Your SMiLE mix...for the fun of it

[guitarfool2002]

I just also want to throw a reminder in here about these acetates, and the great mysteries of the Durrie Parks discs and everything else like the Holy Grail of Smile...

If an acetate were made, and if that were the "keeper" version, edit, mix, sequence, etc, we'd have more than an acetate recording of it. These acetates were one-offs to take home and evaluate, after the ears and creative thinking process got a break from a studio session.

In terms of getting closer to a "finished" or "definitive" Smile, regarding order or sequencing or anything else, they don't necessarily prove anything except what had been tried at any given session on any given day during the process of making the album. The order was in constant flux in some cases, meaning there was no definitive answer.

I'd argue that if something was in fact "a keeper" that worked and was to be used for a definite purpose, it would exist on tape as well. All we're hearing on acetates is what was, not what would have been. Are they valuable and interesting? YES! But do they tell more than what was going on the day they were cut? Most likely not. If they did, we'd have a clean copy on tape.

[Cam Mott]

My understanding is the original box for the first H&V Part 2 #57045 recordings of January 5 1967 is labeled as "Heroes And Villains Side Two".  Is that not right?

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

I just also want to throw a reminder in here about these acetates, and the great mysteries of the Durrie Parks discs and everything else like the Holy Grail of Smile...

If an acetate were made, and if that were the "keeper" version, edit, mix, sequence, etc, we'd have more than an acetate recording of it. These acetates were one-offs to take home and evaluate, after the ears and creative thinking process got a break from a studio session.

In terms of getting closer to a "finished" or "definitive" Smile, regarding order or sequencing or anything else, they don't necessarily prove anything except what had been tried at any given session on any given day during the process of making the album. The order was in constant flux in some cases, meaning there was no definitive answer.

I'd argue that if something was in fact "a keeper" that worked and was to be used for a definite purpose, it would exist on tape as well. All we're hearing on acetates is what was, not what would have been. Are they valuable and interesting? YES! But do they tell more than what was going on the day they were cut? Most likely not. If they did, we'd have a clean copy on tape.

Yes and no. Brian is supposed to have wiped a lot of vocal tapes he deemed no longer necessary. Not just to scrapped songs, but old classics too. An acetate is almost certainly our best chance to hear what Look really couldve been. What other vocals--or at least REAL (not humble harv) vocals for the IIGS session. These would provide our only real clues to what those songs wouldve been.

Its essential to have every acetate we can for the sole reason that many of the old tapes are missing and have never been booted or backed up. They are the only posterity we have--and theres no way of knowing whether they would have been used or expanded upon had the album bee finished. These latest Durrie Parks acetates are said to have a recording of the Great Shape vocals worked into H&V--with Heroes and Villains instrumentation. This would provide the clearest vintage version of those vocals (dig that alliteration) we know to exist, as well as another clue into the evolution of H&V and IIGS. The new CIFOTM chorus is near-universally regarded as better than the one we knew of before and we only found it through an acetate. Again, our understanding of that track, the possibilities of it and the evolution of it, were greatly enhanced with the discovery of this acetate.

Considering SMiLE was in a near constant state of flux, not just as a whole but each individual song, having as many snapshots of time as possible is incredibly valuable for fanmixers as well as historical posterity. Everyone latches unto some bits of evidence that sounds right to them (including me) and then utilizes the material available to make the best mix they can. Every new recording helps immensely with that.  

[Cam Mott]

RE. "H&V Part 2" #57045: I'm not going to argue with anyone's second guessing of Brian but if you accept a 2 sided H&V single, as per Vosse and Britz, how much more evidence do we need that H&V Part 2 #57045 "Side 2" was for that side 2 of H&V than a new master number with a separate H&V title of it's own marked as "Side 2" ?  It was marked as "Side 2" right? Is my memory playing tricks on me?

What was the master number for the side 2 if not #57045?

GV may have had multiple master numbers but they were all for the same title and no one has suggested that GV was to be a 2 sided single. #57020 was for the title H&V and #57045 was for the title H&V Part 2. So that and #57045 is marked as for a Side 2 are differences with GV.  

People heard this 2 sided version back in the day as I understand it. Someone on this board has heard it I believe. But no one seems to have a description. Bruce has claimed he has a copy of the recording, right? Unless it really is in a time capsule in a cornerstone in Hawaii or whatever, I wonder why it wasn't in TSS?

No one has specifically said they heard the two sided single, they have said Brian planned and was recording a two sided single.  Chuck Britz said both sides were completed and mixed, which means he must have heard both sides if he was involved in mixing Part 2 but he never described them.  From the tape evidence it appears no second side mix was in fact completed but if you listen to the test mixes on TSS a there is a mix of the "Part 2, revised"sections with the Animals/Swedish Frog section edited out.  Perhaps that's what Britz is referring to, but it's not a finished mix.  And if you are continuing to dogmatically assert that the master numbers means something, well those were recorded under the 020 "A side" number so that rules it out for the Bside according to your criteria.

The ONLY tape marked side 2 on the box is the instrumental version of what became the Heroes single chorus, and that was also marked as "Heroes Bridge with low spooky strings and percussion."  

So people heard it.

Yes those were Part 2 of #57020, which shows he didn't have a separate master number just for Part 2s of 020 as he recorded several Part 2s for 020 under their own master number 57020.  

I assume Britz and Vosse mean there was a two sided H&V and viola "H&V Part 2" #57045 was logged, as I understand it, as "Heroes And Villains Side Two" on January 5 1967 followed by additional recordings for that master.  Seems pretty straight forward as SMiLE goes.  What is under 57045 as far as we know (I think) are new recordings/arrangements of samples of album tracks; they also were or had been a considered/active/discarded section of H&V 57020 but as a different recording/arrangement.  What am I missing?

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

RE. "H&V Part 2" #57045: I'm not going to argue with anyone's second guessing of Brian but if you accept a 2 sided H&V single, as per Vosse and Britz, how much more evidence do we need that H&V Part 2 #57045 "Side 2" was for that side 2 of H&V than a new master number with a separate H&V title of it's own marked as "Side 2" ?  It was marked as "Side 2" right? Is my memory playing tricks on me?

What was the master number for the side 2 if not #57045?

GV may have had multiple master numbers but they were all for the same title and no one has suggested that GV was to be a 2 sided single. #57020 was for the title H&V and #57045 was for the title H&V Part 2. So that and #57045 is marked as for a Side 2 are differences with GV.  

People heard this 2 sided version back in the day as I understand it. Someone on this board has heard it I believe. But no one seems to have a description. Bruce has claimed he has a copy of the recording, right? Unless it really is in a time capsule in a cornerstone in Hawaii or whatever, I wonder why it wasn't in TSS?

No one has specifically said they heard the two sided single, they have said Brian planned and was recording a two sided single.  Chuck Britz said both sides were completed and mixed, which means he must have heard both sides if he was involved in mixing Part 2 but he never described them.  From the tape evidence it appears no second side mix was in fact completed but if you listen to the test mixes on TSS a there is a mix of the "Part 2, revised"sections with the Animals/Swedish Frog section edited out.  Perhaps that's what Britz is referring to, but it's not a finished mix.  And if you are continuing to dogmatically assert that the master numbers means something, well those were recorded under the 020 "A side" number so that rules it out for the Bside according to your criteria.

The ONLY tape marked side 2 on the box is the instrumental version of what became the Heroes single chorus, and that was also marked as "Heroes Bridge with low spooky strings and percussion."  

So people heard it.

Yes those were Part 2 of #57020, which shows he didn't have a separate master number just for Part 2s of 020 as he recorded several Part 2s for 020 under their own master number 57020.  

I assume Britz and Vosse mean there was a two sided H&V and viola "H&V Part 2" #57045 was logged, as I understand it, as "Heroes And Villains Side Two" on January 5 1967 followed by additional recordings for that master.  Seems pretty straight forward as SMiLE goes.  What is under 57045 as far as we know (I think) are new recordings/arrangements of samples of album tracks; they also were or had been a considered/active/discarded section of H&V 57020 but as a different recording/arrangement.  What am I missing?

The picture that was posted which seems to show that thats not the case. Again Im mostly holding back judgement on this because I myself am not well versed in master numbers and am not really invested in the single

[buddhahat]

My speculation? Barnyard wasn't super important. It was the fade to Heroes and then a little later, it wasn't. Personally I think most of the other candidates for Heroes' fade work better and make more sense. The stolen OMP fade is probably the best, but if you want to keep that in its original track, there's a dozen others you can make from all the various sections.

The Harv demo is important because it gives us a snapshot of an earlier Heroes and Villains - one that contained both GS and Barnyard. There are some quotes that suggest that H&V lost something the more Brian tinkered with it and I'm always curious about that - what was the initial character of the song?

A H&V that contains Barnyard and GS (as per the Harv demo) has a stronger sense of narrative imo and a recurring single protagonist throughout.

At a guess (a big guess but please indulge me) the overall lyrical content of Heroes at the point of the demo might have been something like the following. I've highlighted all the points where the central male character is present:

I've been in this town so long that back in the city
I've been taken for lost and gone
And unknown for a long, long time

(I) Fell in love years ago
With an innocent girl
From the Spanish and Indian home
Of the heroes and villains

Once at night Catillian squared the fight
And she was right in the rain of the bullets
That eventually brought her down
But she's still dancing in the night
Unafraid of what a dude'll do in a town
Full of heroes and villains

My children were raised
You know they suddenly rise
They started slow long ago
Head to toe healthy, weathy and wise

At three score and five
I'm very much alive
I've still got the jive
to survive with the Heroes and Villains

Freshened air around my head
Mornings tumble out of bed
Eggs and grits and lickety-split, look at me jump
I'm in the great shape of the open country

Out in the barnyard
The chickens do their number
Out in the barnyard
The cook is chopping lumber

Jump in the pigpen
Next time I'll take my shoes off
Hit the dirt, do two and a half
Next time I'll leave my hat on

So it's a guy that moved from the city long ago, out into the countryside/a wild west town maybe? He's 65 now and looking back on his life - a love lost, three children which have grown. Then we're very much in the present (maybe via the tape explosion), he's tumbling out of bed out into the fresh air of his barnyard and surveying all the animals etc. Admittedly the narrative tails of a bit around the barnyard section, but if more lyrics were to follow, then that's not a problem.

The more I consider this the more I think the "We're still working" line in the demo refers to VDP and Brian's attempts to create an ending to the narrative - either with further lyrics to Barnyard (if that's the fade), or in creating another extra section after barnyard that would be the conclusion of the song.

They would go on to create the 'Sunny Down Snuff" section which fulfils that purpose.

I've run away a bit there and made lots of fanciful leaps of logic! I do stand by my point though that a Heroes that includes GS and Barnyard has a clearer sense of narrative, less abstract than the final release.

Can we all just agree tho that the fact that we can take all these little sections and argue whether they're in Heroes/IIGS/OMP is significant? And that Brian going back and forth himself, as well as back and forth on CE/Worms and IIGS/Veggies too, is even more significant? You don't hear about this kind of jumbling of Heroes into Wonderful, Worms into Surfs Up or OMP in Wind Chimes for example. It's always between the songs we typically associate with Americana. I take this to be extremely compelling evidence those songs would go together on a side since they're all part of the same train of thought, and their individual pieces interchangeable. Furthermore, since its pretty clear the Americana idea was more VDP's thing, I wonder if this correlation means anything? If he was more prone to writing in snippets or rather, he had a lot of little ideas of vignettes of America he wanted to express but not so much full songs?

I think the two suite idea is attractive and I sometimes lean towards it when I group the songs. However, it just seems a bit too clean. Your argument that American songs are only mixed with Americana songs and so on just doesn't hold up - Wonderful ends up with the Heroes/bicycle rider major key variation in its final Smiley incarnation so I don't think Brian was so precious as to only rearrange sections of songs within certain suites.

I'd love to believe that the american and life suite songs always existed as separates but I'm not 100% convinced. I think Brian & VDP got in that sandbox and just went where inspiration took them. There were certainly separate themes of Americana and the Wordsworth poem maybe inspiring some cycle of life songs but I doubt they decided at that point that they would form separate sides of the album. I really think they were just going where the muse took them. Certainly, for Brian, if he felt a section would sound cool in another song I can't imagine him being bound by the divisions of suites and a heroes section ending up in Wonderful bears that out.

But then somebody mentioned a Darian quote that said those two suites were vintage. Are we sure about that? What's the quote? I only remember him saying they had two clear suites and they created a third (the elements). I get the sense that the music lent itself very obviously to two suites and anything that didn't fit neatly ended up in a catch all Elements suite.

[Bicyclerider]

My understanding is the original box for the first H&V Part 2 #57045 recordings of January 5 1967 is labeled as "Heroes And Villains Side Two".  Is that not right?

No that's not right.  The tape box for the eventual chorus of the single is the only thing labelled "Heroes and Villains Side Two" and it also had the notation "Heroes Bridge with spooky low strings and percussion."

[Bicyclerider]

Some people might have missed this because I mistakenly "buried" it in a quotebox:

Yes the idea of a sampler B side just doesn't work.  And the two master numbers are a red herring - the recordings with the 045 number don't make any kind of coherent B-side, and the first session with that number, the Jan 5 session overdubbing lead vocals and fuzz bass on the Bicycle Rider section from Worms, was obviously intended for the A side as a replacement for Great Shape which had been pulled to its own track.  The vocal mixes on Unsurpased Masters with the 2 verses edited into the beginning of bicycle Rider (these are the verses with Brian on lead and Mike echoing/doubling on the last three words of each verse) demonstrate that.  So BR was to be Part 2 of the Aside replacing the previous Part Two, IIGS ( with a subsequently abandoned Part 3, the chimes "Intro" from December).  Also there's a test edit in circulation of the verse music hard edited into the Bicycle Rider music WITH the backing vocals of the Worms version before the lead was added on Jan 5.

So that means the new master number was being used for Part 2 of the A side, perhaps a new master number because Brian was planningg several parts to Part 2 and wanted to keep them distinct for ease in editing later.  Another reason why the master numbers are a red herring- the "Part 2" sections that we associate with a Bside or part 2 of an extended 7 minute single - Gee/aum diddy wadda heroes and villains/the fast dit dit dit heroes and villains with handclaps/"Animals"(Swedish Frog)/slow dum dum dum heroes and villains - were recorded under the 020 master number, which would be the Aside.  Even with Brian's deteriorating mental state, I find it hard to believe that he would consider 2 minutes plus of repetitive "the heroes the heroes the heroes and villains" chanting as a commercial Aside.  So in this case the 020 master is most likely for the Bside.  So I think the assignment of master number, initially starting with the new master number for Part 2 of the Aside, becomes somewhat random and not Indicative of Brian's intent.  And didn't Good Vibrations sections that ended up in the final single have different master numbers?  So there's precedent for that.

[Cam Mott]

My understanding is the original box for the first H&V Part 2 #57045 recordings of January 5 1967 is labeled as "Heroes And Villains Side Two".  Is that not right?

No that's not right.  The tape box for the eventual chorus of the single is the only thing labelled "Heroes and Villains Side Two" and it also had the notation "Heroes Bridge with spooky low strings and percussion."

Alan Boyd has said "HOWEVER, the original box for the "Heroes And Villains" theme that eventually became the chorus of the single logs that piece as "Heroes And Villains Side Two"." Is that not right than?

[Bicyclerider]

My understanding is the original box for the first H&V Part 2 #57045 recordings of January 5 1967 is labeled as "Heroes And Villains Side Two".  Is that not right?

No that's not right.  The tape box for the eventual chorus of the single is the only thing labelled "Heroes and Villains Side Two" and it also had the notation "Heroes Bridge with spooky low strings and percussion."

Alan Boyd has said "HOWEVER, the original box for the "Heroes And Villains" theme that eventually became the chorus of the single logs that piece as "Heroes And Villains Side Two"." Is that not right than?

Isn't that what I just said?  The Jan 5th Bicycle Rider overdub session was a Heroes session and was not marked "Heroes and Villains Side Two" as you asked, the single chorus session recorded Feb 27th was the one marked Side Two.

[soniclovenoize]

Also there's a test edit in circulation of the verse music hard edited into the Bicycle Rider music WITH the backing vocals of the Worms version before the lead was added on Jan 5.

Are you referring to the test edit that runs 1:59, that goes Verse / Bicycle Rider / Verse (instrumental)?

Note the H&V verse backing vocals of that one are from the overdubs done 6/13, so it couldn't have been from January, if that's what you are suggesting. 

[Bicyclerider]

There's a "test" edit (assuming it was a test and not for some other reason, like overdubbing onto a previous edit):

Verse instrumental/Verse with backing vocals/after the verse someone (Al?) sings "dit a dit do" i.e going into the a capella bit, but that ends/pause/Bicycle Rider (Worms) with backing vocals from Worms but without the lead from Jan 5th/clean edit into verse instrumental which cuts off into the second time around.

It's unclear if the pause means these are two different edits copied onto the same tape.  My point is the edit BR/verses likely predates the Jan 5th vocal/overdub session - otherwise why not include the vocals - and the Feb 27th remake of the BR theme had already been made and vocal overdubs were done 6/12-6/14, so why not use that edited into the verses, rather than BR?

So we have the edits from the verses into BR (from the vocal sessions on the Brian lead/Mike echo last three words tapes) AND we have an edit of BR into the verses (probably for the 3rd verse and/or a capella section). 

[soniclovenoize]

There's a "test" edit (assuming it was a test and not for some other reason, like overdubbing onto a previous edit):

Verse instrumental/Verse with backing vocals/after the verse someone (Al?) sings "dit a dit do" i.e going into the a capella bit, but that ends/pause/Bicycle Rider (Worms) with backing vocals from Worms but without the lead from Jan 5th/clean edit into verse instrumental which cuts off into the second time around.

It's unclear if the pause means these are two different edits copied onto the same tape.  My point is the edit BR/verses likely predates the Jan 5th vocal/overdub session - otherwise why not include the vocals - and the Feb 27th remake of the BR theme had already been made and vocal overdubs were done 6/12-6/14, so why not use that edited into the verses, rather than BR?

So we have the edits from the verses into BR (from the vocal sessions on the Brian lead/Mike echo last three words tapes) AND we have an edit of BR into the verses (probably for the 3rd verse and/or a capella section). 

Yep we're talking about the same "test edit".  I guess I interpret it as a June 67 edit since it featured all those recut backing vocals from then.  But I see your point: "Why use BR is they already had the chorus remade?"  And that's true.  Might have been an experiment to see if Brian felt the tone of the two segments matched. 

It is of interest that you can always hear a scrap of Bicycle Rider at the end of the June vocal tracking on the Verse.  But I've always felt that was just a tape remnant on the master (as in Brian was simply taping over that mix/master of Bicycle Rider) since there is a 'tape wow' and Bicycle Rider cuts in abruptly.  If that's the case, maybe that 'tape wow' and fragment of Bicycle Rider that followed on the masters inspired Brian to see what it sounded like if the two segments followed each other? 

[Bicyclerider]

But you also hear the BR fragment on the Jan/Feb Brian lead/Mike "echo" vocal as well, don't you?  maybe they reused the 4 or 8 track tape with the BR edit on it, wiped the original vocals and overdubbed them in June.

[soniclovenoize]

But you also hear the BR fragment on the Jan/Feb Brian lead/Mike "echo" vocal as well, don't you?  maybe they reused the 4 or 8 track tape with the BR edit on it, wiped the original vocals and overdubbed them in June.

Ah-ha!  There it is too!  Must have been the case.  We have no mixes or anything past that point.  Why?  Because there was nothing past that point.  But MAYBE that was what gave Brian the idea for the modulation to the Bicycle Rider chorus? 

[Bicyclerider]

Well the chorus just a minor key rewrite of the Bicycle Rider theme from Worms.  I figure that Brian realized the Worms section didn't work in that key, and rewrote it, intending it as a bridge between sections.

It's interesting how many times Brian recorded the BR theme for Heroes.  After the Jan 5th section didn't work, he records "Hold On" - a fast solo piano version, unknown date.

Feb 15 he records "piano theme" (so named in TSS) slated as "piano bit" - starting in a high register and then switching to a lower.

Feb 20 he remakes the piano theme slated "Part Two" with an endbit that was supposed to be sung a capella and which the Boys sing a snippet of - and which sounds to me suspiciously like the backing vocals to "Barbershop"/sunny down snuff - which ultimately follows the BR theme in the single.  Then he does a "Part 2 revised" solo piano with further piano explorations of the Bicycle Rider theme – one take includes an ominous piano roll (“is that villainous enough for you Brian” asks Mike) and the final take which has a second piano overdub providing bass counterpoint at the end.

Feb 27 - the harpsichord version that became the single chorus

the fact that Brian is working on two different "Part 2"'s and two different "Part 2 revised"'s on Feb 20th suggests to me that he was working on revising the A side (cantina - perhaps cantina was out as early as Feb 20th) at the same time as he was working on the Bside.  All with the 020 master number.

[soniclovenoize]

Yeah I read the above conversation but didn't chime in.  imo the Master numbers are, as previously stated, a red herring.  The Gee/Hold On/P2 revised sections--which seem to be the B-side of this single--were the same master #s as the previous H&V proper.  it wasn't till Brian thought to scrap the thing and try again from scratch that it changed.  It was a good idea though. 

I believe that the reason the by all accounts final Cantina mix was rejected was because Brian thought "This song has no real chorus!" and took it and transposed it from DYLW. 

[doinnothin]

.

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

My speculation? Barnyard wasn't super important. It was the fade to Heroes and then a little later, it wasn't. Personally I think most of the other candidates for Heroes' fade work better and make more sense. The stolen OMP fade is probably the best, but if you want to keep that in its original track, there's a dozen others you can make from all the various sections.

The Harv demo is important because it gives us a snapshot of an earlier Heroes and Villains - one that contained both GS and Barnyard. There are some quotes that suggest that H&V lost something the more Brian tinkered with it and I'm always curious about that - what was the initial character of the song?

A H&V that contains Barnyard and GS (as per the Harv demo) has a stronger sense of narrative imo and a recurring single protagonist throughout.

At a guess (a big guess but please indulge me) the overall lyrical content of Heroes at the point of the demo might have been something like the following. I've highlighted all the points where the central male character is present:

I've been in this town so long that back in the city
I've been taken for lost and gone
And unknown for a long, long time

(I) Fell in love years ago
With an innocent girl
From the Spanish and Indian home
Of the heroes and villains

Once at night Catillian squared the fight
And she was right in the rain of the bullets
That eventually brought her down
But she's still dancing in the night
Unafraid of what a dude'll do in a town
Full of heroes and villains

My children were raised
You know they suddenly rise
They started slow long ago
Head to toe healthy, weathy and wise

At three score and five
I'm very much alive
I've still got the jive
to survive with the Heroes and Villains

Freshened air around my head
Mornings tumble out of bed
Eggs and grits and lickety-split, look at me jump
I'm in the great shape of the open country

Out in the barnyard
The chickens do their number
Out in the barnyard
The cook is chopping lumber

Jump in the pigpen
Next time I'll take my shoes off
Hit the dirt, do two and a half
Next time I'll leave my hat on

So it's a guy that moved from the city long ago, out into the countryside/a wild west town maybe? He's 65 now and looking back on his life - a love lost, three children which have grown. Then we're very much in the present (maybe via the tape explosion), he's tumbling out of bed out into the fresh air of his barnyard and surveying all the animals etc. Admittedly the narrative tails of a bit around the barnyard section, but if more lyrics were to follow, then that's not a problem.

The more I consider this the more I think the "We're still working" line in the demo refers to VDP and Brian's attempts to create an ending to the narrative - either with further lyrics to Barnyard (if that's the fade), or in creating another extra section after barnyard that would be the conclusion of the song.

They would go on to create the 'Sunny Down Snuff" section which fulfils that purpose.

I've run away a bit there and made lots of fanciful leaps of logic! I do stand by my point though that a Heroes that includes GS and Barnyard has a clearer sense of narrative, less abstract than the final release.

Can we all just agree tho that the fact that we can take all these little sections and argue whether they're in Heroes/IIGS/OMP is significant? And that Brian going back and forth himself, as well as back and forth on CE/Worms and IIGS/Veggies too, is even more significant? You don't hear about this kind of jumbling of Heroes into Wonderful, Worms into Surfs Up or OMP in Wind Chimes for example. It's always between the songs we typically associate with Americana. I take this to be extremely compelling evidence those songs would go together on a side since they're all part of the same train of thought, and their individual pieces interchangeable. Furthermore, since its pretty clear the Americana idea was more VDP's thing, I wonder if this correlation means anything? If he was more prone to writing in snippets or rather, he had a lot of little ideas of vignettes of America he wanted to express but not so much full songs?

I think the two suite idea is attractive and I sometimes lean towards it when I group the songs. However, it just seems a bit too clean. Your argument that American songs are only mixed with Americana songs and so on just doesn't hold up - Wonderful ends up with the Heroes/bicycle rider major key variation in its final Smiley incarnation so I don't think Brian was so precious as to only rearrange sections of songs within certain suites.

I'd love to believe that the american and life suite songs always existed as separates but I'm not 100% convinced. I think Brian & VDP got in that sandbox and just went where inspiration took them. There were certainly separate themes of Americana and the Wordsworth poem maybe inspiring some cycle of life songs but I doubt they decided at that point that they would form separate sides of the album. I really think they were just going where the muse took them. Certainly, for Brian, if he felt a section would sound cool in another song I can't imagine him being bound by the divisions of suites and a heroes section ending up in Wonderful bears that out.

But then somebody mentioned a Darian quote that said those two suites were vintage. Are we sure about that? What's the quote? I only remember him saying they had two clear suites and they created a third (the elements). I get the sense that the music lent itself very obviously to two suites and anything that didn't fit neatly ended up in a catch all Elements suite.

Oh, I didnt mean to imply that Humble Harv wasnt important. It totally is--its the only GS and Barnyard vocals we have, and as you say, its an invaluable insight into how H&V developed. My argument was that Barnyard as in that snippet of music itself wasnt particularly important. Personally, I dont know the chronology of which lyrics were written when and whatever, but the song to me is about a man living in a rough and tumble town where he met the love of his life in a seedy cantina and lost her in a gunfight. He's got mixed feelings on the town and himself, but the silver lining is his children going from "often wise" to "wise." Similar to Surfs Up in a lot of ways, actually. GS and Barnyard just kinda dont fit. GS in place of Cantina seems more of a distraction than a relevant plot twist to me, as does Barnyard. Suddenly, out of nowhere, the guys on a farm when he was in a bustling dangerous Western town? I think Brian made the smart move reworking Heroes...he just didnt know when to stop!

Hmmm. Fair point on Wonderful. I will counter that that only happened with Smiley which was 6 months after all the reshuffling during SMiLE, when the Americana suite, many of the songs, and any structure the old album wouldve had was definitely long dead. But at the same time, I acknowledge Im being somewhat hypocritical saying that, because I also consider Smiley a more simplified SMiLE but still true to its spirit in a lot of ways. IDK. Theres no clear answer.

Thats definitely how they wrote, but its clear things developed and got more complex and entwined after the first few nights in the sandbox. I just hear the identical pianos/harpsichords and horns in WC/CIFOTM/SU/Wonderful and it just sounds right to me. Plus theres the interviews from Brian saying the original was a two movement cantata and when asked what he changed he replied "a third movement" implying there were already movements, just they added a new one to make up for the hole that is the dead "The Elements." The quote from Darian is that the second suite was his favorite part and "vintage Brian Wilson" or perhaps it was "pure Brian Wilson" something to that effect. By itself not very good evidence, but with everything else I consider it corroborating testimony that there existed 2 clear groupings of songs (and again, the obvious thematic similarities, the reshuffling of Americana and identical instrumentation in Life bears this out)

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

Yeah I read the above conversation but didn't chime in.  imo the Master numbers are, as previously stated, a red herring.  The Gee/Hold On/P2 revised sections--which seem to be the B-side of this single--were the same master #s as the previous H&V proper.  it wasn't till Brian thought to scrap the thing and try again from scratch that it changed.  It was a good idea though. 

I believe that the reason the by all accounts final Cantina mix was rejected was because Brian thought "This song has no real chorus!" and took it and transposed it from DYLW. 

Hmm...well, that seems to settle it, to me. The master numbers are a red herring. Thats a shame, because it wouldve been great to have a clear distinction of what to use for what. Personally, when mixing Heroes I usually tend to use: all the verses, obviously, including threescore and five and the slower reprise verse. Cantina overlaid with Swedish Frog. Western theme (i believe its called prelude to fade), that flutter horn, usually the tape explosion, sometimes mission pak if I feel like it, some kind of fade--either False Barnyard, the Intro as a fade, or something else from the sessions if Im feeling creative.

I did a second Heroes track for Aquarian and some of my older mixes (that I havent saved and dont really listen to anymore) and I always ended up using the three or four remaining chants (because they sound so repetitive and unnecessary if you use them in the "real" track) and sometimes the bicycle rider chorus (as a reprise of Worms at the end of the suite). Honestly, its nothing but speculation but I think Side Two would just be a dumping ground for what didnt make the cut for the single. I think early on Brian realized he was recording a LOT for this song and itd be a waste and a shame for so much to never see the light of day. That, and Im sure he thought it'd be "arty" and cool to do a two sided single (was such a thing even done before then?) hence a two-sided Heroes. I think it would've been structured something like: one of the chants/a tangential section (like All Day or something)/different chant/another tangent(like Gee or something)/different chant/one of the scrapped fades or instrumental sections to end it. Again, this is pure speculation. And then IIGS the track would be some mashup of GS, Do A Lot and Barnyard, similar to how Cabin Essence was created.

[Summertime Blooz]

Yeah I read the above conversation but didn't chime in.  imo the Master numbers are, as previously stated, a red herring.  The Gee/Hold On/P2 revised sections--which seem to be the B-side of this single--were the same master #s as the previous H&V proper.  it wasn't till Brian thought to scrap the thing and try again from scratch that it changed.  It was a good idea though. 

I believe that the reason the by all accounts final Cantina mix was rejected was because Brian thought "This song has no real chorus!" and took it and transposed it from DYLW. 

Hmm...well, that seems to settle it, to me. The master numbers are a red herring. Thats a shame, because it wouldve been great to have a clear distinction of what to use for what. Personally, when mixing Heroes I usually tend to use: all the verses, obviously, including threescore and five and the slower reprise verse. Cantina overlaid with Swedish Frog. Western theme (i believe its called prelude to fade), that flutter horn, usually the tape explosion, sometimes mission pak if I feel like it, some kind of fade--either False Barnyard, the Intro as a fade, or something else from the sessions if Im feeling creative.

I did a second Heroes track for Aquarian and some of my older mixes (that I havent saved and dont really listen to anymore) and I always ended up using the three or four remaining chants (because they sound so repetitive and unnecessary if you use them in the "real" track) and sometimes the bicycle rider chorus (as a reprise of Worms at the end of the suite). Honestly, its nothing but speculation but I think Side Two would just be a dumping ground for what didnt make the cut for the single. I think early on Brian realized he was recording a LOT for this song and itd be a waste and a shame for so much to never see the light of day. That, and Im sure he thought it'd be "arty" and cool to do a two sided single (was such a thing even done before then?) hence a two-sided Heroes. I think it would've been structured something like: one of the chants/a tangential section (like All Day or something)/different chant/another tangent(like Gee or something)/different chant/one of the scrapped fades or instrumental sections to end it. Again, this is pure speculation. And then IIGS the track would be some mashup of GS, Do A Lot and Barnyard, similar to how Cabin Essence was created.

Stevie Wonder had Fingertips Part 1 and Part 2 as a single in 1963. That actually went to #1 on the charts. I'm sure there must be others.

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

Yeah I read the above conversation but didn't chime in.  imo the Master numbers are, as previously stated, a red herring.  The Gee/Hold On/P2 revised sections--which seem to be the B-side of this single--were the same master #s as the previous H&V proper.  it wasn't till Brian thought to scrap the thing and try again from scratch that it changed.  It was a good idea though. 

I believe that the reason the by all accounts final Cantina mix was rejected was because Brian thought "This song has no real chorus!" and took it and transposed it from DYLW. 

Hmm...well, that seems to settle it, to me. The master numbers are a red herring. Thats a shame, because it wouldve been great to have a clear distinction of what to use for what. Personally, when mixing Heroes I usually tend to use: all the verses, obviously, including threescore and five and the slower reprise verse. Cantina overlaid with Swedish Frog. Western theme (i believe its called prelude to fade), that flutter horn, usually the tape explosion, sometimes mission pak if I feel like it, some kind of fade--either False Barnyard, the Intro as a fade, or something else from the sessions if Im feeling creative.

I did a second Heroes track for Aquarian and some of my older mixes (that I havent saved and dont really listen to anymore) and I always ended up using the three or four remaining chants (because they sound so repetitive and unnecessary if you use them in the "real" track) and sometimes the bicycle rider chorus (as a reprise of Worms at the end of the suite). Honestly, its nothing but speculation but I think Side Two would just be a dumping ground for what didnt make the cut for the single. I think early on Brian realized he was recording a LOT for this song and itd be a waste and a shame for so much to never see the light of day. That, and Im sure he thought it'd be "arty" and cool to do a two sided single (was such a thing even done before then?) hence a two-sided Heroes. I think it would've been structured something like: one of the chants/a tangential section (like All Day or something)/different chant/another tangent(like Gee or something)/different chant/one of the scrapped fades or instrumental sections to end it. Again, this is pure speculation. And then IIGS the track would be some mashup of GS, Do A Lot and Barnyard, similar to how Cabin Essence was created.

Stevie Wonder had Fingertips Part 1 and Part 2 as a single in 1963. That actually went to #1 on the charts. I'm sure there must be others.

I appreciate the answer.

While Im on that, anybody got scans or a link to Part 2 of the Anderle crawdaddy piece? Or if not, can you at least tell me if it actually talks about SMiLE or is just more general musings on Brian, Wild Honey and music in general?

[Bicyclerider]

Besides Fingertips, we have other R & B singles - Ray Charles' What'd I Say (1959) - covered live by the Beach Boys!, Isley Brothers Shout (1959), James Brown's Papa's Got a Brand New Bag (1965) and many subsequent Brown singles, and Like a Rollling Stone (1965) - dj promo copies only.

[The Cincinnati Kid]

Did anyone have an issue downloading his mix?  Chrome is blocking it, saying it may harm my computer.

Worked fine for me. Firefox, bro.

I must be doing something wrong because I still can't get it to play.  Would you mind telling me exactly what I need to do?   

[zaval80]

GV may have had multiple master numbers but they were all for the same title...

Some were logged as "Inspiration", strangely enough in the middle of the recording process. Yes there never was doubt that with GV, Brian worked on one title only; he just changed the structure of middle-to-finish half of the song, tinkered with instrumentation and tried out fancy ideas.