SMiLE Sessions box set!

[Andrew G. Doe]

My point was, having clarified your point of view much better since, your initial statement, due to very poorly thought out phrasing, resulted in the iron clad clanger that was "I'm happy Brian's life turned out the way it did and I wouldn't change it". Shall we all move on now? 

+1

Yeah, I don't get the whole witch hunt for Fishmonk here, he has over and over again tried to explain that he in fact isn't happy Brian suffered, but people seem to skip those posts and quote his initial one. What you say Andrew? Can you let it go?

I did - check out reply #1393.

[tansen]

My point was, having clarified your point of view much better since, your initial statement, due to very poorly thought out phrasing, resulted in the iron clad clanger that was "I'm happy Brian's life turned out the way it did and I wouldn't change it". Shall we all move on now? 

+1

Yeah, I don't get the whole witch hunt for Fishmonk here, he has over and over again tried to explain that he in fact isn't happy Brian suffered, but people seem to skip those posts and quote his initial one. What you say Andrew? Can you let it go?

I did - check out reply #1393.

I meant 'let it go' in a sense that 'can we all be friends, and leave no grudges behind'

[18thofMay]

In the red corner we have Tansen, FUN3, Bill and the Monk.
In the Blue corner we have me, AGD and his IP, any other takers?

[Andrew G. Doe]

My point was, having clarified your point of view much better since, your initial statement, due to very poorly thought out phrasing, resulted in the iron clad clanger that was "I'm happy Brian's life turned out the way it did and I wouldn't change it". Shall we all move on now? 

+1

Yeah, I don't get the whole witch hunt for Fishmonk here, he has over and over again tried to explain that he in fact isn't happy Brian suffered, but people seem to skip those posts and quote his initial one. What you say Andrew? Can you let it go?

I did - check out reply #1393.

I meant 'let it go' in a sense that 'can we all be friends, and leave no grudges behind'

Your middle name 'Pollyanna' by any chance ? 

[tansen]

Your middle name 'Pollyanna' by any chance ?  

lol, right on Andrew.

And 18thofmay, actually my allegiance is only with myself, but I think right should be served when right is deserved. Btw, I see you over at the Steve Hoffman forum - you as excited as me about the deluxe version of 'Arthur' ?

[Andrew G. Doe]

you as excited as me about the deluxe version of 'Arthur' ?

Hell, yes !

[18thofMay]

Your middle name 'Pollyanna' by any chance ?  

lol, right on Andrew.

And 18thofmay, actually my allegiance is only with myself, but I think right should be served when right is deserved. Btw, I see you over at the Steve Hoffman forum - you as excited as me about the deluxe version of 'Arthur' ?

I was kinda joking. a bit

[tansen]

you as excited as me about the deluxe version of 'Arthur' ?

Hell, yes !

!

I'm hearing talk of a 'Lola' re-issue too - we've got a lot to look forward to!

[A Million Units In Jan!]

My point was, having clarified your point of view much better since, your initial statement, due to very poorly thought out phrasing, resulted in the iron clad clanger that was "I'm happy Brian's life turned out the way it did and I wouldn't change it". Shall we all move on now? 

+1

Yeah, I don't get the whole witch hunt for Fishmonk here, he has over and over again tried to explain that he in fact isn't happy Brian suffered, but people seem to skip those posts and quote his initial one. What you say Andrew? Can you let it go?

Doubt it.

[TdHabib]

Only in the world of the Beach Boys could we turn such a net positive as a SMiLE boxset into the mountain of negativity that is (or in my case was) this thread.

[onkster]

Hmmmm, barbs fired, followed by cries of "it's you, not me", and other protestations of self-defense. Bleah.

This board used to be fun.

It's becoming yet another mudpuddle of trollery.

I say, let's get back on topic in a gentlemanly spirit, or ditch this thread (and any others suffering this problem.)

[Jason]

I did. It just goes to show you that if you type something more than a couple of lines theres not a good chance it will be read and there's an even lower chance it will be understood.
Many of you have already made up your mind about me, and you'll purposely interpret my posts for your own ends. Brian Wilson is my hero, I have no greater respect for anyone, and its kind of sad to be characterized as a bad fan when really my only interest is in putting things in their proper place. I don't wish to glorify drugs, justify my own drugs use (seriously, I've never even commented once as to my own experience with drugs...), or to give them overriding predominance above other aspects of Brian's life. I believe Brian's issues were tied up in a complex of issues that fed into eachother and interacted in such a way that I don't think anyone here (this includes me, so don't try and twist this) truly understands. I believe that the sentiment of many posters here is admirable, and you only wish Brian the best, but I believe some of what's being said is naive. If you're hurt that I characterized you as naive, don't be, as I don't believe naivety is a necessarily bad quality, it's simply my characterization as informed by my own philosophic beliefs, which many of you may not share, but are nonetheless equally valid.
I believe that when you look at any one thing individually you can easily dismiss it as an influence. But when you look at all of Brian's interests, the scene that he was part of, the language he used, along with comments that he made, a pattern begins to emerge. One can easily discern an underlying link between these things, you can start to understand how Brian fit these things together. I simply believe this all deserves its proper place in any interpretation of SMiLE.

As far as that first statement goes, as someone who has typed virtual essays in response to some topics on here, I can dig where you're coming from. And in many of those cases a certain passage was taken out of context and consequently led to a huge flame war.

I think the situation has finally resolved itself, folks. Let's move on.

[tansen]

You know one thing I am kinda bummed out about is that the 'definitive' CD version of Smile will be in mono. Hopefully we will get all the songs in stereo as well so we can make our own stereo version!

[onkster]

Wait a minute...is it absolutely confirmed to be mono? Not both mono and stereo?

Sorry if this has been clarified before and I missed it...too much infighting to slog through...

[rab2591]

I am incredibly glad it will be coming out in mono.

I LOVE stereo (nothing gets better for me than listening to the 2009 mix of 'Don't Worry Baby' or the stereo mix of WIBN) but there is a depth and warmth achieved with mono that stereo just can't compete with. There is a unity with mono whereas stereo can sound scattered. I enjoy both formats, but mono just seems right for SMiLE - considering the lack of instruments on many of the songs (Wonderful, Friday Night, You Are My Sunshine) I don't think too many of these songs would sound good in stereo. But that's just me. And please prove me wrong Mr. Linett!

For those of us buying the boxset I have no doubt that we'll be treated to both stereo and mono for the majority of the SMiLE songs.

[tansen]

I am incredibly glad it will be coming out in mono.

I LOVE stereo (nothing gets better for me than listening to the 2009 mix of 'Don't Worry Baby' or the stereo mix of WIBN) but there is a depth and warmth achieved with mono that stereo just can't compete with. There is a unity with mono whereas stereo can sound scattered. I enjoy both formats, but mono just seems right for SMiLE - considering the lack of instruments on many of the songs (Wonderful, Friday Night, You Are My Sunshine) I don't think too many of these songs would sound good in stereo. But that's just me. And please prove me wrong Mr. Linett!

For those of us buying the boxset I have no doubt that we'll be treated to both stereo and mono for the majority of the SMiLE songs.

Onkster, yeah, at least that's what I've heard.

I hear ya Rab. Mono can definitely sound punchier than stereo, and example being Odessey and Oracle. But I still prefer O&O in stereo even if it lacks a bit of punchiness. As for SMILE, I agree that songs such as Friday Night and You Are My Sunshine will definitely work in mono, but I really want Wonderful in stereo. Put the harpsichord to the left, backing vocals to the right, (give them both stereo reverb) and lead vocal in the middle, and that will sounds awesome. Or even spread the BG vox around in the stereo image and put the harpsichord behind Brian's voice - that should work too.
I just think the wackiness of Smile needs the potential wackiness of stereo . And we are talking about a psychedelic album, and to my ears psychedelia works best in stereo.

[The Heartical Don]

I am incredibly glad it will be coming out in mono.

I LOVE stereo (nothing gets better for me than listening to the 2009 mix of 'Don't Worry Baby' or the stereo mix of WIBN) but there is a depth and warmth achieved with mono that stereo just can't compete with. There is a unity with mono whereas stereo can sound scattered. I enjoy both formats, but mono just seems right for SMiLE - considering the lack of instruments on many of the songs (Wonderful, Friday Night, You Are My Sunshine) I don't think too many of these songs would sound good in stereo. But that's just me. And please prove me wrong Mr. Linett!

For those of us buying the boxset I have no doubt that we'll be treated to both stereo and mono for the majority of the SMiLE songs.

Onkster, yeah, at least that's what I've heard.

I hear ya Rab. Mono can definitely sound punchier than stereo, and example being Odessey and Oracle. But I still prefer O&O in stereo even if it lacks a bit of punchiness. As for SMILE, I agree that songs such as Friday Night and You Are My Sunshine will definitely work in mono, but I really want Wonderful in stereo. Put the harpsichord to the left, backing vocals to the right, (give them both stereo reverb) and lead vocal in the middle, and that will sounds awesome. Or even spread the BG vox around in the stereo image and put the harpsichord behind Brian's voice - that should work too.
I just think the wackiness of Smile needs the potential wackiness of stereo . And we are talking about a psychedelic album, and to my ears psychedelia works best in stereo.

In principle, that would be my wish too. But would it have been Brian's intention? I think not. For obvious reasons. What there is, was in all probability meant for a mono end result. Perhaps Capitol would have pondered the wretched Duophonic thing again.
All in all, mono AND stereo would be the optimum deal.

[letsmakeit31]

All this talk about Smile got me fired up esp when it looked like we was all going to copy our Heroes and Villians by breaking out in civil war
So I tried my hand at what I could do with some of the Smile Sessions of "Vegetables" this lunch time seeing if I could second guess what would be on this box set .
So using the Vegetables boot from Nowhere man cd's I reconstrioned the song using the following tracks from the cd (Of which there are 39 tracks)
4) Vegetables pt1 vocals & instruments overdub.1min1sec.
16) Vegetables pt2 2nd vocal overdub 1min9secs fade down with starting at the end the next track.
19) Vegetables pt2 2nd vocal overdub) 1min13secs fade down into two tracks first.
23) Vegetables pt3 take 12 then after 12secs joined by.
25) Vegetables pt3 2nd vocal overdub till the end of this track.
In total its 5mins 15secs long and I've cut out some of the studio chat etc.
Only took me 1hr 30mins to do, I only did it for fun and my own pleasure and not for any bootlegs or fan mixes or anything bad like that.
Anyone else tried to do anything close to this on this track or have you mixed any other Smile songs?? in the past few months since we knew that Smile would be released??.

[Matt Bielewicz]

You know one thing I am kinda bummed out about is that the 'definitive' CD version of Smile will be in mono. Hopefully we will get all the songs in stereo as well so we can make our own stereo version!

I have a theory about that. The official releases said that the new mixes of SMiLE would be mono because that's how Brian originally envisaged SMiLE, or words to that effect. But that didn't stop them remixing Pet Sounds into stereo, which Brian also originally envisaged, mixed and had mastered in mono! (I don't think that's a bad thing, incidentally - I'm a fan of Pet Sounds in both stereo AND mono.)

No, I think the reason the new mixes of SMiLE will be mono is because it's difficult and time-consuming to do it any other way.

With Pet Sounds, all of the multitrack tapes for the album are present in the BB archives, and in nearly all cases, the parts needed to recreate the original mono mix in stereo are ON those multitracks. There are just a couple of exceptions - the vocals at the start of the tag to God Only Knows, Mike's bridge vocals for Wouldn't It Be Nice, and Brian's doubled lead on You Still Believe In Me. In the first two of those cases, nothing was actually MISSING - there were different vocals on the multitracks for those parts instead (a Brian lead on the bridge of Wouldn't It Be Nice, and a more 'softly sung' version of the God Only Knows tag vocals). For the lead doubling on You Still Believe In Me, they just had to go for a single lead there, but at least there WAS a vocal to work with.

The SMiLE tapes are in a much, much more fragmentary state than the ones for Pet Sounds (or at least, they were until Alan Boyd began his vault searches - I'm going on information that may now be a bit out of date). Lots of the multitrack tapes are (or were) missing, or sometimes there are tapes that may have had vocals on them, but no longer do. One example is Dennis's vocal for You Are My Sunshine, which only existed on an mono acetate (unless they've turned up something in the last few years).

With modern DSP software, it's getting *easier* to extract mixed material from mono mixes, but it's incredibly time-consuming to do it well. It's only previously been attempted on a few parts in the Beach Boys catalogue, like the mono Mike bridge vocal for a stereo version of Wouldn't It Be Nice, and the aforementioned 'Stand or fall, I know there shall be peace in the valley...' verse of Heroes and Villains on the stereo mix done for Hawthorne, California. Even then, if I remember rightly, the extractions weren't done to a standard where you could have solo'ed the vocals and heard none of the backing track - there would have been quite a lot of 'junk' behind the vocal. Of course, in a stereo mix, that often doesn't matter - it's only a problem if you're trying to make 'Stack-O-Vocals' mixes.

On the other hand, if you're only trying to create new MONO mixes, a lot of these problems are less acute. You can just edit the surviving mono section from the acetate (or whatever) into a new mix. That's not quite the end of the story, as you ideally have to make the REST of the new mono mix mesh tonally with the section from the acetate, or vice versa, but as I understand it, broadly speaking, it's easier to create new mono mixes with this kind of material than it is to create new stereo versions.

So if you want to create a new mix using that vocal from YAMS, it will be hard to do it well without the new mix also being in mono. There's lots of this with SMiLE - as I was reminded on here last week, having completely forgotten this fact myself, there is no multitrack tape with the vocals for two verses of Heroes and Villains 'Stand or fall, I know there shall be peace in the valley...' and 'at three score and five, I'm very much alive...'. Those vocals only exist in mono mixes, too. So new mixes featuring those sections would probably also be in mono.

But who really knows? Perhaps new multitracks or even old stereo mixes have turned up; perhaps Messrs Boyd and Linett have been using the latest in software to hack mono vox parts from old trial mixdowns and marry them with stereo backing tracks (like that chap here did the other week with Good Vibrations to such great effect)... we just don't know yet!

Point is, I think the supposed mono-ness of the new SMiLE, if indeed that does prove to be the case, may be for a practical reason, and not an accident.

MattB

[tansen]

In principle, that would be my wish too. But would it have been Brian's intention? I think not. For obvious reasons. What there is, was in all probability meant for a mono end result. Perhaps Capitol would have pondered the wretched Duophonic thing again.
All in all, mono AND stereo would be the optimum deal.

I'm with you Don. Both would be ideal!

[rab2591]

I am incredibly glad it will be coming out in mono.

I LOVE stereo (nothing gets better for me than listening to the 2009 mix of 'Don't Worry Baby' or the stereo mix of WIBN) but there is a depth and warmth achieved with mono that stereo just can't compete with. There is a unity with mono whereas stereo can sound scattered. I enjoy both formats, but mono just seems right for SMiLE - considering the lack of instruments on many of the songs (Wonderful, Friday Night, You Are My Sunshine) I don't think too many of these songs would sound good in stereo. But that's just me. And please prove me wrong Mr. Linett!

For those of us buying the boxset I have no doubt that we'll be treated to both stereo and mono for the majority of the SMiLE songs.

I really want Wonderful in stereo. Put the harpsichord to the left, backing vocals to the right, (give them both stereo reverb) and lead vocal in the middle, and that will sounds awesome. Or even spread the BG vox around in the stereo image and put the harpsichord behind Brian's voice - that should work too.

The the former option will sound like the Beatles remasters where the guitar is on the direct left, drums and bass on the direct right, lead vocals direct front, etc etc....the Beatles stereo remasters sound like rubbish. I'll agree with you on the latter though - a subtle stereo mix of Wonderful would probably sound really good.

Funny, O&O is one of my top 5 favorite albums and I've never heard it in mono - I must do that one of these days.

[Andrew G. Doe]

You know one thing I am kinda bummed out about is that the 'definitive' CD version of Smile will be in mono. Hopefully we will get all the songs in stereo as well so we can make our own stereo version!

Whoa there. Not 'definitive'. Not even close. CD1 of the two-disc version will be an "as-close-as-we-can-get" approach using the existing (incomplete) 1966-67 material and apparently based on the BWPS template.

The sessions on all the other CDs, as far as I'm aware, will be in stereo.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Funny, O&O is one of my top 5 favorite albums and I've never heard it in mono - I must do that one of these days.

The mono mix isn't just better, on a few songs - notably "This Will Be Our Year" - it's different.

That said, the stereo mix has its charms.

[Mikie]

The Beatles stereo remasters ain't rubbish!!!  And Smile in stereo won't be either!!!

[Matt Bielewicz]

Wow, Rab... you've never heard the mono mix of O&O? Does that mean you've NOT heard 'This Will Be Our Year' with the trumpet and other horns? Or have you heard the awful fake stereo version they 'duophonic'ed' out of the mono mix back in the day?

The new stereo mix is nice... but that song *really* suffers without the trumpet, I think. A bit like listening to 'Help Me Rhonda' in stereo, but without the piano and guitar solos on the bridge that you can only get in the mono version.

And following what I just said, and Andrew's comment... I'm guessing the session stuff on the other CDs of the SMiLE box will be in stereo because they still have the multitrack tapes for those bits. Unlike some of the finished songs, as I said above...

MattB