Smiley Smile songs we would miss

[Mike's Beard]

I would miss absolutely nothing, considering that any one of us could probably produce an album of equal or better quality in about two hours with a four track cassette recorder.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the stupidest post ever!

Exactly. You'd need at least 3 hours to produce your own Smiley Smile album.

3 hours and 45 minutes.  30 minutes to score the weed, 15 minutes to roll a bunch of joints, and 3 hours to record the music.

I wonder what a really stoned Mike was like to be around?

[EgoHanger1966]

I wonder what a really stoned Mike was like to be around?

cough....UM 18....cough.

[monicker]

You know what i don't get? People talk about how Smiley is all drugged out, how it's the result of a band getting stoned and hitting the record button, etc. But were they on drugs all the time? When the album was finished, when it was mixed, when it came time to present it to Capitol and put it out, what, were they still in a drugged stupor? Were Capitol execs on drugs? I was thinking about people i knew in high school who recorded in their bedroom. A number of people who smoked a lot of pot, wrote some songs, and then recorded while being high. Inevitably, the next day would come and they'd be sober. They'd either a) find that what they recorded the previous day stunk or b) they thought it was good, they liked what being in an altered state did to their creativity and so they continued tapping into that. I don't really know where i'm going with this. The question above about Mike being stoned just got me thinking. How long was the period in which Mike was smoking? I guess my point is, they had to have thought for at least a few months time that the music was good and worth putting out, right? I understand a kid recording one night stoned out of his mind with no consequences, and then returning to it later and assessing the recordings. But this is The Beach Boys recording an album over the course of a couple of months and then a few more months passing before release date. That surely can't just be a case of the guys getting stoned one night or two and recording any old thing. I know some people on here have argued before that they were in a position where they needed to put out anything no matter what, just have some product out. Would they have really considered it worse to put out no album than an album they thought was total crap? Did Capitol see it that way? I'm just thinking out loud. 

[Nicko1234]

You know what i don't get? People talk about how Smiley is all drugged out, how it's the result of a band getting stoned and hitting the record button, etc. But were they on drugs all the time? When the album was finished, when it was mixed, when it came time to present it to Capitol and put it out, what, were they still in a drugged stupor? Were Capitol execs on drugs? I was thinking about people i knew in high school who recorded in their bedroom. A number of people who smoked a lot of pot, wrote some songs, and then recorded while being high. Inevitably, the next day would come and they'd be sober. They'd either a) find that what they recorded the previous day stunk or b) they thought it was good, they liked what being in an altered state did to their creativity and so they continued tapping into that. I don't really know where i'm going with this. The question above about Mike being stoned just got me thinking. How long was the period in which Mike was smoking? I guess my point is, they had to have thought for at least a few months time that the music was good and worth putting out, right? I understand a kid recording one night stoned out of his mind with no consequences, and then returning to it later and assessing the recordings. But this is The Beach Boys recording an album over the course of a couple of months and then a few more months passing before release date. That surely can't just be a case of the guys getting stoned one night or two and recording any old thing. I know some people on here have argued before that they were in a position where they needed to put out anything no matter what, just have some product out. Would they have really considered it worse to put out no album than an album they thought was total crap? Did Capitol see it that way? I'm just thinking out loud. 

Didn't it take 2 or 3 weeks to record it? Not months...

I don't think it was a group decision really and more just down to Brian. Now Carl said, 'Smiley Smile was lost because Brian wanted it to be lost'. Capitol must have been putting pressure on to release something...

[leggo of my ego]

I wonder what a really stoned Mike was like to be around?

cough....UM 18....cough.

Which tracks in particular? I'm listening to this now -- trying to reassess this album, maybe I haven't given it enough time. 

[Cam Mott]

You know what i don't get? People talk about how Smiley is all drugged out, how it's the result of a band getting stoned and hitting the record button, etc. But were they on drugs all the time? When the album was finished, when it was mixed, when it came time to present it to Capitol and put it out, what, were they still in a drugged stupor? Were Capitol execs on drugs? I was thinking about people i knew in high school who recorded in their bedroom. A number of people who smoked a lot of pot, wrote some songs, and then recorded while being high. Inevitably, the next day would come and they'd be sober. They'd either a) find that what they recorded the previous day stunk or b) they thought it was good, they liked what being in an altered state did to their creativity and so they continued tapping into that. I don't really know where i'm going with this. The question above about Mike being stoned just got me thinking. How long was the period in which Mike was smoking? I guess my point is, they had to have thought for at least a few months time that the music was good and worth putting out, right? I understand a kid recording one night stoned out of his mind with no consequences, and then returning to it later and assessing the recordings. But this is The Beach Boys recording an album over the course of a couple of months and then a few more months passing before release date. That surely can't just be a case of the guys getting stoned one night or two and recording any old thing. I know some people on here have argued before that they were in a position where they needed to put out anything no matter what, just have some product out. Would they have really considered it worse to put out no album than an album they thought was total crap? Did Capitol see it that way? I'm just thinking out loud. 

Didn't it take 2 or 3 weeks to record it? Not months...

I don't think it was a group decision really and more just down to Brian. Now Carl said, 'Smiley Smile was lost because Brian wanted it to be lost'. Capitol must have been putting pressure on to release something...

If you only count the June/July '67 sessions it was 6 weeks. However that is 25 sessions. Compare that number of sessions to the number of session for PS or the earlier albums. It as many sessions but packed into a short time span apparently because they could work when they wanted to and didn't have the waiting periods between booking studios. Of course other sessions before June were also towards SS so that figure of 25 total sessions is low. So for some reasons we want to believe that SS was dashed off but it wasn't.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I wonder what a really stoned Mike was like to be around?

cough....UM 18....cough.

Which tracks in particular? I'm listening to this now -- trying to reassess this album, maybe I haven't given it enough time. 

If you didn't like it initially, you probably never will. I'm not sure it's a "grow on you" type of album. I wouldn't lose sleep over it if I were you. You like what you like.

[Mike's Beard]

You know what i don't get? People talk about how Smiley is all drugged out, how it's the result of a band getting stoned and hitting the record button, etc. But were they on drugs all the time? When the album was finished, when it was mixed, when it came time to present it to Capitol and put it out, what, were they still in a drugged stupor? Were Capitol execs on drugs? I was thinking about people i knew in high school who recorded in their bedroom. A number of people who smoked a lot of pot, wrote some songs, and then recorded while being high. Inevitably, the next day would come and they'd be sober. They'd either a) find that what they recorded the previous day stunk or b) they thought it was good, they liked what being in an altered state did to their creativity and so they continued tapping into that. I don't really know where i'm going with this. The question above about Mike being stoned just got me thinking. How long was the period in which Mike was smoking? I guess my point is, they had to have thought for at least a few months time that the music was good and worth putting out, right? I understand a kid recording one night stoned out of his mind with no consequences, and then returning to it later and assessing the recordings. But this is The Beach Boys recording an album over the course of a couple of months and then a few more months passing before release date. That surely can't just be a case of the guys getting stoned one night or two and recording any old thing. I know some people on here have argued before that they were in a position where they needed to put out anything no matter what, just have some product out. Would they have really considered it worse to put out no album than an album they thought was total crap? Did Capitol see it that way? I'm just thinking out loud.  

Good points but I'm guessing that The Beach Boys were perma stoned around the summer of '67. Not only did SS seem like a good idea at the time but then they couldn't even put the hash pipe down long enough to record Lei'd in Hawaii. Also Bruce essentially left the band for a few months because he couldn't tolerate the drug situation in the group at that time.

[sockittome]

I would miss absolutely nothing, considering that any one of us could probably produce an album of equal or better quality in about two hours with a four track cassette recorder.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the stupidest post ever!

Don't sugar coat it or anything, tell us how you really feel! 

[EgoHanger1966]

I wonder what a really stoned Mike was like to be around?

cough....UM 18....cough.

Which tracks in particular? I'm listening to this now -- trying to reassess this album, maybe I haven't given it enough time. 

I dunno, I haven't listened to the set in a while...not that I've ever heard it, I mean. Nudge nudge.

I remember hypehat turned me on to one of the H&V (IIRC) sessions on the official box where Mike seems to be "affected". He giggles quite a bit!

[Doo Dah]

Ah, the deification of Smiley Smile. What would I miss? Not much - six out of the eleven would have been presented in their (painstaking) glory on Smile. And that would have been far far superior to the dashed-off, demoesque SS renditions.

I would like to hear from someone who heard it in '67 and LOVED it as a low tech masterpiece. Really not sure those people exist, since hindsight has brought legions of low-fi fanatics who have imbued a ridiculous amount of pretense to this strange album.

I 'kind of' like it (when I'm in the mood), but I could very easily see it slip away into the shadows of history if the full and proper Smile was released. To me, SS's adherents remind me of people who worship at the feet of Pavement and early Guided By Voices. Quick, dirty, noisy, DONE (as if that somehow imbues some great artistic honesty). No thanks...spend the time in a proper studio and get it done right. Anything else is jive, in my opinion.

Here's 2 scenarios where some of the quirky SS tracks could receive a proper reception by an adoring public:
a) a solo album by Brian...why not? say, circa '70
b) a double album by the boys, ASSUMING they've already generated the MO and good will they would have greatly deserved had Smile been fully realized. White Album, anyone?

To me Smiley Smile is a strange cult of an album. I might hang out and accept its offer of toke, but it's just too silly and too inconsequential for my tastes. Definitely a 'casual' acquaintance.

[Jay]

i'll tell y'all what i do miss: smiley smile versions of "cabinessence", "do you like worms?", "child is father to the man", and "surf's up". now THAT would've been a truly blunted, lo-fi psychedelic pop masterpiece.

Just do your own Smiley Smile mix and stick on the 1967 Brian "demo" of Surf's Up. It fits very nicely. 

[monicker]

Ah, the deification of Smiley Smile. What would I miss? Not much - six out of the eleven would have been presented in their (painstaking) glory on Smile. And that would have been far far superior to the dashed-off, demoesque SS renditions.

I would like to hear from someone who heard it in '67 and LOVED it as a low tech masterpiece. Really not sure those people exist, since hindsight has brought legions of low-fi fanatics who have imbued a ridiculous amount of pretense to this strange album.

I 'kind of' like it (when I'm in the mood), but I could very easily see it slip away into the shadows of history if the full and proper Smile was released. To me, SS's adherents remind me of people who worship at the feet of Pavement and early Guided By Voices. Quick, dirty, noisy, DONE (as if that somehow imbues some great artistic honesty). No thanks...spend the time in a proper studio and get it done right. Anything else is jive, in my opinion.

Here's 2 scenarios where some of the quirky SS tracks could receive a proper reception by an adoring public:
a) a solo album by Brian...why not? say, circa '70
b) a double album by the boys, ASSUMING they've already generated the MO and good will they would have greatly deserved had Smile been fully realized. White Album, anyone?

To me Smiley Smile is a strange cult of an album. I might hang out and accept its offer of toke, but it's just too silly and too inconsequential for my tastes. Definitely a 'casual' acquaintance.

So you seem to be suggesting that only contemporary opinion is valid when evaluating the quality and merit of music. I suppose the fact that Bach’s style of composing fell out of favor with the public toward the end of his life is an indicator of the true quality of his late works because whatever opinions people have formed about it in hindsight don’t really count? The opinion of the day is the final arbiter?

Smiley Smile is not lo-fi. I think that’s the second most common misconception about the record. Sparse arrangements, lack of echo chamber, using Neumanns and a professional board (albeit one for radio) ≠ lo-fi.

I can’t speak for anyone else, but here is one Smiley Smile adherent who has no tolerance for Pavement and similar music. I haven’t really given Guided By Voices a proper chance so i can’t comment there. But quick, dirty, and noisy are some of the last terms that would describe my tastes in music. As i mentioned earlier in this thread, Smiley doesn’t sound rushed or half-heartedly thrown together at all to me. And, as Cam Mott noted above, by the standards of the day (aside from Smile, which was the exception to the rule), the Smiley sessions were not much shorter than sessions for previous albums. Spend some time in a proper studio, you say? So, what, i take it your problem with SS is more from an engineering perspective? The same exact songs and arrangements recorded in a proper studio would do the trick? Is it an issue with session musicians vs the Beach Boys as musicians?

Sounds to me, based on your post, that you’re more hung up on the mythology of Smiley Smile than the cult following who you say deify it. 

[DonnyL]

Yeh, I've said it before, Smiley & Wild Honey are not lo-fi at all. They're kind of demo-like though, particularly for a band of the group's stature at the time. I think Smiley is the most bold release from a major band ever. They've aged very well, and will continue to turn people on and on ...

I think sometimes people confuse production prowess with fidelity.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I do notice though that the UM boot has the recordings in much clearer sound than the actual album. I don't have the reissued SS, though, so I can't comment on its sound, but the original CD pressing was very muddy.

[Doo Dah]

I do notice though that the UM boot has the recordings in much clearer sound than the actual album. I don't have the reissued SS, though, so I can't comment on its sound, but the original CD pressing was very muddy.

True. H&V didn't really come to life for me until Linett's stereo mix. I could drag Wild Honey into the sound quality discussion as well, but naw - this is all about Smiley right now.

I just feel that this album has engendered a following which is way way beyond its mettle. And while it's easy to use examples of art which grew on listeners over time, Smiley to me is only a quirky, yes - demoesque recording... which certainly applies to the 90's four track home recording movement of the likes of GBV et al. Perhaps I misspoke when I characterized its failings as quick and dirty. The minimal instrumentation is certainly 'clear' - but that doesn't make it deep or in any way profound. As for me, I prefer Deep-n-Wide.

[Doo Dah]

Spend some time in a proper studio, you say? So, what, i take it your problem with SS is more from an engineering perspective? The same exact songs and arrangements recorded in a proper studio would do the trick? Is it an issue with session musicians vs the Beach Boys as musicians?

Sounds to me, based on your post, that you’re more hung up on the mythology of Smiley Smile than the cult following who you say deify it. 

Couple things - as I mentioned before, I prefer the fully fleshed out versions of the 6 tracks which would've been featured on Smile. As such, I could live without their demo versions. The balance of the album as is would not have been saved even if it were recorded at Abbey freakin' Road. The songs just weren't fully realized. Which is okay - if you're into an experimental trip. Maybe they were...doesn't mean that it holds water to what came before or after.

Secondly, yeah the mythology of it all kind of makes me laugh. Makes me smiley.  I just don't take the album very seriously to tell you the truth. A huge missed opportunity back in the day.

[Nicko1234]

If you only count the June/July '67 sessions it was 6 weeks. However that is 25 sessions. Compare that number of sessions to the number of session for PS or the earlier albums. It as many sessions but packed into a short time span apparently because they could work when they wanted to and didn't have the waiting periods between booking studios. Of course other sessions before June were also towards SS so that figure of 25 total sessions is low. So for some reasons we want to believe that SS was dashed off but it wasn't.

Ah, I hadn't checked the sessions...

Interestingly Brian when publicizing the album claimed that it was done in 3 weeks which says a lot for his mentality at the time perhaps. It also may speak for the fact that some of those sessions were nothing like as intense as earlier ones and a lot less work as done.

[Mike's Beard]

Forget Smiley's ties to Smile for just a second and just focus on what it is and the end result for me is just the same - a weird, rushed off sounding record that just doesn't hold up to what the boys had put out before it. The bar had been set very high by their previous releases. Smiley wasn't acceptable as a follow up to Pet Sounds for many of their fans.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

I would miss absolutely nothing, considering that any one of us could probably produce an album of equal or better quality in about two hours with a four track cassette recorder.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the stupidest post ever!

Don't sugar coat it or anything, tell us how you really feel! 

Well, you took it in the spirit it was meant. 

[Mike's Beard]

Also with the glut of Smile boots out there it's clear to see that a decent Smile release was clearly within the groups grasp. The bulk of the album was in the can for months. How long would it have taken to finish off the leads for Plymouth Rock and have Carl cut a lead for Cabin Essence in 66? You never see my name in the Smile Sessions discussions because frankly I could give a sh*t what part of Barnyard was meant to fit in what song or where The Old Master Painter was to be sequenced. All the little bits Brian was tinkering with are to my ears insignificant fluff. Nice, but not worth stalling an album for. Here's a perfectly decent Smile tracklist that was a good 90% done when Brian junked it;

1- Our Prayer/Gee
2 - Heroes and Villians
3 - Roll Plymouth Rock (just finish the lead vocal)
4 - Windchimes
5 - Cabin Essence (just add lead vocal)

6 - Vega - tables
7 - Wonderful
8 - Mrs O' Leary's Cow
9 - Surf's Up (with or without a second movement. The piano half works fine as it is)
10 - Good Vibrations

[Cabinessenceking]

Also with the glut of Smile boots out there it's clear to see that a decent Smile release was clearly within the groups grasp. The bulk of the album was in the can for months. How long would it have taken to finish off the leads for Plymouth Rock and have Carl cut a lead for Cabin Essence in 66? You never see my name in the Smile Sessions discussions because frankly I could give a sh*t what part of Barnyard was meant to fit in what song or where The Old Master Painter was to be sequenced. All the little bits Brian was tinkering with are to my ears insignificant fluff. Nice, but not worth stalling an album for. Here's a perfectly decent Smile tracklist that was a good 90% done when Brian junked it;

1- Our Prayer/Gee
2 - Heroes and Villians
3 - Roll Plymouth Rock (just finish the lead vocal)
4 - Windchimes
5 - Cabin Essence (just add lead vocal)

6 - Vega - tables
7 - Wonderful
8 - Mrs O' Leary's Cow
9 - Surf's Up (with or without a second movement. The piano half works fine as it is)
10 - Good Vibrations

This is how their 'Lifehouse' could've been a smashing 'Who's Next' transformation. Scrapping all that material was the silliest thing anyone ever did. I fully agree with you that the small segments/fragments were insignificant compared to the main songs which were all fully recorded except a few leads and Surf's Up 2nd movement (which I'm sure Brian could've held a session for and arranged in less than a week back then). It might not quite have been what VDP and Brian originally had in mind (although it seems that itself is very ambiguous), but it would've been a very unique album and something to be proud of for both of them. In fact, in that configuration it might've been more successful than throwing Holidays into the lot.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Also with the glut of Smile boots out there it's clear to see that a decent Smile release was clearly within the groups grasp. The bulk of the album was in the can for months. How long would it have taken to finish off the leads for Plymouth Rock and have Carl cut a lead for Cabin Essence in 66? You never see my name in the Smile Sessions discussions because frankly I could give a sh*t what part of Barnyard was meant to fit in what song or where The Old Master Painter was to be sequenced. All the little bits Brian was tinkering with are to my ears insignificant fluff. Nice, but not worth stalling an album for. Here's a perfectly decent Smile tracklist that was a good 90% done when Brian junked it;

1- Our Prayer/Gee
2 - Heroes and Villians
3 - Roll Plymouth Rock (just finish the lead vocal)
4 - Windchimes
5 - Cabin Essence (just add lead vocal)

6 - Vega - tables
7 - Wonderful
8 - Mrs O' Leary's Cow
9 - Surf's Up (with or without a second movement. The piano half works fine as it is)
10 - Good Vibrations

And the ensuing unfair comparisons the Sgnt Peppers?

No, I think Brian knew what he was doing. And aren't we lucky, we now have two wonderful albums.

[Mike's Beard]

Also with the glut of Smile boots out there it's clear to see that a decent Smile release was clearly within the groups grasp. The bulk of the album was in the can for months. How long would it have taken to finish off the leads for Plymouth Rock and have Carl cut a lead for Cabin Essence in 66? You never see my name in the Smile Sessions discussions because frankly I could give a sh*t what part of Barnyard was meant to fit in what song or where The Old Master Painter was to be sequenced. All the little bits Brian was tinkering with are to my ears insignificant fluff. Nice, but not worth stalling an album for. Here's a perfectly decent Smile tracklist that was a good 90% done when Brian junked it;

1- Our Prayer/Gee
2 - Heroes and Villians
3 - Roll Plymouth Rock (just finish the lead vocal)
4 - Windchimes
5 - Cabin Essence (just add lead vocal)

6 - Vega - tables
7 - Wonderful
8 - Mrs O' Leary's Cow
9 - Surf's Up (with or without a second movement. The piano half works fine as it is)
10 - Good Vibrations

This is how their 'Lifehouse' could've been a smashing 'Who's Next' transformation. Scrapping all that material was the silliest thing anyone ever did. I fully agree with you that the small segments/fragments were insignificant compared to the main songs which were all fully recorded except a few leads and Surf's Up 2nd movement (which I'm sure Brian could've held a session for and arranged in less than a week back then). It might not quite have been what VDP and Brian originally had in mind (although it seems that itself is very ambiguous), but it would've been a very unique album and something to be proud of for both of them. In fact, in that configuration it might've been more successful than throwing Holidays into the lot.

True Brian may have lost track of what he originally intended for Smile, but to scrap everything brings to mind the old saying "throwing the baby out with the bathwater".

I just did a runtime tally on my proposed tracklisting and it is a little short even by 1960s lp standards. How about inserting the Dada "water, water, water" chant section between Windchimes and Cabin Essence for a bit of mid 60's freakiness? And as a wild card have Carl's "Tune X" finish the album after Good Vibrations.

[Mike's Beard]

Also with the glut of Smile boots out there it's clear to see that a decent Smile release was clearly within the groups grasp. The bulk of the album was in the can for months. How long would it have taken to finish off the leads for Plymouth Rock and have Carl cut a lead for Cabin Essence in 66? You never see my name in the Smile Sessions discussions because frankly I could give a sh*t what part of Barnyard was meant to fit in what song or where The Old Master Painter was to be sequenced. All the little bits Brian was tinkering with are to my ears insignificant fluff. Nice, but not worth stalling an album for. Here's a perfectly decent Smile tracklist that was a good 90% done when Brian junked it;

1- Our Prayer/Gee
2 - Heroes and Villians
3 - Roll Plymouth Rock (just finish the lead vocal)
4 - Windchimes
5 - Cabin Essence (just add lead vocal)

6 - Vega - tables
7 - Wonderful
8 - Mrs O' Leary's Cow
9 - Surf's Up (with or without a second movement. The piano half works fine as it is)
10 - Good Vibrations

And the ensuing unfair comparisons the Sgnt Peppers?

No, I think Brian knew what he was doing. And aren't we lucky, we now have two wonderful albums.

But you can argue that if he hadn't spent so much time jerking off in the studio then Smile would have come out long before Pepper.