C's o-dub expertise

[Jeff]

I was listening to Manhattan Transfer's EXTENSIONS recently. Always loved the tight sound created. I did notice that at the end of one tune the groups last word of chorus was "last". What caught my attn. was that all four of the members ended the word 'last' at different moments. So it wasn't a collective/cohesive finish. Got me to thinking that rarely if ever do I hear K&R finish their phrases out of sync. Remarkable. I've heard that doing self or sibling or well associated band o-dubs are easier due to...well doing "yourself" and the inherent ability to sync as it were. I'm no recording engineer so my thoughts are not worded correctly. But I'm wondering if another member can explain the phenomena that creates this perfection. Doing the multi-layered harmonies must be difficult to achieve so seamlessly. This is where brilliance and is it maybe Bernie Grundman's wizardry that contributes? Perhaps Chris May can help as is experience may translate well.

Jeff

 

[Tapdancer]

Jeff, I was speaking at length to my brother last week on this very point! As teenagers back in the 70s, he and I were performers in a group - he being the lead instrumentalist, and I'd play the harmony. But as we were still living at home, I'd always be exposed to his playing. Thus, I knew exactly how he'd play every piece - his emphasis, his phrasing, his timing etc. Following his lead was a no-brainer. Even today, we have other musicians coming up to us and remembering how precise we were back in the day.

Listening to other non-sibling groups, that is not always the case. I think there are three primary reasons for this: Firstly, there may only be a limited amount of time available to rehearse a piece before it is stage-ready, and 'close enough is good enough'. Secondly, the group may not place as much an emphasis on the importance of precision at a certain point in the song as the listener demands. Thirdly, every musician has his or her own "DNA" - and unless you practically live with them, you'll never work them out completely.

At the end of a song, quite often there is the drawn-out note. Performing live, we have the benefit of visual cues to get the synchronised finish. In a recording studio, my guess is that this may not always be the case if the parts are recorded separately.

Another thing I've found from listening to the Carpenters, is that my expectations are now set so high, that the otherwise tiniest of shortcomings in other performers really start to stand out!

 

[Chris May]

I was listening to Manhattan Transfer's EXTENSIONS recently. Always loved the tight sound created. I did notice that at the end of one tune the groups last word of chorus was "last". What caught my attn. was that all four of the members ended the word 'last' at different moments. So it wasn't a collective/cohesive finish. Got me to thinking that rarely if ever do I hear K&R finish their phrases out of sync. Remarkable. I've heard that doing self or sibling or well associated band o-dubs are easier due to...well doing "yourself" and the inherent ability to sync as it were. I'm no recording engineer so my thoughts are not worded correctly. But I'm wondering if another member can explain the phenomena that creates this perfection. Doing the multi-layered harmonies must be difficult to achieve so seamlessly. This is where brilliance and is it maybe Bernie Grundman's wizardry that contributes? Perhaps Chris May can help as is experience may translate well.

Well, the general rule-of-thumb is as a producer, you generally want to make sure that phrases/notes end evenly, and that certain words are even pronounced differently in backing vocal overdubs vs. a lead. Not always, but often times - For instance, if a phrase that is being sung ends with a word that has an "s" on the end, usually the lead will sing the word with more natural emphasis on the "s", whereas the BGVs might eliminate the "s", or sing it much softer. Because the lead vocal is mixed more dominant, you don't miss the "esses" on the backings. In fact, if they were too over-pronounced - like in the case of Carpenters, where you have 8-12-16 voices - it would be overkill, so you have to think differently when overdubbing multiple vocal tracks that are all singing the same thing. There are different tricks for sure with this kinda stuff.

If you listen to the center channel of the SACD (a great track to do this with is "This Masquerade"), you'll hear very tight and extremely tidy backing vocals; almost as if they were cut and pasted. That's how perfect they made them sound. Every piece fit together like a puzzle perfectly on those Carpenters albums - be it the rhythm tracks, strings, backing vocals...you name it! The only thing that Karen and Richard did differently often times, was they liked hearing the breaths at the beginning of phrases. They didn't mute them or punch them out - whatever could be left there was left there, as they felt that kept the lead more natural sounding.

 

[newvillefan]

Great thread!

For instance, if a phrase that is being sung ends with a word that has an "s" on the end, usually the lead will sing the word with more natural emphasis on the "s", whereas the BGVs might eliminate the "s", or sing it much softer. Because the lead vocal is mixed more dominant, you don't miss the "esses" on the backings. In fact, if they were too over-pronounced - like in the case of Carpenters, where you have 8-12-16 voices - it would be overkill, so you have to think differently when overdubbing multiple vocal tracks that are all singing the same thing.

It's strange that, despite the Carpenters' efforts to achieve precisely the above - reducing the 's' sound on the background vocals to avoid overkill - Richard often didn't follow this rule of thumb when it came to his solo material and vocal overdubs. Because of his lisp on the 's' sound, it tends to ruin some of his vocal work in places. Examples that spring to mind include 'It Came Upon A Midnight Clear' ("to touch their harpS") and 'Something In Your Eyes' (the last "something in your eyeS").

 

[ullalume]

Funny, Stephen. . .Something in Your Eyes was the first thing that came to my mind too.

I actually think the clean SSS sound works as a nice full stop, since it's the overdubs that end the song, something that didn't happen too often with the Carpenters. In fact, Richard did that a few times with TIME. . .going for a bit of a Brian Wilson I think. . .Say Yeah and I'm Still Not Over You both end with overdubs.

Ooohhh, now I'm thinking which Carpenters songs end with overdubs. . .just vocals. . no accompanying instrumentation whatsoever.

Invocation, Don't Be Afraid, Eve (almost), Help (almost)

Saturday, Druscilla Penny, Intermission, Fun Fun Fun.

Think that's all of 'em.

 

[GaryAlan]

The ending of Merry Christmas, Darling has fantastic vocal overdubs.

 

[A&M Retro]

Great thread, indeed. And I learned something at the same time! There are other nuances they both did with their vocals that have always stood out to me. Just little things to make the words sound more interesting when they're singing in unison.

An example of this is the 'live' version of 'Hurting Each Other' from Boston Pops in 1974. They sing 'Hurting Eeesh Other'....not 'each'. It's not on You Tube, but I'm sure most of the readers here have it. It's quite clear they ain't singing 'each'!

They were definitely one musical mind in two bodies. And precision was/is their middle name.

 

[ullalume]

At the close of Those Good Old Dreams' second chorus the bg vocals do a little skip that is most effecting. "I've dreamed o. . . of you". At first I thought it was a glitch in the recording, but that can't be since the "glitch" covers every one of those 8 voices perfectly. It's just a very neat twist that Richard employs.

 

[GaryAlan]

I learn something new here everyday!
And, greatly appreciate everyone's devotion and expertise!
That being said, and hard as this may be to believe, I have never seen/heard the entire Boston Pops performance from 1974.
Only Close to You from that program is familiar to me.
But, one day when I do get the pleasure, it will be awesome to see and hear, I'm sure.

 

[Jeff]

Boston Pops was phenomenal. A class effort that should see release for BP's as much as C's.

Jeff

 

[JeffM]

Well, the general rule-of-thumb is as a producer, you generally want to make sure that phrases/notes end evenly, and that certain words are even pronounced differently in backing vocal overdubs vs. a lead. Not always, but often times - For instance, if a phrase that is being sung ends with a word that has an "s" on the end, usually the lead will sing the word with more natural emphasis on the "s", whereas the BGVs might eliminate the "s", or sing it much softer. Because the lead vocal is mixed more dominant, you don't miss the "esses" on the backings.

Was reminded of a classic example of this the other day when an oldies station played "Fallin' In Love" by Hamilton, Joe Frank, and Reynolds. Only the lead vocalist is singing "Baby, baby, fallin' in love;" the other two guys are singing "fowwin' in love." Reputedly, when David Seville was overdubbing his vocals on the original "Chipmunk Song," he found he had to soft-pedal the "p's" in the line "Want a plane that loops the loop" because otherwise he ended up with an overpowering "pop!" in the sound from that consonant.