Do you prefer SMiLE as a 3 movements piece or as 12-14 tracks?

[shangaijoeBB]

Never mind what was the original concept back in 1967, do you prefer to listen to SMiLE as a complete "suite" or mostly unrelated, "banded" tracks?

Personally, I prefer the tracks because it helps me to appreciate the greatness of each song with breaks in between them. Even though I love the '04 arrangement, it moves way too quickly for me.
 

[John Manning]

66/67 = separate tracks
2004 = suites

[Moon Dawg]

  The movements are fine, but isn't it almost certain that SMILE would have originally ended with "Surf's Up" rather than "Good Vibrations"? Making "Good Vibrations" the closer in 2004 and 2011 was a revisionist touch I never cared for, even though the second movement ("Wonderful" -"Surf's Up") works beautifully.

[Sheriff John Stone]

In my opinion, the movements on BWPS (the record) are a travesty and a disgrace, robbing the songs of some of Brian's (potentially) great fades, especially on "Do You Like Worms", "Cabinessence", "Look", "False Barnyard" somewhere, and "Surf's Up".  

I also think the movements give the listener too much music bunched up and not spread out. At the end of each movement, I find myself coming up for air. It's not a feeling I like while listening to the SMiLE songs.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

12 tracks. Namely these:

Prayer
H&V
Wonderful
Holidays
Cabin Essence
Fire
Child

Good Vibrations
Wind Chimes
Look
Vegetables
Worms
Surfs Up

No tinkering, no cross-fades, no forced inclusions. I've finally found the perfect lineup...FOR ME.

[Andrew G. Doe]

My preference is for how Brian (and Van Dyke) envisioned it back in 1966 - single album, 12 tracks. BWPS is a wonderful, wonderful thing. But it's not Smile. How can it be ?

[rab2591]

I prefer the vintage tracks in a 12-13 song order. I prefer the BWPS recordings in the 3 suite movement.

The vintage tracks are too unfinished to keep my attention for 50 minutes.

[Tristero]

 The movements are fine, but isn't it almost certain that SMILE would have originally ended with "Surf's Up" rather than "Good Vibrations"? Making "Good Vibrations" the closer in 2004 and 2011 was a revisionist touch I never cared for, even though the second movement ("Wonderful" -"Surf's Up") works beautifully.

Agreed!  I can see how GV works in terms of the concert performance as kind of a show stopper, but you've gotta have "Surf's Up" as the final track on Smile in my book.  I thought that the three suites worked well live, but it's not how I prefer to listen to the original Smile material.  I go for separate tracks in kind of a modified Americana/Elemental configuration, mainly sticking with the back cover listing (plus my own mix of Dada/Water):

Our Prayer
H&V
IIGS/Barnyard
OMP/YAMS
Worms
Cabinessence
Wonderful
Vegetables
Wind Chimes
Fire
Dada
Child
Surf's Up

I enjoy a good segue as much as the next guy and I can see why it's tempting to try something like that with Smile, but it starts to feel a little gimmicky after a while.

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

12 tracks. Namely these:

Prayer
H&V
Wonderful
Holidays
Cabin Essence
Fire
Child

Good Vibrations
Wind Chimes
Look
Vegetables
Worms
Surfs Up

No tinkering, no cross-fades, no forced inclusions. I've finally found the perfect lineup...FOR ME.

What versions of the songs, Bubba?

[Summertime Blooz]

Never mind what was the original concept back in 1967, do you prefer to listen to SMiLE as a complete "suite" or mostly unrelated, "banded" tracks?

Personally, I prefer the tracks because it helps me to appreciate the greatness of each song with breaks in between them. Even though I love the '04 arrangement, it moves way too quickly for me.
 

I think there is a third choice that falls somewhere between the two options you gave. For instance, Wonderful/Look-Song for Children/Child Is The Father Of the Man works for me as a unified piece. It's not too far out to think Smile could have been a combination of free standing tracks and suites. Whatever one believes Smile would have been, we should all agree that the songs are by no means "unrelated" as you propose.

[felipe]

 The movements are fine, but isn't it almost certain that SMILE would have originally ended with "Surf's Up" rather than "Good Vibrations"? Making "Good Vibrations" the closer in 2004 and 2011 was a revisionist touch I never cared for, even though the second movement ("Wonderful" -"Surf's Up") works beautifully.

I think Good Vibrations would be the first song, as the Our Prayer (intro to the álbum), which was originally in C#(Heroes And Villains), was changed to Eb (Good Vibrations).

[Mikie]

My preference is for how Brian (and Van Dyke) envisioned it back in 1966 - single album, 12 tracks.

Agreed. 

[Ron]

I like the three movements.  Good Vibrations fits in well for me at the end, because it represents the Ether the fifth element. 

I don't get too caught up on what he intended in 1966, the album never happened. 

[Mikie]

Years back, I use to belong to the Earth, Fire, & Water contingent. Wasn't that the philosophy that Priore or somebody preached? I mean, I guess you can make the songs fit that theme if you want, but........nah, it was just 12 beautiful tracks with lives of their own. A bunch of songs about a musical journey across America from East to West; about modern American history and culture, including the Wild West. Notice many of those Smile songs were cut and pasted or reworked for Smiley Smile, which had NO common theme. Notice Cabinessence and Our Prayer and Cool, Cool, Water And Surf's Up were cut and pasted onto subsequent albums and they seemed to fit (acknowledging that 20/20 was a hodge podge album.) So SMiLE to me had a common thread, but still consisted of separate tracks on their own.
 

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I wonder how Cabinessence would've sounded with a 1966 vocal...

[Jim V.]

I like the three movements.  Good Vibrations fits in well for me at the end, because it represents the Ether the fifth element. 

I don't get too caught up on what he intended in 1966, the album never happened. 

Right on Ron. Sometimes I would start going down the rabbit-hole thinking about what SMiLE could, woulda, shoulda been. But then I just realized it wasn't finished in the '60s, and despite what any of us wanna think, Brian finished in '04. He says it's finished, so it's finished. Just like Pet Sounds or whatever. Do I think there woulda been three suites in '60s version? Absolutely not. Do I think there would have been some segues between songs? Sure, yeah, probably a few, and then the rest as your usual stand alone songs.

I do wanna say though that I feel that the songs from the SMiLE era actually hit me harder with their presence on subsequent albums than they do when I listen to The SMiLE Sessions. For instance, "Surf's Up" to me seems so much more powerful on the Surf's Up album (not to mention that I prefer the '71 version anyways). To me, it seems like that's when the song was meant to be released. "Cabinessence" also seems to be a really big, important song on 20/20, whereas within SMiLE it seemed like a cool song surrounded by other cool songs.

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

Never mind what was the original concept back in 1967, do you prefer to listen to SMiLE as a complete "suite" or mostly unrelated, "banded" tracks?

Personally, I prefer the tracks because it helps me to appreciate the greatness of each song with breaks in between them. Even though I love the '04 arrangement, it moves way too quickly for me.
 

I think there is a third choice that falls somewhere between the two options you gave. For instance, Wonderful/Look-Song for Children/Child Is The Father Of the Man works for me as a unified piece. It's not too far out to think Smile could have been a combination of free standing tracks and suites. Whatever one believes Smile would have been, we should all agree that the songs are by no means "unrelated" as you propose. 

I would agree with this. I think there *is* a middle option, in my opinion, the most likely way the album would've been finished in 1967--Suites, but 2 of them. Not 3. There's definitely a link between some of these songs, but 3 movements doesn't bode well with the vinyl format and theres no proof that 3/4 of the songs we now consider "the elements suite" were originally intended that way.

Thats how I organized my own SMiLE Mix. As for how I think it wouldve come out in 1967: 

I think 2 side-long suites, or perhaps "mini-suites" is the most likely route the project was heading in. I think it's possible SMiLE couldve been one half Americana and one half Life, if we're talking side-long suites. If we're talking "mini-suites" I think it wouldve been the four movement Barnyard and Elements suites on their own respective side, bookended by standalone tracks. Either way, I think each song (if wed include these potential Barnyard/Element mini-suites as songs) wouldve been its own standalone work, but with semi-related bridges in between them. 

I've said it before, I think Psychedelic Sounds and the wackier Smiley Smile moments are more important than they're usually given credit for. I think segments like the Garden Fight with Hal and George Fell Into His French Horn were at some point supposed to lead into Vega-Tables and Surf's Up, respectively. Perhaps segments like Taxi Cabber couldve lead into Worms or Side Stroke lead into the elements/dada/cool water or whatever.

I agree with the opinion that BWPS, while a great presentation of the material for a live performance, doesn't work in the context of the original 1967 studio recordings. Every mix I've heard (including my own early ones that followed the 3 movement structure and TSS Disc 1) that uses BWPS as a guide just sounds FORCED and exhausting to listen to all the way through. The fragmented tracks like Barnyard and Great Shape in the beginning make it sound disjointed and thrown together right from the get-go. The Elements was never meant to be a medley of Veggies/Chimes/Cow/Dada and they sound terrible together like that, in my honest opinion. I agree that Good Vibes, while it'd work at the end live, just sounds tacked on and anti-climactic at the end. I don't buy this "fifth element" nonsense either.

So, yeah. 12, maybe 13 tracks--not 17~19. Two sides that are linked thematically/musically but where each song stands as a seperate, unique work all its own. In case you couldnt already tell, I'm very passionate about this material. I'm not trying to insult Brian's work with BWPS or Mark and Alan's with TSS. But...now that I've experimented with a 2 movement structure, and found one that works for me personally, I don't think I'll ever go back. The difference is night and day, and I never realized before how much the BWPS sequence really cheapens (for lack of a better word) the material. 

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

In my opinion, the movements on BWPS (the record) are a travesty and a disgrace, robbing the songs of some of Brian's (potentially) great fades, especially on "Do You Like Worms", "Cabinessence", "Look", "False Barnyard" somewhere, and "Surf's Up".  

I also think the movements give the listener too much music bunched up and not spread out. At the end of each movement, I find myself coming up for air. It's not a feeling I like while listening to the SMiLE songs.

While I wouldn't go so far as to call them a travesty as far as their use in BWPS, I do strongly disagree with BWPS itself being passed off as the unquestionable final word on SMiLE, and I especially disagreed with the decision to restructure the original recordings based on it for TSS. In BWPS it works ok for what it is. But trying to force the sessions into that order really just accentuates how unfinished the original tracks are.

Also, the 3 movements are just very uneven in terms of pacing, mood and how complete the songs are. The only one that really, unquestionably works is the Childhood suite. The fact that they couldn't even really get that to flow for TSS shouldve been a red flag that this was not the best sequence to use, I'd say. And either way, coming off the unified in theme, flowing in music second suite, the Elements "suite" sounds so incredibly mismatched on BWPS or TSS.

[Ron]

For instance, "Surf's Up" to me seems so much more powerful on the Surf's Up album (not to mention that I prefer the '71 version anyways). To me, it seems like that's when the song was meant to be released.

I haven't thought of it that way, but I like the concept.  Something to think about!

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

For instance, "Surf's Up" to me seems so much more powerful on the Surf's Up album (not to mention that I prefer the '71 version anyways). To me, it seems like that's when the song was meant to be released.

I haven't thought of it that way, but I like the concept.  Something to think about!

Eh. I can see how putting them on their own albums could allow each SMiLE track to really stand out. Instead of a great song in a sea of great songs, it's THE great song in a sea of ok-good-really good songs. But see, to me that's really the beauty of SMiLE the album. Just the idea of an album full off killer material, tracks that on any other album would be stand-outs in their own right. Like assembling all the best (insert your preferred sport) players on one team, or how Squaresoft assembled the best developers in the business to make the game Chrono Trigger. The fact that all this exemplary stuff was recorded all at the same time, as part of the same artistic message...it just makes each track seem even more special to me, than if they just came out one after the other on whatever random album.

Surf's Up is way more profound as an intentional "look how far we've come" during the peak of psychedelia and the best year for pop music than as an abandoned song, half-finished and stuck on the upcoming album as a way to garner attention. Not trying to insult the band, but in the former scenario theyd be making a conscious change to reinvent their image at the height of their popularity. In the latter scenario, whether it was or not...it just *seems* like a desperate, too little too late attempt at rekindling former unfulfilled glory.

Just offering a counter-argument. But I think a finished SMiLE in 1967 would've been something truly special and greater than the sum of its parts.

[JK]

I like the three movements.  Good Vibrations fits in well for me at the end, because it represents the Ether the fifth element. 

I don't get too caught up on what he intended in 1966, the album never happened. 

Right on Ron. Sometimes I would start going down the rabbit-hole thinking about what SMiLE could, woulda, shoulda been. But then I just realized it wasn't finished in the '60s, and despite what any of us wanna think, Brian finished in '04. He says it's finished, so it's finished. Just like Pet Sounds or whatever. Do I think there woulda been three suites in '60s version? Absolutely not. Do I think there would have been some segues between songs? Sure, yeah, probably a few, and then the rest as your usual stand alone songs.

I do wanna say though that I feel that the songs from the SMiLE era actually hit me harder with their presence on subsequent albums than they do when I listen to The SMiLE Sessions. For instance, "Surf's Up" to me seems so much more powerful on the Surf's Up album (not to mention that I prefer the '71 version anyways). To me, it seems like that's when the song was meant to be released. "Cabinessence" also seems to be a really big, important song on 20/20, whereas within SMiLE it seemed like a cool song surrounded by other cool songs.

Wow. There's nothing----0%----I disagree with here. Now all I need is a vinyl version of BWPS... ;=)

[Alan Smith]

My preference is for how Brian (and Van Dyke) envisioned it back in 1966 - single album, 12 tracks.

Agreed. 

So, are the 12 you guys are agreeing on the unsequenced:  Do You Like Worms, Wind Chimes, Heroes and Villians, S'Up, Good Vibrations, Cabin Essence, Wonderful, I'm In Gr8 Shape, Child Is Father Of The Man, The Elements, Vega-Tables, The Old Master Painter: from the back cover.

If yes, what's your take on The Elements, which is at least 2 tracks (Cow and DaDa) as per AGD's nifty pink or blue tome circa 2004 = total 13

[Andrew G. Doe]

According to VDP when I asked him back in the late 90s, the album was envisaged as a single disc, banded, twelve titles and no cross-fading or segues except internally on one track. I could lie and tell you he also told me the exact sequencing, but he didn't.

Of course, I could be lying when I say that... 

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

According to VDP when I asked him back in the late 90s, the album was envisaged as a single disc, banded, twelve titles and no cross-fading or segues except internally on one track. I could lie and tell you he also told me the exact sequencing, but he didn't.

Of course, I could be lying when I say that...  

I don't think you're lying. But of course, Peter Reum claims Brian himself said it was to be 3 movements way back in the 80s. So which is it? I don't think the creators even knew--the idea kept growing and changing. Once I gave up trying to make sense of Brian's interviews and trying to shoehorn whatever random bits into a forced "Elements suite" and started looking at what was actually recorded it made a lot more sense.

Maybe it wouldnt have been "suites" as we think of them in the BWPS format, with crossfades and whatnot. But I don't see why splitting these vastly different tracks onto two sides of the vinyl in such a way that each side is musically cohesive is such an impossible idea. It was done with Today and made even more sense with SMiLE.

I think it'd help explain some of the discrepancy between the collaborators, too. Brian was way more into those Psychedelic Sounds skits than VDP. Perhaps in his mind it wouldve been a novel way to frame the album, as someone tripping, thinking to himself, and meeting people (gardener, taxi cabber.) From what I've read, VDP didn't think too highly of these skits and thought it was just Brian goofing off. That could explain why one guys saying there were suites and the other thinks it'd just be a standard album. Might also explain why the Boys disapproved of the project but claim to love the music.

This is all just speculation on my part. I've read a lot about SMiLE, but I think a lot of that knowledge is circulatory and becomes like an echo chamber. I think we ought to take a fresh look at this, starting with what was recorded during late '66 to early '68.

[Andrew G. Doe]

This is all just speculation on my part. I've read a lot about SMiLE, but I think a lot of that knowledge is circulatory and becomes like an echo chamber. I think we ought to take a fresh look at this, starting with what was recorded during late '66 to early '68.

A wise concept. Instead of theorising about what might be, go back to what is, and proceed from there.