Brian: "Smile 2004 was better"

[juggler]

Brian comments on the upcoming Smile box...

In the wake of the Gershwin project, talks of a Beach Boys reunion and the release of the original Smile recordings have surfaced. Famously described by Wilson as a “teenage symphony to God,” Smile was recorded in 1966 and ’67 as a follow up to Pet Sounds, but was never finished due to Wilson’s escalating drug habit and mental illness. Though he released an album of rerecorded versions of the songs in 2004, Capitol Records will finally put out the original outtakes sometime this year.

“The one I did in 2004 was better,” he said earnestly, though he does expect fans to get something out of the upcoming release. “They can hear interesting music, experimental music, and, you know, good music.”

Smile is seen by many as the final, unfinished chapter in a creative battle between the Beatles and the Beach Boys some 40 years ago, each group trying to push the boundaries of popular music as far as they would go. “That was quite an experience,” recalled Wilson, adding that he still listens to Paul McCartney’s music frequently. “We were in the mutual admiration society.”

http://www.fairfieldweekly.com/entertainment/music/ff-beach-boy-brian-wilsons-does-george-gershwin-20110603,0,2856511.story

[the captain]

I think it makes sense for him to feel that and for him to say that. Granted, I doubt a lot of other people would agree with him (myself included). But from his point of view, it makes sense.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

So who's going to be the first to say "Brian, I disagree......."

[the captain]

So who's going to be the first to say "Brian, I disagree......."

You deliver him to my house, I'll give him a beer, a piece of cake, set him down at the piano, and I'll break the news to him.

[Jason]

And he'll say "my wife and managers thought it was a good idea to say that."

[the captain]

That or, "wait, what are we talking about? Pardon me, could you put on Norbit, please? I'd like to watch Norbit, if you have it."

[donald]

wtf is nor bit?

[onkster]

"My wife and managers told me it was a good idea to say that" is the BB equivalent of "John would have loved that" on a certain other board.

My vote: retire it!

[JohnMill]

I think it makes sense for him to feel that and for him to say that. Granted, I doubt a lot of other people would agree with him (myself included). But from his point of view, it makes sense.

I can kind of see his POV.  "SMiLE" as he recorded it in 2004 is a complete piece of music.  While it wouldn't have anything on the original sixties recordings if they were indeed complete, I think there will be more than a few people who pick up the 2 disc issue and think to themselves "WTF is this crap"? because of the incomplete nature of the music.  Actually the first time I ever read about "SMiLE" was in Clinton Heylin's "Bootleg" book where he quoted an article found in ICE newsletter which in reviewing a SMiLE bootleg stated "Those hearing SMiLE here for the first time will be left wondering what all the fuss was about, since it sounds exactly like what it is: a collection of scraps from an unfinished project which - if properly completed could've been a masterpiece, but doesn't even come close in this form"

I don't necessarily agree with that assessment but it is what it is.  Besides there are probably dozens of personal reasons why Brian still prefers his 2004 presentation of the project as oppose to the original work he did in the sixties.

[Cam Mott]

So even Brian admits that Smile 2004 is something different than and therefore not the completion of Smile 1966. So why would we want to use BWPS 2004 as a template for SMiLE?  

If there is a vote being taken, which there isn't, I vote [respectfully] to use "the" 1966/7 tracklist for the historical SMiLE and not the contemporary BWPS template for the Sessions CD.

What does Brian know anyway?

[Shady]

Pretty much the same as saying "my current band are better singers than The Beach Boys" or whatever he said a few years ago..

Comes across pretty bitter much like all the other broken up classic bands, seen A Ringo interview recently? lol

[TdHabib]

So even Brian admits that Smile 2004 is something different than and therefore not the completion of Smile 1966. So why would we want to use BWPS 2004 as a template for SMiLE?  

If there is a vote being taken, which there isn't, I vote [respectfully] to use "the" 1966/7 tracklist for the historical SMiLE and not the contemporary BWPS template for the Sessions CD.

What does Brian know anyway?

Cam, I am almost positively sure that the decision to use BWPS as the template for one disc of the upcoming boxet had nothing to do with Brian. Would Mr. Doe confirm or deny my assessment?

[Cam Mott]

So even Brian admits that Smile 2004 is something different than and therefore not the completion of Smile 1966. So why would we want to use BWPS 2004 as a template for SMiLE?  

If there is a vote being taken, which there isn't, I vote [respectfully] to use "the" 1966/7 tracklist for the historical SMiLE and not the contemporary BWPS template for the Sessions CD.

What does Brian know anyway?

Cam, I am almost positively sure that the decision to use BWPS as the template for one disc of the upcoming boxet had nothing to do with Brian. Would Mr. Doe confirm or deny my assessment?

I was trying to be funny. It doesn't matter, which way they do it, or whose idea is what: I'll be grateful for whatever. Just a personal preference that doesn't matter.

[brother john]

They should release a version for Garage Band or something with individual tracks like Ben Folds' Stems & Seeds so we can make our own mixes, running orders etc. No-one knows how Smile should go - Brian didn't then and doesn't now, so a version where all the parts can be time-stretched and pitch-shifted so that they all fit together in any mix or sequence would be the best thing to do. Anything else will be a fudge.

[Andrew G. Doe]

So even Brian admits that Smile 2004 is something different than and therefore not the completion of Smile 1966. So why would we want to use BWPS 2004 as a template for SMiLE?  

If there is a vote being taken, which there isn't, I vote [respectfully] to use "the" 1966/7 tracklist for the historical SMiLE and not the contemporary BWPS template for the Sessions CD.

What does Brian know anyway?

Cam, I am almost positively sure that the decision to use BWPS as the template for one disc of the upcoming boxet had nothing to do with Brian. Would Mr. Doe confirm or deny my assessment?

I'm guessing it was the choice between a questionable template or none at all.

[smile-holland]

wtf is nor bit?

A movie.
And part of an unforgettable interview with BW.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,8778.msg148262.html#msg148262

Interviewer: what's the last movie you saw ?

BW: Norbit.

Interviewer: what's your favourite movie ?

BW: Norbit.

[Jason]

They should release a version for Garage Band or something with individual tracks like Ben Folds' Stems & Seeds so we can make our own mixes, running orders etc. No-one knows how Smile should go - Brian didn't then and doesn't now, so a version where all the parts can be time-stretched and pitch-shifted so that they all fit together in any mix or sequence would be the best thing to do. Anything else will be a fudge.

That's the same thing that Trent Reznor's been doing with Nine Inch Nails. And it's made him more fans today than he had almost two decades ago. I doubt the BBs will release the Smile stuff under a Creative Commons, though.

[Cam Mott]

So even Brian admits that Smile 2004 is something different than and therefore not the completion of Smile 1966. So why would we want to use BWPS 2004 as a template for SMiLE?  

If there is a vote being taken, which there isn't, I vote [respectfully] to use "the" 1966/7 tracklist for the historical SMiLE and not the contemporary BWPS template for the Sessions CD.

What does Brian know anyway?

Cam, I am almost positively sure that the decision to use BWPS as the template for one disc of the upcoming boxet had nothing to do with Brian. Would Mr. Doe confirm or deny my assessment?

I was trying to be funny. It doesn't matter, which way they do it, or whose idea is what: I'll be grateful for whatever. Just a personal preference that doesn't matter.

No doubt and I can wind off without being responsible to anyone like those funding and benefitting from the choices.

Still, to me it would be appropriate to also include a "best available" collection based on "the tracklist". To me Brian had it all thought out and he may have even had everything recorded that he planned including the SMiLE version of H&V and VT. It seems like a possibility if not a probability. The idea that he probably had not or could not finish it seems to me to be speculation which isn't well supported by the info available.     The info available to us anyway, which may not be the only info available to the team responsible.

Go Team!

[shelter]

Anyone who prefers BWPS over the real thing must have problems with his hearing.

Oh, wait...

[Wirestone]

Why wouldn't he think that? One of the projects brought him acclaim and personal validation, and was performed by a ruthlessly supportive backing cast. One of them was scrapped and featured bewildered bandmates. It's the most natural thing in the world to feel the way he does.

What's more, he's right. The 2004 project is a completed piece of work. The 66-67 sessions aren't. One is an album. One is a personal failure. (That being said, I don't know anyone who wouldn't prefer the 60s-era backing tracks to the less-nuanced remakes.)

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Why wouldn't he think that? One of the projects brought him acclaim and personal validation, and was performed by a ruthlessly supportive backing cast. One of them was scrapped and featured bewildered bandmates. It's the most natural thing in the world to feel the way he does.

What's more, he's right. The 2004 project is a completed piece of work. The 66-67 sessions aren't. One is an album. One is a personal failure. (That being said, I don't know anyone who wouldn't prefer the 60s-era backing tracks to the less-nuanced remakes.)

Absolutely spot on.

[Austin]

Actually, one of the reasons I'm excited for this set is to hear better versions of some of the already-bootlegged but shoddy-quality backing tracks. Normally I try not to let that kind of thing get in the way of the music, but between the bootlegged "Child" stuff and the BWPS version, I'll take the latter any day.