The Smiley Smile Message Board

...I mean: do you bear this possibility in mind? You've spent long years reading about SMiLE, bought many bootlegs, participated in several message boards, perhaps even constructed your own SMiLE mix... and after 44 years, finally, the best possible (most complete?) version of that monster, that beast, that legend, will see the light of day. And you'll pay a handsome price for it.

But what if you, contrary to your own expectations, will feel let down?

Actually I expect to be disappointed.

Disappointment is inevitable with any official release of Smile. I think, by its very nature, this music survives best in the  constant state of flux of our fantasy mixes. Once 'set in stone' something will be lost. However I reckon most here are down with that fact and are just welcoming the opportunity to have it all in one place in the best possible audio, and with a few unbooted nuggets thrown in for good measure (hopefully).

What I am not looking forward to is the monotonous griping that will slowly gather pace a month or so after the initial hysteria has died down. I can hear it now: "Why did they use Brian's BWPS sequence as a blueprint, even though we all know it was Darian's fanmix in the 1st place?!" "Why have they clipped 0.5 seconds from the end of George Fell Into His French Horn?" "Where is the 2nd take of Tones?" etc. I'm seriously considering abstaining from all BB message boards in the immediate aftermath of this release to avoid all such whingers!

I won't be disappointed at all, no matter what. Even if I have all of it already on bootlegs. At minimum, I'm confident that everything that's out there on bootlegs will now be in better sound quality from the best sources. That's all I'm asking for, and anything I haven't heard already will be icing on the cake. And I'm confident that the packaging will be nothing less than stellar in starlight. And the biggest thing for me is knowing that SMiLE will finally be presented to the masses around the world, even to average listeners who only know The Boys from their surf/sand/girls material. It will undoubtedly turn new fans onto the Beach Boys and present them in a new light. Yeah, it shoulda coulda have been released much earlier, but better late than never. And if BWPS hasn't provided Brian with complete closure with SMiLE, I'm sure this release will surely do it. Too bad Carl and Dennis aren't here to enjoy it, but at least Brian and Van Dyke are. I completely trust Linett and Boyd on this - they both have a great track record so far and I'm sure Brian Wilson knows it's in good hands.

well said!

We all have our personal wish lists for this thing, and mine is probably more optimistic than most of yours (yes, I am half-expecting Surf's Up part 2).  With that said, I'm not going to be "disappointed" if stuff on my personal wish list no longer exists or never existed or has not been located for this release.  As far as I'm concerned, WHATEVER new music we get on this release is gravy at this point.  And, as to the not-so-new stuff, it'll be awesome to have it in better sound quality.  And I'm not going to be disappointed at all if the playing order isn't the way I would have done it because I can (and probably will) burn my own CDs in any and every order I want.

So, as to the music, no, I will not be disappointed. No matter what.

I have to admit, though, I could be disappointed with the packaging.  For all these years, I have expected that if a package like this were to come out, Frank Holmes' artwork would be part of it.  If that doesn't happen, yes, I'll admit that I probably will be disappointed.  If Holmes' artwork is absent, I would hope that Capitol will do as they've been doing and stick to the non-Holmes stuff from the vintage 1967 cover (i.e., the red SMiLE and blue THE BEACH BOYS in the familiar font) rather than come up with something completely new that inevitably WILL be a disappointment.

It's The Beach Boys. Something is bound to go almost inexplicably wrong! :lol

I don't think that any of the surviving Beach Boys will force a postponement, but box fabrication or vinyl pressing problems could indeed cause a postponement. Remember, the vinyl edition of the Bob Dylan mono albums box was issued two months after the CD edition, due to a shortage of factories that could make quality vinyl pressings. In the end, the vinyl box got good reviews for its' quality.

We can all agree, that we want the CD/Vinyl/book box to be well-manufactured, and not be a disaster of missing discs, missing memorabilia, damaged packaging & disc-damaging packaging like Universal Music's recent Derek & The Dominos box......where most consumers got sets in unsatisfactory condition.

Dare I say it:

I don't really care about the SMiLE box set.  Yeah I plan on purchasing it and believe I'll get something out of it, but I'm not one to blow things out of proportion.  I have no expectations for it.  Why should I?  The album was never completed.  A cohesive version of this album already came out in 2004.

THERE"S a different take. 
To me, that's like saying, "I don't need to hear the Beach Boys perform THEIR songs, because I have the "Surfsiders Sing The Beach Boys".

Wasn't that more of a live version of Smile? Didn't really care for the production, instrumentation and vocals on that version. Still enjoyed it though

Um... isn't that stretching the comparison by a few millimeters?  :police:

If SS Boxset disappoints me:

i will shut out the world, put LOVE YOU in my system on non-stop repeat, curl up in the fetal position, and cry for hours. seriously.

All I want are cleaned up SMiLE tracks. I'm not looking for the Holy Grail here, just a nice mixing job. So I'm really in no position to be disappointed. That is unless Al's statement about the Boys finishing up the SMiLE tracks with their own voices was true. Then I think I will be crying for hours.

You should all be doing that with Love You anyway, jeez. Where the f*** is my Love You-era box set?!

The musical content of the box set almost surely won't disappoint me. I am not expecting much in the way of previously-unheard material, so anything that we do get will be gravy to me. I do expect one or two gems, no idea what they'll be, but not much more than one or two. And as for disc one, the presentation thereof, and all the controversy it is likely to precipitate, honestly, I'm not that concerned. Their job is to present disc one to the world, balancing priorities of commercialism, historicity, taste, and common sense. In that pursuit they are guaranteed not to please everyone, and almost everyone will surely find bones to pick with their approach, large or small. That comes with the territory. So I just expect them to do their best, which I trust will not be half-hearted (I have great faith in Mr. Boyd especially), and that will be good enough for me.

Where I am much more likely to meet with disappointment is in the informational content. Brian and Van Dyke won't be around forever, and despite their nearly non-existent acknowledgment of particulars over the years, I still feel they are our best hope in gaining insight into some of SMiLE's more resilient mysteries. I'm thinking of questions like what exactly was the concept behind The Elements, and what exactly comprises its recorded and compositional history, as best as can be remembered 45 years later? That's just one example, but there are many others as we all know. It's my view that these are important questions. I feel like the larger world all too often dismisses details like this as geek-outs not worth bothering about. But these questions are not just for the trainspotters, they're essential in filling in and documenting the overall mosaic that is SMiLE. I believe this body of work will be of interest to many generations to come, and will come to be seen as one of the 20th century's most important works of pop art. And if I'm right about that, then wouldn't it be a small tragedy if we miss the opportunity to mine the data that lie within the minds of Brian and Van Dyke? Granted, that data will be skewed by time, haze, drugs and whatever else. But it's still the best primary source we've got. My biggest fear is that the producers of this set will wimp out and not mine that primary source sufficiently.

I also worry that there will be a cavalier attitude (especially in Domenic's essay) toward proper documentation and thoroughness in separating fact from fiction from plausible speculation. I will be disappointed if the essay and the accompanying informational content trot out old canards like "Mike hated SMiLE" and "Brian blew his mind on drugs" (or conversely, "drugs were a non-issue") and throw them out there as the unexamined prime insights into the elegant tapestry that is SMiLE, and expect us to just swallow that merda and like it, and shut up. Remember, this is a work that is so rich and deep it supports multiple theories and interests, from Zen interpretaions to expositions on the American experience, to fan dreams of a high-art concept album, and all supported by a compositional and recording-based musical topography that is so dense and varied that it almost rivals Faulkner's Yoknapatawpha County. That means one needs to explore that topography, the particular hills and dales, valleys and streams, in order to gain meaningful insights into the whole. "Because Dom said so" is just NOT going to fly with me if they're going to throw out sweeping generalities that "SMiLE was almost finished" or "Brian had a concept album in mind" without supporting those statements with documented facts and/or educated speculation into what was recorded and why (and when).

Another area that might bring disappointment is the packaging. If the box is flimsy I will be slightly disappointed. If the artwork is ugly I will experience real pangs. If Frank Holmes' artwork is not used or is used in horrible taste, I will probably retire to my bed for a month. I am also hoping for a cornucopia of vintage photos (especially the Jasper Dailey photos) in best ever quality, uncropped, and easily scannable without damaging the book (that is because I like to make my own homemade CDs, NOT because I intend to pirate and distribute anything). I am prepared to sustain a certain amount of disappointment in that area, but if the situation is too bad - i.e. if there are NO Jasper Dailey photos or if everything is in black and white or if it's an unredeemable scrapbook mess - then I will be very disappointed indeed.

That made my day :lol

Are we really running out of things to talk about?

Donate it to Goodwill  ;D

Jonas, you're right.  I think I'll start a thread on the Global Moderators.

Good point.  Forgot about that possible disappointment.  Let's hope the issue is mute and that this thing has Frank's artwork included. To me, it's part of the legend of SMiLE.

Maybe, until Capitol, Mark Linett or Alan Boyd reveal more information about the box.

4PPR3C!47!0N 7HR34D$ R 6H3Y

Whatsat?  Code for "Kiss my white posterior"?   Or the serial key to a copy of Microsoft Windows 7?

The thing that will disappoint - but in no way surprise - me about the box will be the reaction here and on other boards. Fans will bitch about, in no particular order...

why wasn't [insert your track of choice] given more representation ?

why wasn't there more documentation ?

why was that take chosen and not take 453b-1 from the SOT set ?

why was the track edited like that, it's wrong ? (only one person can say that with any legitimacy, and he sure doesn't post here)

why wasn't more material included ?

In short, fans being fans and thus insatiable.

Will there be any bones of contention/disappointments within the material itself ? Sure to be.  This is The Beach Boys, the band who have unerringly, over the last few decades chosen the wrong option when it would have been  far easier to do it right.

Leetspeak.

"4PPR3C!47!0N 7HR34D$ R 6H3Y" - original
"Appreciation threads are gay." - translation
"Appreciation threads r ghey." - transliteration

I farted.

AGD is absolutely correct - some disappointment and complaining is inevitable, especially when Smile is involved.  Out of all the great Beach Boys music that we love and celebrate, Smile is the one piece of work that has remained "ours" to some extent.  Having never taken any cohesive form, it was there for us to play with and endlessly speculate about. 

No matter how great the box set is, and how much we all revel in the fact that it's coming out at all, we're going to be losing some of that control that we had over it (imagined or not).  Of course, all the parts will still be there, and speculation will indeed never end, but as was the case with BWPS, just the inherent fact that it's an officially sanctioned product will undoubtedly cause some backlash.

Unless two of the four discs consist of Good Vibrations recording sessions, I can't imagine it being a dissapointment.

I'd personally want a disc full of nothing but studio chatter and talk - I love that fly-on-the-wall stuff. Obviously that's not a universal thing so I'll settle for what's on there. The only disappointment if it could be called that would be one disc being basically a rehash of the GV box set and bonus track material from the 90's. No live stuff, either - Smile was a studio project.

*Shudder*

I know this isn't within the realm of possibility, but I would love to see huge artists like the Beach Boys release ALL their extant studio tapes in a download-only format. It would eliminate challenges of inventory and overhead, and it would allow for niche marketing at the most granular level. I just can't understand why no one has tried this. I mean, if 30 hours of unabridged SMiLE sessions were available on iTunes for $10 per hour, I'd buy the lot over time to be sure. As would a good gaggle of other anoraks like me. I know the target demographic tends to be comprised of audiophiles who get all snobby about mp3s, but I still think nerds like us would shell out for this beyond-the-fringe stuff in any format. I know I would.


TOTALLY agree.

The Beatles may have already set a precedent for the studio-chatter release: As bastardized and as over-edited as it was, that second "bonus" disc in the Let It Be Naked package was nothing but studio talk.

I'd definitely shell out for mp3's of 60's studio chatter too, if it were material not already heard on SOT and elsewhere.

Unlikely - read the original articles from 3/11 and 3/14 again.  ;D

Best post ever!!!  >:D

I'm gonna be pissed to no end if they use digital keyboards, auto-tune, and put a bass harmonica on every track.  If we can avoid that, I'm cool.

Then buy a survival kit now. Word has it that Mike Love remixed the whole thing. With the elements you mentioned. Also, John Stamos did all of the missing leads, on a secret location. That's why the Lovester didn't stall the release or start another court case.

I read that Kanye West, The Black Eyed Peas and Jay-Z will make guest appearances to fill up the instrumental sections. Anyone who can confirm this?

True dat. But you forgot an essential thing: Eminem will be on it too. He disrupts 'Wonderful' in his own, inimitable style, with a scathing reality rap, about how his Mom, being high as a kite on Valium and strong booze, forgot to feed him his Kellogg's. He himself says: 'my contributions are so good, they make BWPS stink, that's how good they are!'

I have every reason to believe him.

I'll restate this: if it sounds like I'm being cheap then it may be true, but my disappointment would be if I spent a few hundred on this set to get vinyl I don't really need and I find out the bulk of the material is material already in my collection.

I worry that the difference between the impressions of the general record-buying public and Smile fans, obsessives, and collectors might be blurred in the minds of those who would have signed off on a release like this. What I'm saying is I'd be willing to pay for "new" material, but if 90% of the tracks are ones we've (Smile obsessives) already heard, and the book and essay is the same info presented in a different way, and the photos aren't anything new...

I'm just saying with the price of gas being what it is and several major expenses coming my way soon, I'd almost rather wait a few days to hear some feedback before pre-ordering or buying this set the first hour it becomes available.

That's the practical side of me talking.

I hear where you are coming from, but you also have to remember, just because you've "heard" some of this material on bootlegs doesn't mean that its already been released and therefore it would make purchasing it redundant. I mean, if the 2-disc set is just like a bunch of stuff that was already officially released then I could see your point, but just because you've been listening to "He Gives Speeches" and "Look" for so long illegally, doesn't mean that its not "new", if you get the jist. Just my opinion.

And lastly, I mean, come on, its SMiLE, why wouldn't you want it?

For me the book that comes with the deluxe edition - despite the Dom essay - will be essential for the photos and art and liner notes  detailing the sessions and perhaps solving issues that have bedeviled us Smilophiles for so many years.

Then there's the new mixes/acetate mixes that will be essential new additions to the canon.

I fear there will be some but not much "new" material for those evil fans who have illicitly been listening to non Capitol releases of Beach Boys material.  So that would leave the hope that the material Smile fans have been listening to  for years will appear in better quality.  For some tracks that will be a no brainer - Child is Father to the Man instrumental track, for example.  But will the Sea of Tunes stuff really sound better on this release?  I have my doubts.  Hopefully the harsh treble boosted EQ used on Summer Love Songs and the Capitol Singles box will not be applied to Smile.

I definitely want the set and am anxiously awaiting the set but at the same time I need to be practical and think about the cost: If the set contains most of what I already know, I'll wait it out to hear the reviews and reports before waiting in line the first day for it, which I thought I'd originally be doing.

The possibility of new photos is also very, very exciting but I hope new ones are included alongside the ones, again, we have already seen.

I want to add I have no qualms or guilt whatsoever about considering "illicit" Smile stuff among the finest music I've ever heard, released or unreleased. And it's also important to say at the time I was hearing all of that the realistic chances of an official release of Smile from Capitol were slim to none. So it was a case of choosing between someone dangling half a carrot in front of you in the present or waiting possibly years, decades, or to infinity for the official release whose chances for release were slim to none. That was a no-brainer for me as a die-hard fan.  :)

So you've seen the book?  I haven't seen any mention of new photos and art and notes detailing the sessions being included, even tho that would be presumed by the three names for writers.

I think it's a given there will be a detailed sessionography, and as Dom's essay is about 3000 words, there'll have to be something else to occupy the pages.

Now there's a good question. SOT 16 and 17, in addition to other SMiLE material that's out there in pristine quality, will be tough to beat sound quality wise. SOT is like the quality benchmark. If the 24 (or whatever bit) and/or the new technology with this release is even better, I'll be a little surprised. I expect it to at least match the quality of SOT - to surpass it will really be something. I'm not expecting a few things (i.e. demos, acetates) material to be of equal quality though.  

Well, at least the material will be mixed properly...which it isn't on any of the SOT discs. I look forward to hearing some of these sessions minus the various coughs, sighs, chit-chat, etc. and with well-balanced instrumentation and vocals.

So, if the sound quality of the released SS box IS actually better, will bootleggers have to retitle their releases "Surpassed Masters"? 8)

This goes to personal preference: I like the random chat and noises as part of the audio verite experience of hearing the sessions as they unfolded without editing that stuff out later. Again, it's all personal preference. I could listen to raw, unmixed session tapes for hours while others would find that tedious and boring.

You know, I think this scenario IS within the realm of possibility, Catbirdman!

I think it's the logical conclusion (!) of the record industry's never ending re-issue campaigns. All they need is a big band to have the courage to "let it all hang out"  :)

Like you, I would be in heaven if they did this.

I can feel that. But we've got some of the material which sounds so lousy. The thing i'm looking forward to the most, apart from wishful thinking, is hearing Holidays in crystal clear sound! That's why the box can't really disappoint me. So much of this material sounds like ass on the bootlegs.

Couldn't agree more. 'Holidays' is my #1 reason for buying this. I can't wait to hear this stuff properly mixed.

I normally set aside an hour or two a week to listen to a few SOT sessions. I don't know why I like listening to them so much - I guess I just love hearing Brian guide the sound to what he wants.
_____
I wish Mr. Linett would do another interview - please give us something for us to chat about for the next couple weeks! Anyone at the Examiner want to call him up to snag some more info?

I hear ya.  Part of me says, 'Hey, we're talking about an official release of Smile... the very thing BB fans have been clamoring for since 1967.  How can any fan even consider not buying it?"

But then I remember back to 1993 to when the "Good Vibrations: 30 years" box was released, and I didn't buy it... despite its treasure trove of previously unreleased Smile tracks.  Why not? Because it was $60, and I was in school and had no job and very little money... that's why.

It's 18 years later now, and I'm fortunate to be in a position where I can buy a Smile box without it impacting my finances.

But I remember where I was at in 1993, and I had to pass on the box... which gives me the chance to tell (or retell, as the case may be) one of my greatest BB fan moments. At some point a number of months after the box came out, I was browsing the used CDs at a now-defunct record store called The Wherehouse.  And what was sitting there with its chrome heart shining in the sun?  Disc 2 from the box... the disc with the Smile stuff!  Used and alone... for some ridiculously low price like $4.   How or why that one disc ended up for sale remains a mystery to me.  I mean, if you're going to sell your BB box, sell the whole thing, right?  And if you need to sell off just one disc from that set, dump Disc 4 with the late '70s through Kokomo, right?  You don't sell Disc 2 with California Girls/Help Me Rhonda/Pet Sounds/Smile.  You just don't.  But someone apparently did.  And that $4 disc found its way into the hands of exactly the nearly-broke fan who wanted it (i.e., me).

He checks out the board now and then so he's obviously interested in the fans perspective, why he doesn't chime in is beyond me.

Gag order?
  ;D

Probably

Yeah - it's called "The Jardine Sanction".  ;D

Oh I enjoy the random chat and noises, too. But I don't want the official release to only offer audio verite mixes when we now have the chance to hear some of this material in a more polished presentation. For example: I doubt we'll get a "Vegetables" that has two verses being sung at the same time simply because the multi-tracks are left unmixed/unedited - keep that stuff for the bootlegs. If that's the only way you want to hear these sessions, then maybe the official release won't sound better to you. But when I heard the nuances that Mark and Alan were able to bring out with the official mix of Dennis' "Fallin' In Love", I never wanted to hear the earlier unofficial version(s) again.

There is one "official" version of Fallin' In Love (Lady) - the version released as the B-side to Sound of Free, credited to Dennis Wilson and Rumbo, 1970, catalog number Stateside SS 2184 (got it off AGD's site). Summer Love Songs is NOT the first release of this tune.

Right, I completely forgot about the 1970 single release (I don't own it, but I assume I've heard it from unofficial sources). I stand by my statement that the "remix" of "Fallin' In Love" on SUMMER LOVE SONGS is excellent and indicative of what Mark (and Alan) could do with presenting the previously unreleased SMiLE material in a way that significantly improves upon the boots.

The Summer Love Songs version is a remix, not the original.

I think I just acknowledged that, didn't I?

Geez, I posted within a few mins. of yours. Why even call me on it? I saw that someone posted ahead of me, but couldn't see what was there.

Just more of that SMiLE testiness coming out, methinks

Everybody needs to just  :hat till SMiLE drops  ;)

Don't you start...  :lol

These dudes can do wonders with session tapes, as The Pet Sounds box will attest. A Child Is The Father Of The Man, all nicely EQ'd, with some tasteful reverb, from the instrumental and vocal multi-tracks...  you can't say we all want that?

Owing to some of the recent Mark Linett remixes I don't think there is any guarantee the material will be mixed properly. For example, the "Shut Down" and "Dance Dance Dance" remixes on Sounds of Summer. The "Shut Down" remix is essentially fake stereo. I do like his work on the Pet Sounds Sessions box but many of his subsequent remixes are awful. His use of reverb on the 'Please Make Me Wonder" sounds closer to "Getcha Back" that what was used in the mid 1960's. Modern reverb, phasey/swishy sound, hard and bright EQ, very narrow separation. This is why I hope they use as many vintage remixes as possible for the Smile set..

I'll take Brian's 11/66 mix with no added reverb thank you.

Agreed. I wouldn't accept a 'restored' Mona Lisa with some new paint strokes here and there, done by a modern art worker, either.

Boy, it sounds as though you guys are unsheathing the knives already. Or at least testing them to make sure they slide out fast when the time comes that you feel you need 'em... but to what end? What's the point?

I'm not being snidey - this is a serious question. What comes out on this release is not up to you, or me, or (I would guess) ANYONE who posts on this board. You have no say in its mixing, track selection, or sequencing. You'll have to accept what you're given, whether you like it or not, as we all will.

To the best of our knowledge as it stands today, there *AREN'T* vintage mix-downs for most of the SMiLE material. That's why Mark Linett mixes are mostly what we've got for all the stuff that's come out officially so far (on the '93 GV set, etc etc). Assuming that remains the case, and Messrs Boyd and Linett haven't unearthed a motherlode of 1966-7 era mono mixes in the course of their research, they have **no choice** but to create new mixes. As soon as you do that, you are using non-contemporary tools to create SMiLE mixdowns, or, as the Don has just put it above, having a modern art worker put new brush strokes on the masterpiece. That's inevitable. You can try to get close to the original equipment, intention, and artistic vision, and I'm sure Alan and Mark are the right guys to get as close as possible to that - but you cannot recreate the original art as it might have been in 1966-7. Not without a time machine. So why can't everyone accept that as their default starting position?

Art is *not* a democracy. Artists rarely consult their fans before taking decisions on what to do, and nor should they. But then people rarely get a chance to develop a sense of entitlement about a record before it comes out. Usually, the first thing fans know about it is when it's released. SMiLE, interestingly, is different. That's part of its charm, of course, but it also leads some people to be mighty self-righteous about it. If SMiLE *had* been released in 1967, and you'd been the age you are now in that year, how much influence would you have had with Brian Wilson about the final shape of SMiLE? How much could you have persuaded him, say, to include the False Barnyard fade or He Gives Speeches if he had decided not to on his release? Not one iota. To exactly no extent whatsoever. And so it is with this Sessions box set in 2011 (assuming it does make it out this year!). You can rant and moan all you want, but there is NOTHING anyone here can do to influence the form this box set takes. There is, in fact, just ONE thing you can do to express your displeasure in any kind of meaningful way. If you don't like it (and let's face it, there will be plenty of places you'll be able to hear the contents within a few days of release, unlike back when, say, the Pet Sounds box first came out), then don't buy it, and don't listen to it. Just stick with your existing boots, the recordings that first fired you up with a love of this music. Be happy with those, as you always have been. You don't *have* to buy the Sessions box set. Vote with your feet if you feel that strongly about it, because that's all you can do.

What gets me in these situations (like, say, following the release of a certain record in Autumn 2004) is the people that buy the release, spend the money (thus supporting the artist in all of the creative decisions he's made that the buyer has loudly made clear they're opposed to), and then continue to moan endlessly on about it not being 'right' (in other words, not in keeping with *their* vision of how it 'should' have sounded). There was some small justification for this kind of thing back in the days when it was hard to hear a record before it came out, and you often HAD to buy it before you could hear it... but not today. How long, with the best will in the world, will it be after release before it hits a file-sharing network?

So here's my suggestion, which I'm sure everyone will roundly ignore come the day. If you like the sound of the box set, then buy it and support the massive effort and artistic endeavour that went into its writing, performance, mixing and mastering, and all the creative choices that went into that combined effort. If you don't - well, then *don't*. Just keep listening to the mixes you've been happily enjoying for years. If everyone did that, THEN we'd have world peace. Just this once, everybody'd live... happily ever after.

But back from the world of dreams. The above is a recipe for a much happier life, but I have this funny feeling that there will be a lot of people that don't follow this advice come the day of the release...

Ooh, I *am* Mr Grumpy Face today. I really should let my breakfast go down before posting on here...

MattB

My main concern is that the original material could be - for whatever well-intentioned reason - somehow compromised by a questionable artistic decision. Of course the sequencing on CD1 of the two-disc set will provoke discussion and dissent: that's a given, the only unknown is exactly how het-up we'll get over it (my guess is "considerably"), but I'm more fussed about the original material being used in an unrepresentative way. Leave it be. No 2011 tinkering beyond mixing, mastering and editing. The very most I'll concede (yeah, like anyone in a position to do anything about it cares what I think !  ;D) is using Carl's 1968 vocal from "Cabinessence". I'm in a generous mood today: savour it, it won't last.

My secondary concern is that iconic Frank Holmes artwork may not be used, for whatever reason. The original articles didn't use it and that sets my spider senses tingling. I hope to be proven entirely wrong in this respect, as a project like this with his artwork is simply inconceivable.

That about sums it up. We're getting 4 CDs of Smile music. As long as it's not tampered with, we ought to be happy :)

Here's a serious answer:

a) I'm not fond of the recent BB's remixes b) the same engineer is mixing the Smile set c) I expressed concern with how the new mixes will turn out.  

I'm not quite sure why this prompted such a theatrical, histrionic reply.


For real? You mean the fans are picking the tracks? Thanks for clearing that up.


No merda? If vintage mixes didn't exist they had to remix? Thanks for the audio lesson  ::)

Yes, I understand they (as you put it) "have **no choice**" but to remix. I just hope they mix in a way more in line with how they mixed things in 1967.
 

Why? Because most (but not all) of the recent remixes made no effort to get as close to the original equipment, intention, and artistic vision. Why does get your panties out of line?

Talk about being self-righteous! I don’t really disagree with any of that but it reads like a series of non sequiturs in this thread.


Matt, are you sure you aren't the one ranting and moaning here? Two one sentence posts speculating about the mixing based on prior work and you come back with the Magna Carta?

Also, has anyone talked about not buying it? Has anyone said they are happy with the boots? Are you really Mark L?


Here’s my suggestion. If you can spare the drama each time someone speculates about Smile on a Smile board I’ll buy you a set. Deal?

But, Andrew, and Loaf... it HAS to be 'tampered with', before we can hear it! It has to be mixed! And Andrew, you say 'no 2011 tinkering beyond mixing, mastering and editing'. Well, you can do an *awful* lot to a record just by mixing it differently - as I'm absolutely certain you know well. And editing and mastering can absolutely destroy or enhance a record, too.

To take a fairly insignificant example from the Beach Boys catalogue that I'm sure we're all familiar with: the Smiley Smile version of 'Vegetables'. Check out the lovely harmony tag near the end: "I know that you'll feel better..." etc etc. Compare the mono version of that with the stereo version of the same section from 'Hawthorne, California'. Just after Brian sings right up to a high 'A' on the line 'the... NAME of your...', the backing vocals create a slightly different chord in the two different versions, because one of the voices (my ears aren't the best, but I think it's singing an F sharp) has been mixed more loudly in the stereo mix than in the mono. It's absolutely lovely singing in both versions, and I wouldn't be without either version, but it goes to show what difference a mix can make. I'm sure the extra note is IN the mono mix, but to my ears, it's not obvious, whereas it is in the stereo mix, and it gives a fuller sound to the backing vocal chord. Sounds terrific either way, but they definitely seem different to me.

If that doesn't ring any bells with you, what about the 66 mono mix of Sloop John B versus the 96 stereo mix? When the lead vocal sings the line 'Sheriff John Stone... why don't you leave me aloo-o-one', there's a harmony vocal 'waaaaahhh' in the background which comes in just after 'Sheriff John...'. It's audible in the mono mix, but barely. I didn't really notice it when all I knew was the mono mix of Pet Sounds. But once you've heard the stereo mix or the acapella mixes from the Pet Sounds Sessions box, you can't miss it or forget it ever again - it's the most extraordinary harmony pad. Virtually lost in the mono mix - and very much a feature of the stereo version.

That's just what differences in LEVEL can do to a mix, let alone adding effects, compression or EQ. The mix can contribute hugely to how the finished article sounds. And with a track like the SMiLE version of Vega-Tables, for reasons I've explained in the 'Catbirdman's List' thread I started the other day, the choices made at the mix can hugely affect the sound *and* structure of the finished record.

Even without extra overdubs (and personally, I hope they steer well clear of those too), they could make versions of SMiLE tracks that we'd hardly recognise, just by changing the mix. I don't think we're going to get into that kind of territory on the box set, but we'll see.

My point is, these creative decisions have to be made before we can hear this music, as Capitol are NOT releasing flat multitrack transfers of original multitrack tapes (in a way, I kind of wish they were... but that's ME getting into 'coulda shoulda woulda' territory...). They're releasing tracks in stereo and mono, which means they have to mix, and so they have to take a lot of decisions that there often aren't any 1967-era guide mixes to help them with. And sometimes, the overdubs we hear on acetate versions we've become familiar with (like Dennis's vocal on YAMS) aren't there on the multitrack to mix from, so any new mixes have to be made with parts missing. If you know the Zombies 'Odyssey and Oracle', think of the stereo mix of 'This Will Be Our Year' without the trumpet. Sounds pretty different, right? Like a whole HOOK from the original track is missing!

So how can you say what's 'representative' of the original recordings? And how can we judge what the 'original SMiLE' (whatever form that might have taken) was intended to sound like? From the badly mixed bootlegs we've all heard? From poor nth-generation cassette copies of what were themselves unfinished acetate-derived test mixes? They don't necessarily tell us what finished product in 1967 would have sounded like, so what are we going to use as a basis for praising or condemning the new SMiLE mixes?

And as I said above, it doesn't matter what we think anyway, as we have absolutely nada influence on the final sound!

Like I say above... sit back and enjoy the new box. Or don't: sit back and enjoy the same boots you always did. But recognise that most of the Sessions box will probably feature new mixes, done this year or last, and it might not be quite what any of us are expecting. And that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

In fact, it could be very exciting, if we can open ourselves to that possibility.

MattB

There's tinkering, and then there's tinkering. That's all I'll say.

Fair enough, Andrew. I can't judge what you mean until this damn box set comes out. So let's save that discussion until the time comes!

Chris, to level with you - I'm bored and at a computer because I should be working, but I'd far rather speculate about the SMiLE box, because what I'm *supposed* to be doing is (relatively speaking) dull. So I get typing, and all this stuff comes out. I admit that it *isn't* necessarily the most well-thought-out pile of thoughts in the known universe. And there's lots of it, because I type fast. But my pants (under or over) aren't in a twist. I was just making some points I thought were interesting. Sorry you didn't feel the same way, and sorry there was, well... so much of it that you didn't agree with. It wasn't quite the Magna Carta, and I didn't sound, as you put it, 'theatrical' in my head as I typed it, but I can see how you got that from it.

Anyway, who knows. Perhaps, if this box set is TRULY great, we'll get new mixes AND all of the extant test mixes from back in the day that could be found. THAT would be a great thing, as then you'd have as much as is available of 67-era SMiLE as can be mustered, plus the new attempts to do something interesting with the raw tapes. The best of both worlds...?

And finally - I'm most definitely NOT Mark Linett. I often wish I was. But I was born four years after SMiLE was cancelled, in the East of England, in Great Britain, and there I remain as I type these words. Dammit!

MattB

Vintage Brian mix or not, the quality of the boots of that song are crap. I even find the SOT sessions too murky, in their unfettered sound.

 You two know exactly what I meant! I could have easily said Holidays/OMP/Fire/Lots of H&V sections/whatever has been passed around from cassette dubs and vinyl rips.

Adding some EQ where EQ is needed is fine with me. Adding reverb where reverb is needed is fine with me. Whatever makes these songs sound pristine and crisp. Boyd and Linett know what they are doing - their 2009 stereo mix of 'Don't Worry Baby' blows me away every time I hear it.

and everyone here should be incredibly thankful that we have Alan Boyd and Mark Linett doing these mixes - hate the stereo mixes or love them - they are about 100x better than the Beatles stereo mixes. Beach Boys stereo mixes overflow with sound - whereas the Beatles stereo mixes are quite dull and lifeless....I very much prefer the Beatles in mono. But the Beach Boys are a different story.

On the whole I love Mark's recent stereo mixes of 60s tracks...as has been mentioned before the new Time to Get Alone lacked the 'depth' and dynamic of the original, though this could be a result of the mastering rather than the mixing...Don't Worry Baby has been mentioned, Kiss Me Baby is a favourite of mine, and the whole of Pet Sounds sounds great in stereo I think; Matt referred to the Sloop John B backgrounds, well I just love how the stereo mix immerses us in that wash of harmony personally, same with Wouldn't it be Nice.

In all, I am not sure we could really hope that the Smile material be in more capable hands, right?

(It does seem that Mark's stereo mixes are not everybody's cup of tea, which is cool.)

For what it's worth, I couldn't agree more. And yes, Sam, those Pet Sounds stereos! Those HARMONIES! "Sheriff John -- Waaaaaaaahhhhhh..." Mind-blowing stuff.

MattB

Not on my home and car stereo systems are they dull and lifeless!!  I'll take the Beatles (and Beach Boys) in stereo any day o' the week! The new Beatles stereo remasters are superb!! Even better than Ebbetts!

My apologies, good doctor. I'm afraid I was starting to get wound up with the contentious tone of the board as of late and quickly replied without thinking (and then immediately shut the computer down as I was due at an appointment). Sorry for being so rude.

The initial post I was responding to questioned whether the material on the SMiLE box set will sound any better than the SOT boots. I think Matt B. has commented articulately on how the past work of Mark and Alan has enriched previously released sessions. I see no reason why their work on the SMiLE sessions should be anything less than an intriguing alternative to what is heard on the boots, and I fully expect it to be much better.

Thank you, Roger!

I have a few beefs with a couple of Mark's stereo remixes, but on the whole I'm pretty happy with what he's done with the 2000-2001 Reissues. I expect Smile will be handled with care. I think it was on this board that someone said that Mark is great at making a sonic turd into a polished diamond or something like that. ;)

I think the Pet Sounds Sessions stereo mix was a fantastic job.

Agreed - these guys know what they're doing, and all the other re-mixes have been very tastefully done in my opinion, so I have no worries about the mixing aspect. 

Well, it was the only official, completed version of SMiLE ever to be released. 

Sure it's cool that the Beach Boys' recordings of SMiLE is coming out.  But again, the album was *never completed*.  That is a point to ponder...

I uploaded a sample of the Shut Down remix from Sounds of Summer below--I'd be interested in your thoughts on the first 30 seconds of the track.

http://www.sendspace.com/file/cmj6qs

Mmmm... might be my ears but the SOS remix sounds a bit overly 'bright'.

Bright and LOUD! I never listen to it and spent money on both versions; SOS & Sights... With the DVD.

I agree. Now listen for the massive phasey, smeared sound during the intro. Awful isn't it? Also note how some elements are practically duophonic with other true stereo? At times the instrumental track sounds like it is fake stereo (treble on the left, bass on the right) with other elements like the vocals true stereo (albeit bright and hard). I don't understand how the Pet Sounds box was done so well where something like this is appalling.

By and large, the new remixes have been at worst acceptable, but the one that is totally indefensible is "Time To Get Alone" on Summer Love Songs, with the reedy whimper where there originally was a booming "deep and wide !". Ruins the whole song - I've not listened to that since I bought the CD.

It also seemed a bit irrelevant, seeing as Time To Get Alone is ALREADY in stereo!

That is an unfortunate by-product of modern mastering. It really got obnoxious around 1999, and since then the record companies value high levels and heavy compression over lower volumes and allowing the listener to turn up the track if they choose.

Radio stations never had this issue as they did this themselves at the stations: With the advent of mp3 players and shuffle-play, the companies want everything to be at an equal volume, so you get a situation where a new remix of an older Beach Boys song matches the volume of, say, an Eminem or Lady Gaga song.

Take any CD made before 1990 and compare it if you can to a recent "remastered" reissue of the same exact album. The differences in volume levels are in some cases shocking. This is jazz. rock, metal, country, etc.

As unpopular as this opinion may be, I actually prefer the remix of TTGA on SUMMER LOVE SONGS. I always felt that Carl's lead sounded buried/murky on the original mix and that the "deep and wide" vocal was too exaggerated and it unbalanced the rest of the recording. At the same time, I can easily see why some folks would be disappointed that the section was toned down. That's why it's great to have all the versions available so we can pick our favorites.

What's kind of strange is that SOS is a 2003 release, yet TWOTS & SLS are later, but not nearly as loud. The reissues are brighter and louder than the 1990 versions, but not excessively so. SOS is by far the worst one of the lot.

The Loudness Wars had kinda become a controversial point by the time the Warmth of the Sun comp had come out, right? So they were probably aware of that.

That is a great point. Once people who wouldn't normally consider such things as how an album was mastered started reading mainstream articles about it and hearing the difference with their own ears, I think the companies took notice. The one that started it if I recall was "Californication" by the Red Hot Chili Peppers in 1999, and after they released that album which was mastered so loud it actually distorted, so many others followed suit and the "Loudness Wars" were on. Then I guess the backlash helped bring it down a bit as you suggested.

Yep, Shut Down too. Somehow the original tossed off in 5 minutes 1963 stereo mix of Shut Down slays the modern remix.

The only way that the "Smile Sessions" box set can disappoint anyone is if it is actually released, and while the chances of this set being released appear reasonably good, Smile's history tells us that we have no guarantee that something won't go wrong at the last minute.

But after all the times(over the decades) that a hope of an official release has been raised, then crushed, I'll say this: this is the last time that I'm going to WANT an official "Smile" set. We're looking at(from the March 2011 announcement) anywhere from a 4 to 9 month build-up of fan expectations and speculation(during which we'll be given no further concrete information to sustain a rational online discussion), and this may(or may not) lead to an actual box set to play on our CD players. If it doesn't happen, I'll just make do with my own fan compilation(based on the Domenic Priore running order in the 2nd edition of "Look Listen Vibrate Smile"), which is actually quite good.

Honestly, I don't think Capitol gives a crap whether or not we have stuff to talk about here. We do think very highly of ourselves here, eh? ;)

Since both Mark and Alan visit here, I'm sure they will post something once they are given the green light to do so. I've waited 44 years, so another month or two is drop in the bucket.

This is just one more thing that proves that we are a society that wants and needs instant gratification.

OK Phil - put up or shut up time: $50 says it gets released this year. Whaddaya say ?  ;D

44 years is not exactly "instant".

No, but what you are calling for is "instant".

Are you guys thinking a summer release is not looking good, and we should actually be expecting something by end of the year

Been saying for a long time, my best guess is on late summer/early fall and certainly before the 2012 Grammy cut-off date. To me, if only on logistical grounds, July 12th is somewhat unlikely.

To me, July 12 is a bit of an odd date, what with many folks going on vacation, or spending extra money on other things... the box won't be cheap. I'd guess that AGD's best guess simply makes more sense.

Hmm, well I'll let all hope go and let the chips fall where they may

Meanwhile, if its been awhile, go back and relisten to the SOT smile, the boots, and BWPS.  Great stuff!

....postponed until August 9th. My prediction: one of a long series of postponements. I'm out of here. I'm putting my 2-CD "Smile" fan mix CD-R's back on the shelf, and not playing "Smile" or thinking about "Smile" again any time soon(if ever again). This is a lost cause.

Wow. Just because it sounds like it's coming, then there's a bit of a delay, you're going to quit listening to SMiLE, maybe for all time? That seems like a pretty extreme reaction to me. Like (I imagine) many people here, I go through phases of listening to SMiLE-related stuff intently, then pull back from it for lengthy periods. The music is incredible, but after a while the on-going unknowns about it and its unfinished nature start to bug me, and I stop listening. The recent chat about it has put it back on my listening radar again, but before that, I prolly hadn't played original SMiLE sessions for a couple of years or so, aside from occasional plays of the 2004 SMiLE.

I first heard about SMiLE in 1988, and got seriously interested in 1995. Having to wait another few months, even a year, is nothing compared to that time. And it must seem even less to the old-timers who've been waiting since 1966.

If it frustrates you, just put SMiLE on the back burner for a bit; no need to throw all your discs away and sign a pledge renouncing it for all time. If you love music, you'll come back to SMiLE and its riches eventually. I always do. And by then, the box will probably be out!

July, August, December; it's all good. And then we'll sell a million units in January... ;)

MattB

Phil has a bit of a problem: having stated that it's not going to happen this year, he's in a basically indefensible position.  ;D

You fool. Throw your toys out the pram while you're at it.

I get the impression from a lot of your posts that you care about this release deeply, hence these knee jerk reactions whenever we get some news that you deem as negative. I felt a similar way when Al retracted his initial statement about Smile. Since the Capitol press release however, echoed on Brian's site, I've felt pretty confident that this is going to happen.

If I were you I'd stop worrying. There's been no 'official' release date yet anyway - all we have is hearsay, and until we get an official press release confirming the release date I'd take all news with a pinch of salt, if for nothing else but your own sanity!

Is 'postponed' the correct word though, given that no official date had/has been set anyway?

The release date has been "reimagined".

 ;D

As you are aware, before Capitol's announcement in March, audiophile Gold CD mastering engineer(and website operator) Steve Hoffman responded to the "Smile" box rumors by saying that "Smile" would never be released. The latest statement from Mr.Hoffman(May 6,2011)(in response to one of his forum members who mentioned a possible August release, then added "Who knows?") was "I do. It's not being released in August"

The question I have, is why The Beach Boys and Capitol would announce a "Smile" box?  Is it only to play games with us? Why bother? This whole thing is getting tired. The fans have been through this again and again.

Geez Phil, he said he knows the date and it isn't August 9th, not that isn't going to be released. AGD's September release is looking more and more likely. In the mean time, it's time for you to meditate. ;)

I'm merely relaying Mr.Hoffman's statements to you. I'm only the messenger. Don't shoot the messenger. Mr.Hoffman isn't claiming that he knows what the release date is, but he knows that the box isn't being released in August.

He said "I do" when answering the question. Re-read it. Plus, he also said not August. Not never.

...but Mr.Hoffman originally(before Capitol's announcement) said that "Smile" would never be released. It will be interesting to see if Mr.Hoffman's original prediction is ultimately correct.

i'm enjoying how "postponed" release dates, none of which have come from capitol, is starting to put people in the "here we go again" mindset.

I'm not sweatin' it. A delay of months is nothing compared to waiting the previous 44 years.

Sure. you say that now.  What will you be saying if months turns to years?

Then it will be nothing new to Beach Boys fans, surely!

Won't. ;D

Were you not doing laps Phil??

Where does it read 'postponed' on the web? First time I saw it was just now. Is Mike in 're-write' mode again?

Nope.

I guess that technically it hasn't been postponed at all since a date was never officially announced. It makes me laugh when Steve Hoffman posts things like that on his forum. He likes to lead us to think that he is in the know.

Thanks for bringing me (and others) back to ground level. Well, I for one didn't think July 12 to be ideal, but nevertheless I was very happy with it... but there have been stranger things in the BBs universe, I guess.

Now, Hoffman has posted, "OMG. Why don't you guys listen?"

Listen to what?  He declared that it's not coming out in August, and now that the oracle has spoken everything should be clear?   What the...?    What about the other 11 months?  ::)

I don't know Hoffman.  Never met the guy.  Never interacted with him on the internet.  But for some reason, he annoys me.

Glad I'm not the only one. "Annoys" me is putting it mildly...