Smile Box set: Ghost melodies, clues, hints, and new mysteries

[hypehat]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

I don't know, I don't think that works/sounds very good - the way the lines cut doesn't sound natural at all. I know that apparently puts my head in the sand, so I'll give you a muffled thank you for trying.  

And of course, what some people are saying here is that it WOULDN'T blend with the 2003 melody, so you can't please everybody, I suppose. But that's a sincere post.

[Wirestone]

What? You're trying way too hard, at this point. Not trying to be mean when I say that, but there are how many other Smile things that only exist once? Gonna discredit those things, too?

It's six words and a couple of mumbled syllables. It lasts approximately four seconds.

I'm just unable to translate that into definitive proof of anything. Sorry.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It's six words and a couple of mumbled syllables. It lasts approximately four seconds.

I'm just unable to translate that into definitive proof of anything. Sorry.

It's not the amount of words or syllables but rather the conditions under which they are sung where it becomes overwhelmingly convincing that this was the melody for the song.

[adam78]

It's six words and a couple of mumbled syllables. It lasts approximately four seconds.

I'm just unable to translate that into definitive proof of anything. Sorry.

Of course, nothing in this entire thread can be definitive. Definitive is having the finished vocal sung by a beach boy on TSS disc 1. My point would be that there is signifcant thought process to speculate that this could have well been the melody....and speculate i must emphasise. This vocal snippet has me more excited about a "new" what may have been than anything i've heard in years!

[Wirestone]

It's not the amount of words or syllables but rather the conditions under which they are sung where it becomes overwhelmingly convincing that this was the melody for the song.

Which is why the lyrics for Help Me Rhonda are, as cited in the session for that tune:

"Help Me Rhonda, do ba beep ba dah doo beep bah."

[Wirestone]

Of course, nothing in this entire thread can be definitive. Definitive is having the finished vocal sung by a beach boy on TSS disc 1. My point would be that there is signifcant thought process to speculate that this could have well been the melody....and speculate i must emphasise. This vocal snippet has me more excited about a "new" what may have been than anything i've heard in years!

I find nothing to disagree with here at all. Quite so.

(I would have accepted a demo as "definitive" proof, too.)

[Chocolate Shake Man]

It's not the amount of words or syllables but rather the conditions under which they are sung where it becomes overwhelmingly convincing that this was the melody for the song.

Which is why the lyrics for Help Me Rhonda are, as cited in the session for that tune:

"Help Me Rhonda, do ba beep ba dah doo beep bah."

But did Murry Wilson have anything to do with writing the song? Was he actually an authority in the studio that night? You and I both know the answer to that question, which is why you know that you are being nothing short of intellectually dishonest by bringing this up (twice now, I was being kind and ignored it the first time) in order to pretend its a legitimate analogy to what we're talking about. I can assume that you are actually unwilling to behave respectably here so I'm happy to carry on the conversation with someone who is. Otherwise, I'm done with you in this thread.

[adam78]

Of course, nothing in this entire thread can be definitive. Definitive is having the finished vocal sung by a beach boy on TSS disc 1. My point would be that there is signifcant thought process to speculate that this could have well been the melody....and speculate i must emphasise. This vocal snippet has me more excited about a "new" what may have been than anything i've heard in years!

I find nothing to disagree with here at all. Quite so.

(I would have accepted a demo as "definitive" proof, too.)

chance would be a fine thing...

[Wirestone]

But did Murry Wilson have anything to do with writing the song? Was he actually an authority in the studio that night? You and I both know the answer to that question, which is why you know that you are being nothing short of intellectually dishonest by bringing this up (twice now, I was being kind and ignored it the first time) in order to pretend its a legitimate analogy to what we're talking about. I can assume that you are actually unwilling to behave respectably here so I'm happy to carry on the conversation with someone who is. Otherwise, I'm done with you in this thread.

It's not at all intellectually dishonest to point out that just because something is said or sung at a session doesn't mean that the final tune includes those words or that exact melody. How about how "In My Childhood" became a different song for Pet Sounds? Or how Mike Love created a new set of lyrics for Good Vibrations, and the entire song changed substantially from the original sessions? This was a fluid time for BW.

[runnersdialzero]

It's not the amount of words or syllables but rather the conditions under which they are sung where it becomes overwhelmingly convincing that this was the melody for the song.

Which is why the lyrics for Help Me Rhonda are, as cited in the session for that tune:

"Help Me Rhonda, do ba beep ba dah doo beep bah."

Further grasping at straws. Murry had nothing to do with writing that song. He didn't co-write the song with Brian and then say, "Right Brian?" to Brian to confirm the validity of it as Brian has done to Van Dyke Parks here.

Again, not trying to be mean, but these are some extremely poor examples, d00d.

As for your last post - again, what does this have to do with anything? So now you're saying it is a valid melody intended for the song but was later replaced?

[Wirestone]

I'm saying -- as I have said consistently the entire thread -- that we have no way of knowing.

My personal opinion is that it sounds like an on-the-spot riff or improv. But I have not said that I know that as fact. Those who believe it is something more have argued that their opinion in the matter is factual.

I simply don't agree.

(I also regret causing anyone to overheat. I find the topic fascinating, love the snippet, love the song -- old and new -- and enjoy debating this things. And I do think there's a chance this is the vintage melody. I don't agree that it is without question, but I will agree there is a chance.)

[rab2591]

I think Wirestone is merely stating that we shouldn't jump to conclusions on this issue. One of the initial posts had the opinion that this was the 'definitve' melody - which is pure BS. We have no idea if this was the intended melody. Sure, there's a great chance this was the melody, but to call it 'definitve' is irrational.

We can only speculate - because until 2004, there was never a definitve recording of lead vocals on this track.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I think Wirestone is merely stating that we shouldn't jump to conclusions on this issue. One of the initial posts had the opinion that this was the 'definitve' melody - which is pure BS. We have no idea if this was the intended melody. Sure, there's a great chance this was the melody, but to call it 'definitve' is irrational.

We can only speculate - because until 2004, there was never a definitve recording of lead vocals on this track.

Apart from that example, though, I'm not sure anyone else is really jumping to conclusions. I've suggested that the evidence is fairly overwhelming and I stand by that. Nevertheless, if someone has a problem with someone else's statement then it should be taken up with the person who made that statement not other people. Remember that even the person who used the term "definitive" qualified it by saying "for me, anyway." Even when Wirestone was reminded of that crucial caveat, he chose to ignore it in order to make some irrelevant comments about what's wrong with our culture. So there's a lot of smoke being blown here, as far as I'm concerned.

[Cam Mott]

Was Brian in the habit of not singing/demoing the proper melody?

[Wirestone]

From earlier in the thread:

For those with the Pet Sounds boxset, start listening at the 1:30 mark of the 'Caroline, No' tracking session. Brian sings almost that exact same melody as this 'Do You Like Worms' bit - while showing the tempo of the track to the session musicians.

[runnersdialzero]

From earlier in the thread:

For those with the Pet Sounds boxset, start listening at the 1:30 mark of the 'Caroline, No' tracking session. Brian sings almost that exact same melody as this 'Do You Like Worms' bit - while showing the tempo of the track to the session musicians.

That sounds nothing like this melody.

[Wirestone]

I think Rab was referring to the "doodle-doot all the way like that / we'll get a record oodle ooh" line that starts at 1:33. It sounds just a bit like what Brian is singing as he forgets the words to Worms.

But this is an example that can cuts both ways -- Brian clearly sings the correct melody to Caroline, No a few seconds earlier. But then he sing-talks a string of rhythmic nonsense. So he did just sing random melody lines at sessions -- but here it follows a clear, accurate line from the song.

[Cam Mott]

I don't have the box yet, so when he sings the lyrics he is singing the melody; when he sings gibberish it is to a gibberish melody?

[Wirestone]

He sings the first five words while banging out a beat, then a few syllables of babble: "Once upon the (starts to slur) Sandwish Isle de dee doo doo doo doo." It all seems of a piece, but he definitely is trailing off at the end, so it's hard to tell.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

I don't have the box yet, so when he sings the lyrics he is singing the melody; when he sings gibberish it is to a gibberish melody?

Cam, he starts out singing lyrics with this new melody, but the lyrics peter out and he goes into a scat at the end of the phrase.  He gets through "a once upon the sandwich isles..." and then gets unintelligible, but the musical phrase is continued to the point in my youtube video (http://youtu.be/ZYu12MpBqdU) where I sing the "ture" syllable of "structure" or so, when I do that line.

And would ya get the box, would ya?

[runnersdialzero]

Anyone hear a bit of this in "Tones"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH2-TGUlwu4

[SMiLE Brian]

Anyone hear a bit of this in "Tones"?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QH2-TGUlwu4

That just blew my mind

[TdHabib]

Cam, you're thanked in the book for the sessions box yet you still don't have it?!

[Dunderhead]

This also seems to make sense, with the sessions listing four parts. The way aeijtzsche does it, all the lyrics are used up in a single verse. BWPS has Verse-chorus-verse-chorus, but it looks like that might not have been the case.

[Blake Alan]

Here's how the melody played out in my head when I first heard it...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RpdU8Bep28

Like Josh, this isn't meant to say that's how it would've went, it's just to show there are plenty of ways the melody could've gone that would've worked over the music.