New album info (as it rolls out...)

[I. Spaceman]

The only mistake he made was asking for anyone's opinions here.

Yeah, all you stupid losers! He should never have asked your opinion. 

just let the child play.

If you are not going to bother properly capitalizing sentences, you can probably leave the period at the end off, as well.

[guitarfool2002]

It feels like the responses are less about what I actually wrote and more about trying to address things that are already accepted knowledge. Of course this band out of any others has the artistic versus the commercial issue raging constantly no matter what they do or release. I do think listeners and fans usually find what they like or respond to and that gut reaction or connection is more of an issue than any explanations or backstories attached to the music, no matter how good or bad it may be.

To my McCartney reference: Did we go around telling people who liked Sgt. Pepper and the White Album similar things when his latest album of love ballads and songs came out? Maybe we did and I missed it, but I don't think trying to ease a listener into something is as good as just letting the music play, and if someone likes it or connects with it after hearing it, what difference does it make where it came from? Or how the artist has a corny versus hip side, or a rocker versus balladeer side, or a jazzer versus country side, or whatever else. The music really shouldn't have an asterisk next to it, no matter who the artist is.

All this may just play out where McCartney's Ram is now being deluxe re-released akin to The Smile Sessions, and we'll have the ability to see the experimental post-Beatles garage-rocker McCartney in contrast to his other musical incarnations of recent years. Do we place the asterisk on the Ram box set and say "This is the same guy that did Sgt Pepper" or "This is the same guy who did the album of sappy love songs a year ago"?  

Artists from the 60's still making music today exist in a much larger (and more inclusive) stylistic tent than even Perry Como, Sinatra, et al. Stylistically the tent is probably as big as it will ever be even for the next few generations of music fans, so the music becomes the ultimate basis for someone's opinion of it.

[DonnyL]

Using autotune as an effect; is this the digital version of reverb and echo in world of today's music making?

no, digital reverb and digital echo are the digital versions of reverb and echo.

Because only audio effects developed by the mid-60s (or their approximations) are legitimate, of course.

Autotune, in contemporary pop records, is indeed much like reverb in the 60s.

I mean, I could see something like double-tracking being compared, but reverb and echo are still widely used (really rare to find a pop hit without one or the other, or both), so the initial analogy doesn't make sense.

Audible pitch correction sounds worse than singing off-key in my (and many others') opinion.  The thing is they are double-tracking, using reverb and echo (and God knows what else) ... AND overusing pitch correction.  No one is talking about which effects are 'legitimate' ... anything goes in music and production.  But people are entitled to express their opinion when they feel something sounds bad.

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

[Runaways]

The only mistake he made was asking for anyone's opinions here.

Yeah, all you stupid losers! He should never have asked your opinion. 

just let the child play.

If you are not going to bother properly capitalizing sentences, you can probably leave the period at the end off, as well.

you're slipping man.

[guitarfool2002]

Just so this doesn't get lost in the posts, I want to re-emphasize one part of a previous post:

Consider what we are discussing in the context of age and era. Just a few quick ones to consider:

When Brian and the BB's had a #1 with I Get Around, when Beatlemania was in full swing, music that was 50 years old was music of the 1910's...World War One era. Wax cylinder Edison "talking machine" kind of stuff...can anyone name one of the more popular musical artists or songs from, say, 1916? Of course not.

When we were liking Appetite For Destruction or another of the benchmark 80's popular albums, Sgt. Pepper was 20 years old...yet didn't feel all that old. 50 years, though: 1930's big band, swing era, early Delta blues like Robert Johnson before the CD box set made him a rock star, rural Carter Family country...etc. It was a niche audience among record collectors, musicians, and whatnot who were actively into that stuff... but among people aged 13-19? Pretty much a rarity if not totally unheard of among that peer group.

Now in 2012 a new album and tour from a 50 year old group comprised of 70 year old men playing 50 year old songs is getting attention and positive feedback from audiences spanning at least three generations. The music is alive, the band is alive, and fans are coming to the shows and will buy (in lesser numbers) the new album.

Put into the context of my teenage years, and Brian's teenage years, this is mindblowing to consider. Add Beatles, Stones, VU, Doors, etc into the mix and it's still 50 year old music that remains vibrant across three generations of fans - numbering in the millions.

I think the longevity rules the day with a lot of this. Lesser music, lesser artists do not age that well and have not in the past, for specific reasons. If we're actively discussing a forthcoming album by a group of men in their 70's who are performing concerts featuring 50 year old music, that in itself makes an incredible story to tell. The fact that some of the new music is compelling, and some not-so...decorations on the icing on the multi-layered cake.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

I think Jon's more worried about those fans who only came to the Beach Boys because of Pet Sounds and Smile and have no room to consider an album like, say, MIU as something worth listening to.  

Jeff Manson is right. M.I.U. is a superior listening experience to Pet Sounds and Smile.

1) It doesn't make me all emotional inside like Pet Sounds (unless you count hunger as an emotion...all that talk of croissants in Belles of Paris gets me going

2) It has simple boy/girl/tomboy/Hawaiian/France vacation lyrics that I can comprehend, not that artsy fartsy Van Dyke Parks crap.

Some of us are red-blooded Americans who like football and women. We like songs that make us feel good and that we can tap our foot to all the way through. Try doing that with "Do You Like Worms". I sprained my ankle one time trying to keep up with it.

If Jon Hunt says the album is good he's probably right. He tells me to jump, I say "how high?" He tells me to tape dynamite to my chest and run into a Ke$ha concert, I'm gonna do that too. He's my Randall Flagg, except he's gonna win and Mother Abigail and her pack of loons are going to self-destruct before they make it to Boulder. Hallelujah! Holy sh*t!

[Ziggy Stardust]

what the hell did i just read.

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

If you are not going to bother properly capitalizing sentences, you can probably leave the period at the end off, as well.

You are one unserviceable son-of-a-bitch.

[runnersdialzero]

I can't say I'm terribly concerned with the opinion on this album of folks who see little merit in this band (or Brian Wilson solo project, as they like to think of them) aside from Pet Sounds, which was kind of a fluke and Brian was just ripping off the Beatles anyway and then he went insane and stayed in bed for 30 years while Mike Love (aka Satan) released "Kokomo".

[Old Rake]

I can't say I'm terribly concerned with the opinion on this album of folks who see little merit in this band (or Brian Wilson solo project, as they like to think of them) aside from Pet Sounds, which was kind of a fluke and Brian was just ripping off the Beatles anyway and then he went insane and stayed in bed for 30 years while Mike Love (aka Satan) released "Kokomo".

This is the most awesome summary of none of the reviews thus far posted!

[runnersdialzero]

I can't say I'm terribly concerned with the opinion on this album of folks who see little merit in this band (or Brian Wilson solo project, as they like to think of them) aside from Pet Sounds, which was kind of a fluke and Brian was just ripping off the Beatles anyway and then he went insane and stayed in bed for 30 years while Mike Love (aka Satan) released "Kokomo".

This is the most awesome summary of none of the reviews thus far posted!

'twasn't a review summary you don't understand me AT ALL!!!!

[Andy B]

Using autotune as an effect; is this the digital version of reverb and echo in world of today's music making?

no, digital reverb and digital echo are the digital versions of reverb and echo.

Because only audio effects developed by the mid-60s (or their approximations) are legitimate, of course.

Autotune, in contemporary pop records, is indeed much like reverb in the 60s.

I mean, I could see something like double-tracking being compared, but reverb and echo are still widely used (really rare to find a pop hit without one or the other, or both), so the initial analogy doesn't make sense.

Audible pitch correction sounds worse than singing off-key in my (and many others') opinion.  The thing is they are double-tracking, using reverb and echo (and God knows what else) ... AND overusing pitch correction.  No one is talking about which effects are 'legitimate' ... anything goes in music and production.  But people are entitled to express their opinion when they feel something sounds bad.

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

Yeah i guess the problem again lies with expectations, both ours as listeners and of the band themselves. Thing is, if there is one thing the whole world can agree upon is that the Beach Boys are kings of harmony. Maybe even Gods. Their super tight fearless vocal blend is their weapon of mass destruction. It was damn near close to perfect in the days of 4 track recording, then it became a wonder to behold with the advent of multi tracking turning their 4 or 5 parts into a massive mulitlayered wall of vocal splendour.

Problem is now, they can't get anywhere close to that without a little help. There are 2 options -1) spend hour after hour trying to get a good part down, then repeat many times for the different layers, or 2) get a bit of technological help. Problem with option 1 is that they are now 70 year men whose voices (maybe with the exception of Al and Bruce) are completely shot, and the stamina required to stand up to vocal mike for hour after hour is somewhat lacking. As much as they would probably want to sing in perfect harmony on their own, they simply cannot anymore. Nothing to be ashamed of.

However that doesn't stop us as listeners expecting the same old perfection. So they need a bit of help. They use pitch correction, they use auto tune, and maybe just maybe a lot of this effect has to be applied to get suitable results. It does sound a bit weird and we all now know that they haven't got the vocal chops they once did, but it gives us a listenable record without killing anyone. A win win situation if ever there was one,

[runnersdialzero]

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

Trufax ^_^ People will look back at autotune and laugh or cringe, just as they do with the booming synth drums of the 80s.

[EgoHanger1966]

Using autotune as an effect; is this the digital version of reverb and echo in world of today's music making?

no, digital reverb and digital echo are the digital versions of reverb and echo.

Because only audio effects developed by the mid-60s (or their approximations) are legitimate, of course.

Autotune, in contemporary pop records, is indeed much like reverb in the 60s.

I mean, I could see something like double-tracking being compared, but reverb and echo are still widely used (really rare to find a pop hit without one or the other, or both), so the initial analogy doesn't make sense.

Audible pitch correction sounds worse than singing off-key in my (and many others') opinion.  The thing is they are double-tracking, using reverb and echo (and God knows what else) ... AND overusing pitch correction.  No one is talking about which effects are 'legitimate' ... anything goes in music and production.  But people are entitled to express their opinion when they feel something sounds bad.

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

Yeah i guess the problem again lies with expectations, both ours as listeners and of the band themselves. Thing is, if there is one thing the whole world can agree upon is that the Beach Boys are kings of harmony. Maybe even Gods. Their super tight fearless vocal blend is their weapon of mass destruction. It was damn near close to perfect in the days of 4 track recording, then it became a wonder to behold with the advent of multi tracking turning their 4 or 5 parts into a massive mulitlayered wall of vocal splendour.

Problem is now, they can't get anywhere close to that without a little help. There are 2 options -1) spend hour after hour trying to get a good part down, then repeat many times for the different layers, or 2) get a bit of technological help. Problem with option 1 is that they are now 70 year men whose voices (maybe with the exception of Al and Bruce) are completely shot, and the stamina required to stand up to vocal mike for hour after hour is somewhat lacking. As much as they would probably want to sing in perfect harmony on their own, they simply cannot anymore. Nothing to be ashamed of.

However that doesn't stop us as listeners expecting the same old perfection. So they need a bit of help. They use pitch correction, they use auto tune, and maybe just maybe a lot of this effect has to be applied to get suitable results. It does sound a bit weird and we all now know that they haven't got the vocal chops they once did, but it gives us a listenable record without killing anyone. A win win situation if ever there was one,

When I saw them live, I heard the huge, "wall of sound" vocals that the Beach Boys are known for. That was because they had help, and it wasn't autotune/pitch correction.
They could have had Darian, Scott et. all help fill out the harmonies on the record.
We'd all be bitching still probably, but it might have sounded more natural.
Of course, would you rather have voices on the record that aren't the BBs, or would you rather have the vocals pitch corrected and autotuned within an inch of their life?
Valid discussion I think - but it's moot - the album is already made and we got the latter.

[Andy B]

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

Trufax ^_^ People will look back at autotune and laugh or cringe, just as they do with the booming synth drums of the 80s.

Or as people do with backwards guitar solos, or slapback echo, or rythmn king drum machines, or phasing.........

[DonnyL]

This idea that, "well, that's just the effect of the day" is a cop-out.  The Beach Boys have always been forward-thinking and innovative with their recordings.  Auto-tune is already totally out of date as an effect.

Trufax ^_^ People will look back at autotune and laugh or cringe, just as they do with the booming synth drums of the 80s.

Or as people do with backwards guitar solos, or slapback echo, or rythmn king drum machines, or phasing.........

The fact of the matter is the standards for record production that were developed in the '60s hold up better over time because they are generally natural and tasteful due to the limitations of the technology.

Necessity is the mother of invention, and when you are required to get creative, the results are ... more creative-sounding. and more exciting to listen to.

[DonnyL]

Valid discussion I think - but it's moot - the album is already made and we got the latter.

for the record, I've been talking about a future record ... the next one, not this one.

If Brian and the group came up with a ragged album that was a cross between Love You, Friends, and Summer Days (i.e. the Paley Sessions), would Capitol reject it? They'd have an automatic press angle ('Beach Boys baffle listeners with critically acclaimed 50th Anniversary follow up') and more sales from people who actually buy new music (i.e., younger people).

I'm just saying I BELIEVE I BELIEVE I BELIEVE Brian and the Beach Boys have one more GREAT album -- on par with their best stuff -- in them. And TWGMTR is not it.

[Jeff Mason]

It feels like the responses are less about what I actually wrote and more about trying to address things that are already accepted knowledge. Of course this band out of any others has the artistic versus the commercial issue raging constantly no matter what they do or release. I do think listeners and fans usually find what they like or respond to and that gut reaction or connection is more of an issue than any explanations or backstories attached to the music, no matter how good or bad it may be.

To my McCartney reference: Did we go around telling people who liked Sgt. Pepper and the White Album similar things when his latest album of love ballads and songs came out? Maybe we did and I missed it, but I don't think trying to ease a listener into something is as good as just letting the music play, and if someone likes it or connects with it after hearing it, what difference does it make where it came from? Or how the artist has a corny versus hip side, or a rocker versus balladeer side, or a jazzer versus country side, or whatever else. The music really shouldn't have an asterisk next to it, no matter who the artist is.

All this may just play out where McCartney's Ram is now being deluxe re-released akin to The Smile Sessions, and we'll have the ability to see the experimental post-Beatles garage-rocker McCartney in contrast to his other musical incarnations of recent years. Do we place the asterisk on the Ram box set and say "This is the same guy that did Sgt Pepper" or "This is the same guy who did the album of sappy love songs a year ago"?  

Artists from the 60's still making music today exist in a much larger (and more inclusive) stylistic tent than even Perry Como, Sinatra, et al. Stylistically the tent is probably as big as it will ever be even for the next few generations of music fans, so the music becomes the ultimate basis for someone's opinion of it.

Craig, you are aware that McCartney is usually the least cool of the Beatles to like, and there's a whole slew of fans who think McCartney is now and always was pap?  And that those fans think that Sgt. Pepper is overrated and slag on all of McCartney's work on it?  And that even in 1968 there were nervous voices about much of McCartney's work on the White Album, to the point of his own bandmates questioning McCartney's taste?  You better believe there has been second-guessing the coolness factor of some Beatles music and most of McCartney's solo career as a purveyor of lightweight uncool music.  You are actually more making our case by using him as an example.  When I'm 64 is about as "hip" as an old-time pop song pre-rock era, if you want to get into "hipness", and stuff like Obla-di-Obla-da was getting slagged at the time of release (heck, George even slipped in a derogatory comment on the same fricking album!).

So to return to your point, in 1978 I guarantee you that fans were making apologies for how wussy London Town sounded to them and were trying to ease their friends into listening to it. It's not wussy or bad, not to an open-minded listener anyway (I really like it), but to a fan of rock in the purist sense, songs like I'm Carrying were cringeworthy.  People have been apologizing for new McCartney albums for years because of how uncool they are.  Jon could have been reviewing London Town or Pipes of Peace for all we know, so much of his points can apply towards McCartney.

[Shady]

Pretty interesting article here

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/24/the-beach-boys-are-making-radio-waves/

[EgoHanger1966]

Pretty interesting article here

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/24/the-beach-boys-are-making-radio-waves/

Thanks for posting that. For all of you wondering about the suite, your answer is there. The first half of the intended full suite is incomplete. Most of the second half is on the new album, sans a track called "I'd Go Anywhere", which is incomplete too.

[Aegir]

I think that article answers all the uncertainties I've been having about exactly how this all came about.

[Wirestone]

Pretty interesting article here

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/24/the-beach-boys-are-making-radio-waves/

Thanks for posting that. For all of you wondering about the suite, your answer is there. The first half of the intended full suite is incomplete. Most of the second half is on the new album, sans a track called "I'd Go Anywhere", which is incomplete too.

Fascinating. It's pretty clear that the full suite was never the same thing as this album, though. Wouldn't it be crazy if Brian actually finishes it and releases it as a solo album, though?

And as some folks here suspected, That's Why God Made the Radio originated as a BW saying. Of course.

[southbay]

Pretty interesting article here

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/24/the-beach-boys-are-making-radio-waves/

Interesting article, thanks.  That answers alot of the questions we have been wondering about...

[Ziggy Stardust]

Pretty interesting article here

http://www.vcstar.com/news/2012/may/24/the-beach-boys-are-making-radio-waves/

Thanks for posting that. For all of you wondering about the suite, your answer is there. The first half of the intended full suite is incomplete. Most of the second half is on the new album, sans a track called "I'd Go Anywhere", which is incomplete too.

i'm confused.

[Jim V.]

And "Summer's Gone" was supposed to be the career-ender. Wow. My mind is definitely in a different place now, concerning Brian's role in the album. This really truly is Brian dominating an album his way for the first time since Love You. I'm excited for it. And I really get the vibe now that this isn't even close to the end for The Beach Boys. I get the vibe that Brian feels right being part of this band again, and that in his heart, he wants to write for his, Mike, Al, and Bruce's voices.