|
|
Post by BethMosior on Jun 27, 2004 17:20:38 GMT -5
I agree with you Dave   and I really loved the analogy  thanx too for your words earlier, thats another reason I love this web site, I can share my love for Richard & Karen Carpenter and even share my love of their Photo's that I have collected over the years  and not get attacked like I did in the past  Thanx  |
|
steve
NEW TO THE FAMILY
Posts: 27
|
Post by steve on Jun 27, 2004 19:45:10 GMT -5
I think that some people dislike the carpenters because they did very easy listening music which for some people is quite bothersome..I remember being laughed at for likeing the Carpenters and my wife was laughed at for likeing Barry Manilow music..There seems to be a great number of people who cant accept music that is finesse oriented and well crafted..These same people only like "In your face" type music which to me makes them more barbaric (A joke)..I personally like alot of Rock and roll artists,but appreciate good music of all different styles...Quality is what matters to me and the Carpenters had that in abundance..Personally I dont think they belong in the Rock and Roll hall of fame,simply because they were not a "Rock" group..
|
|
|
|
Post by Boat2Sail on Jun 27, 2004 23:41:39 GMT -5
Personally I dont think they belong in the Rock and Roll hall of fame,simply because they were not a "Rock" group.. I think Carpenters do belong in the Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame. They made such a big impact on the music scene in the early 70's, and they really did change the outlook on the music landscape atleast for a few years. I remember their music being called groundbreaking and a fresh new sound. And as Rick noted in his earlier post not all the groups in the Hall Of Fame are rock and roll. After all Dinah Washington is in the Hall Of Fame, she's the furthest thing from rock music. I agree with Rick that Karen is a pioneer in her own right. I also agree with Dave's statement that the Carpenters contributed something special to the game...the game of music. |
|
|
|
Post by enigma on Jun 28, 2004 10:56:19 GMT -5
Thats true Rick R&R HOF members are not necessarily Rock and Roll but I don't see alot of easy listening groups/artists in there (I don't see easy listening artists in your list; who in the list do you consider easy listening?). I agree that Karen was a pioneer being one of the first female drummer singers but I meant pioneer in the musical sense like Elvis, Chuck Berry, The Beatles etc. The Carpenters music was fresh in that there was no one producing that music at that time but a few decades earlier that music was being produced (it is very simular to the 40's and early 50's music just a little more advanced)
The big obstacle the Carpenters will face should they be considered for the R&R HOF is the inherant prejedice of so called legetimate music magazines like Rolling Stone and the HOF committee itself. I feel they still write the Carpenters off as sacarine balladeers and don't take them seriously as artists. Most album reviews I have read on The Carpenters did not give any of their albums high marks and wrote borderline insulting reviews on their work. I never felt critics or the music community as a whole fully embraced The Carpenters dispite their numerous awards, popularity and quality music.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rick Henry on Jun 28, 2004 11:17:42 GMT -5
Thats true Rick R&R HOF members are not necessarily Rock and Roll but I don't see alot of easy listening groups/artists in there (I don't see easy listening artists in your list; who in the list do you consider easy listening?). I agree that Karen was a pioneer being one of the first female drummer singers but I meant pioneer in the musical sense like Elvis, Chuck Berry, The Beatles etc. The Carpenters music was fresh in that there was no one producing that music at that time but a few decades earlier that music was being produced (it is very simular to the 40's and early 50's music just a little more advanced) The big obstacle the Carpenters will face should they be considered for the R&R HOF is the inherant prejedice of so called legetimate music magazines like Rolling Stone and the HOF committee itself. I feel they still write the Carpenters off as sacarine balladeers and don't take them seriously as artists. Most album reviews I have read on The Carpenters did not give any of their albums high marks and wrote borderline insulting reviews on their work. I never felt critics or the music community as a whole fully embraced The Carpenters dispite their numerous awards, popularity and quality music. Hi Enigma, you definitely bring up some good points here. I also think another big obstacle for the Carpenters is the whole image thing. I think that's one of the reasons why they received only fair reveiws from Rolling Stone magazine. But also with time Rolling Stone has re-evaluated their opinion on the Carpenters. Now several of their albums are given three stars instead of one or none. As far as easy listening Simon & Garfunkel, Everly Brothers, Dinah Washington, Platters - are just a few in the HOF whose music is easy. The Carpenters, though, are the epitome of easy listening. Really they brought a new sound and popularity to easy listening with much more detailed musical arrangement than what there was before. they added instruments that you didn't generally hear in an easy listening group. Before Carpenters easy listening was basically a vocalist or a few vocalists singing in front of an orchestra, but Carpenters went and added jazz drum progressions, fuzz guitar solos, steamy saxophone work, almost psychecdelic vibe sounds, heavily layered vocal arrangements. They took the sound to a new unheard of level. Once the whole image thing finally blows over they will be regognized by the HOF. It's not necessary that they be inducted, but the Carpenters have really contributed a lasting and important factor to popular music. Maybe someone should start a POPULAR MUSIC HALL OF FAME. Back to reviews on albums, I have read more than my share of excellent reviews on their albums. These of course were generally written by newspapaers and other music publications. Rolling Stone magazine for some reason bcak in the 70's (not now anymore) really did not want to recognize the quality of musicianship in Carpenters music. They did give Karen's solo album a fairly decent review compared to the reviews they gave them in the 70's. |
|
steve
NEW TO THE FAMILY
Posts: 27
|
Post by steve on Jun 28, 2004 18:05:35 GMT -5
I dont think there is much question about the Carpenters musical legacy and the fact that they were every bit as "Great" as the acts in the Rock and Roll hall of fame..I just think that the Rock and Roll hall of fame should stick to Rock artists!! I dont think the other non-rock artists should be in it either..Imagine having an "easy listening" hall of fame and having Jimi Hendrix in it because of his great impact!! A JOKE ! HA HA HA !To me putting the Carpenters in the Rock and Roll hall of fame in some ways makes them less significant..I am happy they were not a rock act!!!I love them just the way they are and dont need the validation of the Rock and Roll community to make me feel better about them!
|
|
|
|
Post by Boat2Sail on Jun 28, 2004 18:36:03 GMT -5
I dont think there is much question about the Carpenters musical legacy and the fact that they were every bit as "Great" as the acts in the Rock and Roll hall of fame..I just think that the Rock and Roll hall of fame should stick to Rock artists!! I dont think the other non-rock artists should be in it either..Imagine having an "easy listening" hall of fame and having Jimi Hendrix in it because of his great impact!! A JOKE ! HA HA HA !To me putting the Carpenters in the Rock and Roll hall of fame in some ways makes them less significant..I am happy they were not a rock act!!!I love them just the way they are and dont need the validation of the Rock and Roll community to make me feel better about them!  :)This is a pretty interesting conversation with opposing viewpoints. but we all come to the same conclusion that the Carpenters did produce quality music. I really like Steve's last comment it makes sense.  |
|
|
|
Post by Rick Henry on Jun 28, 2004 23:52:29 GMT -5
I dont think there is much question about the Carpenters musical legacy and the fact that they were every bit as "Great" as the acts in the Rock and Roll hall of fame..I just think that the Rock and Roll hall of fame should stick to Rock artists!! I dont think the other non-rock artists should be in it either..Imagine having an "easy listening" hall of fame and having Jimi Hendrix in it because of his great impact!! A JOKE ! HA HA HA !To me putting the Carpenters in the Rock and Roll hall of fame in some ways makes them less significant..I am happy they were not a rock act!!!I love them just the way they are and dont need the validation of the Rock and Roll community to make me feel better about them! Very well written Dave. Carpenters are a great band whether or not they are part of the HOF. I guess sometimes I get protective of them and I think they deserve to receive every accolade available. But when it comes down to it, it's not the awards one wins, but more so the quality of work they produce. And as it stands the Carpenters have received a lion's share of accolades. |
|
|
|
Post by Superstargal on Jun 29, 2004 2:13:36 GMT -5
What an interesting topic, and all of you have made such excellent points; I've really enjoyed reading the posts from all of you. True, there are always going to be some people who don't like The Carpenters. It just depends on the tastes of people I guess. I too have heard about the bad promotions and how The Carpenters were too sugary sweet. But you know, The Carpenters brought color to the 1970's. I mean, the 70's were filled with all kinds of music from funk, disco, country, R&B, punk, rock, etc. Critics should not have been so judgemental of The Carpenters, but rather see them as part of the colorful music variety of the 1970's. They were simply the mellow side that offered a breath of fresh air. I only wish that current music had variety like that of the 1970's. But I digress. I respect the different musical tastes of people, just as long as they don't make others feel bad for liking certain groups that maybe they would not like (such as The Carpenters maybe). Bashing someone's favorite group for no reason or making fun of someone's favorite group for no reason is needless to say, very unnessesary. Other than that, I respect that various musical tastes make the world interesting. I for one have a wide variety of music that I like. In addition to The Carpenters, I enjoy listening to The Doors and Journey just to name a couple others. Bye for now!  |
|
|
|
Post by Will on Jun 29, 2004 16:56:49 GMT -5
I dont think there is much question about the Carpenters musical legacy and the fact that they were every bit as "Great" as the acts in the Rock and Roll hall of fame..I just think that the Rock and Roll hall of fame should stick to Rock artists!! I dont think the other non-rock artists should be in it either..Imagine having an "easy listening" hall of fame and having Jimi Hendrix in it because of his great impact!! A JOKE ! HA HA HA !To me putting the Carpenters in the Rock and Roll hall of fame in some ways makes them less significant..I am happy they were not a rock act!!!I love them just the way they are and dont need the validation of the Rock and Roll community to make me feel better about them! I guess I agree with Steve. I think I'd rather see them in a general Music Hall of Fame because of their staying power, the depth of their lyrics, their ability to cover various styles of music, their attention to detail, and their perfect execution. |
|
Dave
Ultra Emissary
"sleeping in the arms of the cosmos..."
Posts: 1,515
|
Post by Dave on Jun 29, 2004 20:06:31 GMT -5
Hey Superstargal, nice thoughts. If you would like to see what other classic tunes were represented on the Top 40 here in Pittsburgh during the time K&R were charting, there's a link here somewhere or just type "Jeff Roteman's KQV Web Page" into Google and check out the KQV Surveys page. Top 40 was a mix from the Doors and Hendrix to Donna Fargo and John Denver.
|
|
|
|
Post by Superstargal on Jun 29, 2004 20:14:09 GMT -5
Hey Superstargal, nice thoughts. If you would like to see what other classic tunes were represented on the Top 40 here in Pittsburgh during the time K&R were charting, there's a link here somewhere or just type "Jeff Roteman's KQV Web Page" into Google and check out the KQV Surveys page. Top 40 was a mix from the Doors and Hendrix to Donna Fargo and John Denver. Thanks a lot for the info Dave! I'll definitely look into that! Long Live The Carpenters! |
|
|
|
Post by Joeyd on Jul 14, 2004 17:13:00 GMT -5
Sorry. I disagree. No matter that I love Karen Carpenter and I own most of the Carpenters' recordings, the Carpenters do NOT belong in the Rock n' Roll Hall of Fame. The Carpenters were not rock n' roll.
Rock n' roll is a state of mind. And the Carpenters' music did not capture the spirit of rock n' roll. Why?
I'll tell you. First, their music became more and more mellow as the years progressed. Second, where was the passion and the spontaneity? For heaven's sake, Karen had to pre-record her duet with Ella on TV in order to sound her "best". Richard especially had to be perfect (and so stiff). Guess what? Rock n' roll is raw and imperfect, and wonderful!
No, the Carpenters do not belong in this hall of fame.
Again, I like the Carpenters for other reasons. That VOICE, the Christmas music. The hauning arrangements. I could do without most of the overdubbing, however. And especially the chorus voiceovers that Richard put in after Karen's death. That is NOT rock music.
Just my thoughts,
JD
|
|
thanx too for your words earlier, thats another reason I love this web site, I can share my love for Richard & Karen Carpenter and even share my love of their Photo's that I have collected over the years 
