SMiLE Sessions box set!

[guitarfool2002]

Also there is this notion that Brian was a god at everything, playing, producing, mixing, mastering the works. I would say he was not a god behind the console and were often a victim of his own whims, lets turn help me rhonda ending up and down as a fun prank or lets turn down the background for a half verse on IJWMFTT. He was a good writer arranger and producer ill give him that but mixing...honestly...nahh..

I like the notion of freeing the music from the chains of mono and from the chain of 60´s console EQ...

I like that idea too. I prefer listening to the Pet Sounds stereo mixes over the best of the mono CD's, including the much-lauded DCC gold disc. I own the gold disc, have listened to it on everything from audiophile headphones to good 70's-era speakers and amps to normal receivers and Walkman-style 'phones and I just prefer the separation and the detail of the stereo mix. I think Mark Linett did a terrific job with that remix.

I do think Beach Boys fans and Smile fans in particular are some of the most knowledgeable fans out there, bar none, and as such their demands for a certain level of quality and respect are very high. From the casual fan to the die-hard collector, they know the original sounds and have a certain standard for any reissues. Add up all the reissues and collections of the past 20 years, and we've been treated pretty well, from a sonic perspective.

I'm also one to say the mono fetish gets old sometimes. Brian mixed in mono because that was all he could do - he had one good ear! And AM radio was only broadcast in mono! That was the industry standard. As soon as FM opened up stereo broadcasting for pop and rock music, only a small majority stuck with mono for aesthetic reasons. Or for the mono fetish, or simply because they wanted to. But is mono better?

Remember that Brian Wilson had a surgery to restore his hearing in the bad ear (it wasn't successful), and Carl Wilson in an interview revealed how exciting it would be for Brian to be able to hear stereo. So if the man wanted to stay in a mono world, why bother with the risk of a surgery?

I think some fans pull back on the various methods of remastering because it might remind them of colorizing a black-and-white film, a trend which has all but disappeared.

As far as Brian being a good mixer - refer to the accounts of him working at the board with Chuck Britz, and impressing fellow musicians and observers who happened to see him at work. Remember too that a large majority of his records up to 1967 could not have been given a final mix by Brian...a hands-on, working the board final mix...because only the indie studios like Western and independent engineers like Chuck Britz would allow Brian to touch the board. All the other final mixes were done by other engineers, then mastered by yet another engineer somewhere else. It's hard to fault Brian for a mix when he wasn't the one doing the actual hands-on mixing most of the time. Although the decisions to cut or not to cut something sloppy were ultimately his, and that's a production decision.

[Mikie]

You could, um, go to a record store, um, and detach it from the box, hide it under your T-shirt, and run away?

Yeah, I thought o' that.  But the board would be too long to fit under my shirt, so I'd have to shove half of it down my pants and it would look like I had a boner. That would be too embarassing, so I'll have to think of something else....

[Matt Bielewicz]

I'm with you, Smokey. Of course, there will always be those that say 'but the only version of Pet Sounds that BRIAN finished is the mono 1966 version, so that's the only one worth listening to'. For me, as long as you offer that up to keep those people happy, and make the new mixes available as alternatives at the same time, that's fine. The PS Box Set keeps that balance brilliantly. Then those who insist on the mono 1966 version can have it... and those who want what, to me, are mixes done with better equipment and higher production values, can have those too. Everybody's happy!

Trouble is, with SMiLE, apart from a few acetate test mixes, the Feb 67 cantina mix of H&V, and Good Vibrations, you can't do the same thing. You HAVE to mix most of the stuff from scratch, because it was never done by Brian back in 1967. So given that this is the case, what criteria do you adopt for a box set?

...and for me, the perfect answer is the one it looks as though the SMiLE Sessions producers have adopted. Fill one disc with remixed versions that fly in everything you can in the interests of making the songs as complete as possible. Mix up different takes as far as you can, fly in vocals from completely different versions as required, if it helps make the end result a bit more finished.

But THEN, on the remainder of the set, present ONLY what's on the tapes and acetates, unadulterated. No cutting around of stuff or flying in of extra material.

Of course, even that approach can't be completely 'pure', as you still have to mix those tapes, and that can reduce the presence of parts that some people consider indispensable. For example, I personally think that the clapping on the SOT boots of 'He Gives Speeches' is MUCH, MUCH too loud. If I were mixing that from scratch, I'd tone the clapping right down. But perhaps there's someone out there who likes the clapping that forward and 'present' in the mix. If that person gets the box set and finds the clapping on He Gives Speeches has been reduced in volume, they might claim that this new version is 'not the way He Gives Speeches should be'. And that's the problem. You can't please all of the people, all of the time...

But given that there is NO master tape marked 'SMiLE 1967' in the Beach Boys' vault, this stuff HAS to be mixed from scratch in order to be released. I think the approach being taken is the best possible compromise, but I'm sure there will still be tears before bedtime on November 1 from some people here... !

MattB

PS I always wonder about the people who think that Brian's SMiLE from 2004 sounded 'too clean and happy' as well, and that some of the 'spooky, dirty sound' had been sanitised away in the 2004 version. Is that simply because they'd been listening to muddy-sounding SMiLE boots on cassette for years, and couldn't take more hi-fi versions? The early booted versions of 'Do You Like Worms' sounded AWFUL to me... bass-boomy, distorted, muddy... but it seems some people have got used to hearing it like that. For me, hearing the sessions on SOT 17 was a revelation, because I realised the original tapes didn't actually sound like the crappy boots I'd heard of that song up 'til then. As you can probably tell, I think that the Brian Wilson band did a truly incredible job of replicating the sound of the original SMiLE arrangements in 2004. And yes, I *do* know that they used a Kurzweil for the harpischord. STILL, I think they did a brilliant job, and I'm not sure where this 'the real SMiLE is down and dirty, and BWPS is all over-polished, digital and shiny' idea came from....

[smokeythebear]

I am probably going to dangle from a tree for saying this but why all this extreme nostalgia nitpicking about smile cutting and mixing? Do mono tape splices bad EQ sound so great? I simply do not get it. I think the Pets Sounds new stereo mixes sounds one million times better than the original pet sounds mix that frankly sounds like a sloppy job, and i hope they go in and do the same for smile.

Getting as close to what Brian envisioned for smile seems to be the goal, but that was given the tools he had at the time and that was a limit of tracks that forced bouncing, scissors for cutting tape and a console not made for stereo.  I do not care much for recreating the tracks in mono only and with tape splices just for the sake of prosperity, if you just want to release it exactly as Brian had planned do one LP vinyl cut in mono, mixed Hoffman style and release it. Or perhaps you can listen to the boots through a single speaker.

But we do have other tools today that can get us closer to what Brian intended with the music such as protools, good EQ, and endless tracks. We can make the tracks sound brilliant with perfect cuts between bits, we can make them blend seamlessly. We have the ability to fly in vocals recorded later that's missing and it can be done with taste.

Brian did not intend to use scissors, bad EQ, Mono, tape bounces, different studios. He was limited in the tools he was given at the time and there is a major difference, it can be seen as charming and a part of the sound, me it just bugs to hear bad edits and knowing how good it could sound with todays technology.

A good anology would be Starwars and the rerelase of the movies, the tasteless stuff added was the CGI bar scene, but the good stuff they did was removing ugly matting on the ships, upgrading the picture quality and fixing small errors and bad cuts, i like bad matting as much as i like bad cutting in music. Was it GL´s intention to release Starwars with bad mating, bad puppetry and phony looking planets? no, but it was the only tools that were available to him at the time and that is why he waited with the other movies and revamped the first (Ill never forgive him for Jar Jar tough).

Also there is this notion that Brian was a god at everything, playing, producing, mixing, mastering the works. I would say he was not a god behind the console and were often a victim of his own whims, lets turn help me rhonda ending up and down as a fun prank or lets turn down the background for a half verse on IJWMFTT. He was a good writer arranger and producer ill give him that but mixing...honestly...nahh..

I like the notion of freeing the music from the chains of mono and from the chain of 60´s console EQ...

There i said it, let me hang

Nice post, but about a year to late. I don't see Disc 1 being in mono just because that is the way Brian would have released it in 1967. Mono is really the common denominator of all the sources used to prepare it for high fidelity presentation. The rest of the set has plenty of stereo for you to enjoy.

Agree, but it seems to be the preference of most hardcore people and i do not think i will ever get it. Sure the mono has more balls in the base but hey thats about it. Listened to the new Heroes mix and it was like...well this is not very consistent mix, sure there is clarity but still the volume difference between sections are all over the place and the background track is a muddle.  And the thing is they have the backing track of Heroes in the can, they have most of the vocals, i guess i was just expecting more. Perhaps we will get a whole new stereo mix of heroes in the box....

[The Heartical Don]

You could, um, go to a record store, um, and detach it from the box, hide it under your T-shirt, and run away?

Yeah, I thought o' that.  But the board would be too long to fit under my shirt, so I'd have to shove half of it down my pants and it would look like I had a boner. That would be too embarassing, so I'll have to think of something else....

  that made me laugh...

[Jason]

I do think that even the great sound quality on the SOTs don't disguise the ominous sounds on those tapes. There was a mood to that music. Fidelity has nothing to do with it.

[Mikie]

I think some fans pull back on the various methods of remastering because it might remind them of colorizing a black-and-white film.

And this is exactly what I was thinking about when I heard those two 'spoiler' tracks yesterday for the first time (Good Vibrations and Heroes & Villains). It's one thing to improve the sonic quality to today's standards, but the additional edits thrown in............it just seems to me there's a line there. I really do like the edits, I've heard them many times before in alternate takes, but was that really what Brian originally envisioned for the songs?

I dunno. Damn if you do - damned if you don't. I used the word "sacrilege" yesterday - which may have been too harsh.

[guitarfool2002]

The Monkees "Headquarters" is one of my favorite albums, and it's a great example of a group of fans raving about the mono mix, how the only proper way to hear the album is the mono mix. Well, I think that is a load of crap! Seriously though, it's an album I've listened to many times, and there are certain musical parts and instrumental sections which are all but buried in mono, and I think losing those parts brings the song down a notch. I compare it to the barrelhouse-saloon piano that was buried for decades on "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times", then when the stereo separation on the remix brought it out, people were amazed by that part. It adds so much to that song - and the limitations of mono mixing buried it for years.

I will say that hearing mid-60's songs as they were broadcast on AM radio - which is essentially why they were mixed a certain way, EQ'ed a certain way, and mastered a certain way to sound good over AM - can be a revelation. Songs heard in the format they were mixed and mastered to sound best come alive. A remaster, remix, or digital reissue cannot touch the impact of hearing those originals on AM broadcasts.

Do we then sell some new converters or (horrors...) an iPhone app to simulate an AM radio broadcast so these mono mixes are heard as they were meant to be heard?

[drbeachboy]

I think some fans pull back on the various methods of remastering because it might remind them of colorizing a black-and-white film.

And this is exactly what I was thinking about when I heard those two 'spoiler' tracks yesterday for the first time (Good Vibrations and Heroes & Villains). It's one thing to improve the sonic quality to today's standards, but the additional edits thrown in............it just seems to me there's a line there. I really do like the edits, I've heard them many times before in alternate takes, but was that really what Brian intended for the original songs?

I dunno. Damn if you do - damned if you don't. I used the word "sacrilege" yesterday - which may have been too harsh.

By the time of Smile and surely after, it was not unusual for the album version of a song to different than the 45 version. Had Smile been released after Wild Honey, and both H&V and GV being on Smiley Smile, I think Brian probably would have done something like what has been done here on TSS. We have the originals in our collection 10X over, so it is nice to have something different, but not radically so, in this set.

[Mike's Beard]

Screw the music. I've heard most of SMiLE already. I want the surfboard!

You could, um, go to a record store, um, and detach it from the box, hide it under your T-shirt, and run away?

I'm going to stick one down the front of my pants. If anyone asks I'll just say I'm really happy that Smile is getting a release.

[ghost]

let's clear things up alright. this is your host quentin tarantino alright. smile had a 'mood' as some have said here not due to the fidelity of the recordings we've heard although that added to it certainly in some cases but due to the context in which the music was conceived and performed, within a certain epoch of mental time, a personal era over a few months. it's not 2004 it's 1966. the musicians weren't playing music that had a 40 year myth around it, they were playing far out new tracks from Brian loving it but spontaneously. not as geeks having heard the same thing 70,000 times, just a few. think about that. we all know the smile songs better than the musicians that played on them. unless they have continuously reminded their memory of the events through the years there;s no way it would stand out as anything but a blur. i've recorded music in the past in my home with people and i can't recall many specific details at all. just individual discontinuous memories of things. so the music was new, real, living, fresh, breathing. in 2004 it was like a 60+ year old trying to out run his 23 year old record.

[Shady]

Awesome to see SMiLE back at 8 on the amazon charts..

I had a dream Rolling Stone gave SMiLE the cover in November, this better happen

[Mikie]

By the time of Smile and surely after, it was not unusual for the album version of a song to different than the 45 version. Had Smile been released after Wild Honey, and both H&V and GV being on Smiley Smile, I think Brian probably would have done something like what has been done here on TSS. We have the originals in our collection 10X over, so it is nice to have something different, but not radically so, in this set.

Very true.  Brian did so much to Heroes & Villains - he kept tinkering with it over and over and I'm not even sure he was completely satisfied with the final product. Same with Good Vibrations for that matter.

Different and new are good.

[smokeythebear]

I agree with what most of you are saying and i understand the technical limitations. But It was a different story when the boxset was confirmed, it was like they better not fly on Brians vocals over surfs up or dont they dare release this in stereo, they should not use 68 matereal and much more. I remember reading and just thinking what? How anal can you get? I do not get it, you can get surfs up with intended backingtrack and vocals by the guy who wrote it, what more can you ask for?  You can get the multitracks remixed to sound great.

The real fear should not being changing mixes or remixing, the fear should be not doing it with good taste. Recoloring black and white movies is not good taste, doing a 4k scan and editing out blemishes and releasing it on blu-ray is.

One big disappointment was for example the beatles remasters, they could have done remixes that sounded great and they choose to remaster they same old mixes, and yeah they sounded great in their day but time has caught up. The highhat and the cymbals are good example of mixing that just hurts your ears, or the stereo with all stuff in one speaker, jeez put that in your headphones and feel sick.

So there now i took a crap on both smile and the beatles sound

[tansen]

..in 2004 it was like a 60+ year old trying to out run his 23 year old record.

Agreed.

[chris.metcalfe]

Life until Nov 1 seems so utterly, utterly dull and worthless suddenly.

Oh I dunno - life over here will be quite entertaining on October 31st! (for several reasons.... ) 

[Shady]

I still can't believe some of us got the box for $110, which works out at roughly 76 euro for me..

Looks like Amazon is keeping it at $170.73

[bsten]

Here is the contest for anyone interested. Sorry if its been displayed already in the last 20 pages!

http://tongal.com/project/smile#!tab_files-content

Downloaded - both tracks are mono - but EXCELLENT mastering/mixing!!!!  

We're in for someting really really REALLY GOOOOD!! (But we already knew that didn't we?)    

And I just learnt that I won $1500 in the Swedish National Lottery!!!!!!

So now I can BOTH go to the at RFH on Sep 17th AND purchase the box set! Woo woo woooo!!

/b

[pixletwin]

Yeah am so glad (and grateful to those who posted links) that I was able to get all 3 sets for roughly the same price as is being charged now for just the boxset alone.

[The Heartical Don]

I have a hunch that this thread will have reached 1,000 pages and caused the server to explode come November 1.

[Shady]

Yeah am so glad (and grateful to those who posted links) that I was able to get all 3 sets for roughly the same price as is being charged now for just the boxset alone.

Amazing right  

I have a hunch that this thread will have reached 1,000 pages and caused the server to explode come November 1.

I say beofre that, when it leaks

[Wirestone]

in 2004 it was like a 60+ year old trying to out run his 23 year old record.

Preposterous. Have you ever even _heard_ BWPS?

[Mikie]

Not in the order of importance, but I wonder if they'll isolate the "Truck Drivin' Man" section in Cabinessence for this box. The masses should hear it.

[tansen]

in 2004 it was like a 60+ year old trying to out run his 23 year old record.

Preposterous. Have you ever even _heard_ BWPS?

Yes, and you can't get away from the fact that there's a 60+ year old guy singing lead vocals.

[Heysaboda]

it's alright, Mike's Beard, just put this in your mouth and, er, breathe on it a while.... 

Ah, you went to a Catholic school as well......

My condolences......