound like "Calling Occupants" is the same transfer from the JAPANESE SINGLE BOX and that is somewhat disappointing, however I will disagree vehemently regarding "Santa Claus Is Comin' To Town". The version presented on THE COMPLETE SINGLES is much, much cleaner than the one on the JAPANESE SINGLE BOX. It's much better in phase than the Japan version and I hear no quick fade at all. Perhaps you are used to hearing it with the longer fade on the remixed version.

Since "Calling Occupants" is essentially an edit, it's no big deal anyway. With some software, cutting and pasting and using the cleaner opening notes on the single, one could easily replicate the single edit, so it makes one wonder why they didn't just do that in the first place. As you said, they may not have remembered or realized that the Japanese used a needledrop. I don't think there was any intentional dishonesty.

Harry

 

[GaryAlan]

Quick question:
I do not have any Single/45 copies of the
Santa Claus Is Coming To Town,
Is this version--the 1974 Single-- that which appears on the 1975 Christmas Compilation album
Henri Mancini Selects Great Songs of Christmas ?
(Neither the Album sleeve , or Record itself ,has a time stamp for the song; a cold ending, original
sax interlude.)

 

[newvillefan]

Since "Calling Occupants" is essentially an edit, it's no big deal anyway. With some software, cutting and pasting and using the cleaner opening notes on the single, one could easily replicate the single edit, so it makes one wonder why they didn't just do that in the first place.

For the sake of audio quality I'm baffled as to why they didn't just do that instead of looking for a vinyl copy that was good enough, tidying it up and then people still noticing it was from vinyl anyway.