Who Did It Better?
Sweet Alibis
On occasion there are songs which never hit, yet they do catch the ear of a given artist or producer who breathes life into them, endearing them to fans the world over. Such is the case with today's little gem of a song, which was recorded by three distinct female vocalists - all with varying degrees of musical prowess.
Which brings to mind the question: is it better to be musically accomplished or emotionally effective? Not that they are necessarily mutually exclusive, but, if you had to choose... which serves a song best?
American jazz legend, Carmen McRae is considered one of the most influential jazz vocalists of the 20th century due to her behind-the-beat phrasing and ironic interpretation of lyrics. When she was 17 years old, she met Billy Holiday and the two became friends. As a result, McRae never performed without singing at least one song associated with 'Lady Day.' She even recorded an album in 1983 in Holiday's honor entitled For Lady Day, which finally saw the light of day after McRae's death, in 1995.
In November and December of1978, McRae found herself with some extra studio time to fill and decided to take on songs written by those she considered the up and coming writers of tomorrow's musical standards. She chose a selection of adult contemporary songs by the top songwriters of the day, including Melissa Manchester, Carole Bayer Sager, Al Jarreau, Ralph McDonald, Peter Allen, Billy Joel, Paul Williams and Marvin Hamlisch. And Sweet Alibis made the cut. However, McRae, as per usual, was between labels at the time and the recordings sat in a vault until Buddah Records bought the rights to them. Released as I'm Coming Home Again, the album, due to Buddah's distribution deal with Arista, received little label support and floundered in obscurity.
In November and December of1978, McRae found herself with some extra studio time to fill and decided to take on songs written by those she considered the up and coming writers of tomorrow's musical standards. She chose a selection of adult contemporary songs by the top songwriters of the day, including Melissa Manchester, Carole Bayer Sager, Al Jarreau, Ralph McDonald, Peter Allen, Billy Joel, Paul Williams and Marvin Hamlisch. And Sweet Alibis made the cut. However, McRae, as per usual, was between labels at the time and the recordings sat in a vault until Buddah Records bought the rights to them. Released as I'm Coming Home Again, the album, due to Buddah's distribution deal with Arista, received little label support and floundered in obscurity.
Bernadette Peters was in the midst of her first flush of fame. Thanks to a pair of films along side then-boyfriend Steve Martin (The Jerk, Pennies From Heaven,) she'd become a hot commodity - and not just on Broadway, where she first cut her teeth.
Signed to MCA Records, she recorded her first solo album, a pastiche of tunes recalling bygone eras. Produced by Brooks Arthur (!) it featured a cover which boasted an original painting of Peters done by none other than a then 84 year old Alberto Vargas, king of the pin up girls. Her eponymous album, released in 1980, yielded the surprise Top 40 hit, Gee Whiz.
For the follow-up, the powers that be at MCA decided to repeat the formula of the first. Only this time, her producer, Arthur suggested that Peters take on Sweet Alibis, which he considered perfect for her, especially in light of her recent break up with Martin. Featuring yet another painting by Vargas (it was to be one his last works,) 1981's Now Playing also included songs by Jerry Leiber and Mike Stoller and Stephen Sondheim.
Released to coincide with her appearance and photo spread in the December issue of Playboy magazine, for which she posed in lingerie designed by famed designer Bob Mackie, the album failed to chart, thus putting an end Peters' association with MCA.
And that's the whole story.
Now? Onto the competition!
The Song: Sweet Alibis
The Competitors: Bayer-Sager vs. McRae vs. Peters
Sweet Alibis - Carole Bayer Sager
Sweet Alibis - Carmen McRae
Sweet Alibis - Bernadette Peters
Carole Bayer Sager
Such a subdued intro. Producer Arthur has a way of dealing with singers with slight voices, making the best of what would some would view as a liability. The resigned ache present in Bayer Sager's voice is used to good effect. The arrangement is kept appropriately sparse in order to not overwhelm the vocalist, consisting of little more than the bell-like tones of an electric piano, a sympathetic bass, rounded percussion and a group of restrained strings.
Bayer Sager's phrasing is clipped, most likely because she's incapable of sustaining a note. It places an emphasis on her very crisp articulation, which serves as a sort of percussive element. It's an effective, unconventional technique.
I really like the string arrangement. It's very clever. That abrupt acoustic-sounding piano at the 1:44 mark is a bit of unexpected drama. And the guitar solo? A matter of taste. It's a bit homogenized, but effective. I think Arthur is trying to stir up a bit of dramatic relief via the contrasting tones; the simplicity and quiet surrounding Bayer Sager's vocal contributions and the whirlwind of the instrumental break. Again, the strings are used quite effectively. And, over the years, I've come to love that overworked guitar solo.
When Bayer Sager returns, so does the sound of isolation. Her vocals, which are little more than whispered phrases, are treated with a great deal of reverb, effectually evoking the aloneness one experiences when facing the truth of a failed relationship. The plaintive piano solo which begins after a beat and plays us out is yet, another fruitful construct. It evokes the image of the song's protagonist walking away, resigned, self-contained, but mournfully so.
I'd forgotten how potent Arthur's production work frequently can be and what a tiny, succinct melancholy valentine this song happens to be.
The songwriters got this one right.
Carmen McRae
The little trio at work here put us on notice right away; this is going to be a much more muscular take on the song. There's a lot of rhythmic undertones in that very focused keyboard work along with a very quiet trap set. The material may be MOR, but the musicians are all jazz.
McRae's vocals come on strong, right out of the box. She bites off phrases and stretches vowel sounds with a knowing, no-nonsense purr. She infuses the lyrics and melody with all sorts of percussive touches - a flex, here, a clipped word, there. Moving into the lyrical bridge, the trio is fully engaged and McRae is in a playful mood. Where Bayer Sager is resolutely resigned, McRae is still slyly stirring the ashes.
And, of course, her signature phrasing is on display here; that's what makes McRae such an original.
The production work is knobbed hot and bright. Lots of ringing tones with crisp percussive elements abound. The strings arrive late in the game. I think I could have done without them. They feel a little in the way.
Love it when this lady digs in on "driving me crazy."
Very odd instrumental break. That plucked acoustic bass, (?) an interesting choice. Again... the strings are in the way.
McRae reenters the mix in full swing mode. She's almost playing off the strings, which are way to high in the mix for my comfort. Wow, the lady is bringing this one home. And the plucked acoustic bass takes us the rest of the way.
I like McRae's voice. I'm unfamiliar with her work and will have to check more out.
Bernadette Peters
Peters technique as a vocalist is very interesting, and one more singers should study. She never wastes a word. She fills them all in. Every vowel sound, an opportunity to open up her sound so it hits the back of her throat. Yes, she has a tendency to flutter away the end of a phrase, but that's part of her Gibson girl charm - evoking another era. She's also an expert when it comes to singing on top of a note. Listen to her single line, direct to the end delivery at the 24 second mark. It's all one line, but imbued with a total tonal transformation. In one phrase. That's intuitive. I don't know that you can teach that.
Bernadette Peters
Peters technique as a vocalist is very interesting, and one more singers should study. She never wastes a word. She fills them all in. Every vowel sound, an opportunity to open up her sound so it hits the back of her throat. Yes, she has a tendency to flutter away the end of a phrase, but that's part of her Gibson girl charm - evoking another era. She's also an expert when it comes to singing on top of a note. Listen to her single line, direct to the end delivery at the 24 second mark. It's all one line, but imbued with a total tonal transformation. In one phrase. That's intuitive. I don't know that you can teach that.
As we move into the lyrical bridge, her accompanist gets a bit... greedy. She doesn't need his help in that way. Those fills... horribly distracting. I'd rather concentrate on the story Peters is telling. And the strings are a bit ripe, too.
The percussion sounds like its being tapped out on cardboard boxes. Arthur is not bringing his A-game here. It's like he doesn't trust Peters to carry the song. I'm disappointed.
I think Peters handles the "driving me crazy part" the least effectively, so far. Also disappointing, as that's sort of the climax of the song's story arc. Oh, dear, no instrumental bridge, she goes full emotional warrior, competing with some screaming strings. Well, tender, this is not.
No. the further we get into this, the less it is working. Not as a recorded version. Live? On stage? As part of a musical? I don't know. But this is a fail from "driving me crazy" on to the end.
Well, that's a shame. It was a good match... on paper.
The Verdict
Love Peters, but her version misses the mark. I don't know how producer Arthur could get it so right when it came to Bayer Sager and blunder so badly when it came to Peters.
The Verdict
Love Peters, but her version misses the mark. I don't know how producer Arthur could get it so right when it came to Bayer Sager and blunder so badly when it came to Peters.
And Bayer Sager's version is incredibly effective. In fact, it may be my personal favorite of the three. But that may have more to do with growing up with it than musical accomplishment.
McRae's take is sassy and sly, and while it doesn't bring out the devastation inherit in the song, it certainly casts her as a long term survivor of anything romance has to dish out.
So, I'm torn. McRae's is fully developed and more accomplished musically, but Bayer Sager's tiny truths are much more emotionally potent.
Hats off to both, but I'm going with Bayer Sager. And if you disagree? I will concede that you may very well be right.
But I can't separate my opinion from the history this song and I have shared, nor the hours spent, all alone, locked away in my room with nothing but an inexpensive stereo and her album.
As Noel Coward once wrote... "strange how potent cheap music is."
--- ---
And that's enough of me.
Your turn. Leave your choice and thoughts in the comments section. You know how I love a differing opinion.
That's all for now. Until next time...
Thanks for reading... and listening!
4 comments:
Huh...I wasn't familiar with this. Though I've never been a huge fan, I guess I prefer Peters because she brings her sense of Broadway storytelling.
Not my favorite tune but, Peters enunciation is so clear (although theatrical) that I must go with her.
I have never heard this song but it sounds familiar. I think I prefer McRae's version, to be honest. I think she's brilliant and conveys the heartache with a steely resolution. Love that for me.
XOXO
I have to go with Carmen McRae.
Just sublime!
Post a Comment