Track Talk #6: In The Cantina

[buddhahat]

Ok, ok, so it's obviously not a track, but as Brian wrote in feels and sections during this period, why not devote a thread to this most beautiful fragment from Heroes & Villains?

It's such an incredible piece, and to think it features so fleetingly within H&V - not even within the single proper, but within a bonus track some 25 odd years later. It surprises me that Brian didn't choose to make more out it in the intervening years, considering Mama Says was deemed worthy of release on Wild Honey. It would make a fantastic verse within a Country Air type of song imo.

[Cabinessenceking]

tbh I think it slows H&V down too much. Thematically it fits perfectly, yet I feel it just takes the edge off that song. It's a great section, don't get me wrong.

[Jukka]

What he said. A great feel, but not suitable for a hit single. Same goes for quite a few of Brian's feels of that time.

Love the piano sound. And I'd like to know how many takes of laughter were taped before Brian was happy.

[runnersdialzero]

Don't agree at all that it slows the track down too much. I mean I guess if we're talking strictly in terms of aiming for huge commercial success, but Smile wasn't solely about that at all. It was a goal, don't get me wrong, but yeah.

Absolutely beautiful section. To me, the song is incomplete without it. Blasphemy, but I rarely listen to the single/album version anymore as, despite hearing it before other edits, my brain just expects the cantina section and it doesn't happen.

[EgoHanger1966]

It's great. It allows for a long mix of H&V to be more tolerable - if you just had the verse, chorus, and vocal 'barbershop' parts that were based around the same chord sequence, you'd probably want to push the next button after 3 minutes. The cantina bit is cool 'cuz it's usually placed somewhere in the middle, and divides the story into two parts.

[Phoenix]

Exactly!  It's "always" been my belief that the "final" decision for "Part Two" was a second half, that would have wound up on singe's flip side, like numerous other songs ("American Pie", "Love Machine", "Standing On The Top", etc).  "Part One" = Cantina version without the Barnshine fade, "Part Two" = single version from the start of the first chorus.  I think Brian decided (or was persuaded) to edit the single down to a more common length for one side of a Pop 45 by eliminating the second half of "Part One". 

"Barnshine" may have been added to "Part One" as an experiment to see if the single worked with just "Part One" or possibly to give it a proper ending when it came time to actually release it on the twofer.  (I can't remember if there's contemporary for it.)

[Chris Brown]

Don't agree at all that it slows the track down too much. I mean I guess if we're talking strictly in terms of aiming for huge commercial success, but Smile wasn't solely about that at all. It was a goal, don't get me wrong, but yeah.

Absolutely beautiful section. To me, the song is incomplete without it. Blasphemy, but I rarely listen to the single/album version anymore as, despite hearing it before other edits, my brain just expects the cantina section and it doesn't happen.

Agreed on all counts.  "Cantina" doesn't slow the song down any more than the chorus from the single mix does (one of my major gripes with that particular edit - the chorus just drags on and on).  I love that it comes out of nowhere and acts as a perfect bridge between verses.  I don't think the song as a whole can work without it.

[buddhahat]

Exactly!  It's "always" been my belief that the "final" decision for "Part Two" was a second half, that would have wound up on singe's flip side, like numerous other songs ("American Pie", "Love Machine", "Standing On The Top", etc).  "Part One" = Cantina version without the Barnshine fade, "Part Two" = single version from the start of the first chorus.  I think Brian decided (or was persuaded) to edit the single down to a more common length for one side of a Pop 45 by eliminating the second half of "Part One". 

"Barnshine" may have been added to "Part One" as an experiment to see if the single worked with just "Part One"

This is a really interesting theory - that at the point of having to whittle the single down to one side Brian just took what he had for part 1 and added the fade to hear if it worked. That  'alt version' edit from the twofer is a contemporary edit so the fade was definitely Brian's intention at that point. Much that I love the edit, I don't think it'd have made a sensible single and Brian obviously felt the same way. However that doesn't mean I prefer it without Cantina. I think that musical left turn is very much what makes it a Smile track. The structure of the 45 is still relatively unorthodox, but the transitions between the different pieces are much less jarring and I think something has been lost. You don't really feel like you're moving from one scene to another without the cantina section.

[Phoenix]

Thanks for dating the edit for me! 

I totally agree.  The single version (without the Cantina section) just sounds wrong to me now.    

[Jaco]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJXZe6RfJMk&t=27m33s

Well, the intro to the third part of Brian's 2004 SMiLE, (I'm In Great Shape), was an instrumental variation of 'In The Cantina'.
Allthough it's a nice little piece, I've always find that a weird choice, because the music starts with the IVth chord of the scale. For a new intro, you would've expect  I or V, but IV?

To me it feels like it's a piece that should be inbetween other small sections, and not be orchestrated, not be used as a grandioso intro to the third movement of SMiLE, like they did. But starting straight with the obscure I Wanna Be Around/Woodshop, that  is also not an easy catchy tune.

And we found out on TSS 2011:  I'm In Great Shape was placed 'back' into the first movement.

Sorry to be so nitpicking about that great album, but when I found out about that IVth chord, I understood why it didn't feel right right. Part 1 flows very good, part 2 really cannot be better, but part 3 is more like thrown together of what's  left over.

[buddhahat]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJXZe6RfJMk&t=27m33s

Well, the intro to the third part of Brian's 2004 SMiLE, (I'm In Great Shape), was an instrumental variation of 'In The Cantina'.
Allthough it's a nice little piece, I've always find that a weird choice, because the music starts with the IVth chord of the scale. For a new intro, you would've expect  I or V, but IV?

To me it feels like it's a piece that should be inbetween other small sections, and not be orchestrated, not be used as a grandioso intro to the third movement of SMiLE, like they did. But starting straight with the obscure I Wanna Be Around/Woodshop, that  is also not an easy catchy tune.

And we found out on TSS 2011:  I'm In Great Shape was placed 'back' into the first movement.

Sorry to be so nitpicking about that great album, but when I found out about that IVth chord, I understood why it didn't feel right right. Part 1 flows very good, part 2 really cannot be better, but part 3 is more like thrown together of what's  left over.

You're right - it doesn't sound like an intro, but I always thought of it more as a reprise in that context. It's referencing the earlier Cantina section to remind you that what follows (Great Shape) was potentially part of H&V and is musically related to Cantina in that they share the waltz timing. It's almost like a musical disclaimer that says "we're starting The Elements movement off with Great Shape because there's some evidence it was to precede Workshop BUT we all know it also belongs with H&V so just kind of imagine we're coming out of the catina section right now, right?!"

Listening to the sessions disc 2 now. Wow, the cantina section is so beautiful when you just hear it played without vocals.

[Jaco]

I agree it's great music!

I also think these 3 opening bass notes (on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJXZe6RfJMk&t=4m32s) are perfect, almost essential for the flow of  Heroes And Villains with Cantina:  now it's still a new little piece of music, but it doesn't come so suddenly from out of nowhere.

[buddhahat]

I agree it's great music!

I also think these 3 opening bass notes (on http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dJXZe6RfJMk&t=4m32s) are perfect, almost essential for the flow of  Heroes And Villains with Cantina:  now it's still a new little piece of music, but it doesn't come so suddenly from out of nowhere.

Yeah I see what you mean about those notes.

[Phoenix]

I always thought of it more as a reprise in that context. It's referencing the earlier Cantina section to remind you that what follows (Great Shape) was potentially part of H&V and is musically related to Cantina in that they share the waltz timing. It's almost like a musical disclaimer that says "we're starting The Elements movement off with Great Shape because there's some evidence it was to precede Workshop BUT we all know it also belongs with H&V so just kind of imagine we're coming out of the catina section right now, right?!"

Once again, I concur.

[mike s]

well I love the piano track to Cantina but I'm not as keen on the vocal melod/lyrics - its really nice but doesn't quite zap me as much as other Brian melodies

I think its partly because the melody vaults around so much - I think it could have been a bit simpler

[buddhahat]

well I love the piano track to Cantina but I'm not as keen on the vocal melod/lyrics - its really nice but doesn't quite zap me as much as other Brian melodies

I think its partly because the melody vaults around so much - I think it could have been a bit simpler

I think you make an interesting point here in that the vocal melody does jump around a lot. It makes me wonder how Brian and VDP wrote together. The vocal melody is not a logical counterpart to the simple descending melody of the piano track, although the slight dissonance between the two is one of the things that makes this fragment so compelling. Presumably Brian wrote the base melody first and then the vocal melody was created to accommodate the words. It makes me wonder if VDP might have created the vocal melody himself when he wrote the words. Does anyone know how these two wrote together i.e. if VDP did have input into any of the melodies?

This jumpy vocal melody reminds me of the weird little snippet of Sandwich Isles vocal melody that Brian scats during the worms session. Again that seems like a really clunky melody that is not a logical fit with the track, almost as if the vocal melody there was written by VDP also. Brian does appear to ask VDP's opinion after singing it "Right Van?" which might suggest it was Park's melody.

[EgoHanger1966]

Since you mentioned that, a little Do You Like Worms tangent....

The Sandwich Isles bit in DYLW makes complete sense when you compare it with what you're saying with H&V's vocal melody structure (compared to the melody). It's jumpy, maybe a little clunky at first, but unexpected and it fits when you wrap your head around it. Also bringing in the fact that DYLW and H&V have a lot of similarities, and that would be another one of them.

I'd actually love to hear someone just sing the whole lead vocal sung in the supposed style over the backing track with backing vocals (as it appears on TSS).

[buddhahat]

Since you mentioned that, a little Do You Like Worms tangent....

The Sandwich Isles bit in DYLW makes complete sense when you compare it with what you're saying with H&V's vocal melody structure (compared to the melody). It's jumpy, maybe a little clunky at first, but unexpected and it fits when you wrap your head around it. Also bringing in the fact that DYLW and H&V have a lot of similarities, and that would be another one of them.

I'd actually love to hear someone just sing the whole lead vocal sung in the supposed style over the backing track with backing vocals (as it appears on TSS).

Yes in these instances where the vocal melody is so at odds with the base melody of the track, and where its main function is apparently to accommodate VDP's loquacious lyrics, one has to wonder if he is responsible for these vocal melodies, rather than Brian.

[Bill Ed]

I find the "You're under arrest!" bit a little annoying. I was fascinated by the Cantina section at first, but nowadays not so much. I think I prefer the single version, but the Smile version certainly works as an album track.

[EgoHanger1966]

I find the "You're under arrest!" bit a little annoying. I was fascinated by the Cantina section at first, but nowadays not so much. I think I prefer the single version, but the Smile version certainly works as an album track.

Just the spoken Gene Gaddy line used to irk the hell out of me. It's become so familiar that I don't mind it.

[Rocky Raccoon]

I love the Van Dyke Parks wordplay with margarita being mentioned as both the drink and a woman's name.

[I. Spaceman]

One of my favorite pieces of the Wilson/Parks collaboration.

[Lonely Summer]

Thanks for dating the edit for me! 

I totally agree.  The single version (without the Cantina section) just sounds wrong to me now.    

Me, too.

[Gertie J.]

three me.

[mike s]

hi yeah there is a slight dissonance in the piano track too i na couple of places - to me it sounds like a recording artefact, like maybe the piano wasn't totally in tune or maybe there was an odd overtone

I think the double tracking also takes some of the life out of the vocals on this section and I really don't like the laughter -  I would have expected Brian at this point to create a laughter feeling with the BVs rather than simple recording staged laughing

so a few things about the section that I don't like that much but its still superior music, just not an example I am bowled over by

well I love the piano track to Cantina but I'm not as keen on the vocal melod/lyrics - its really nice but doesn't quite zap me as much as other Brian melodies

I think its partly because the melody vaults around so much - I think it could have been a bit simpler

I think you make an interesting point here in that the vocal melody does jump around a lot. It makes me wonder how Brian and VDP wrote together. The vocal melody is not a logical counterpart to the simple descending melody of the piano track, although the slight dissonance between the two is one of the things that makes this fragment so compelling. Presumably Brian wrote the base melody first and then the vocal melody was created to accommodate the words. It makes me wonder if VDP might have created the vocal melody himself when he wrote the words. Does anyone know how these two wrote together i.e. if VDP did have input into any of the melodies?

This jumpy vocal melody reminds me of the weird little snippet of Sandwich Isles vocal melody that Brian scats during the worms session. Again that seems like a really clunky melody that is not a logical fit with the track, almost as if the vocal melody there was written by VDP also. Brian does appear to ask VDP's opinion after singing it "Right Van?" which might suggest it was Park's melody.