The Recording of Fun, Fun, Fun and Don't Worry Baby

[halblaineisgood]

.

[c-man]

Delving into another "FFF"-related scenario, this time guitar-wise:

Could everyone who has access please listen to the new MIC stereo mix, and tell me what they hear for guitars in the center channel, after the intro has finished...it's hard to be completely sure, 'cause the vocals come in on top, but I hear a Dano 6-string bass picking away at qurter notes...and, I've always assumed a normal rhythm guitar chugging away on the low E and A strings, playing a standard Chuck Berry 5th-and-6th toggle. And I'm sure there's a standard Fender bass in the mix, too. BUT if you listen to the backing-track only from the Hawthorne, CA set, I hear the normal guitar playing a rhythm pattern on the higher strings (especially notable in the fade section), instead of the low E and A sting part I mentioned. Thoughts, opinions?

[Jon Stebbins]

I don't have any valid theories to offer, wish I did, but maybe in the analysis process removing some of the SOT factors would get closer to what was done in 1963?

Hang on...1963? I thought Fun, Fun, Fun was started January 1, 1964, which is still the latest information on the Bellagio site. Has new evidence come to light they started working on the song earlier than was known? Sorry, I did try to read back through the thread to find the answer myself, but didn't see anything regarding dates...and man, is this thread technical. (Not complaining - I know it's threads like these that make this a special place.)

Recorded in January '64 is correct. It was written and first rehearsed in 1963...prior to Dave's departure.

[Mikie]

Fun, Fun, Fun. If we are to believe the tale that at least the beginning of the song was written in a cab near Salt Lake City (and not during the Australia tour) this would have been on Sept 7, 1963 coming from the Lagoon, just outside of Salt Lake City. Dave Marks was still in the band. Orrrrr, they were in a cab coming from the Terrace Ballroom in Salt Lake City, where they appeared on Dec 27 and 28 1963. By this time Al was in the band. Then the song, at least the backing track, was recorded on January 1, 1964. Correcto mundo?

[Jon Stebbins]

Fun, Fun, Fun. If we are to believe the tale that at least the beginning of the song was written in a cab near Salt Lake City (and not during the Australia tour) this would have been on Sept 7, 1963 coming from the Lagoon, just outside of Salt Lake City. Dave Marks was still in the band. Orrrrr, they were in a cab coming from the Terrace Ballroom in Salt Lake City, where they appeared on Dec 27 and 28 1963. By this time Al was in the band. Then the song, at least the backing track, was recorded on January 1, 1964. Correcto mundo?

Right, recording initiated Jan 1 '64. Dave has a strong recollection of rehearsing the song with the BB's in late '63, so I'd think the Sept. '63 date is likely for it's birth as a composition.

[bringahorseinhere?]

Great thread! Boys n Girls........

keep it alive!!!!

I love this 'stuff'...!!!!

RickB

[c-man]

DonnyL: <<It'd make more sense that a 4-track would be rented for a session, rather than a third 3-track ...>.

Instead of renting an additional 3- or 4-track, what if they borrowed the extra 3-track from Western 1 or Western 2? All three Western rooms had two 3-tracks, right? As long as the second 3-track from 1 or 2 wasn't needed there for a particular session, I could see them wheeling it over to Studio 3 for the "FFF" overdub/dubdown session...

[Alan Smith]

Delving into another "FFF"-related scenario, this time guitar-wise:

Could everyone who has access please listen to the new MIC stereo mix, and tell me what they hear for guitars in the center channel, after the intro has finished...it's hard to be completely sure, 'cause the vocals come in on top, but I hear a Dano 6-string bass picking away at qurter notes...and, I've always assumed a normal rhythm guitar chugging away on the low E and A strings, playing a standard Chuck Berry 5th-and-6th toggle. And I'm sure there's a standard Fender bass in the mix, too. BUT if you listen to the backing-track only from the Hawthorne, CA set, I hear the normal guitar playing a rhythm pattern on the higher strings (especially notable in the fade section), instead of the low E and A sting part I mentioned. Thoughts, opinions?

I think the low part is there in the CA mix, just a bit murkier and buried, like the sax parts that certainly shimmer and are more detailed/seperated on the MIC mix - the MIC mix also draws more attention to a lot of harmonics between the Rguitars and pianos.

[DonnyL]

DonnyL: <<It'd make more sense that a 4-track would be rented for a session, rather than a third 3-track ...>.

Instead of renting an additional 3- or 4-track, what if they borrowed the extra 3-track from Western 1 or Western 2? All three Western rooms had two 3-tracks, right? As long as the second 3-track from 1 or 2 wasn't needed there for a particular session, I could see them wheeling it over to Studio 3 for the "FFF" overdub/dubdown session...

Hmm, I don't know if they had 3-track in all rooms. Lots of smaller studios had a couple mono or 2-track decks only. What were Western 1 or 2 used for? Were they big dates, or radio station jingles, commercials, etc ?

In any case, though, even if they did have access to a third 3-track, I can't imagine simultaneously bussing two-different mixes/live overdubs at the same time to two different machines, just to decide which to use later. That really sounds kind of crazy. Stranger things have happened, of course ... but I'd bet lots of money that something like that did not happen.

EDIT: I just realized I'm confusing Gold Star w/ Western, based on the photos in this thread -- Sorry! ... So basically, we DON'T know that they had a playback-only deck, or how the setup was. They more likely were bouncing from two standard 3-tracks. But the basic info I've posted would still apply -- I still don't think there would be a third 3-track in there at any point.

[c-man]

DonnyL: <<It'd make more sense that a 4-track would be rented for a session, rather than a third 3-track ...>.

Instead of renting an additional 3- or 4-track, what if they borrowed the extra 3-track from Western 1 or Western 2? All three Western rooms had two 3-tracks, right? As long as the second 3-track from 1 or 2 wasn't needed there for a particular session, I could see them wheeling it over to Studio 3 for the "FFF" overdub/dubdown session...

Hmm, I don't know if they had 3-track in all rooms. Lots of smaller studios had a couple mono or 2-track decks only. What were Western 1 or 2 used for? Were they big dates, or radio station jingles, commercials, etc ?

In any case, though, even if they did have access to a third 3-track, I can't imagine simultaneously bussing two-different mixes/live overdubs at the same time to two different machines, just to decide which to use later. That really sounds kind of crazy. Stranger things have happened, of course ... but I'd bet lots of money that something like that did not happen.

EDIT: I just realized I'm confusing Gold Star w/ Western, based on the photos in this thread -- Sorry! ... So basically, we DON'T know that they had a playback-only deck, or how the setup was. They more likely were bouncing from two standard 3-tracks. But the basic info I've posted would still apply -- I still don't think there would be a third 3-track in there at any point.

Western 1 and Western 2 were both much larger rooms than Western 3. Western 1 in particular was used for lots of orchestra and big band dates. If the Studio 3 control room had two 3-track decks, I'd bet the other two rooms did as well.

[DonnyL]

DonnyL: <<It'd make more sense that a 4-track would be rented for a session, rather than a third 3-track ...>.

Instead of renting an additional 3- or 4-track, what if they borrowed the extra 3-track from Western 1 or Western 2? All three Western rooms had two 3-tracks, right? As long as the second 3-track from 1 or 2 wasn't needed there for a particular session, I could see them wheeling it over to Studio 3 for the "FFF" overdub/dubdown session...

Hmm, I don't know if they had 3-track in all rooms. Lots of smaller studios had a couple mono or 2-track decks only. What were Western 1 or 2 used for? Were they big dates, or radio station jingles, commercials, etc ?

In any case, though, even if they did have access to a third 3-track, I can't imagine simultaneously bussing two-different mixes/live overdubs at the same time to two different machines, just to decide which to use later. That really sounds kind of crazy. Stranger things have happened, of course ... but I'd bet lots of money that something like that did not happen.

EDIT: I just realized I'm confusing Gold Star w/ Western, based on the photos in this thread -- Sorry! ... So basically, we DON'T know that they had a playback-only deck, or how the setup was. They more likely were bouncing from two standard 3-tracks. But the basic info I've posted would still apply -- I still don't think there would be a third 3-track in there at any point.

Western 1 and Western 2 were both much larger rooms than Western 3. Western 1 in particular was used for lots of orchestra and big band dates. If the Studio 3 control room had two 3-track decks, I'd bet the other two rooms did as well.

So I guess my final guess based on the info provided is:

If the final 1/2" master is for sure 3-track, and the layout is: 1-vocals, 2-vocal OD, 3-track,

then the SOT mix that suggests [1-vocals, 2-track, 3-inst. OD] was an alternate take that features a different (but probably sounding more or less the same) vocal OD. I think the simplest explanation would be the most likely.

[guitarfool2002]

Here's some timeline info for Western's studio rooms, some of this I was discussing earlier this year regarding some questionable dates for a Petula Clark recording session:

Bill Putnam signed the ownership agreements to take over the facilities in Fall 1961. Renovations and installations started up, and the first sessions were held in 1962. There are photos from this "grand opening" ceremony featuring artists like Rick Nelson, if I recall.

The only studio room *not* to be in operation was Studio 1. That was undergoing extensive renovations, and if you connect the dots and clues, not to mention the official literature, Studio 1 was not completely finished and in full operation until 1966. So for those first few years, 62-65, Western more or less had two main tracking rooms, and several adjunct project rooms used for voiceover work, ads/jingles, and the like where a large room was not needed. These would have had a more basic equipment setup. There were also editing and copying/dubbing rooms as well.

This also explains why all Beach Boys session photos at Western prior to 1966 show them in Studio 2 (the Party sessions) or Brian's preferred Studio 3.

There was also United before Western, which had lettered rooms instead of numbered. This was Putnam's first purchase in LA dating to 1957, financed also by Bing Crosby and Sinatra. United A was where many of Sinatra's Reprise recordings were cut, though in '66 his sessions with the Wrecking Crew were also done at Western 1. The big-name singers like Sinatra usually recorded at United A, although United B was popular too. Then when Putnam bankrolled Western, they combined to become United-Western in the 60's. The room lettering and numbering stayed the same.

So if we're talking about Beach Boys in 1964, Western 1 was not in operation yet, and only 2 rooms were running full sessions at Western.

And here is Western 1:

[DonnyL]

great info !

[c-man]

Remember how Chuck is quoted in the Preiss book as saying Studio 3's control room was finished at the time of the BBs first session there, in April '62, but the recording room itself was still under construction; so he, Murry and Audree all sat in the control booth of Studio 3 and communicated to the band via intercomm as they played in the larger Studio 1 across the hall, with the microphone cables running back to the board in Studio 3's booth. The above might exlpain why they didn't just use Studio 1's tracking room AND control booth: because the booth was under renovation...in Studio 3, the opposite was true...

[guitarfool2002]

Just an aside: The thing with Western 1 and the timeline came about earlier this year as I was communicating with fellow board member "jeremylr" (who writes *terrific* and very informative music articles BTW, highly recommended reading! ) , about researching and dating some Rick Nelson pictures for one of his projects, including a photo that was supposedly celebrating the "opening" of Western.

Let me just say that as with a lot of this stuff...there is a lot of incorrect and missing information floating around even some reliable sources when it comes to dating these events and photos and everything. It's navigating a minefield, as anyone who has done this in any way can attest. In the case of Western, a source I thought was on the level had cited Petula Clark as being either the first "official" or among the first sessions at Western...unfortunately in 1961 and even into '62 she was still cutting records in French, and wasn't really much of a factor in US music or studios and whatever.

Then the possibility came up that she was the first session held at ***Western 1***, the newly renovated studio 1, which would date to around 1966, and this made much more sense, both with the timeline and the kind of records she was making that would seem to be a fit for Studio 1, with the larger facilities.

But even then, something as simple as a document, session sheet, interview, whatever would nail it down as "fact", but I wasn't able to come across anything of the sort. So it goes on the most logical solution, factoring in anything, risking being "wrong" at least until something more solid surfaces to confirm 100%.

I'm just adding this backstory, connecting Bill Putnam to Rick Nelson to Petula Clark to the Beach Boys in some sort of warped "six degrees of separation" kind of scenario, to demonstrate how and why sometimes the reports we read and might use for reference can be not only tough to suss out through conflicting info, but also a fascinating search effort that leads to information you didn't even set out to find, but which eclipses what you were digging for in the first place! That's the joy of it. The pay sucks, but it's a ton of joy... 

So the way we got to information on Western 1 in this thread related to the BB's and something resembling a timeline, relating it to certain Beach Boys questions and things like "why didn't they use Studio 1, why are there no photos, etc... ) traces back to researching something totally unrelated to the Beach Boys! But now some points might make a little more sense to the BB's history in the studio.

[guitarfool2002]

C-Man: Thanks for the info on Chuck Britz and the Preiss book...I had forgotten about those quotes!

I took a look at my copy and read through Chuck's quotes, and a few things stuck out.

That first session you mentioned, Chuck said it was on a Sunday and they did that demo session for Surfin Safari, Surfer Girl, and 409, with Murry Audree and Gary Usher (who Chuck said sang on the sessions too) in attendance.

What's interesting is that the date of this places it as very, very early in the history of Western in general, not long after they had opened for business after Putnam signed the papers and began renovating and building up the rooms. That would explain why Studio 3's live room was still under construction, yet the booth was ready for sessions.

But consider Chuck's words when he said "they were in a big studio across the hall..." while Chuck, Mom, and Dad were in #3's booth and talking via intercom. I believe that big room would have been "Studio 2" at the time, as #1 wasn't ready to do much of anything as it was being constructed and overhauled.

Studio 3 was the smallest live room, still under construction for that first BB's session with Chuck, Studio 2 was a larger room where a band could cut records, and Studio 1 was the largest room built for larger orchestras and all of that but not ready to go until a few years later.

I'm guessing it was studio 2 where the Boys were tracking that Sunday, and it's very interesting that they were there very, very early in the process of building Western to the point where that split-studio setup had to be done to track. Then Chuck also says he didn't see them for a few months, but they came in later with Murry to say they had been signed to Capitol. Very cool backstory!

What also caught my attention from Chuck's comments was this:

"Everything was done on a four-track basis; the first sessions were done on a three-track. Everything was mono as far as the music was concerned. We did all the vocals live and dubbed them. Everybody sang at one time."

It sort of confuses the issue again of when exactly they went to four track, right? Same thing with the mono-stereo issues, do all of the pre-1964 BB's mixes from Chuck and Brian line up that way, where the instrumental tracks are always mono, including the overdubs like solos or organ tracks, and whatever else came after the basics were tracked?


Just for the record, this is one of the series from the Party sessions at Studio 2, I wish there were some more expansive views of the room itself from that era to give a sense of its size and layout versus both #3 and the later #1. I'm looking...

[c-man]

Yeah, I considered that it might have been Studio 2 instead, but for some reason decided it was more likely Studio 1. They were both across the hall, weren't they? I asked Alan Boyd and he seemed to think it was Studio 1 - I think it's directly across the hall. Is Studio 2 across and down, or just down? If just down, it would seem Studio 1 is the likely candidate.

And...it wasn't a Sunday, apparently. So much for that memory! Actually, he doesn't say it WAS a Sunday, does he - just that "they wanted to book a session on a Sunday". It was, in fact, a Thursday. And the Gary Usher session was the previous Monday.

[guitarfool2002]

Yeah, I considered that it might have been Studio 2 instead, but for some reason decided it was more likely Studio 1. They were both across the hall, weren't they? I asked Alan Boyd and he seemed to think it was Studio 1 - I think it's directly across the hall. Is Studio 2 across and down, or just down? If just down, it would seem Studio 1 is the likely candidate.

And...it wasn't a Sunday, apparently. So much for that memory! Actually, he doesn't say it WAS a Sunday, does he - just that "they wanted to book a session on a Sunday". It was, in fact, a Thursday. And the Gary Usher session was the previous Monday.

The memory issues strike again! That's what Chuck said, but even reading it you get the impression it was booked on a Sunday and that Gary Usher was with the Boys and sang. More to sort out.  

I'm staying with the idea that they tracked in Studio 2, mostly on the basis of Studio 1 not being anything near complete, several reports of it undergoing "extensive renovations" which suggest much more than a facelift, let's say, and not being ready to book for sessions until about 4 years after the Boys cut those first tracks with Chuck at Western.

The physical location of the room doesn't seem too significant, as they could easily communicate between rooms and booths, and even if they weren't hard-wired to do that (which I'm pretty sure they were as standard practice), it would be a simple case of patching in. No matter where each room was, they'd be linked, and if they weren't it was a simple thing to rig up. But I'm sure they were.

This early in Putnam's ownership, and it was within the same year that Western started booking that the BB's came in, I'm guessing that big Studio 1 room was pretty rough in that first year, and hadn't been fixed up acoustically or cosmetically for some time after, especially considering the smaller #3 was still being renovated as the BB's showed up to record.

Again, I don't know for sure, but I'm going heavily on the construction timeline from UA and the history of when Studio 1 started booking sessions about 4 years after that first BB session over the memories.  

[Andrew G. Doe]

And...it wasn't a Sunday, apparently. So much for that memory! Actually, he doesn't say it WAS a Sunday, does he - just that "they wanted to book a session on a Sunday". It was, in fact, a Thursday. And the Gary Usher session was the previous Monday.

Possible reason why they couldn't/didn't book a session on the Sunday - it was Easter Sunday.

Also... is it possible that Chuck was, some fifteen years after the event, conflating the 4/16 Gary Usher session (at which the band provided the instrumental backing) and the 4/19 BB demo session ? Given that Murry was indisputably at the Thursday session, my guess is Usher might have diplomatically decided to wash the car that day.

[c-man]

And...it wasn't a Sunday, apparently. So much for that memory! Actually, he doesn't say it WAS a Sunday, does he - just that "they wanted to book a session on a Sunday". It was, in fact, a Thursday. And the Gary Usher session was the previous Monday.

Possible reason why they couldn't/didn't book a session on the Sunday - it was Easter Sunday.

Also... is it possible that Chuck was, some fifteen years after the event, conflating the 4/16 Gary Usher session (at which the band provided the instrumental backing) and the 4/19 BB demo session ? Given that Murry was indisputably at the Thursday session, my guess is Usher might have diplomatically decided to wash the car that day.

I'm pretty sure Gary was at the 4/19 session...(1) Murry was at both the 4/16 and 4/19 sessions (2) Alan and I, and maybe Adam, think we can hear Gary singing backup on "409" (3) David recalls that Gary played the guitar intro on "Lonely Sea".

[surferlicious]

http://www.studioelectronics.biz/newsletters/65dec.pdf

[c-man]

guitarfool2002 wrote: <<I'm staying with the idea that they tracked in Studio 2, mostly on the basis of Studio 1 not being anything near complete, several reports of it undergoing "extensive renovations" which suggest much more than a facelift, let's say, and not being ready to book for sessions until about 4 years after the Boys cut those first tracks with Chuck at Western.>>

I'm still leaning toward Studio 1: since Studio 2 was apparently fully operational in early '62, why not just book it? My guess it it was already booked. From Chuck's quote, Studio 3's tracking room was under construction, and only the control booth was operational. With Studio 2 already operational, perhaps the plan was to get Studio 3 up and running next, before gutting and rebuilding what used to be the "theatre" into Studio 1. Perhaps the recording equipment formerly used in the Studio 1/theatre was moved into the new Studio 3 control room, thus there was no Studio 1 control room yet.

I think we can say it was Studio 1 if we knew for sure that of the two big studios, only Studio 1 is across the hall from Studio 3 (as Chuck said the room in question was)...if they are BOTH across the hall from Studio 3, then we can't say for sure without knowing the specifics of the renovation timeline. Jon Stebbins, you've been there - what do you recall about the locations of Studios 1, 2 and 3 in relation to one another? Is Studio 1 or Studio 2 across the hall from Studio 3, and the other one on the same side of the hall as Studio 3...or are they BOTH across the hall from Studio 3?

[Jon Stebbins]

And...it wasn't a Sunday, apparently. So much for that memory! Actually, he doesn't say it WAS a Sunday, does he - just that "they wanted to book a session on a Sunday". It was, in fact, a Thursday. And the Gary Usher session was the previous Monday.

Possible reason why they couldn't/didn't book a session on the Sunday - it was Easter Sunday.

Also... is it possible that Chuck was, some fifteen years after the event, conflating the 4/16 Gary Usher session (at which the band provided the instrumental backing) and the 4/19 BB demo session ? Given that Murry was indisputably at the Thursday session, my guess is Usher might have diplomatically decided to wash the car that day.

I'm pretty sure Gary was at the 4/19 session...(1) Murry was at both the 4/16 and 4/19 sessions (2) Alan and I, and maybe Adam, think we can hear Gary singing backup on "409" (3) David recalls that Gary played the guitar intro on "Lonely Sea".

With all due respect to his importance in the Beach Boys story, i've found many obvious errors in Chuck Britz recollections about the Beach Boys studio process. Again we have someone who was there, whose anecdotes and interview answers need to be scrutinized, but so happy that there are some CB responses to be fact checked.

Regarding David, I originally thought he was describing Gary Usher as having recorded the guitar intro to Lonely Sea, but I'm pretty sure he later clarified that Gary "wrote" the intro, but that Carl recorded it, and that Gary played no guitar on the actual session. David witnessed Brian and Gary writing Lonely Sea, and made the point that it was unusual in that it was more of an Usher musical composition that Brian added lyrics to. Hence the guitar intro being a Gary thing.

One other consideration...It's also a good possibility that the non-Wilson voice on 409 is David.

More things to scrutinize.

PS I think you're right about studio 1 because somewhere in the revolving recollections of those early early days David mentioned to me that they used the big studio one day, not sure which day, but one of the first sessions.

My recollection is that 2 and 3 are side by side and that studio 1 is across the hall, actually on the other side of the wall of the lounge across the hall...so you have to go down the hall and around...but if you could bust through the lounge's wall, then yes it would be across the hall. Please, anyone who is more solid in their memory of the layout, correct me if I'm wrong.

[c-man]

<<PS I think you're right about studio 1 because somewhere in the revolving recollections of those early early days David mentioned to me that they used the big studio one day, not sure which day, but one of the first sessions.

My recollection is that 2 and 3 are side by side and that studio 1 is across the hall, actually on the other side of the wall of the lounge across the hall...so you have to go down the hall and around...but if you could bust through the lounge's wall, then yes it would be across the hall. Please, anyone who is more solid in their memory of the layout, correct me if I'm wrong.>>

Thanks, Jon. Regarding David's recollection of using the big studio one day...according to Mark L., "Punchline", the outtake included thiry years later on the "GV" box set, was recorded in Studio 2. Regarding the lounge...I wonder if that lounge was there back in early '62? Not that it would necessarily matter, as guitarfool2000 points out, the various rooms could have easily been connected via cables, but walking across the hall from room to room would have certainly been easier with no lounge. Just wondering.

[guitarfool2002]

http://www.studioelectronics.biz/newsletters/65dec.pdf

Thank you for posting that - those are *the* standards for tracing the history of United-Western.

Having said that, please read just pages 1 and 2 of that company newsletter. The history of Western 1 is spelled out clearly.

I ask: How could the Beach Boys or anyone be recording in a room which was actually a theater and was at the beginning stages of being totally stripped down and rebuilt as a live tracking room to accommodate orchestras and large groups?

The newsletter read that the former theater at Western was "completely dismantled, until only the basic shell of the room remained".

Also, note that tons of granite and concrete were poured to level the sloping floor (as any theater would have) and provide acoustic treatment on top.

No matter what the layout, no matter what anyone in the band remembers, in spring 1962 Western 1 was still a theater with a sloping floor that was being stripped down to the bare foundation for renovations that took upwards of 3 years.

Logically, does it make sense that the Beach Boys were recording in that theater room a few months after Western opened for business? 

The only other "studio" room at Western was studio 2 at this time, as 3 wasn't finished either.