The Smiley Smile Message Board

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but hey, what isn't?

Anyway, what do you think? I had a proper Heroes and Villains listening marathon just recently, and I noticed that he got it right in the early 1967. The cantina version that's on Smiley Smile, or part one... That's it right there. A compact musical cartoon, with not a a dull second included. Sure, it didn't have a catchy chorus, but it didn't really need one. The bicycle rider chorus just kills the track's momentum. The moment he decided to add it the song lost its original idea.

No. The finished single is just sublime. The cantina version is a work in progress. I love it, I love all H&V sessions, but the single is perfect, we're lucky to have it.

I wouldn't say "ruin", but I do like it better without. Never too fond of that part of the song. On the album reconstructions it is annoying having two songs back-to-back with the same chorus, too.

I agree that it kind of ruins the momentum.. I personally like the cantina version with some minor changes...
Dont need to point out that I think that Chorus is a great piece of work, both vocally and instrumentally..that wouldn`t exist in January 67 Smile album!:)
I myself in my Smile mixes put it somewhere, apart from HV, in the end..maybe just a snipett in the end, after the Surfs up finishes..you know Surfs up...silence..HV chosrus snippet.. gone, slience... Think that it kinda closes the album in a nice way..

My favorite own version of H&V has the instrumental chorus after "You're under arrest!". Works great, actually takes up momentum instead of destroying it. It wasn't a good idea to add the bizarre vocals and organ drone and leave the bass and most of the percussion out. That's what ruins the momentum.

In case you're interested: http://www.michael-fredrich.de/HeroesAndVillainsMicha.mp3 (http://www.michael-fredrich.de/HeroesAndVillainsMicha.mp3)

(pre-TSS.) Tell me what you think.

I don't think ruin is the right word but Brian clearly had trouble deciding what should happen after the first two verses given the amount of part 2's and other sections that followed .  Also the transition from the end of verse 2 to whatever part 2 would be was a problem.
I would still love to hear the v1/v2/great shape/my children/3 score/barnyard? version (if that is indeed what was intended in October 1966). Those Durrie Parks acetates auctioned earlier this year must be heard as they apparently contained a Great Shape/My Children edit. That's a feature piece of the jigsaw.
I never felt the Cantina version was THE one but close. Funnily enough i was always underwhelmed by it but a few years back it came on in my local pub and sounded amazing. I was on my first pint so it wasn't the alcohol !
Apart from the momentum somehow being lost with the Bicycle Rider insert for Heroes it also left Do You Like Worms in trouble.
If anyone has a line to Al we should persuade him to get BW to play the Great Shape Heroes and sort out that original melody for Worms and play them on tour. I bet Al could sing the heck out of those two. That'd be 2 key parts of Smile essentially sorted. Then we could get on with arguing about The Elements and the Child Is Father lead vocal.
BTW I'm also intrigued as to how the part 3 from December on the Smile box fits in or joins on and to what. It's in E and seemingly lost in the mystery that is Heroes and Villains.

Tbh, I think the 'cantina section' is the boring part. I agree the chorus could be considered tedious, but if he shortened it there would be no problem, but because he goes 2x D#m G#m it loses it's momentum. Which is why I mixed out of my mix! ;D

The main problem of the Smile sessions was that Brian wasn't writing finished songs. I think the song would have been better if he actually wrote a chorus that logically followed the melody of the verse.

I do love the Smiley Smile Heroes and Villains, though. I agree that it's the best version of the song.

I disagree. I think for the most part the songs as compositions were essentially finished. It was during the recording process that BW went back re-recording sections/replacing sections. I believe that in almost every case at the beginning of sessions for heroes/worms/cabin/child/wonderful/wind chimes/surfs up/master painter-sunshine/vegatables/look/holidays BW could have sat down and played through the whole tune for the assembled musicians. Maybe the words weren't completely finalised but i think they were at the very least mostly there.
The Heroes version played for Humble Harv shows there was (at least initially) a clear plan.
I wish there were some composing demos knocking around.

He didn't ruin it.  He finished it!  Without it, the song had NO chorus.  Even as far out as "Good Vibrations" was at the time, it wouldn't have went to #1 without having a good hook in the refrain.

In answer to the question... No.

I always preferred the Smiley version by far. It finishes the song nicely, the vocals are incredible and the bicycle rider part I always thought was a perfect chorus. I don't see how that could stifle the songs momentum at all. On the original versions, sections changed randomly into each other and didn't have much of a flow to begin with! So how could the single version ruin the songs momentum when it didn't have a straight momentum to begin with? I love the Smile versions with the different sections. I love how Smile in general is modular and changes from section to section randomly, even if it sounded unexpected and out of left field. There's no way that the public would get that Cantina version of H&V and it wouldn't have topped the charts as far as I'm concerned. Just look at the charts in '66 and '67. There were still lots of catchy pop songs high on the charts. GV was still a catchy pop song through & through ( even though the production was beyond what most other artists were doing).

I personally think it says a lot how well H&V did on the charts after SMile was abandoned. It didn't hit top 10 but it still hit top 20, not too shabby. I doubt any other version that was done for Smile would have done as well as GV as a single. Vegetables however I think would of had potential.

I'm not a big fan of the studio version, any studio version. Mostly because of the muddy mix.

Give me the In Concert version instead.

The final Smiley version is the only one that sounds like a record to me. I remember hearing it on the radio when I was about 12 or 13 and really loving it. Let's not forget it WAS a hit. Bigger hit than 'Do It Again' or 'Darlin', and their biggest until 'Rock and Roll Music'.

Here Here!  I can't take the mix.  All those beautiful sessions and intricate instrumentation-- and we get that horrible mix.  I've asked the question here a few times before but can never get a good answer: how did that mix result from those sessions?  Was it just a matter of recording a recording of a recording?  How could anybody not notice how muddy the finished product sounded.  Or did they?  Whenever I bring it up, nobody echoes my complaint.

My favorite H&V version is the one I made myself using the BWPS instrumental version with fly-in vocals from the sessions and other released versions.

I always read things like that and get briefly confused, being used to Do it Again being a Number 1 hit here.

God I see that thing EVERYWHERE. And Barbara Ann. Every single flippin' singles box.

For some reason I went my whole life without every hearing the Smiley Smile version of H&V.  So my very first exposure to any incarnation of the song was the Cantina mix on a friend's SMiLE mix sometime in 2001.  I was astounded and dumbfounded!  It was one of the most amazing songs I'd ever heard! 

So when I eventually heard the Smiley Smile version of H&V I was really let down, because I felt that chorus belonged in Do You Like Worms, not H&V, and then the overall flow of the song seemed more disjointed, as compared to the Cantina version which I felt was more cohesive, even without an actual chorus.  I also thought the vocal performances was flimsy and too whimsical (as compared to the "strong" vocals of the Cantina version) and the vocals were incredibly dry and didn't seem to match the beauty of the backing tracks (thanks to home-studio recording).

So yeah, I felt it was ruined, but not just by the chorus.  But of course that's because my first exposure of it was the Cantina version. 

Been listening to both versions now... If your goal is to make a "three-minute musical comedy", you go with the cantina version. If your goal is to make a hit single you go with the Smiley version.

I agree with everything you said, Phoenix! The song would've been monotonous without the "Bicycle Rider" segment. There where we hear grains of creativity that Brian had in mind - it's a vocal masterwork! One of the finest examples of the BBs' harmonizing. I like the verses a little bit more, though.

GV without Mike's famous hook=No.2 at most. And that'd be quite disappointing (esp. to Brian), taking into account how long they were recording it & how much money it cost them in total. At different studios, mind you also.

Agree.  A version w/o Bicycle Rider might have worked for his early conception of a series of movements along with IIGS, Barnyard, etc, but only as an ambitious album track, not a single.

No.

Do you really think that "Barnyard" and "I'm In Great Shape" are a part of the song "Heroes and Villains?" They are completely individual songs, albeit part of the original conception of the "Heroes and Villains" suite, but completely individual compositions, no matter how short they are.

Yep.  And Gershwin should never have used woodwinds on Rhapsody in Blue.

Word. Some people just never get it right!

Word?  Word!  Brother... Or is that bro'? I was agreeing with you.  Never mind...  ::)

Shoulda been Bro' Records!

To me the Bicycle Rider chorus is an essential part of Heroes and Villains.  Don't mind the inclusion of the Cantina section except for the spoken segment "You're under arrest!" which I find so irritating that I've actually gone to the trouble of editing it out so that I can listen to H&V without having the flow of the song interrupted by that jarring segment.

It doesn't need the chorus on the album...but it does on the single.

If any of you naysayers can construct a  piece of music which changes and develops as much as the H&V single, which contains wildly conflicting sections and yet retains a perfect sense of structure throughout, then I'd love to hear it. I would wager though that it's the bloody armchair pundits with the least amount of talent who think they know better than a master of his art.

I wouldn't go as far as saying that anyone who doesn't think the H&V single is sheer perfection is a fucking moron, but I certainly wouldn't disagree with anyone who did have the vision and audacity to make a bold statement like that

I love the BR section. It always represented the Villainous part of H&V to me - the dark counterpoint to the more comedic up tempo sections. A literal interpretation I know, but it works for me. Some of the Heroes sections he worked on definitely evoke silent-movie villainous cad.

Yes, he did.

i really can't fathom why anyone would think Heroes & Villains is better without the chorus. You're under arrest, folks.  :police:

Wow seriously?

To expand on my "No":

 The "Bicycle Rider" section is the part of the song that grabbed me first back in '67. Like hell Brian ruined it.

Just to make it clear, I'm not condemning the single version (I admit, "ruin" is a bit too strong word here). That's the Heroes and Villains I first fell in love with, and one of the key tracks that got me hooked on this band in the first place. But, as I mentioned earlier, the "three-minute musical comedy" thing he had originally in mind DID work just fine! It didn't need no chorus to be a great song. It's great, action-packed and fun. Biff! Pow! Bang! Zap! The finished Smile would have had enough melancholy bits to balance out it's perkiness (one song doesn't need to contain all the emotions).

I'm not saying I know better than Brian what to do with his songs. Just saying that he didn't necessarily need to tinker with it endlessly like he did. He got it right in early 1967. Such a shame he didn't see it.

Funny thing is, when I first heard the cantina version, I was like "yeah, this is great"! I didn't even notice it doesn't have the familiar chorus until after maybe 20 listens! That goes to prove that it did have the flow and momentum a great song needs. I still think it would have been a hit. Top 12 at least.

I think you got it right. (But I wouldn't eliminate either section)

It was the same for me. I had heard the Cantina version for many years before realizing there was no Bicycle Rider part!

H&V was the albatross and the phoenix sprung from the same nest, all the versions, fragments, etc. are part of something much larger and complex swirling around in the madness of the agonizingly extended SMILE moment. The arc that the versions go through is akin to an almost cinematic shift from brightly lit sunshine to night & shadow (following up on buddahat's very fine insight). The chorus adds an emotional weight and depth that gives the song an extra dimension. Paul Williams thought that Brian's greatest achievement was to finally put together a coherent, cohesive version of the song after all of that "birth trauma." Methinks there's a good bit of truth (and wisdom) in that viewpoint...

I'm a cantina version fan all the way.  I think the "three score and five" bit is the best part of the song and the "la la la la la" is just the song treading water for a while.

Heh, I've always thought that's the "hit singalong nesteet-thing-to-chorus-hook" part!

I love both versions!  They are both perfect in their own ways.  I just can't imagine hearing the Cantina version on the radio, especially out of context with other BBs songs of that era.
In my world:

Smiley version-single

Cantina version-album

....which invites the question, would the Cantina version have made an appropriate opener to Smiley Smile?  I realize that for commercial reasons they needed that established single to kick off the album, but I ask the question from a creative point of view.  Thoughts, anyone?

Yes I do believe they are part of Heroes - at least according to Van dyke who says they were written as part of the song from the very beginning.  See Dominic's book for Van's description.

I think the chorus, stolen from another song where it fits perfectly, definitely slows the momentum and hurts the song but ultimately made it slightly more commercial (I suspect the fact there was the slow section in GV and it was so successful may have influenced the use of it, but as a chorus it was underwhelming, it would have been better as a standalone section or a fade) - remember, this single was a failure commercially in comparison to other BB hits.  I also prefer the version on Hawthorne that restores the original instrumentation (bass, percussion) and mixes out/lowers the organ overdub.  It's more smile and less smiley in that mix.

Troll alert.  Stupidest argument ever?  If we can't write music as good as Brian we can't prefer an earlier version of the song to the later released version?  You need to go back to your armchair and read a book on logic and maybe etiquette before sharing more of your great insights with us.

 :lol

Yeah, I was in a bad mood. It was funny though.

The funniest bit was when you got offended, and went all like Hannah Montana, like, stupidest post ever, like OMG! Troll alert.

I disagree completely. To me, the first chorus and the bicycle rider choruses are the best part of the song!

Maybe Brian was never concerned about overall sound quality in general? (shrug)
After all, even with one good ear he HAD to have noticed the intrusive bass notes that are present on PS's "I'm Waiting For the Day" that sounds like he used a tape that wasn't properly erased.

....and the chatter in Here Today and other songs, various coughs, clunky edits, and the list goes on.  You've got to wonder why Brian would take so much care in detail with writing, arranging, recording, etc. only to let weird anomalies like this slide in the mixing/mastering process.

Sound 'quality' is not really the issue here -- these are errors that Brian (and others, like Chuck Britz) let slide due to things like time constraints, label deadlines, etc. ... and (I think) moments of inspiration. If you got a perfect mix that had a small technical error (that may not have even been heard until later), sometimes you'd let it slide. Brian was very tuned in to sound quality, but decisions were made based on the standards of the day. And these imperfections -- which may be so obvious in today's digital age -- were not as noticeable on vinyl, particularly Capitol's pressings, which were usually EQ'd pretty heavily. I'm sure the mistakes were noted and BW and the engineers, etc. agreed "no one will notice it on vinyl". Or that they just added to the vibe. And seriously, people did not listen with such critical ears in those days ... not sure the Kingsmen's "Louie Louie" would become a hit if released today.

... though I do agree that the multi-track working methods of the mid to late '60s favored artistic preference and convenience of workflow over sound quality in general. But things like the mistakes left in were really just errors, not sound quality issues. Though there were some decisions made that legitimately affected sound quality, like the the entire instrumental track being dubbed to just one track on an 8-track master. Those were conscious decisions made, where the workflow was considered over sound quality.

Personally, I think the imperfections give a certain humanity and character.

It's all the same.  I've said for years: Cantina version, minus the Barnshine fade = part one.  Single version, from first chorus on = part two.  Once Brian decided to trim things down to a standard length single, he combined the two by putting the opening of part one at the start of part two.  Voila!  Since hitting on that idea, every other version sounds incomplete or, in the case of the 2004 construction, wrong, to me.

I dont' feel he ruined it.  It has a strange vibe to it but that's what he was going for.  If he wanted it to not have a chorus, he would have left it like that, or if he wanted a properly written chorus he would have written one.  He wanted it to sound like the single (pretty much) did.  It was meant to sound different than anything before. 

It's easy for us to listen to songs like that and say "Oh, well if this was like this, it woud flow better" but he wasn't trying to make it the best sounding, best structured song he ever did.  He wanted it to be jarring and for the Chorus to kill the momentum a bit.  No musician is trying to make every song they record better than the last one, most musicians try to make each song sound different than the last one.

I think the only argument you can make is that he thought they were 'natural'.  Happy accidents, as Bob Ross used to say.  

Another thing about Brian, he often had people sing apparently two different lines at the same time.  So like in "Car Club"... half the guys appear to be saying "Car Club... Car Club" and the other half are going "Start Up... Car Club".  It screws with each other and kind of muddies the sound, makes it unclear... some would consider that a mistake, but either somebody messed up and he left it, or he instructed them to sing like that.  

He also has publicly stated that he recorded stuff with no concern over whether you'd be able to hear it in the mix.  I.E., he'd record the instruments, then record the vocals over it and it'd often drown out all kinds of stuff that was going on in the instrumental.  You can't really hear what's going on at the bottom of "Kiss me Baby" unless you KNOW what Mike's singing... and even now, I can't hear what they're saying in the background of "Shelter" towards the end. 

I think he felt that it was all natural, or subliminal, or whatever and still added to the song even if it was a mistake, or just noise, or lyrics you couldn't hear, or whatever. 

"Happy Accidents"

Well, I personally don't consider the muddy mix of H&V to be a "happy accident" at all.  I've never heard this track on vinyl but I can't imagine it sounds ok.  One of my favorite bb tracks and the thing sounds like crap!

This was a Spector thing too. There's a famous story out there somewhere of an engineer telling another engineer that he had seen Spector work, and knew the 'secret' to get the wall of sound, but he'd never believe him. So they make some kind of bet, and the first guy goes to the studio with the second guy to show him how to do it. Time was booked, musicians hired, etc.

So they start setting up and the guy starts setting up musicians all over the place, some of which are not even miked up. Engineer #2 starts freaking out ('is this a joke!?! I'm not gonna pay a guy who's not even being recorded!' etc.), and the session is cancelled.

I wish I could find this story online because I'm paraphrasing !!! probably just lore in any case, but I'd believe it.

These things do matter ... I mean the blending, etc. You throw in enough subtle things, it adds up to a whole that cannot be easily reproduced.


The sound of this mono mix is one of the reasons I love the Beach Boys so much. Find anything, anywhere that has the sonic texture of this track. totally weird. like cartoon music. closest is Ike & Tina's "Save the Last Dance for Me", but even that sounds more 'REAL'. Something so beautifully plastic and artificial about the 'H&V' 45 mix.

I agree with Donny - it comes down to the artistic and aesthetic choices Brian made for how this record was going to sound. In this case, he was walking the same path as Phil Spector and the "Wall", where definition of individual instruments was not as important to the textures he wanted for the song as the overall effect of a blast of sound hitting you through one (often small) speaker.

With these issues, I think to understand what went on in the decision-making process behind a record like "Heroes", you need to compare and contrast it to other recordings from the time. In this case, there is one specific recording that really dramatizes the difference in intent and the way the process was different based on that final goal for the record.

"All Or Nothing At All", by Frank Sinatra, arranged by Nelson Riddle, recorded in LA between April-May 1966 and using some of the exact same equipment and technology, and in some cases the same musicians (at least on the Strangers In The Night album where this song can be found) as Brian was using for his 1966 recordings, at least the tracks he was cutting at Western. Remember, they were using the same technology and equipment, though Frank usually recorded in larger rooms at Bill Putnam's United/Western facilities.

Listen to this: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfeBAo-08c0 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfeBAo-08c0)

Nelson Riddle sounds like he's trying to out-Riddle himself, as he had great acclaim and success with a similar bombastic arrangement for Frank on "I've Got You Under My Skin"...popular enough that when Sinatra played his Vegas live shows, he'd often yell "run for cover!!!" just before Quincy Jones led the Basie band into sheets of exploding sound during the arranger's chorus of the song.

When you listen to "All Or Nothing At All", pay specific attention to the arranger's chorus from 2:08 to 3:06. It's probably one of the most bombastic and over-the-top shout choruses Nelson ever wrote, just pure explosions of brass, organ, bass, etc. Yet during that shout chorus, you can hear almost *everything* that's playing in the band. Everything from acoustic piano, to acoustic bass, to Hammond organ, to nearly every woodwind and brass instrument so you can even hear the specific notes of the bari sax in those thick chords.

Incredible. One of my favorite sections of music, ever, period.

And again, the fact that you can hear so much definition in every section of instruments, from rhythm to winds to brass to strings to Frank's voice, is what kills you every time.

Consider what Brian was doing in going for the Spector sound - again, same technology, same gear, same studio facilities in some cases - That definition was entirely possible as demonstrated by Sinatra-Riddle using a studio band I'd estimate almost twice the size of Brian and Spectors' groups when you factor in a full big band with strings. But that's not what Brian was going for, nor was Spector. It was a different texture, a different mindset going into those recordings that created the "Wall Of Sound" versus what Riddle and Sinatra were doing at the same time.

Your ears are the ultimate judge of that.  :)

What order do you think H&V would have gone in had Brian left in Great Shape and barnyard? (I always felt they WERE part of the song and were very weak alone - which is why I never put them on my Smile mixes)

The work in progress "Cantina Mix" to me feels like a complete HV Part I, meant to be followed (at some point) on the album by a Part II.  And  the Smiley Smile single version that Brian eventually did complete would have made the more succinct single version -- although, it wouldn't have sounded so dull, muddy and slap-dash -- had it remained in the SMiLE vernacular.

I don't get what any of you are talking about... Heroes & Villains on Smiley is tremendous and sounds great to me! What's this muddiness you all keep referring too? And dull? It's one of their greatest ever songs and this [Smiley] is the best version.

Listen to any of the Heroes sessions on TSS, then listen to the finished song.  There's no way you can tell me it ain't muddy.  The sessions have such definition, clarity, and depth.  The finished track is flat, mashed together, inordinately unclear.  It sounds like you're listening to a recording of a recording of a recording.  It's awful.

Great insight, by the way, guitarfool.  Thanks!

That's interesting. To me it feels that if there ever was a track called "H&V part 2" it would have been a single B-side non-album track. Not saying you shouldn't feel the way you do, just that I feel differently.

As the position of your speakers, the quality of your equiptment and, most importantly the range of your ears make it an extremely subjective thing, there's no way you can tell me it is muddy.

You can't listen to unmixed session tapes and compare it to the finished article. It wasn't supposed to be heard like that. These things were mastered for mono car speakers. These clear as a bell new mixes are an attempt to shoehorn these recordings into a modern dynamic.

I'm no purist, but to me, the stereo Smiley Smile sounds sterile and lifeless. There were no moments when I heard any details that I had not heard previously, as some have claimed, but we all have different ears. The original mono mix though, this muddy album that folk keep referring to,has a powerful and overwhelming sound. I hear no mud

I think the other guy meant this record:

(http://userserve-ak.last.fm/serve/500/91366935/Lets+Have+A+Party++The+Best+Of+Mud+Lets+Have+A+Party+Best+Of+7275.jpg)

That's neat.

I don't happen to have any mono car speakers, so I guess I'm screwed!

I get what you're saying, but I have a hard time believing I'm alone in disliking the finished mix, and I reject the notion that one must have his speakers set just right, the right quality equipment, etc., in order to truly appreciate a piece of music.  I realize you're not necessarily pushing that notion here, but it drives me nuts.  Can we really rule out the possibility that the final mix of Heroes sounds the way it does not because of a meticulous calculation by Brian to target a single specific medium, but because the mixing technology of the day simply didn't allow the quality of the session recordings to be retained to the end of the process?

I think that's true, yes. Even nowadays things end up screwed at the mastering stage (not that I'm saying H&V is screwed   ;))

A good mix should translate well across mediums and systems, and I think 'H&V' does. However, it may sound more ideal (or closer to the original vision) in certain environments.

Lots of people think 'H&V' is murky/muddy/lo-fi/etc. But I don't think this is a result of the limitations of the technology of the day. In fact, I think the technology of 1967 was capable of a higher-quality recording than what most are made with today. I also don't think it's lo-fi at all if you really listen to it. A big part of the 'murk' is the way the bass instruments are mixed.

I'd say the primary sonic texture on the 45/Smiley mix of 'H&V' is due to:

1. Brian's creative decisions
2. Brian's workflow decisions
3. the engineers
4. the equipment

What do you make of Al Jardine's comments that Brian "purposefully underproduced" the Heroes and Villains single?

The single release came as a transition from 'Good Vibes' to Smiley (closer to Smiley). So Brian was probably on his way to the home studio/Smiley scene, and started making decisions toward that kind of vibe. I mean, yeh, he dropped out of the production race right there.

'Mastering' as we know it today did not really exist on '60s records. The standard in the '60s was to make your mix sound how you want the finished product to sound.  Mastering was making sonic compromises to ensure a good cut to vinyl. I'm sure plenty of records were cut right from the 1/4" master, or a direct dub of it. Later, 'EQ'd Masters' (as they were often called) were made on a separate tape, factoring in the vinyl limitations and massaging individual songs into a more cohesive whole.

Off topic, but it leads on from what you're saying Donny. Judging by the description (can't remember from who) of Brian giving instructions to on the fly to the guy who prepared the Pet Sounds master, as it was cut on the lathe, a lot of it was dynamic instructions, i.e, bring it up here, down here. And you can hear those level changes on the original mix, particularly in tracks like I Just Wasn't Made For These Times.

Another earlier example of these dynamic changes which in this case I think were planned for during tracking is Do You Wanna Dance. Because it starts off so soft, the power when the chorus comes in is really intense. This is really lacking in the new stereo mix, you can hear the modern compression coming in on the chorus to compensate for the level changes. So Brian's original vision in this case, has gone.

My favourite CD version of the Today album is the Past Masters. Not for any purist reason, just because it sounds so good.Brian knew what he was doing. Pet Sounds seems to work better in stereo than Today. Today is a masterclass in mono mixing. The stereo mixes leave me cold.

And was it on this board that I read that modern compression techniques leave music with the same dynamic range as an Edison cylinder?

I'm not sure what's been going on with recent masters, but the digital processing is out of control. I don't have a problem with compression or limiting, but the digital stuff just doesn't seem to sound good on the end result. For instance, lots of '60s stuff was seriously over-compressed and limited to hell (lots of Beatles stuff ... and the Monkees' Pisces, Aquarius ... album [even Nesmith mentioned that they overdid it with the then-new UREI 1176]) ... but they still sound cool.

Even the orig. mono mix of Pet Sounds has quite a bit of compression. sounds great. yeh, Brian and Chuck and everyone else involved were on top of their game, unbeatable. totally bold strokes all around.

No musician except for Brian Wilson!  Brian was very competitive, with himself as much as others, and definitely wanted his next song to be "better" than the previous Good Vibrations, he wanted to "blow minds" with the next single.  Now did he give up on Heroes after Smile collapsed and deliberately "underproduce" it to get that murky sound with the organ on purpose?  Maybe.  Al thinks so.  Jarring tranisitions, I'll buy - they're all over Smile.  Did he want the chorus to kill the momentum of the single?  I doubt it.  He wanted Heroes to be a hit.

I suspect the murky sound was the result of shifting sessions from Western and Columbia to the home studio, recording vocals in the empty swimming pool, overdubbing organ and multiple layers of vocals, copying sections of the backing track and overdubbing more vocals on a now second generation backing tape, etc. - technical reasons rather than conscious decisions.

I can handle both the unreleased February 1967 single and the Smiley Smile version. For me, the 'In the Cantina' version is incredible until the False Barnyard ending, I always wish that the fade was different. The Smiley Smile single is very similar in timing and structure to Good Vibrations i.e. verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/tag/prelude to fade (or final chorus)/ fade (or final repeat of chorus). The knowledge of what a magnificent song Do You Like Worms could have been leaves me with regret in relation to the chorus used with the Smiley Smile version of Heroes and Villains.

I'd bet my jewels the reason it sounds "off" is because it was just tacked on as some kind of place holder.

As I said:

I think the "finished" Cantina version we all know was a possible attempt at making a single version out of just the first half.  As bad as the barnyard fade fits, the tape explosion would have been a worse ending for the radio, which is why I think he stuck the other one on there.

I love the fade of the cantina version much more than the jarring single version chorus and think it fits the song very well. BTW it's not Barnyard even if it's the same chords.

That is an intriguing possibility.

What are you saying? The cantina version's fade is perfect! The song goes through all kinds of hoops and loops, all kinds of craziness going on... Then it ends with a BANG (the explosion), and the fade represents our hero riding to the sunset after his big adventure. I say it's no placeholder. It just makes sense. Kind of like end credits, you know?

Yeah I can't believe people would take off that "false barnyard" ending.. That is definitely one of my favorite parts of the original H&V.. The ending is absolutely perfect. It makes you realize what an epic song you just listened to. It's like a movie with the perfect ending. Those BB vocals (I can't remember if they were in the original mix or not) are some of the most gorgeous harmonies they've ever done! Up there with Our Prayer and the Whispering Winds tag from SS Wind Chimes to me..

Where did this "hero riding off into the sunset" theory come from?

From my mind, as told by my ears. Hey, Imma genus too!

Yeah, well, I just picture a very fugly old woman dancing around.

Slightly sped-up, sepia toned crackly film... Yeah, I can totally picture it.

That's a great theory.  It makes total sense and is quite possibly the reason Brian used it like that when he decided to.  I just still think any version but the one I picture as the full "mythical long version" sounds incomplete. 

I'm being honest here, and not being dismissive of this at all, but what do you think the "mythical long version" would be. A version that would include "I'm In Great Shape" and "Barnyard"? What else? I for one think that like SMiLE, "Heroes And Villains" will always sound best in a version that we can only imagine, but never hear. However, to me, I'm totally happy with the single version. Still my favorite.

From page 2 of this thread:

Combine them and you have the "mythical long (album) version". 
Split it in half and you have both sides of the two sided single:  Side A = Part 1, Side B = Part 2 :)

Hey DonnyL,

Is this the story that you're thinking of?

"The late recording engineer Larry Levine (the inventor of the Gold Star WALL OF SOUND) told me this amusing story at breakfast one day a few years back. I think you will find it interesting.

One day this hot shot producer calls Larry up and sez: "Larry, I have this hot new singer (now quite famous) and I want her to be backed up with the Wall Of Sound type deal. Can you reproduce that in the studio for me?"

Larry said he could if the hot shot producer would let him have free reign and not interfere. The producer said he would. So, Larry booked a studio (A&M) and hired a bunch of great LA studio musicians and started recording.

First thing the hot shot producer did when he walked in was take a look into the studio. He stopped the session right there and said: "Hey, Larry, something is wrong here! There are two bass players, two drummers, three guitar players, two keyboard players and most of them ARE NOT EVEN MIKED!"

Larry said "I know, that's what I want".

The producer said "What is the good of having all of those musicians playing (and costing me a union fortune) if they are not going to be on microphone? This is costing me a great deal of money."

Larry said that if this guy wanted the WALL OF SOUND, this type of recording setup was essential. The hot shot producer said that if he needed two drummers, bass players, etc. he could just have his usual players overdub as many parts as they needed but at least they would be on mike.

Larry explained that the entire idea of the Wall was to create a literal WALL OF SOUND and that to put all the musicians on their own microphones would ruin the effect. The idea wasn't to hear all of the musicians, the idea was to obscure the detail of individual instruments and instead feel the total sound in your gut, the adding of detail would ruin the illusion.

The hot shot producer immediately canceled the session and that was that. No WALL OF SOUND for that guy. He just couldn't believe what Larry Levine was telling him. It was the impact of the group as a whole that was important, not the details of what the glockenspiel player was doing, etc."

I got this from here:
http://forums.stevehoffman.tv/threads/pet-sounds-and-beach-boys-new-stereo-mixes-why-did-brian-wilson-change-his-mind.156267/

Post #1

Are you sure the sunset hero thing "only" comes from your mind? Because that's the way I've always heard the ending as well! It's not in a book och lner notes or so, is it?

Don't remember reading it anywhere... But it's kind of obvious, innit? Goes to show you that Brian knew what he was doing and he did it well. Putting images into peoples heads with his music.