SMiLE release thoughts from a returnee and some questions for the scholars

[bgas]

I would have to think that Brian will be involved in some capacity with the sequencing. Mark Linett says: "But we are certainly going to present the whole piece as close to it as was envisioned, or as is envisioned, as possible." I think to do that they would need Brian's participation, else they have mental telepathy.

What they would have to have is Brian1967's participation.
Brian2004/2011 has too much CCW under the bridge to know/remember( if even he ever really knew) what the sequencing would be.

[armona]

it doesn't make any more sense to use the handwritten tracklist than it does to use the BWPS template.

we don't know if the handwritten tracklist was really definitive, or if it wouldn't have changed by the time the album came out.

Brian really revisited this material and finished it to the best of his ability in 2004.

and why stick to a 40-min format when we've got more space to utilize in this day and age?

Just say SMiLE should have been a double album after all, and release it that way.

With deference to plans underway by those in charge and confessed ignorance about what is available, I would probably have made a (mostly) mono version for purists that adheres to the 1966 tracklist and incorporates vintage mixes where available, and a mostly stereo version that roughly follows the BWPS sequence. It would leave the question of what's definitive open ended.

[pancakerecords]

it doesn't make any more sense to use the handwritten tracklist than it does to use the BWPS template.

we don't know if the handwritten tracklist was really definitive, or if it wouldn't have changed by the time the album came out.

Brian really revisited this material and finished it to the best of his ability in 2004.

and why stick to a 40-min format when we've got more space to utilize in this day and age?

Just say SMiLE should have been a double album after all, and release it that way.

With deference to plans underway by those in charge and confessed ignorance about what is available, I would probably have made a (mostly) mono version for purists that adheres to the 1966 tracklist and incorporates vintage mixes where available, and a mostly stereo version that roughly follows the BWPS sequence. It would leave the question of what's definitive open ended.

I hope they release as much as they can reasonably fit.  I can cut it down to a dozen or so essential tracks if I so desire.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I don't recall Linett (in the article that I read at least) saying that he was using the BWPS tracklisting as a template  tracklisting that will be followed in CD1. Where does he say this?

[Jeff]

Why do we want less SMiLE music?

I don't want to lose 10 minutes just to trim it down to what might have been a 40 minute album. As "Wirestone" has stated, Brian had too much material and no idea how to make it work on a two-sided vinyl album in '67. That album can't be recreated. However, Brian, Darian and Van Dyke fashioned something new using what Brian determined to be the best material at hand and it works quite well as a finished piece. I'm not certain how the existing Beach Boys sessions will work when based on that new template, but more SMiLE rather than less is perfectly fine by me.

Because, this project concerns the Smile sessions 1966-67 - not what someone did with the same material 37 years later. If, as stated, the intent is to get something as representative of the 1967 (non-)release as possible using the original recordings, then having BWPS as a template don't merely fall at the first fence, it doesn't get out of the starting gate. Ican just about concede using Carl's 1968 vocal for "Cabin Essence" asit was the only important element missing and two years on he wouldn't have sounded much different. Not happy about it, really rather wouldn't, but if you must... but basing even a vague and partial recreation of a 1967 album on a 2003 template is, in my view, indefensible.

AGD's quote should be pinned at the top of this board for a long, long time.

As for the tracks on the back cover, people should keep in mind that (1) Capitol put a big investment into printing the cover, so Brian really would have been bound to at least approximate that list - not in the order, but in the titles; and (2) with a couple of minor exceptions (including Prayer and You're Welcome), all of the Smile sessions between October '66 and April '67 were for one of the 12 listed song titles.  It seems like a lot of folks want to say that Brian had no idea what the tracks were going to be back then, so we should throw our hands up and use an after-the-fact reconstruction.  But I think it's clear that Brian did have a very good idea of what the tracks would be--he was basically required to once the covers were printed.

[18thofMay]

I think that there were certainly going to be tracks as indicated on the back. But there were going to be many little hidden non listed snippets. Maybe Mr taylor flew that across the ditch. The running time may have been indicated  but the "actual" running time may have been longer. Teenage Symphony's to God run as long or short as they want to run!!

[Cam Mott]

Why do we want less SMiLE music?

I don't want to lose 10 minutes just to trim it down to what might have been a 40 minute album. As "Wirestone" has stated, Brian had too much material and no idea how to make it work on a two-sided vinyl album in '67. That album can't be recreated. However, Brian, Darian and Van Dyke fashioned something new using what Brian determined to be the best material at hand and it works quite well as a finished piece. I'm not certain how the existing Beach Boys sessions will work when based on that new template, but more SMiLE rather than less is perfectly fine by me.

Because, this project concerns the Smile sessions 1966-67 - not what someone did with the same material 37 years later. If, as stated, the intent is to get something as representative of the 1967 (non-)release as possible using the original recordings, then having BWPS as a template don't merely fall at the first fence, it doesn't get out of the starting gate. Ican just about concede using Carl's 1968 vocal for "Cabin Essence" asit was the only important element missing and two years on he wouldn't have sounded much different. Not happy about it, really rather wouldn't, but if you must... but basing even a vague and partial recreation of a 1967 album on a 2003 template is, in my view, indefensible.

AGD's quote should be pinned at the top of this board for a long, long time.

As for the tracks on the back cover, people should keep in mind that (1) Capitol put a big investment into printing the cover, so Brian really would have been bound to at least approximate that list - not in the order, but in the titles; and (2) with a couple of minor exceptions (including Prayer and You're Welcome), all of the Smile sessions between October '66 and April '67 were for one of the 12 listed song titles.  It seems like a lot of folks want to say that Brian had no idea what the tracks were going to be back then, so we should throw our hands up and use an after-the-fact reconstruction.  But I think it's clear that Brian did have a very good idea of what the tracks would be--he was basically required to once the covers were printed.

Thank you, my point exactly. The idea that Brian was tragically lost is a romantic fan-tasy imo. Mainly because Brian documented in some way exactly what each section he recorded was for, in what song, in what place in that song. He did change his mind and would record something new or a replacement and each time it is noted what it was for in what song. He wasn't just casting around recording crap hoping he found a place for it. Anyways, it was exactly the way he did GV, noting what each recording was for and where it fit in the song.

Calm down Cam. Well, you know.....it just...... Go lay down, pard.

[drbeachboy]

I don't recall Linett (in the article that I read at least) saying that he was using the BWPS tracklisting as a template  tracklisting that will be followed in CD1. Where does he say this?

Don't recall? Here it is in Billboard:

Linett says Wilson's 2004 "Smile" album has served as a blueprint for the current project, which will be mixed in mono because that's how Wilson‹who's deaf in his right ear‹intended it. But Linett adds that other selections from the 30 hours of "Smile" session recordings will more than likely be issued in stereo.

"Some of these questions are hard to answer because not only haven't we assembled them yet, this has to be played for Brian and the other members of the group to see what kind of input they have," he says. "Just because Brian did it the way he did it in 2004 [doesn't mean] he won't say, 'Well, let's add "You're Welcome," ' which was the B-side on the 'Heroes and Villians' single."

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Don't recall? Here it is in Billboard:

Linett says Wilson's 2004 "Smile" album has served as a blueprint for the current project, which will be mixed in mono because that's how Wilson‹who's deaf in his right ear‹intended it. But Linett adds that other selections from the 30 hours of "Smile" session recordings will more than likely be issued in stereo.

"Some of these questions are hard to answer because not only haven't we assembled them yet, this has to be played for Brian and the other members of the group to see what kind of input they have," he says. "Just because Brian did it the way he did it in 2004 [doesn't mean] he won't say, 'Well, let's add "You're Welcome," ' which was the B-side on the 'Heroes and Villians' single."

Well, hold on. In the interview Linett does happen to be answering a question about a tracklisting. But when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint", he is not talking about it in terms of the structure of the tracks. Here is the quotation in context:

We have gaps, we have missing vocals. We aren't missing any music which is heartening. All the songs were recorded. Most of it is there. I can't be sure that we won't still come up with something because we do know that there were other things recorded, but the tapes are no longer in the group's possession. And unfortunately they may have been destroyed years ago.

We have some rough mixes from 1966, which will probably become part of the quote album. There seems to be less of that than you might expect. That also leads to believe, it really wasn't close to being finished when it was put aside to go to the next project.

If you take Brian's 2004 version as a blueprint, [it will have] all of that music, all of the significant parts and even the little segue ways. For the most part, that project was heavily researched by myself and others to make sure Brian had available all the parts that had been recorded back in 1966 and 1967.

Note here that Linett is not talking about the order of the tracks at all, certainly not when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint". Rather, in this entire quotation he is only talking about what music is available. What he means here is that BWPS serves as an indication of the parts of music that exist in the old archives. Granted, his choice of the word "blueprint" is perhaps misleading.

Maybe BWPS will ultimately serve as the guide for the tracklist but I don't think this is what Linett is suggesting in this quotation. Also, as has been indicated in discussions elsewhere, many of "the little segues" were created specifically for the 2004 production so following that tracklisting will be much more difficult.

Linett too would not be saying flatly that BWPS track order is a blueprint for the CD1 track order by starting a sentence with "If". 

As far as I'm concerned nothing in this quotation indicates the kind of conclusions you are drawing - though in all fairness you seem to be basing this on a quotation that has severely editorialized Linett's comments to the point where they are quite different from what he actually said.

[JohnMill]

Don't recall? Here it is in Billboard:

Linett says Wilson's 2004 "Smile" album has served as a blueprint for the current project, which will be mixed in mono because that's how Wilson‹who's deaf in his right ear‹intended it. But Linett adds that other selections from the 30 hours of "Smile" session recordings will more than likely be issued in stereo.

"Some of these questions are hard to answer because not only haven't we assembled them yet, this has to be played for Brian and the other members of the group to see what kind of input they have," he says. "Just because Brian did it the way he did it in 2004 [doesn't mean] he won't say, 'Well, let's add "You're Welcome," ' which was the B-side on the 'Heroes and Villians' single."

Well, hold on. In the interview Linett does happen to be answering a question about a tracklisting. But when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint", he is not talking about it in terms of the structure of the tracks. Here is the quotation in context:

We have gaps, we have missing vocals. We aren't missing any music which is heartening. All the songs were recorded. Most of it is there. I can't be sure that we won't still come up with something because we do know that there were other things recorded, but the tapes are no longer in the group's possession. And unfortunately they may have been destroyed years ago.

We have some rough mixes from 1966, which will probably become part of the quote album. There seems to be less of that than you might expect. That also leads to believe, it really wasn't close to being finished when it was put aside to go to the next project.

If you take Brian's 2004 version as a blueprint, [it will have] all of that music, all of the significant parts and even the little segue ways. For the most part, that project was heavily researched by myself and others to make sure Brian had available all the parts that had been recorded back in 1966 and 1967.

Note here that Linett is not talking about the order of the tracks at all, certainly not when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint". Rather, in this entire quotation he is only talking about what music is available. What he means here is that BWPS serves as an indication of the parts of music that exist in the old archives. Granted, his choice of the word "blueprint" is perhaps misleading.

Maybe BWPS will ultimately serve as the guide for the tracklist but I don't think this is what Linett is suggesting in this quotation. Also, as has been indicated in discussions elsewhere, many of "the little segues" were created specifically for the 2004 production so following that tracklisting will be much more difficult.

Linett too would not be saying flatly that BWPS track order is a blueprint for the CD1 track order by starting a sentence with "If".  

As far as I'm concerned nothing in this quotation indicates the kind of conclusions you are drawing - though in all fairness you seem to be basing this on a quotation that has severely editorialized Linett's comments to the point where they are quite different from what he actually said.

Being not the biggest fan in the world of BWPS, I hope they come up with a tracklisting that is a little bit different from that release.  I mean in my opinion there are some things when arranging a SMiLE mix that are pretty much standard regardless of whom is arranging it.  Nine times out of ten, "Prayer" always opens the set, "Heroes and Villains" is usually found near the beginning of the set and "The Elements" are usually placed back to back.  Beyond that it's open to wide speculation and interpretation as to how this thing will likely be sequenced.

I mean Linett could just use the BWPS sequence and create something that works quite well as regardless of my own personal opinion of that sequencing it does mesh.  He could also arrange it differently and for instance stick "Surf's Up" on at the end like many of us have being doing for years.  

Again personally I'd lean away from the three movements concept.  In my opinion the album in that format was enjoyable to listen to a few times (and was especially enjoyable to hear in concert presented in that context) but soon became a challenge for me to listen to.  It just seemed to elongate the entire album.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Well, I do love BWPS. That's not to say it's perfect by any means. At times it sounds a bit too theatrical (and I don't mean "Queen" theatrical, I mean, the score of Guys & Dolls theatrical) and I still don't quite understand the compulsion to add lyrics to everything but Mrs. O'Leary's Cow. I mean Pet Sounds had two instrumentals on it, is it entirely inconceivable that something like Love to Say DaDa or Holidays or Look were conceived as instrumentals?

Anyway, BWPS is it's own thing. I think that replicating its tracklisting might demean not just the original possibilities of the 66/67 album but also the accomplishments of the 2004 production.

[drbeachboy]

You better look up the word "blueprint". If I was building a house, an industrial park, or practically anything else, if there is a blueprint, I follow it. If I want it built correctly I follow the specifications, no? This Smile will have 3 sides, so possibly 3 movements. I grant you that the tracking could change, but I'm betting not a whole lot. It may not have segues or fading, but if they stay fairly true to the tracklisting, then that could be taken as following the blueprint. So far this is looking quite a bit like BWPS. It would be cool if they do things differently, but like I said earlier, I'm staying pragmatic and not having too many expectations. I will be happy with whatever they deliver.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

You better look up the word "blueprint".

Like I said, his use of the word is misleading. In context (which you can read above, and I suggest you do), he uses the word only to discuss the music that is available for the boxset, not for its sequencing. Again, feel free to demonstrate exactly where in that quotation I provided does Linett indicate that he is talking about the sequence of the tracks.

It may not have segues or fading

Linett says the segues are available (again, read the context). Why do you not trust this but firmly trust his use of the word "blueprint"?

So far this is looking quite a bit like BWPS

So far all you have is the word "blueprint" which in context does not indicate what you are suggesting at all.

like I said earlier, I'm staying pragmatic and not having too many expectations.

Everything you said so far suggests precisely that you expect the album to be sequenced like BWPS. Just because you won't be upset if it turns out differently doesn't make it any less of an expectation. You better look up the word "expectation".

[Les P]

... but basing even a vague and partial recreation of a 1967 album on a 2003 template is, in my view, indefensible.

But doesn't throwing out the 2003 template just reopen the entire pre-2003 sequencing/editing dilemma?  (e.g., starting from scratch to compile H&V, or  sequencing 2 sides?)  What template should be used other than the one Brian has already decided as his final word on the subject?  Or are you opposed to the idea of a "as was envisioned" CD1 and propose a package of all sessions?

I can see both sides; I can certainly see an argument to limit the "as envisioned" CD 1 to the back cover song listing.  But that would mean answering questions that Brian probably considers already answered.

[donald]

It will be hard not to see BWPS as a template of sorts.  It was the first "finished" version.   As the Zen master said; " we'll see"

[Mark H.]

It better be under 40 minutes or we'll have to get the lawyers involved. 


Just release it - program your own sequence if you are that uptight about it.  I've been waiting for this for 35 years - I'll believe it when i have in in my hand.

[buddhahat]

Don't recall? Here it is in Billboard:

Linett says Wilson's 2004 "Smile" album has served as a blueprint for the current project, which will be mixed in mono because that's how Wilson‹who's deaf in his right ear‹intended it. But Linett adds that other selections from the 30 hours of "Smile" session recordings will more than likely be issued in stereo.

"Some of these questions are hard to answer because not only haven't we assembled them yet, this has to be played for Brian and the other members of the group to see what kind of input they have," he says. "Just because Brian did it the way he did it in 2004 [doesn't mean] he won't say, 'Well, let's add "You're Welcome," ' which was the B-side on the 'Heroes and Villians' single."

Well, hold on. In the interview Linett does happen to be answering a question about a tracklisting. But when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint", he is not talking about it in terms of the structure of the tracks. Here is the quotation in context:

We have gaps, we have missing vocals. We aren't missing any music which is heartening. All the songs were recorded. Most of it is there. I can't be sure that we won't still come up with something because we do know that there were other things recorded, but the tapes are no longer in the group's possession. And unfortunately they may have been destroyed years ago.

We have some rough mixes from 1966, which will probably become part of the quote album. There seems to be less of that than you might expect. That also leads to believe, it really wasn't close to being finished when it was put aside to go to the next project.

If you take Brian's 2004 version as a blueprint, [it will have] all of that music, all of the significant parts and even the little segue ways. For the most part, that project was heavily researched by myself and others to make sure Brian had available all the parts that had been recorded back in 1966 and 1967.

Note here that Linett is not talking about the order of the tracks at all, certainly not when he is talking about BWPS as a "blueprint". Rather, in this entire quotation he is only talking about what music is available. What he means here is that BWPS serves as an indication of the parts of music that exist in the old archives. Granted, his choice of the word "blueprint" is perhaps misleading.

Maybe BWPS will ultimately serve as the guide for the tracklist but I don't think this is what Linett is suggesting in this quotation. Also, as has been indicated in discussions elsewhere, many of "the little segues" were created specifically for the 2004 production so following that tracklisting will be much more difficult.

Linett too would not be saying flatly that BWPS track order is a blueprint for the CD1 track order by starting a sentence with "If".  

As far as I'm concerned nothing in this quotation indicates the kind of conclusions you are drawing - though in all fairness you seem to be basing this on a quotation that has severely editorialized Linett's comments to the point where they are quite different from what he actually said.

I can see your point that Linnett's comment is misleadingly phrased but I'll bet he does mean they'll be using BWPS as a template.

Providing they don't hack up the tracks to match the exact structure of each BWPS track I have no problem with BWPS as an overall sequence. It's the only Brian & VDP endorsed sequence. I don't see there being any alternative. Besides I think worrying about it before we have the actual product in hand is pointless - we just don't know what their intentions are at this point.

I'd even go as far as saying we should count ourselves lucky BWPS happened as it's a major reason this boxset is going to (hopefully) see the light of day. Besides changing Brian's opinion of the material, the fact Brian and VDP created a tracklisting makes this archival release (specifically the playable album bit) easier to realise.

[desmondo]

Things haven't changed since the Smile Shop days and its great fun - lol

I get the impression, from Mark's quote, that the "album" will be presented as envisioned in 66/67 using what is available from that period rather than just reproducing BWPS with 66/67 recordings. That would be a lazy way out.

To me that means the "album" part won't/can't be longer than 40 mins with the rest of the first CD taken up with the first bits of the session stuff - just like disc one of the PS box set.

BWPS would not have happened like it did in 66/67 because of the technical limitations. This doesn't mean that BWPS can't be used as a blueprint or a template IMHO as it clearly indicates what Brian had in mind. Despite what was said at the time BWPS WAS Brian finishing Smile - hence the new lyrics and some of the segues. On A Holiday, Blue Hawaii and Song for Children are good examples of this - perhaps it was a question in 2003/04 of here is the all material - how does it all fit together.

The forthcoming should be a historical document - here is SMiLE as it was envisioned in 66/67 and as far as it was recorded and here are examples of the sessions to show how it was all done.

Mark has an unenviable task which is unlikely to satisfy everyone. Good luck to him

I am just glad the stuff is being officially released and even though I don't have a turntable will no doubt get the adult version

[Andrew G. Doe]

I don't recall Linett (in the article that I read at least) saying that he was using the BWPS tracklisting as a template  tracklisting that will be followed in CD1. Where does he say this?

It's strongly inferred - the vinyl BWPS was also three sides, plus it's the only cut and dried sequence we have.

[Chris Moise]

OK, so it may or may not be someones handwriting, so? Still, it doesn't mean that the list was accurate or in sequence. Hell, Shut Down Vol II has the songs listed on the front cover and they are out of sequence.

 I can't see what is so hard to grasp here.
 
Yes, obviously the list was not in sequence but there is no reason to doubt that the tracks, the song titles, ARE accurate. Regardless of who wrote the list it made it to the Capitol art department. I know the 400,000+ slicks printed refers to the front (not rear) cover but we know Capitol received the tracklist. Said tracklist very likely the list came from the LP's producer. Whether he remembered writing it when it was shown to him in the 25 years later or if it was sent under duress in all probability it came from Brian. Owing to...
 
a) the list (likely) coming from Brian
b) the fact that Brian didn't work outside of the titles on the handwritten list from October 1966 to April 1967 to any significant degree
c) there aren't ANY other lists, dubious or not, from 1966/67
 
I don't get the "Smile was never finished and Brian went crazy therefore anything goes how do we KNOW Teeter-Totter Love wasn't the last track" line of thinking. Just because it wasn't finished doesn't mean it is prudent to project our own fanboy fantasies on the project. If an attempt at a reasonable facsimile of a 1966 LP is going to be is included then the evidence matters. What evidence? The massive amount of info re when/where each section of each song was recorded and (more importantly) the extant 1966 Brian Wilson edits/mixes. Any half-a** attempt at a recreation of a 1966/67 LP should stick to titles in the list in their most complete form before it was announced the project was scrapped. It isn't unreasonable to expect the attempt at the album to represent the fullest extent of what Brian accomplished during the sessions. It makes no sense to take the 1966 tapes and mold them into a 2003 form.

Sorry for the rant, I really am thrilled this is coming out. I'm sure even the worst case scenario will yeild some massive upgrades of the material. No matter what happens my favorite Beach Boys album will still be Wild Honey  

[desmondo]

OK, so it may or may not be someones handwriting, so? Still, it doesn't mean that the list was accurate or in sequence. Hell, Shut Down Vol II has the songs listed on the front cover and they are out of sequence.

 I can't see what is so hard to grasp here.
 
Yes, obviously the list was not in sequence but there is no reason to doubt that the tracks, the song titles, ARE accurate. Regardless of who wrote the list it made it to the Capitol art department. I know the 400,000+ slicks printed refers to the front (not rear) cover but we know Capitol received the tracklist. Said tracklist very likely the list came from the LP's producer. Whether he remembered writing it when it was shown to him in the 25 years later or if it was sent under duress in all probability it came from Brian. Owing to...
 
a) the list (likely) coming from Brian
b) the fact that Brian didn't work outside of the titles on the handwritten list from October 1966 to April 1967 to any significant degree
c) there aren't ANY other lists, dubious or not, from 1966/67
 
I don't get the "Smile was never finished and Brian went crazy therefore anything goes how do we KNOW Teeter-Totter Love wasn't the last track" line of thinking. Just because it wasn't finished doesn't mean it is prudent to project our own fanboy fantasies on the project. If an attempt at a reasonable facsimile of a 1966 LP is going to be is included then the evidence matters. What evidence? The massive amount of info re when/where each section of each song was recorded and (more importantly) the extant 1966 Brian Wilson edits/mixes. Any half-a** attempt at a recreation of a 1966/67 LP should stick to titles in the list in their most complete form before it was announced the project was scrapped. It isn't unreasonable to expect the attempt at the album to represent the fullest extent of what Brian accomplished during the sessions. It makes no sense to take the 1966 tapes and mold them into a 2003 form.

Sorry for the rant, I really am thrilled this is coming out. I'm sure even the worst case scenario will yeild some massive upgrades of the material. No matter what happens my favorite Beach Boys album will still be Wild Honey  

Chris

Hurrah - totally agree with all of that - not sure about the Wild Honey thing tho - lol

[Jonas]

Three cheers for Chris Moise! 

[LostArt]

To all who expect CD1 to be the definitive Smile, the COMPLETE SMiLE, you are going to be disappointed.  Smile will not and can not ever be finished.  I don't think the producers should even attempt to present this music as a "quote album".  The December handwritten list...historically accurate, you say?  Yeah, I like that idea.  Okay, lets start with Heroes and Villains, we have that one.  We'll just put the one from the middle of December on there.  What's that you say?  We have never heard a version from the middle of December?  Well, let's just stick the February one on there, it's close enough.  Next?  I'm In Great Shape, hmmm, that's a little tougher.  Just how does that one go again?  It's attached to Barnyard?  Well, it was when it was a part of Heroes and Villains, but since it's listed as it's own track we know it's not in H&V.  Oh, it's attached to I Wanna Be Around?  Isn't that one part of The Elements?  No, The Elements is Fire, and...umm...what else, again?  Well, let's just skip to Surf's Up, we have a recording of that one from the middle of December.  Say what?  That version doesn't have the brilliant instrumental backing track?  Well, we can digitally manipulate Brian's voice from the December solo/piano version and fly that one in.  Then it'll be more historically accurate to what Brian had in mind in 1966.  In November.  

I'm going to stop now.  I'm sure you get my drift.  Yeah, it's fun to speculate.  But at the end of the day isn't Smile really what each of us thinks it is?  We have formed our opinions, we have changed our minds, and we have discussed.  If we hear new pieces, we will likely change our minds again.  I say put all the songs on there, in the best '66-'67 carnation(s) and the best fidelity possible.  Maybe there will be two (or three) cool versions of H&V.  You like the 'cantina' version from February?  Put that one on your mix.  You like the October 'Great Shape' version from Al's acetate (just speculating)?  Put that one on there.  Make your own Smile.  It's what we have done for years.  And any mix that we come up with won't be any more or any less historically accurate than what the producers come up with.    

[Roger Ryan]

I really believe this comes down to which particular stage of SMiLE should be presented with this release. While it is true that things like "Holidays" and "Look" appear to have been abandoned by the time the hand-written note was delivered, it seems pretty clear by looking at the session dates that SMiLE as an album was abandoned early in '67. Brian starts focusing on just getting a workable version of "Heroes & Villains" together as a single, then goes about trying to come up with a new version of "Vegetables" when it looks like that is going to be the single. Tracks like "All Day" or "I Love To Say Dada" are probably as inconsequential to the SMiLE album as "Look" or "Holidays" were near the beginning of the sessions.

I don't believe Brian's working methods were irrational, but all the shuffling around of parts from one song to another gives the impression that he's not exactly sure how some of it is going to fit together. It's not a fanboy fantasy to think that Brian's uncertainty is one of the reasons the album wasn't completed.

If the current press/interviews have been misleading, it is in the statements regarding presenting the "album" as envisioned in '66/'67 in the most complete form possible on Disc 1. That album is SMILEY SMILE  . If the tracks from the SMiLE sessions are to be presented in the most complete form possible, then we should see all tracks worked on from August '66 to May '67 on Disc 1 - not as an album, but as a collection. Looking at it this way, it comes much closer to what was done with BWPS.

[desmondo]

I really believe this comes down to which particular stage of SMiLE should be presented with this release. While it is true that things like "Holidays" and "Look" appear to have been abandoned by the time the hand-written note was delivered, it seems pretty clear by looking at the session dates that SMiLE as an album was abandoned early in '67. Brian starts focusing on just getting a workable version of "Heroes & Villains" together as a single, then goes about trying to come up with a new version of "Vegetables" when it looks like that is going to be the single. Tracks like "All Day" or "I Love To Say Dada" are probably as inconsequential to the SMiLE album as "Look" or "Holidays" were near the beginning of the sessions.

I don't believe Brian's working methods were irrational, but all the shuffling around of parts from one song to another gives the impression that he's not exactly sure how some of it is going to fit together. It's not a fanboy fantasy to think that Brian's uncertainty is one of the reasons the album wasn't completed.

If the current press/interviews have been misleading, it is in the statements regarding presenting the "album" as envisioned in '66/'67 in the most complete form possible on Disc 1. That album is SMILEY SMILE  . If the tracks from the SMiLE sessions are to be presented in the most complete form possible, then we should see all tracks worked on from August '66 to May '67 on Disc 1 - not as an album, but as a collection. Looking at it this way, it comes much closer to what was done with BWPS.

Sorry - that album is NOT Smiley Smile