The Smiley Smile Message Board

“I was listening to a new Beach Boys album ( “That’s Why God Made The Radio”) and it was so obvious the vocals had been auto tuned,” fumed Cummings. “Obviously I was not impressed. I mean this is the same Beach Boys that recorded Pet Sounds and all those great vocal harmonies yet they felt they had to resort to auto-tuning!

I mean Burton's not wrong but the auto tune is no reason to dislike the album

Who is Burton Cummings...?

The Guess Who

Who gives a damn? He's one dude with an opinion.

Off with his head!!

I trust his judgement. But he needs to listen to "the suite" again.

He also had a fairly big solo hit with "Stand Tall." He has a point about the autotune. I'm sure they don't sing as well as they did when they did "Pet Sounds," but it would have been more poignant to hear unvarnished old guy Beach Boys.

Ahhh....gotcha. Only member I was familiar with was Bachman.

Share The Land is a classic!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rLQJ4toj-JY

astroray.

Cummings is passionate about the music he loves, and he does love the Beach Boys. I can tolerate the autotune on TWGMTR, but not on the live album. I will stick with The Beach Boys in Concert from '73 when I want to hear a strong live BB's album. Live in London is a good listen, too.

I beg to differ. I physically can't listen to it. I've tried and tried. I get through the first song, on which the pitch correction isn't too bad, but by the first few seconds of "Isn't It Time", I've quickly turned it off, my face looking like I've just tasted something fetid and rotten.

Yes, I've heard the suite, but again, the pitch correction renders it too painful for me to listen to.

I'll stick with Love You thanks.

I'm happy with 99.9% of the album. Also gotta bear in mind that back in the 60s/70s BW/tBBs sped up or slowed down tapes to get the effects he wanted, which is arguably no different –  it was the best technology available at the time. Nothing from the 60s is rendered unlistenable as a result…

If it had been done to the extent of Michael Bublé's recordings, or the X-Factor shows, then I WOULD be upset!

Suggest you don't go within 250 miles of the 2012 "live" album then. Every cell in your body will explode.

I don't like TWGMTR either. :shrug

Oh dear.  I'm glad I'm not so much of a music fan that I can hate music like that.  :-)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Its not a conscious choice, or me being snobbish. The food analogy is the closest I can get to explaining it. For me, listening to badly executed pitch correction is like eating something very unpleasant. I've had  negative physical reactions to music / genres / instruments I don't like since I was very small.

I'm sad I don't like it. I trust the majority of people on here who say there's some great stuff on it. I'm missing out.

This is why I read this board. Forearmed is forewarned.

Will be keeping a close look on here as the next Joe Thomas project appears on the horizon.  With an open mind obviously.  :angel:

Burton Cummings also sang (autotune-less) backup vocals on Carl's "Youngblood" album.  Funny that Carl ended up working with two members or former members of the Guess Who.

Though I feel completely different than you do, I can understand you. I thought the vox on the album sounded weird at first, but I've gotten used to it, so I can enjoy the music. (Except one song that makes me cringe...)

Personally, I feel about that way when I listen to Love You! Those terrible synths, the croaking vocals, the anti-dynamic drum tracks - just makes me cringe and sad and wish somebody would rerecord the album with real arrangements. Many of the songs are quite good, and had they been recorded and arranged in the 1965-1970 period, they would be classics. But this way... earlier this year I listened to the whole album once more, and after that I managed to listen to SIP and stand the first four tracks without skipping after a few bars!

Remember, I'm just one guy with an opinion! :)

He's entitled to his opinion and it's not like it's a blasphemous one. Anyway, imagine if they'd gotten the vocals to sound like Brian's on the Disney album, recorded just the year before - some of those songs would have been on the Pet Sounds level without any qualifiers.

Wow! Two people with completely diametric views who are able, via the powers of empathy, to not only understand the other's point of view, but to symphathise!

Micha, what say we start a new Mike Love thread where we politely see each others point of view for 38 pages?

Just the two of us? How sweet! ;D

It'll be tough for us to get to 38 pages that way, though...

Yes. A forbidden love between a Brianista and a Kokomaoist.

But, soft! what light through yonder window breakaway?  It is the east, and Micha is the (lucky old) sun

Sorry old bean, you're wearing the dress.

Yeah Burton loves the BEACH BOYS, he tells of the time he was doing the bkgds on "Youngblood" and he was standing between Carl and Timothy B. Schmidt, he was in Heaven, standing inbetween The Beach Boys and  The Eagles!

Burton's comments remind me of the way I felt most every time a new song from the Beach Boys came out between 1988 and, well, um....up to 2012 and it just felt nothing like the magic or the uniqueness that got me into the band so much in the first place. We like what we like, simple as that.

Looking back I guess it's somewhat of a good thing that there were not too many new "Beach Boys" songs released between 1988 and 2012, otherwise there would have been a lot more of us left scratching our heads as everything from Baywatch to Problem Child came out.

Such a terribly produced album

This is why the Paley sessions stuff not coming out is so criminal to me. Then again, if it came out, it would have been worked up by the Adult Comptempo scenesters to render it unrecognizable I'm sure.

The Beach Boys new material in the 80's and 90's aside...simply because I think a lot of the released new songs were weak if not bordering on throwaways...I'm thinking if my opinions are any indication, the era in which they were recorded may have sunk them by design.

I think Burton Cummings is like most musicians who fell in love with this band: We took influence from the classic sounds and productions, which just happened to fall into an era when many of us think the art of recording pop music in the moment was at its peak. The limitations of what they could do made them innovate beyond what any "rules" would say they could do, and they fed off of their peers who were mostly in their early to mid 20's working and almost learning in an odd mentoring situation with engineers who knew what the hell they were doing from a technical angle. Thus, the records pushed the boundaries of technology while also working with some of the finest technology for recording that has ever been available.

Then we get into the 80's and 90's, where digital was being used and abused for the sheer fact that it was "new", even in some cases where techniques that seemed cutting edge were found to have inherent flaws and hiccups that affected the music it was being used to record.

Digital reverb racks in the late 1980's versus even an EMT plate...'nuff said?  :)

I think part of Cummings' opinion comes from seeing "Beach Boys" and expecting something that sounds like the records that he, and I, and Donny, and Lindsey Buckingham, and name anyone else fell in love with and pored over for hours trying to figure out how they captured the magic.

And modern recordings just don't have it by design, they're not aiming for the same goals even with all kinds of plug-ins and simulators designed to mimic the old sounds. It just isn't the same.

And that dooms many "new" recordings from classic bands, by design and fairly or unfairly, not just the Beach Boys but also the Stones, McCartney, CSN, even Dick Dale never captured that undercurrent of chaos and impending danger that one record like Misirlou nailed 50+ years ago on any of his comeback records. They just don't feel the same as what we all loved originally.

Many people felt the same about the BW '88 album, it just missed that undercurrent and feel that we'd expect from the name on the cover due to some now-questionable sounds that were all the rage in 1987-88.

yep ... and the rub on the '88 LP is that the songs are GOOD. But it doesn't sound good.

What's that poetic quote? Unfortunately I don't recognize it.

The production might sound kind of dated but in a way BW88 always reminds me of Sunflower. Or, to put it more precisely, I feel it could've been the group's late-80s equivalent to the early-70s classic. I don't mind the wall of synths at all, although admittedly the overall arrangements are probably not half as intriguing as the group's earlier use of synthesizers on Sunflower, Holland, and Love You.

It's Romeo and Juliet.

It's hard for me to fault the group for using synths on the 1985 album, or Brian on his 88 debut. I'm sure they were told "it's what everybody's doing now" and "you want to get played on the radio, don't you?" If Brian had told Landy in 1986/87 he wanted to make a record "the way I used to do", the wacky doctor would have laughed a good laugh, and then given Brian some heavy duty sedatives. It was an era everyone had to go through before they could get back to a more natural sound with real instruments. I find both the BB85 and BW88 albums infinitely more listenable than, say, McCartney's "Press to Play".

Just like (ya see what I did there ?).

Oh yes, I see now - I didn't remember "Sorry old bean, you're wearing the dress" was actually a Shakespeare quote. ;D

'scuse my ignorance but how do you distinguish/recognise what has been auto tuned?

The bits where the Beach Boys sound like robots, which is pretty much the whole LP.

'Baby just yoouu and meee' in shelter is a prime example.

An Optimus prime example

It's not really the synths, it's just the whole production ... doesn't sound very good. 'Male Ego' sounds cool in that form I think.

I see what you did there.

Would you like me to autotune that for you?

Yea the auto tune gets on my nerves and affects my enjoyment of the record but they have been playin games with their vocals for a long time..Examples: Air that I breathe   Happy Endings  Problem Child  SIP album  Country tribute lp just off the top of my head.Sometimes the back ground vocals are mixed weird and it sounds generic and not BB like at all.

There's some heavy vocal processing on the Still Cruisin' album as well. To me, however, all the examples from the past don't sound half as robotic as the stuff on TWGMTR. I'm not the biggest fan of Alan's solo album but the overall vocal sound of that album is quite pleasant I think and they probably should've went in that direction as a group. (That said, I still like TWGMTR for what it is and consider it on par with BB85, which is another album of theirs that I think is quite pleasant despite its flaws and dated production.)

Ya know I believe your right.! Alan"s solo lp has nice vocal sound and they should have went in that direction..Good Observation. !

It makes it pretty unlistenable so yeah

Cummings is a fantastic vocalist and a pretty darn good songwriter too.

I would go as far as to say the auto-tune seriously ruins TWGMTR, and makes the recent live album just outright unlistenable...

It isn't the same Beach Boys though, is it? Those Pet Sounds vocals were recorded nearly 50 years ago by a group of young men at or relatively near to their vocals peaks. So it's a bit unreasonable to expect that they can still sing at that same level, particularly given that two of them are no longer with us and that Brian (and his voice) have gone through some incredibly difficult times. There's no point pretending that these vocals should sound anything like Pet Sounds.

I consider the album on it's own merits and I think it's excellent. There are a few spots where the vocal processing grates a bit (the opening to "Isn't it Time" in particular), but I don't have a huge problem with the vocal sound overall and I generally think they sound good, all things considered. They could have been better, judging by Brian's other recent contributions (and Al's, I suppose), but I'll take the TWGMTR vocals over the GIOMH vocals any day. I can see why it would irritate those who hate this type of vocal processing, but it doesn't overly bother me (and I've opted to not think or read about it too much, in case I find myself unable to listen to music that I'd otherwise enjoy).

This is my position on it as well. We know there's vocal processing, and sometimes it's not subtle. But, we also know these guys aren't in their 20's  anymore. Perhaps a lighter hand in some areas would be advisable, but a little help to keep the harmonies sounding good isn't necessarily a bad thing. It certainly didn't make it unlistenable for me, even when I can hear the processing.

Besides, if they had left all the processing off, and gone with the "warts and all" approach a lot of people wanted, we'd be hearing criticism that they don't sound good anymore and should just hang it up.

I just enjoy TWGMTR for what it is… the surviving members of the band, now seniors, getting together to make one more album to celebrate their 50 years. With a little help from their friends.

Is it not true that these guys have been using studio trickery for many decades to ge the sound?  Doubling voices a nd going from studio to studio to get a sound?  Sweetening vocals on live albums?  processing the sound of various member's vocals?  Using reverb and various spectorian tricks?    but in the end, you have to look at the final product and the BB sound that you hear.  do you likeitornot?  auto tune is just another Tool to get a sound.   and I like that unique BB sound.  and I still hear it on the new recordings.     

The vocals on TWGMTR are very enjoyable, they don't detract from my enjoyment of the album. But again, on the live album, that's another story. There's NOTHING on that cd that says "live" to my ears. It just sounds like they re-recorded all the hits in the studio, then dubbed in some crowd applause.

Not sure what your argument is here. So your saying basically that because they've used studio trickery in the past, that I should like all studio trickery.

So because they've used synthesizers in the past, I shouldn't have a problem if they made an electronic dance music track?

Or because they've used electric guitars before, then I should be happy if they did a thrash metal track?

Didn't he pretty much say the opposite of that? Donald says we all have to look at the final product and decide whether we like it or not. The point seems to be that there's nothing inherently wrong with any particular form of studio trickery - the issue is whether you enjoy the music or not regardless of how the sound was achieved (apologies if I've got this wrong). You don't like it and that's fine. He doesn't say anything like what you've concocted in your post.

Donald's post might even be the most relevant post in this thread because Burton Cummings seems to have a problem with the use of auto-tune itself, rather than the sound of the album. Some people might agree with him, others don't. He also says “In my day, there was no such thing as 'auto tuned vocals'. Especially when you were recording 45's and 33's, there wasn't the studio capability to fix things and filter things. What you sang is what you recorded." - which isn't really true. There were plenty of methods used to fix and filter things.

You're probably right. But then why not just say "I'm fine with the Autotune"? Using the old "Auto-tune is the new double tracking" argument is somewhat of a challenge to those of us who dislike the sound. It warrant some sort of response in defense of our position.

I've been attacked too much in the past over my feeling about  TWGMTR, so perhaps I'm looking for criticism where there isn't any.  :) In any case my reply to Donald was meant light-heartedly, as I'm sure you gathered.

I'm happy people like this album. I wish I could!

Burton Cummings is a fantastic vocalist and has a lot of cred.  I can totally understand why he would say what he said.  Even still, I am fine with the album.

That's my feeling about Love You.

I don't mind the auto-tune as much as I mind the sterile production quality--it makes me want to staple my ears.

It's not an argument. It's the truth. It's a vocal effect that has become near ubiquitous on popular music, and one used to augment the sound of otherwise thin or shaky vocals. I don't see why that would be a challenge -- you don't have to like the truth, after all. Reality has many things about it that are less than optimal -- my muscle tone, for instance.


These statements always befuddle me. TWGMTR's tacks sound like most of BW's recent productions -- lots of strings and horns and live instruments, mostly played by his touring band. It's no wall of sound, but it's definitely of a piece with the Gershwin and TLOS records.

Yes, it's true, but what I took his post to mean was "Autotune is the new double tracking....so why do you hate it"

However,  I was in all probability looking for criticism were there wasn't any.

And I don't want to know about your muscle.

If you can't sing, don't sing.

Let it befuddle you no longer: people who don't like the production quality of TWGMTR (likely) don't like the production quality of BW's recent releases either. Adult contemporary music lacks aesthetic appeal (in terms of production).  I often try to imagine what the suite would sound like if it were produced using Brian's old techniques...sigh...

How incredibly uncharitable of you, Stephen. And after finally getting around to holding hands with Micha over there on page 23.  ;)

Burton Cummings was a very flashy singer in his day, often venturing into territory formerly reserved for castrati. He was not a choral singer, though I suppose he could have been serviceable as a background singer. The problem is that the BBs have to get as close as they can to their signature blend at an advanced age, and aside from Al, they need a mess of help....and doing without autotune at this point would arguably be a lot worse.

Not trying to single anyone out...I understand how sensitive souls can have such a visceral reaction. Just sayin' that we (and the BBs) are between a rock and a hard place in terms of the previous standards and how to keep those from bringin' the whole darned tent down on top of us...

Today I went walking while listening to the un-autotuned BBC2 live C50 broadcast from last year.

Despite JT's concern that some disaster would doom the listener of any natural Beach Boy product he was unable to get his hand on neither the sky fell, or were I struck down by lightning.

Should I wake in the morning I will assume the world did not end either.

 ;D

Should you wake in the morning, how will you know for certain you're in the real world and not some alternate universe where the hand of JT has berfallen?

If Dennis hands me a cold one and takes me sailing with a bevy of beauties I'll assume I'm on my way to hell!


And if the demons sing like robots I'll know I've arrived.

 ;D

Except that they are. Live musicians. Same instruments. Same producer. And in the case of TWGMTR, the same singers. Now, you might not like the way it's engineered or mixed, or effects like autotune, or the quality of the songs, but the records are, by and large, produced in the same way Brian has been doing it for the last 50 years. Ditto for most of Brian's recent albums.

And have you listened to any adult contemporary music lately? TWGMTR, the Gershwin album, and TLOS sound nothing like it.

I have no problem with people not liking the record, or hating autotune, or whatever else floats their boat or strikes their fancy. But things like autotune and AC and etc., etc., etc., are red herrings. Waving them around as though they make an argument for you -- well, they don't. They don't even start one. The question is whether the record is any good on its own terms.

If a studio effect (or for that matter, mastering) makes a record unlistenable to you, then you shouldn't be listening to pop music.

Just dropping in here to say I forgot how much I absolutely adore "Pacific Coast Highway." One of my favorite Beach Boys songs ever. Part of me wishes it was longer, part of me thinks it's perfect as it is.

I can forgive it all for From There To Back Again

The record isn't unlistenable to me--I actually enjoy it.  But I have to struggle to enjoy it on its "own terms" (i.e. the songwriting, performance).  But I don't agree with your notion that studio-effect/mastering isn't one of the record's own terms--it's just as much a part of the music as the songwriting and performance; the studio-effects/mastering are a part of the finished product, and it's easily the crappiest part, unfortunately taking away from the splendor of the songwriting and performances.

At the end of the day, something is "off" about TWGMTR, and we're forced to explain away its flaws in order to find its splendor.

I'm not complaining about TWGMTR. I love some of the tracks, skip a few of them. I feel the same way about TLOS. Both of them are solid records that I'm not embarrassed to share with my friends, plenty of songs to sing along in the car, and a few teary-eyed moments. These albums will stand the test of time.

according to Trey Parker (one of the creators of south park) he said that when he used auto tune for the Kanye west episode he had to sing really bad to make it sound good, which means that if someone sang really good it makes them sound bad, basically what he is saying is that it's meant to cover up bad singers to make them sound good, I laughed when i heard that..

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4EGYmyC4m4
here we go.... :lol