Should Carpenters be remixed by today's Dj's?

[aaflyer98]

Former A&M artist Amy Grant has a new album coming out...sort of.
"In Motion...The Remixes" features Amy Grant's music remixed by today's hot producers.
See link:
http://www.billboard.com/articles/news/6121508/amy-grant-dance-remix-album-baby-baby-listen-song

Donna Summer's first posthumous release was a similar remix album. Donna Summer fans either loved it or hated it.
http://www.amazon.com/Love-To-You-Donna/dp/B00EKQ3YZI


What if the Carpenters had a dance remix album? Would you buy it? So you think it would get played in clubs and on today's radio?
I may not like it but I do think it would get heavy interest and play and chart. People know the Carpenters. What's your thought on this and Amy and Donna getting the remix treatment?

 

[Murray]

Whoever remixed Amy's "Baby Baby" totally ruined that song. Her vocal is sped up so much that it doesn't even sound like Amy anymore! Yuck! Imagine if one of "today's hot producers" performed such sacrilege on Karen's voice, and then replaced the finely crafted music with a bunch of electronic beeps... I certainly wouldn't buy it. Heck, I don't think that I'd bother to download it even if it were free.

The funny thing is, I actually enjoy some modern dance music (I'm a huge Kylie Minogue fan for instance), but I just don't think that the Carpenters recordings are suitable material for this type of remix treatment. It would be the equivalent to drawing a mustache on the Mona Lisa... Now, if someone were to take Karen's lead vocal tracks, and do nice stripped back acoustic arrangements (all while leaving the tempo and pitch of her vocal alone)... ... but frankly, the Carpenters recordings are pretty much perfect as is, and why mess with perfection. Instead of "modernizing" them in an attempt to make them relevant to the younger generation, play them to the young people in your lives, and explain to them that this is what REAL MUSIC sounds like!

 

[Mike Blakesley]

I agree, why mess with it? The remix on Herb Alpert's WHIPPED CREAM album was not bad, but instrumental music can handle that kind of treatment more than the Carpenters lush vocal sound could, IMHO.

 

[Harry]

There are any number of remixes that people are doing on YouTube. Some of those are, I suppose, clever, but none have moved me.

As to whether a "professional" could do it better - I don't know - it just doesn't seem like a necessary endeavor. Now, if a remix album DID show up, I'd add it to my collection.

Harry

 

[A&M Retro]

YES!!!! ABSOLUTELY!!!! WHY THE HECK NOT?! We already have the originals, and they're not going anywhere. Anything that would bring Karen's voice to a new generation in a different setting would be very welcome to my ears.

 

[GaryAlan]

The Matt Mix of Top Of The World, on Youtube, is quite creative and very good.
But, then Lorrie Morgan's, I Need to Be In Love, from 1984 (?) is quite good, also.
Generally, not a fan of others' renditions of Carpenters' songs, but, I have softened with age.

 

[Joeyesterday]

No. What's next, bread remixes?

 

[Jamesj75]

Great topic, Patrick! And great points made all around! I agree that tampering with "perfection" can be a minefield. However, even though nothing will replace the originals, I am in favor of remixes and remakes because, if for no other reason, by doing so, they bring the Carpenters back into the limelight. As for a Carpenters' dance remix album, I'm in!

 

[Rudy]

I could see Nicola Conte doing a set of Carpenters tracks. Thievery Corporation, Peter Kruder, DJ Spinna, Mario Caldato Jr., and many others could do a more than credible job of it also.

Give a listen to Bebel Gilberto's first two albums, then listen to the accompanying remix albums. It doesn't necessarily have to be dance remixes (and technically these types of projects aren't even remixes...but I won't go there), as you can also remix downtempo also.

Is it wrong? I'll answer it with this: is anyone taking away our original versions?? No. There are remixes I like, and more which I don't like; nobody is forcing me to listen to them, nor does anyone prevent me from listening to the originals. It should be flattering to the original artists to have their work honored like this.

 

[Must Hear This Album]

Yes, yes, and yes.

 

[Chris Mills]

Let the fun begin.......

 

[Chris Mills]

I think it would be great idea, and remixes with a dance beat would get played in clubs. Karen loved disco, so maybe she would approve of the idea.......Richard I'm not so sure of!

 

[JeffM]

If they can remix them as well as motownboy did with Karen's "Jimmy Mack," why not?

 

[Geographer]

Let the fun begin.......

I was going to say "hell no," but this actually works for some reason. I liked it.

 

[scottb]

For me it would depend on who did the remix. Some dance remixes are great and other are terrible. I remember around 2000 when Whitney Houston released her greatest hits album and Club 69 did a dance mix (radio edit remix) of 'Greatest love of all" and it was excellent. Really a great dance mix with just Whitney's lead vocals I believe. Richard did a great job with 'My body keeps changing my mind" so anything is possible I guess.

Scott B

 

[Rudy]

There have been wins and fails with remixes. I recall buying a CD that had some Diana Ross dance remixes. I was thinking that these were her 12" singles being released in digital format ("The Boss", the two Rodgers/Edwards tracks, etc.), much like Donna Summer's were. (And Summer's were very hypnotic, trance-like at times, as they were in that Eurodisco/Ital-disco mode that was coming into vogue back then.) But the Ross CD ended up being new remixes that totally changed the feel of the songs, and I could barely make it through one or two songs before I yanked it.

An album of remixes, to me, would be more like the alt rock If I Were A Carpenter compilation. A group of artists dedicated to putting their own spin on those classics, paying tribute to the originals. That compilation was hit or miss, but...aren't they all? The Rewhipped (Tijuana Brass) remix album was the same--it had some great remixes, a mis-step or two, but it worked.

There is a core group of a couple dozen remix artists (some of which I mentioned earlier) who could probably do this right. Some would even use snippets of other Carpenters songs as part of the new creation. Similar to how the Beatles Love was created (and that one is fun, trying to figure out where all the snippets come from). And there are wannabes out there who would probably just butcher things, even with their best intentions. We have to be careful what we wish for, in other words.

 

[Mark-T]

I'd buy it, of course. I'd prefer an "unplugged" stripped down version instead.

BTW- I agree with Murray. Amy Grant sounds horrible on Baby Bay remix.

 

[Don Malcolm]

That remix works (mostly) because the guys figured out that the connection point was located in what might be the greatest "extended choruses" in Richard's arranging career (and one of the best all-time, IMO). It doesn't quite "rock" but it bounces like all get-out and has got to be the reason why the track was such a smash hit.

The key is that they let that part stand and found a way to work around it in a way that didn't fall too far down the mountain.

There aren't too many other Carpenters tracks with that type of "bounce" to fit into the hippity-hoppity thing, IMO, so chances are relatively high that an album's worth (does anybody even use the word "album" anymore??) would be a disappointment.

 

[Chris Mills]

That remix works (mostly) because the guys figured out that the connection point was located in what might be the greatest "extended choruses" in Richard's arranging career (and one of the best all-time, IMO). It doesn't quite "rock" but it bounces like all get-out and has got to be the reason why the track was such a smash hit.

The key is that they let that part stand and found a way to work around it in a way that didn't fall too far down the mountain.

There aren't too many other Carpenters tracks with that type of "bounce" to fit into the hippity-hoppity thing, IMO, so chances are relatively high that an album's worth (does anybody even use the word "album" anymore??) would be a disappointment.

To be honest, I'm just amazed that anyone has thought to remix and mash-up any Carpenters track, the original songs must sound dated to today's buying /downloading public. So for me, and I've followed Carpenters since 1970, this remix and mash up thing is kind of an appreciation of great music that anyone can enjoy.

 

[Jeff]

Why in tbe ding dang hell not?
REMIX baby. Some news fans, some old fans new again and some pissed off purists. Point being interest. More interest more demand then who knows?

 

[jukeboxexpress]

I wouldn't touch the original single mixes, those were the way we first heard them. Richard has messed with them enough, at OUR expense. If they did anything, do something new and original like releasing the CSG stereo mixes which were mostly heard on FM stereo radio(until they had the LP versions or someone like myself who brought them the commercial store stock 45's). Even at that, luckily being in California, we were treated to the superior vinyl pressing made by the Columbia Santa Maria plant. Most commonly, Carpenters and other A&M artist's singles were injection-molded styrene by Monarch Records of Columbi Terra Haut. Even the A&M LP's pressed by Monarch Records were inferior. Many LP's were done by Columbia Santa Maria with virgin vinyl and are highly prized.

 

[newvillefan]

I wouldn't touch the original single mixes, those were the way we first heard them. Richard has messed with them enough, at OUR expense.

It's funny, as the years go by I find myself reverting to the original mixes more and more. Yesterday I played the album version of 'A Song For You' back to back with the 1987 remix and was stunned how much better the original sounded. Reverb isn't everything at the end of the day. The panned 'church organ' sounds on the original version - a big part of its charm for me - are completely lost off in the remix and it suffers greatly because of it.

 

[Rick-An Ordinary Fool]

It's funny, as the years go by I find myself reverting to the original mixes more and more. Yesterday I played the album version of 'A Song For You' back to back with the 1987 remix and was stunned how much better the original sounded. Reverb isn't everything at the end of the day. The panned 'church organ' sounds on the original version - a big part of its charm for me - are completely lost off in the remix and it suffers greatly because of it.

I agree.....for me it's almost like when I hear the original mix it's like hearing a totally new track because most of what is on my mp3 player are remixes. It's great we have both to enjoy. I can understand how the younger crowd would think the original mixes sound old or dated but the remixes help in that respect to keep them fresher and appealing to new fans.

 

[motownboy]

Speaking as someone who, as a non-professional, for fun has remixed other peoples songs and loves the concept of a remix, I have also seen the mindset and culture within the music industry of what "passes" as a remix. I think remixing the Carpenters in the current remix culture would be a mistake and cheapen the legacy. 90% of the producers who would do modern remixes show little or no reverence to original artist's work, whether it is a classic from the 1970's or the remix of the latest by John Legend. More often than not a modern DJ remix is basically that DJ/producer putting together a track that they themselves like and try to fit the vocal of the song they are supposed to be remixing into it.

I wish that Richard would commission stripped down versions of their songs with re-recorded piano and Karen and backing vocals using alternate vocal takes where possible.

 

[Jeff]

Point well made MB. From your perspective I get it. Ideal partnership...howssbout teaming RC with Motown Boy. Two individuals with like vision. Works for me !