The Smiley Smile Message Board

http://www.iconfetch.com/great-music-interviews/2011-shows/440-mark-linett-a-alan-boyd-smile-followup.html


Bah, good interview, but it hates my computer. Does anyone elses stop when they start playing Cabinessence?

I feel like I ran into this problem before. Come to think of it, I don't think I even heard the last half of the 2nd part of the interview before it came out :O

I want to say downloading it at least got me the entire thing, so maybe try that?

Thanks for the link, been looking forward to this. So far it seems to be working well. About 50% through it sans any problems.

I refreshed and it kicked into life. It's a nice interview!

Is it just me or do you get the impression that a lot of the questions that hardcore fans obsess over just seem rather bizarre to them?  I don't imagine that some of the purists will be satisfied with their response regarding vintage Brian edits...

The tone/laughing before the responses seemed less "What a weird question!" and more a slight touch of "Oh, this again." But nicely said, not implying they were being assholes with their responses or anything. I think any one of us would react similarly if you had a bunch of n00bs criticizing the set for not having a song that can't be real stereo in stereo on it.

It's actually pretty amazing that they are even making themselves available to answer critiques of their work.  Think about it, how many producers would go through the time and effort to sit down and do something like this?  It's obvious that these guys do care what their audience thinks as far as their handling of the Beach Boys catalog goes.  As I've mentioned a few times I think they also realize that the SMiLE fanatics are going to rearrange their work to suit their own personal preferences and that was obviously something they were aware of in the preparation of TSS so that in enough of itself is pretty cool.

Also the fact that they are aware that there is a legitimate audience that is willing to pay out for these kinds of releases renews hope that there will be further releases along the same line in the future.  Trust me when I say this, there are bands (and those with whom they associate with) that are light years away from where Linett, Boyd & The Beach Boys are.  We are very lucky indeed.

I agree, it is BEYOND AMAZING that these guys are willing to publically answer to these hardcore fan questions. We are so fortunate that we had such dedicated people working on the set.

Well, it's nice to hear that Mark reads the Smiley Smile board (Barnyard Mistake thread...)  :lol

....and still agreed to answer fan mail. :)

Both Mark and Alan are members of the board and once posted extensively.

I'm so glad they described the sequence of the original rough mix of "The Child Is Father Of The Man" -  that was the one thing I thought would show up on the set for sure and was a bit disappointed it wasn't there. Now I can imagine it...or recreate it if I choose.

And don't forget that they are both as hardcore fans as you can get.  Their core is likely harder than most of ours combined.

Although he didn't mention BeachBoysCentral.com by name, I think he pretty much squashed the idea in this interview.

For now anyhow.  There just isn't enough monetary incentive right now for the music industry to move in that direction.  As Linett mentioned it would be quite an expensive undertaking to put the entire catalog online available to download by fans.  Add to that getting everyone to sign off on such a project as well as any and all legal ramifications involved and you can understand what a process that would be.

That being said more and more artists are coming to the realization that this is where music is going.  What started with bands like DMB and Counting Crows has now expanded well beyond those shores and with the emergence of itunes and online distribution of music moving to the forefront as far as distribution goes, how long can it be until groups like The Beach Boys are motivated to making archival tracks available to download by their fans?  The fact that Linett and Boyd are plugged in enough to realize that there is a demand for this type of outlet is a huge step in hopefully one day making it come to fruition.  

The music industry at large just isn't there yet which strangely in a way echoes some of the frustrations Brian Wilson himself must have felt back in the sixties when he was trying to push his own rock up a very steep hill.

Is it just me or did they not really answer too many of the questions?  What was the sequence of the average version of Child they took the chorus with the extra vocals from?  It wasn't' what was used on cd1, that was based on  BWPS. 

Esactly!  (though I wasn't sure if it was Mark or Alan who made that statement).

What was exciting, amongst everything else, is the tease about more releases coming from the archives (with Wild Honey (stereo) mentioned in the tease).

I thought it was really heartening Brian didn't veto anything. Although curious what he changed (not erased, which is a strange distinction), but I'm glad he saw it all fit to release.

How? The source material is already there. We know the material is or has been transferred to digital and even that new mixes of some of it are being prepared just for the sake of being archived. What kind of money are we talking about here sans a server to host this stuff?

The Rolling Stones just recently made their famous Brussels concert available on Google's music site, with plans for more archival material in the pipeline.  The delivery models are still in development, but it's coming as old fashioned physical media declines.  Alan and Mark didn't seem too hot on the idea--it was actually my question there, but I bet it's not the first time they've gotten it.  I imagine they could find a way to make additional archival material available via iTunes, Amazon or some other site if they felt the interest was strong enough.

I think the point is, there's not enough money to be made on stuff like this to interest a major record label -- or even a band like the BBs -- in making it available. Any expense in putting it up is too much if you don't have guaranteed sales.  The whole back catalog is already in iTunes as it is.


Well, the question was also put to them in the context of high-res downloads. And those are definitely still an emerging segment of the online marketplace.

Well, it isn't going to happen overnight (though I was caught off guard by the speed of that Stones announcement--boom, it was just available on Friday morning).  Think about all of the other rare/unreleased Beach Boys tracks that fans have sought over the years.  There may not be enough demand to merit a fancy physical release like Smile, but in the wake of that, there may be more fresh interest than before and the interwebs might be a more efficient outlet. 

Wishful thinking?  Probably, but a guy can dream. . .   :smokin

MOVE ALONG, NOTHING TO SEA HEAR

Hey - Tony from Icon Fetch here.  For those having problems with the audio player, it's apparently a Flash problem.  If you update to the latest version, it should remedy the situation.  Shutting down and restarting your browser solves it too.

Part 2 will be posted in a week.

Enjoy.


Tony
Icon Fetch

Great stuff!

Yeah, it was just my computer having a funny five minutes. Thanks so much for making these interviews happen, by the way  :)

Yes Tony - thanks so much for these interviews. This one is especially interesting, hearing Mark & Alan answering some of the questions that have plagued the board for years (Durrie Parks acetates for one). And thanks for submitting my question too. Great to hear a definitive answer on how the Heroes Part 2 mix was compiled.

Actually, I thought they answered almost all of the questions that I had about the set. However, you're right that given how much time they spent talking about "The Child Is Father Of The Man" assembly, they didn't really address where the vocals came from (how did the rest of that acetate go?) plus the fact that the Disc 1 version doesn't really mirror the BWPS version which goes verse/chorus/verse/chorus/moody piano bridge (Disc 1 goes vocal/piano chorus variation/moody piano bridge/chorus/verse/chorus).

By the way, for those who didn't have a chance to hear the interview, Brian's original rough mix sequencing of "Child" reportedly went chorus/verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/half-chorus.

I only listened to this once yesterday, but didn't Mark say he was preparing the stereo track of Good Vibrations for the anniversary release, and then decided to put it on TSS? Then they started talking about hearing isolated elements, (vocals), of the mono track for good vibrations and how they weren't too pleased with the results. Do you think they are/were having a go at doing a full stereo version for the anniversary using this method? If you've heard the beatles rockband multi tracks, then you'll know it can be done VERY well...sometimes. To the degree that you'd never know it was extracted from a mono full mix. Of course some of them aren't as isolated as well.

I'm starting to get excited at the thought of what they may release next year now that smile is in my hands.....

What Mark was talking about was editing the stereo mix of the backing track which did indeed appear on the 2006 anniversary CD single of "Good Vibrations". The backing track appears for a second time on the TSS set. HOWEVER, pay close attention and you'll hear that the drum is missing from the last section of the version on TSS whereas it appears intact on the 2006 release.

The rest of the discussion was based on various YouTube experiments with vocal isolation they've listened to (like we all have) and their feeling that the results are not strong enough to issue an "official" stereo mix of the song.

Oh okay, thanks for clearing that up. I was getting ahead of myself clearly. If they've only been listening to fan made isolations though, and are basing their thoughts on those, they surely aren't as good as could be isolated by the pros who did beatles rockband? I don't know?

Right, but Mark and Alan aren't putting together a BEACH BOYS ROCK BAND game (that would be kind of cool though!) which requires that kind of manipulation in order to make the gameplay practical. I believe they could have some success in isolating the vocals (and at least one of those YouTube versions is superb), but there was no real reason to attempt this. The mono mix is the official track; anything else is just a little diversion and they had already provided two or three of those little "Good Vibrations" diversions on TSS.

Yeah true. My point though isn't why you would extract parts, e.g. the rockband example, merely the point that it can be done. I don't know if you have heard the isolated multi tracks of rockband but truly, the parts extracted are nothing short of a miracle in some cases. No hint of any additional sound bar the instrument they worked on. I don't expect Linnett to do this. It's like a science rather than production ability and it would have to be done out of house.

Now given the significance of GV and that a true stereo mix of this song is possibly the most sought after artifact to many people, and we know that'll never happen from the tapes, surely it's worth having a go?

You're right about one on youtube. Some guy has done a pretty decent home job of separating the vocals using the said process but as he says also, he's no pro and wishes someone else would do it right!

I still remember years and years ago my dad, who's no massive beach boys fan, saying what a shame there was never stereo version of Good Vibrations! Then I got into the Beach Boys and boy was he right!

Sometimes, and not always well. I'll also say there's a difference between making something "work" for a video game and making a presentable product for a non-amateur, officially released track.

It's also worth pointing out that, whether they realize it or not, most fans have different standards for fan mixes and officially-released mixes. The one that I put on YouTube -- which I think is what some people here are referring to -- is pretty good for a fan mix, but were I in Mark and Alan's shoes, I would never approve it.

Although I'd love to hear them do an attempt, I really respect the fact that they're not just running out and capitalizing on the technology, and there are definitely producers out there who would not have that kind of restraint.

Yes, Austin's mix was the one I was referring to. It's a great job, but it is hard to justify that much manipulation to create an official product; if it was just one line (like what happened with the "Wouldn't It Be Nice" stereo mix) or maybe one section, I bet it would be done, but not having to isolate the entire vocal track.

For me, the bigger point is that I would like to be able to get a full stereo version of SMiLE now.  Most of these tracks should be doable in stereo or have already been mixed that way, but there are a few hold outs, including GV, maybe OMP/YAMS and maybe Child.  Are there any others?  In some cases, you might be able to draft in alternate versions, like the instrumental take on GV.  If worse came to worse, I suppose you could resort to mono in a few cases.

My own mix uses mostly stereo with a few tracks in mono due to believing stuff like "Good Vibrations" should be approached with a "leave well enough alone" approach. In the past, some stuff was only available in stereo in incomplete form, but I don't think this is really the case anymore.

I don't know, I don't get either the "everything must be in stereo, even if it results in inferior quality" or "everything must be folded down to mono, even if it results in inferior quality" camps. Two or three mono tracks in your Smile mix won't kill you, and any sane set of ears would adjust in a couple seconds at the absolute most, I'd think.

Yeah, I really like what they've done with OMP/YAMS/Barnshine now too, so I'd probably want to just leave that one in mono too.

Yes true, which I did say so myself, but then I would ask the question again, have you heard some of the multi tracks for beatles rockband? When you hear them isolated, knowing where they orginated from, they sound simply perfect. Like it was recorded solo in isloation. Again, it can't always be done to perfection, but, it can be done to perfection in certain cases. Which begs the original question, why not try? Sure, if it doesn't work, don't release a vocal that sounds like it was sung through a toilet roll into a megaphone, but surely worth a try. That's all I'd say.

I still don't see how these sort of arguments are flying when you have pitch shifted vocals on Look, whispering winds, and Dada that hardly even resemble the voices of the Beach Boys. These sort of arguments need to stop being made because, based on certain things they DID do for an official release, you can poke holes in this reasoning the size of the box set itself. And to the argument that flying in pitch shifted vocals was the only option in those few spots...erm, there's also the option to not do that. I can totally understand trying it out and trying to make it work, but once those results were what came out, i can't comprehend how anyone was okay with it and deemed it usable.


I also don't get the everything has to be either all mono or all stereo. It really doesn't.

Yeah, but with the Beatles rockband, all the multi-tracks exist. Nothings missing. You just have to divvy up the four tracks, and if you're unlucky, apply frequency extraction to one or two elements bounced down.

With the vocals for Good Vibrations, you're talking about extracting doubled, intricate, multilayered harmonies that are mixed quite close to the track, as that's the only place they exist. They only exist on the single master.

Eggsactly <3

Totally true. Although if you've heard the full mono's that they did extract, they sound pretty good isolated, and the moment you put them back into a mix, the partial artefacts left behind virtually disappear.

And the fact that some Joe public extracted truck drivin man!!! That's gotta blow the arguement wide open again? Most people could never even hear that under layers and layers and layers of music and vocals yet someone got it. Imagine with a bit more time and professionalism. Again, someone HAS managed to isolate the GV vocals already. Just not a pro.

Something worth keeping in mind: this is not a black-and-white scenario, where one good extraction means anything can automatically be done. Every extraction depends on many factors: the quality of the source material, the software used, the amount of time and money the controlling forces are willing to put into it, and the judgment and taste of the engineer(s).

I'm not saying it won't ever happen, but really: flying in some stems or extracting the lead vocal from Barnyard are easier tasks than Good Vibrations by an order of magnitude.

Yep. Agree 100%.

Also, remember that what's acceptable for someone working in their study on something to upload on youtube would almost certainly be totally unacceptable to a pro engineer trying to produce something acceptable to their ears for official release on a prestige project that will bear their name. Just look at the sh*t that (unfairly) headed Mark's way over the "Humble Harv" flyins. Then multiply that by, oh, let's say 1000% when a "GV"  'stereo' vocal isolation is used: you wouldn't be able to move for the "This guy's done it better, can't understand why this was released". Believe.

Yes. Very true too.

I think it stems from my personal desire for someone who knows what they're doing to have a go at it full tilt. I'm actually very realistic about the possible results being unusable for an official release, and certainly, after reading some comments on this board about barnyard/great shape, every single person would have a different view on whether it worked, sounded good, sounded sacrilegious etc. So I'm defintely not in the camp of, it can definitely be done and should definitely be done. I personally would love to hear it attempted. And maybe the guy on youtube is the best we'll get?

Cabin Essence does exist in acapella form on certain bootlegs.

It's really a question of quality - i've been impressed by some of the 'stereo' Good Vibrations I've heard, but I'd be a little miffed if they popped up on an official release.

I highly suspect there's a lot of self-deception going on. The officiality of a product, it being, by nature, available to purchase in stores with a Capitol logo, bearing the names of professionals, plays psychological games with many. I'd be willing to bet that if that 'stereo' GV on youtube had first been revealed to the public with a Linett credit, people would be jumping for joy, and conversely, had the fly-ins (forget getting into all the "technical" stuff) from the Capitol CD been attributed to a fan on youtube, the reaction would most likely mirror the most recent responses in this thread, i.e. "pretty good but not good enough for a professional official product." Don't be taken and influenced entirely by the fidelity of the sources used; listen to the work.

And more than a few albums released c. 1967 mixed mono and stereo tracks, even on their "stereo" versions -- ODESSEY AND ORACLE and VU & NICO come to mind. There's nothing wrong with doing a modern SMILE mix this way.

So, essentially you're saying that someone working from the original multi-tracks in a professional studio wouldn't necessarily come up with a better result that someone working in their bedroom using boots ?  Whatever you're on, you need to stop.

And BTW, your premise has been entirely dis-proven by the reaction here to both official and fan versions of the same track. In fact, some seems most irked by the fact that the allegedly crappy "Barnyard" had been officially sanctioned.

No, i'm not essentially saying that. You’ve been using the same tired line since, i think, March. And now that the box set has been released, your argument doesn’t hold up. This is PRECISELY why i wrote the last line in my last post:

Don't be taken and influenced entirely by the fidelity of the sources used; listen to the work.

To throw another one of your tired lines at you: listen to the music not the signal path (which, by the way, “signal path” is not the technically correct usage there, but let’s not get into that). You’re just as guilty of the type of stuff you accuse others of, only in a different direction: you are listening solely to the high fidelity of the master tapes (or in comparative examples, listening to the low fidelity of bootlegs). From the beginning--and it quite stands out because for all your credentials as an expert on the band, when you’re on here, you hardly ever talk about the actual MUSIC and your alleged love of it, instead taking every opportunity to command your pseudo-authority and correct people on minutiae--you have been wowed by the high quality of the tapes (understandably, as the sound quality is superb) and have focused solely on that. Look past that already and listen to the (reissue) production/engineering work.

Also, before you speak, familiarize yourself with studio technology and its relationship to the times. The point of your rhetorical question only really applies to TRACKING (which in this case was done 45 years ago) and digitizing the audio (tape machines used, board, preamps, A/D converters, etc.). Software is software. Alan Boyd explicitly stated in his first Icon Fetch interview that he edited on FINAL CUT PRO! Does this mean anything to you? It doesn’t f*cking matter anyway because at the end of the day, it’s the person’s ear and producer’s vision/discretion that matters. All i’m saying is that the work done on GV by someone in their bedroom (using official released versions of the song, by the way, not boots, as you claim) does not exhibit the egregiousness of some of the work that made it onto the official CD. I’ve brought this up a few times and it’s been ignored: how can people realistically warn against and preemptively complain about doing things like the GV fake stereo extraction on an official release when vocals from other recordings were, 45 years after the fact, digitally pitch shifted and shoehorned into these tracks for the official release? Can you honestly tell me that the pitch shifted vocals on disc 1 really sound like the Beach Boys? Can you honestly tell me that Barnyard sounds better with the demo piano strangling the backing track? Of course, you’re going to say yes to both.


You didn't carefully read what i wrote. I was referring to the sentiments expressed toward the end of this thread. I acknowledge that some people love what bruiteur did. There's obviously more than one camp here.

I don't understand why or how anyone, including i, argue with you. You are a cinder block. ALL of this argument is pointless and insane, i realize. I am insane.

Nope, not going to say yea or nay. No need.  ;D

I know this has been brought up countless times, but why didn't they remove the piano from "Barnyard"? It has obviously been proven possible. They obviously didn't have any problem manipulating the vocals on other parts of the album. I just don't get it. And I think maybe the question wasn't asked on Icon Fetch because Mark and Alan know they should have.

I don't know why and haven't read/heard any response from the producers to it, but in the build up to TSS coming out, I actually just assumed that it would have been done and then when it wasn't, it was quite a surprise. I don't think they've synced it poorly, just thought the piano would be removed. Sorry, i'm not trying to fuel this same argument again.

Yeah I don't wanna start the same old sh*t either, but it's just weird. And for the record, I think "I'm In Great Shape" works great. It sounds complete to me. And "Barnyard" doesn't sound horrible to me, but I think it could have really worked, and I'm just not sure why they didn't try.

Maybe they did try and were not satisfied with the results.