The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: RONDEMON on April 06, 2009, 08:55:54 AM



Title: Details on "Summer Love Songs" (NEW STEREO MIXES)
Post by: RONDEMON on April 06, 2009, 08:55:54 AM
Thoughts??

THE BEACH BOYS PROVIDE THE PERFECT SOUNDTRACK TO SUN-KISSED ROMANCE WITH SUMMER LOVE SONGS, TO BE RELEASED MAY 19 BY CAPITOL/EMI

 
New Collection Features 20 Timeless Classics, Including Six New Stereo Mixes and a Previously Unreleased Song

 
Hollywood, California – April 6, 2009 – The Beach Boys have long been the world’s leading, harmonious voice of summer fun, with an ocean’s swell of universally-loved songs about the beach, surfing, hot rods, and in no small measure, girls and sun-kissed romance.  20 of The Beach Boys’ best love songs, from tender ballads to boisterous romps, have been gathered for Summer Love Songs, a new 20-track CD and digital collection to be released May 19 (May 18 internationally) by Capitol/EMI.  Three classic tracks have been mixed in stereo for the first time, exclusively for this release, and three others have received new stereo mixes.  Two of the new stereo mixes have been created from long lost, newly-recovered analog multi-track masters. A rare track, previously unreleased in the U.S. and long out-of-print in the U.K., is also included.

 
The Beach Boys’ romantic ballads, including “God Only Knows,” “Please Let Me Wonder,” and “Don’t Worry, Baby,” and their playful, high-energy love songs, including “California Girls” and “Good To My Baby,” come together as the perfect soundtrack to romantic fun in the sun on Summer Love Songs. Evocative of time and place for all who hear them, these classics continue to warm hearts around the world.

Two of Summer Love Songs’ new stereo mixes, for “Don’t Worry, Baby” and “Why Do Fools Fall In Love,” have been created from newly-recovered analog multi-track masters that went missing from the Western Recorders studio in Los Angeles after they were first recorded in the mid-1960s. These original 3-track analog masters were recently recovered by The Beach Boys and Capitol/EMI for the first time since they were used for the band’s Shut Down, Vol. 2 album in 1964.  The collection’s four other tracks with new stereo mixes are “Hushabye,” “I’m So Young,” “Good To My Baby,” and “Time To Get Alone.”

 
Summer Love Songs also includes “Fallin’ In Love,” a song written and recorded by Dennis Wilson during the Beach Boys’ Sunflower album sessions in 1970.  The track has never before been released in the U.S. and has long been out-of-print in the U.K. (where it was released as “Lady”).  This track has also been mixed in stereo for the first time.

 
Summer Love Songs follows the worldwide success of 2003’s Sounds Of Summer: The Very Best Of The Beach Boys, now approaching the triple platinum sales mark in the U.S., and 2007’s The Warmth Of The Sun, a career-spanning collection of deeper album cuts, hand-selected and sequenced by The Beach Boys. Summer Love Songs complements the previous collections as a distinct addition to the Rock and Roll Hall of Famers’ legendary catalog.


THE BEACH BOYS: Summer Love Songs (CD, digital)

1.  Why Do Fools Fall In Love [new stereo mix from newly recovered analog multi-track master]

2.  Don’t Worry, Baby [new stereo mix from newly recovered analog multi-track master]

3.  Wouldn't It Be Nice

4.  God Only Knows

5.  Surfer Girl

6.  California Girls

7.  Please Let Me Wonder

8.  In The Parkin' Lot

9.  Your Summer Dream

10. Kiss Me, Baby

11. Hushabye [new stereo mix]

12. I'm So Young [new stereo mix]

13. Good To My Baby [new stereo mix]

14. Fallin' In Love [previously unreleased track, written and recorded by Dennis Wilson]

15. Time To Get Alone [new stereo mix]

16. Our Sweet Love

17. Help Me, Rhonda

18. Keep An Eye On Summer

19. Don't Talk (Put Your Head On My Shoulder)

20. Girls On The Beach



Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: mikeyj on April 06, 2009, 09:20:13 AM
Hell YEAH!! This is great news... of course the stereo remixes are nice, but this is great that we are finally getting Lady on CD :) Of course they could have done us a favour and included Sound Of Free too, but I guess they'll save that for another comp... Still, better than the usual compilations


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Smilin Ed H on April 06, 2009, 09:59:35 AM
Wow. This looks all over the place.  What a mess.  Great to (officially) have Lady, but it would've been better to have released it with material of a similar vintage. Can't hep but think this is just a crass marketing ploy to hook all those who bought POB (that's Pacific Ocean Blue unless you're on the Hoffman board, in which case it's the Plastic Ono Band, but you knew that anyway). So we're getting remixes, uh? Big deal.  Give us something we crave!!!!!!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Heartical Don on April 06, 2009, 10:06:04 AM
Hm.



Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Rocker on April 06, 2009, 10:26:39 AM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 06, 2009, 10:37:20 AM
Some very nice selections and it's good to see evidence that Cap/EMI are locating lost tapes. Maybe the Columbia SMiLE vocal sessions tapes next?

But (Sunflower tracks aside) it does just re-inforces the idea that the BBs did nothing after the 60s.

i guess we'll never be pleased, eh guys!   ::)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Heartical Don on April 06, 2009, 10:45:53 AM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.

Agreed. But did 'Lady' really never surface on CD before?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Chris Brown on April 06, 2009, 11:36:57 AM
I'm excited to hear the stereo mixes, and that they have located some previously missing masters.  Other than that, not a ton to get excited about for us diehards, but I suppose it's nice that Capitol is keeping the music out there.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 06, 2009, 11:44:42 AM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.

Agreed. But did 'Lady' really never surface on CD before?

Sure did.. Super Furry Animals included it on their 2005 Under The Influence compilation. "Feel Flows" is on there too.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: JeffRetro on April 06, 2009, 11:52:17 AM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.

Agreed. But did 'Lady' really never surface on CD before?

Sure did.. Super Furry Animals included it on their 2005 Under The Influence compilation. "Feel Flows" is on there too.

But on the Super Furry Animals comp it's a vinyl transfer of the original mono B-side.  And despite the press release says, "Lady" was originally mixed in stereo for the original "Sunflower" lineup.  Let's hope they use that original stereo mix, 'cause it's gorgeous.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 06, 2009, 12:25:11 PM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.

Agreed. But did 'Lady' really never surface on CD before?

Sure did.. Super Furry Animals included it on their 2005 Under The Influence compilation. "Feel Flows" is on there too.

But on the Super Furry Animals comp it's a vinyl transfer of the original mono B-side.  And despite the press release says, "Lady" was originally mixed in stereo for the original "Sunflower" lineup.  Let's hope they use that original stereo mix, 'cause it's gorgeous.

And people wonder why sometimes I get a bit tetchy. Guy asked if "Lady" was ever on CD before... I give the CD it was on, only for someone to start with the "buts". "Lady" has been on CD before. No buts. It has.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dr. Tim on April 06, 2009, 12:36:23 PM
"Don't Worry Baby" is ALREADY in stereo!  It was on the original LP!  That was before the "mono only" policy.  Now OK they've remixed it again, it may be good, who knows.  But they needn't have bothered.  Hardly a selling point.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bicyclerider on April 06, 2009, 12:43:23 PM
Does this mean ALL the Shut Down Vol 2 multitracks have been located, or only don't Worry Baby and Why Do fools fall in love?  This has been a major gap in the archive, it would be fantastic if they've all been found.  Could the Good vibrations multitracks be found next?

I agree with Dr. Tim - what's wrong with the original stereo mix of Don't Worry Baby?  Why do we need a remix?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 06, 2009, 12:48:36 PM
"Don't Worry Baby" is ALREADY in stereo!  It was on the original LP!  That was before the "mono only" policy.  Now OK they've remixed it again, it may be good, who knows.  But they needn't have bothered.  Hardly a selling point.

'cause the mix is odd - lead one side, bvs the other and the track in the middle.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: tpesky on April 06, 2009, 12:58:27 PM
It's a unique track mix, reminds me of one of those endless Capitol compilations from the late 80's/early 90's that would have the weirdest mixes like Cabinessence into Finders Keepers or Something.   Why do Fools Fall in Love again?? Its not even their freaking song and no one cares the Beach Boys cut it!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 06, 2009, 01:19:50 PM
Then... don't buy it.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: grillo on April 06, 2009, 01:21:30 PM
In the Parking Lot?!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on April 06, 2009, 01:49:51 PM
If this means the masters for "Shut Down Vol. II" were found, that is amazing news.  Were the rest of the missing 1963 masters found as well?

And even though "Don't Worry Baby" was released in stereo, it was bounced down to mono during the recording process.  I'm not exactly sure what the track breakdown is, but you at least have a doubled vocal from Brian, and possibly a stereo backing track and stereo backing vocals too.  A few other tracks in this comp were bounced down in a similar manner and are being remixed as well.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: punkinhead on April 06, 2009, 02:01:50 PM
danget, it's sold me already


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The infamous Baldwin Organ on April 06, 2009, 02:12:21 PM
When was 'I'm So Young' ever released in stereo? Shouldn't that be a first time stereo mix?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 06, 2009, 02:26:38 PM
Not got the 2fer to hand... but maybe the bonus alternate mix on the Today !/Summer Days... CD ?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 06, 2009, 02:38:31 PM
Quote
15. Time To Get Alone [new stereo mix]

Has to be worth the entrance money... one of BW's finest.  Can't wait to hear the new mix.  I'm a cynic but I'm in!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on April 06, 2009, 02:50:24 PM
When was 'I'm So Young' ever released in stereo? Shouldn't that be a first time stereo mix?

"New Stereo Mix" is just a catch all term.  "Why Do Fools Fall In Love" and "Good To My Baby" have never been officially released in stereo either.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bicyclerider on April 06, 2009, 02:56:32 PM
"Don't Worry Baby" is ALREADY in stereo!  It was on the original LP!  That was before the "mono only" policy.  Now OK they've remixed it again, it may be good, who knows.  But they needn't have bothered.  Hardly a selling point.

'cause the mix is odd - lead one side, bvs the other and the track in the middle.

I actually prefer that to the usual alternative, vocals in the middle and instrumental track in stereo.  They were using four track at this time, I guess if they synch the instrumental track before the bounce to the final four track with vocals they could  have stereo vocals (but depending on the final four track breakdown, they may still be able only to put the lead in one channel and backing on the other)  with a stereo instrumental track.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The infamous Baldwin Organ on April 06, 2009, 03:00:35 PM
You have a good point. I do prefer to hear a lot of the original vocals in mono, though. I've been hoping for a remix of Don't Worry Baby, because I never liked the original mix at all.

One thing that surprises me, is that Help Me Rhonda will probably still be in Mono. As far as I could tell, a stereo mix of that should be possible.

A few more 'remixes', and we should have a complete Stereo 'Today!' album...


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 06, 2009, 03:11:25 PM
Alright, second post, here goes.

I'm excited that Lady is finally getting airing, but the exclusion of Sound Of Free has me wondering, like others what is up.  I figured it's because Sound Of Free isn't summery enough?  I think Lady is a bit darker though, at least the atmoshpere.  This may sound silly, but what has sold me on this set is the stereo mix of Good To My Baby.  It's one of my favorite BB's tunes.  I'm hoping these recent discoveries will lead to some stereo mix album releases, because both Today and Shut Down Volume II are among my favorite Beach Boys albums.  I can't fault them for releasing Why Do Fools Fall In Love either, because it's such a great song and the boys do it beautifully.  I know, you're thinking, does he think everything they touched is gold!?  No, but they didn't pretty well and I'll pay to for whatever gems they want to release. 


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on April 06, 2009, 03:17:41 PM
Sound of Free wouldn't really fit in with the romantic theme. In the Parkin' Lot is a relatively
minor tune but has some lovely group harmonies, and it's good to see Your Summer Dream,
Keep an Eye on Summer and I'm So Young included, and Lady of course. Far from perfect,
but O.K. :)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: MBE on April 06, 2009, 03:22:45 PM
I really don't care about stereo when it comes to the Beach Boys. Brian's mono is much more interesting.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 06, 2009, 03:32:44 PM
I'm one of those people that just has to hear everything, call it a curse.  I enjoy mono, but I'm always interested in stereo and I can't fault it unless it's a bad mix.  At least the Beach Boys didn't come of age in the 80s and suffering from mixing albums to DAT, or what not.  I hope we see more Dennis tracks in the future though.  Is this just a fluke, or a good sign?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on April 06, 2009, 03:36:06 PM
I actually prefer that to the usual alternative, vocals in the middle and instrumental track in stereo.  They were using four track at this time, I guess if they synch the instrumental track before the bounce to the final four track with vocals they could  have stereo vocals (but depending on the final four track breakdown, they may still be able only to put the lead in one channel and backing on the other)  with a stereo instrumental track.

Brian didn't have access to four track until around mid-'64 I believe.

After listening to the stereo mix, the tape breakdown of DWB is likely a mono backing track, stereo lead vocals and then one track of backing vocals recorded onto a new tape.  I could be wrong, as there are a number of different ways they could have done it.

One thing that surprises me, is that Help Me Rhonda will probably still be in Mono. As far as I could tell, a stereo mix of that should be possible.

"Help Me Rhonda" can be remixed to stereo, but the guitar part and piano solo were added during the mono mixdown, which would yield an essentially incomplete "alternate" version of the song.  Personally, I say remix and release it in this form on a new Hawthorne-esque set.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Alan Boyd on April 06, 2009, 03:41:48 PM
"Don't Worry Baby" is ALREADY in stereo!  It was on the original LP!  That was before the "mono only" policy.  Now OK they've remixed it again, it may be good, who knows.  But they needn't have bothered.  Hardly a selling point.

'cause the mix is odd - lead one side, bvs the other and the track in the middle.

I actually prefer that to the usual alternative, vocals in the middle and instrumental track in stereo.  They were using four track at this time, I guess if they synch the instrumental track before the bounce to the final four track with vocals they could  have stereo vocals (but depending on the final four track breakdown, they may still be able only to put the lead in one channel and backing on the other)  with a stereo instrumental track.

The Beach Boys were still working in three track in 1964 and much of 1965.  For "Don't Worry, Baby" the instrumental track was recorded mono.  he only instrumental overdub was for the lead guitar stabs in the break.

FYI - "Why Do Fools Fall In Love" has a rather elaborate instrumental intro that we'd never heard before - or even heard of.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 06, 2009, 03:44:56 PM
FYI - "Why Do Fools Fall In Love" has a rather elaborate instrumental intro that we'd never heard before - or even heard of.

That's something for me to look forward to, certainly, the song has a lovely melody.  Is there anything else like that on the compilation?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: sockittome on April 06, 2009, 05:39:19 PM
15. Time To Get Alone [new stereo mix]

Is this really necessary?  I love this song; it's one of my favorites, but I never thought there was anything wrong with the original mix.

I guess I'll just have to give it a listen and see if anything new comes to light (like the Hawthorne version).


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on April 06, 2009, 06:17:00 PM
Because "Why Do Fools Fall In Love" has been a staple of the Mike & Bruce shows the last few years, does that mean Mike was picking songs?

"Help Me Rhonda"? Why? The same version as on Sounds Of Summer, or the Today version?

"In The Parking Lot" finally made it to Compilation Land!

"Keep An Eye On Summer" - The Beach Boys' or Brian Wilson's version? :p

"Our Sweet Love" is kind of a dark horse; sounds a little like "God Only Knows; but, maybe they wanted to represent Sunflower? It has "love" in the title? 

"Fallin' In Love" is worth the price of admission....

While I know WHY some of these tracks were chosen (you gotta have SOME hits), it is a bit of a ripoff when about half of these songs were on the last two comps. I know, I don't have to buy it.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Chris Brown on April 06, 2009, 06:17:31 PM
15. Time To Get Alone [new stereo mix]

Is this really necessary?  I love this song; it's one of my favorites, but I never thought there was anything wrong with the original mix.

I guess I'll just have to give it a listen and see if anything new comes to light (like the Hawthorne version).

It's not about anything wrong with the original mix...just a new listening perspective.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Wrightfan on April 06, 2009, 06:42:45 PM
1.  Why Do Fools Fall In Love [new stereo mix from newly recovered analog multi-track master]

2.  Don’t Worry, Baby [new stereo mix from newly recovered analog multi-track master]

11. Hushabye [new stereo mix]

12. I'm So Young [new stereo mix]

13. Good To My Baby [new stereo mix]

14. Fallin' In Love [previously unreleased track, written and recorded by Dennis Wilson]

15. Time To Get Alone [new stereo mix]

Yes...those shall be mine!  ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Mahalo on April 06, 2009, 07:23:18 PM
I admit, it's much better than I expected. I will be buying this.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Jay on April 06, 2009, 08:14:39 PM
I think Capitol should release a massive one time only box set of the entire Beach Boys catalouge(including the weird stuff like Lady Liberty) in mono, and release a second volume of the same exact thing in stereo. I'm tired of buying 30 cd's just for a handful of mixes I need.


Title: Re:
Post by: Bedroom Tapes on April 06, 2009, 08:47:54 PM
Hopefully iTunes will offer this compilation.  That way I can just buy "Fallin' In Love."   8)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on April 06, 2009, 08:48:36 PM
"Don't Worry Baby" is ALREADY in stereo!  It was on the original LP!  That was before the "mono only" policy.  Now OK they've remixed it again, it may be good, who knows.  But they needn't have bothered.  Hardly a selling point.
[/quote

Hi Alan, good to hear from you here. Can you tell us if all the multitracks for Shut Down Vol. ll were
recovered? ???



'cause the mix is odd - lead one side, bvs the other and the track in the middle.

I actually prefer that to the usual alternative, vocals in the middle and instrumental track in stereo.  They were using four track at this time, I guess if they synch the instrumental track before the bounce to the final four track with vocals they could  have stereo vocals (but depending on the final four track breakdown, they may still be able only to put the lead in one channel and backing on the other)  with a stereo instrumental track.

The Beach Boys were still working in three track in 1964 and much of 1965.  For "Don't Worry, Baby" the instrumental track was recorded mono.  he only instrumental overdub was for the lead guitar stabs in the break.

FYI - "Why Do Fools Fall In Love" has a rather elaborate instrumental intro that we'd never heard before - or even heard of.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: alanjames on April 06, 2009, 09:11:25 PM
It's great to have a Dennis's "unknown" song.
I'll buy it because this compilation have new mixes, but in fact, I'll buy it because it have the track Lady.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shane on April 06, 2009, 10:52:10 PM
I'm really curious to know about these newly recovered tapes.  Where were they found?  How much material was found?  From looking at the SOT track lists, it seems that nearly all of the tapes from the Shut Down Vol.2 and the Little Deuce Coupe album were missing for many years.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: CarCrazyCutie on April 06, 2009, 10:54:29 PM
Yay for Fallin' In Love, I'm So Young, & all the other new mixes ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 07, 2009, 05:26:41 AM
One day, they're going to make a Star Wars-esque trilogy about the Beach Boys, their vaults, and their war to release beautiful music long after the tapes stopped running.  The soundtrack will be Summer Is Love and feature big hits such as Don't Back Down, Custom Machine, and Are You Surfin' Yet?, a previously unreleased band composition and new single.   ;)

I would really like to see a complete boxset too, mono and stereo, but that probably won't happen.  No matter how annoying it is to some, another round of CD reissues may be what the Doctor ordered, if a wealth of tapes have been found I mean.  I'm happy to pick up a compilation CD every couple years or so as long as they keep giving me unreleased tracks and new mixes to listen to.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: sockittome on April 07, 2009, 06:28:02 AM
I'm banking on these tracks being available as mp3 downloads on Amazon, like the singles collection.  That way I can buy just the hew remixes and skip the tracks I already have 10 times over (and I can make up my own comp).


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Menace Wilson on April 07, 2009, 08:48:09 AM
I'm exactly the sort of sucker these compilations are geared for.  Will shell out the cash for yet another BB comp because of the stereo mixes.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Wrightfan on April 07, 2009, 09:12:51 AM
Not got the 2fer to hand... but maybe the bonus alternate mix on the Today !/Summer Days... CD ?

That'd be it. I'm guessing this stereo mix will be of the final version that made the album.

By the way, it's stuff like this that I'm glad I download MP3's from Itunes. Now I know that makes me a young whippersnapper and "rebel" on this board but...  ;D


Title: Re: Details on
Post by: Jonas on April 07, 2009, 09:25:35 AM
its great that the beach boys get this compilation... and the beatles get this: http://beatles.com/core/news/


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 07, 2009, 09:37:08 AM
You have to admit though, The Beatles are The Beatles, and the business (family) end is fairly well run these days as compared to the Beach Boys.  I would love for that to happen with The Beach Boys.  I imagine there would be lovely bonus discs with all the Beach Boys reissues though.   ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 07, 2009, 10:28:44 AM
Personally, I say remix and release it in this form on a new Hawthorne-esque set.

That's what I want.  I want another Hawthorne set.  We'll never see another one of those.  The marketing-monsters are probably asking;

"who the f@$k released that!?  They're so, like, fired! That was at least 2 dozen compilations we could have made, like...'Summer Sweating' and 'Summer Chaffing'.  Damn."


This is really starting to get me angry. Do I need to get 2007's Warmth of the Sun and 2003's Sounds of Summer now too?  And what about that damn, over-priced Singles box?  I do believe there's room for better fidelity than the 2fers I have.  Also, remixing with today's technology can greatly improve the fidelity too.

Did I just answer my own question?

 ???


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The infamous Baldwin Organ on April 07, 2009, 12:25:12 PM
Personally, I say remix and release it in this form on a new Hawthorne-esque set.

That's what I want.  I want another Hawthorne set.  We'll never see another one of those.  The marketing-monsters are probably asking;

"who the f@$k released that!?  They're so, like, fired! That was at least 2 dozen compilations we could have made, like...'Summer Sweating' and 'Summer Chaffing'.  Damn."


This is really starting to get me angry. Do I need to get 2007's Warmth of the Sun and 2003's Sounds of Summer now too?  And what about that damn, over-priced Singles box?  I do believe there's room for better fidelity than the 2fers I have.  Also, remixing with today's technology can greatly improve the fidelity too.

Did I just answer my own question?

 ???


While I completely agree with you, it must all come down to the numbers...financial reasoning. A compilation in the style of 'Hawthorne' would take a lot of work to put together; locating tapes, complete remixing of some tracks, mastering...everything. But it would be the greatest benefit to the music.

But why make the investment in all of that when only hardcore fans would buy it? The cost wouldn't balance out the way they'd like it to.

As far as the commercial side of the music industry, the Beach Boys were dead after the '60s; the new compilation shows exactly that.

This new compilation will give the record company the most bang for their buck because the casual listener may buy it, and keep the hardcore fans interested enough (or at least from rioting in the streets...).


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: SG7 on April 07, 2009, 12:26:54 PM
:Yawn:

At least we get Lady as official .


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 07, 2009, 12:44:11 PM
While I completely agree with you, it must all come down to the numbers...financial reasoning. A compilation in the style of 'Hawthorne' would take a lot of work to put together; locating tapes, complete remixing of some tracks, mastering...everything. But it would be the greatest benefit to the music.

But why make the investment in all of that when only hardcore fans would buy it? The cost wouldn't balance out the way they'd like it to.

As far as the commercial side of the music industry, the Beach Boys were dead after the '60s; the new compilation shows exactly that.

This new compilation will give the record company the most bang for their buck because the casual listener may buy it, and keep the hardcore fans interested enough (or at least from rioting in the streets...).

You're absolutely right.  I'm sure they've got charts and powerpoint presentations (with more charts) that show the threshold of sales.  I'm sure the research shows there's zippy cost benefit to doing a Hawthorne, like you said.  Especially with the success of the Summer-series...which guarantees a top spot on Best Buy's "new release-rack."  Hopefully once that well dries, they'll compile these nice mixes and rarities on a single comp.  Maybe an off-season two-disc'er  could find its way out....with minimal technical effort, since the mixing and mastering had been done on the Singles box and these single disc, greatest hits buffets.

That singles box could have been 3 or 4 discs, dammit.  With a real book, that included essays about the tracks and great info on the sessions.  Throw in another disc of the dozen or so remixes from these summer discs -- there's your 120 dollar box set.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: SloopJohnB on April 07, 2009, 01:38:43 PM
once that well dries

(http://images.encyclopediadramatica.com/images/thumb/9/9e/HA_HA_HA,_OH_WOW.jpg/500px-HA_HA_HA,_OH_WOW.jpg)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: donald on April 07, 2009, 02:00:48 PM
Seems everyone would like another hawthorne.   But I'll wager that many here could create their own hawthorne 2.  I would just like to hear it done professionally and see it nicely packaged.  I think I would need new ears and a better stereo to appreciate any new "mixes"


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Glenn Greenberg on April 07, 2009, 02:25:32 PM

"Fallin' In Love" is worth the price of admission....


Yeah, pretty much.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: harveyw on April 07, 2009, 03:14:38 PM
Which reminds me: whatever happened to the projected second box set of singles? Did the first volume not sell as well as was hoped? How many was it realistically expected to sell?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: hypehat on April 07, 2009, 03:24:09 PM
Seems everyone would like another hawthorne.   But I'll wager that many here could create their own hawthorne 2.  I would just like to hear it done professionally and see it nicely packaged.  I think I would need new ears and a better stereo to appreciate any new "mixes"

what would we put on a new Hawthorne, anyway? I'd go for, in no paticular order

1) Some actual Smile stuff (you release a rarities comp, and leave out the absolute zenith of stuff that's never been released. Nice one)
2) More acappella - 20/20 or some more Sunflower in particular
3) More Dennis
4) Less stereo, really. It's ok, but at the expense of, say, unreleased stuff it's frustrating.
5) Something beyond 'Surfs Up'
6) More Dennis
7) And maybe some more Dennis :P


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on April 07, 2009, 03:51:24 PM
If they really found the complete multis for Shut Down Vol. II and maybe even more of the 1963 stuff that went missing, then a lot of that material should be released on a new Hawthorne style compilation. 

I want to hear, like, every backing track on those tapes.  And I'd love it if they released a complete SOT style presentation of the sessions as an internet exclusive or something, but that's not happening.

Can we get the lowdown on what tapes were found.  How'd were they found?  What's on them?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 07, 2009, 10:01:54 PM
Which reminds me: whatever happened to the projected second box set of singles? Did the first volume not sell as well as was hoped? How many was it realistically expected to sell?

The box was reportedly a limited edition of 10,000... and outside of the fan world, I never heard of any proposed 2nd box.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 07, 2009, 10:03:51 PM
If they really found the complete multis for Shut Down Vol. II and maybe even more of the 1963 stuff that went missing, then a lot of that material should be released on a new Hawthorne style compilation. 

They didn't find all the multitracks.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Sciencefriction on April 08, 2009, 06:09:19 AM
The Beach Boys world is probably the greatest epic sea adventure ever.  Eventually they have to find the rest of the treasure or discover that is has been destroyed, but one day they have to find more because the discovering never seems to end.  I'll just collect the pieces for now until something else happens.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 08, 2009, 07:57:45 AM
Cover art:

               (http://myfunbox.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/bb.jpg)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: phirnis on April 08, 2009, 08:15:03 AM
As far as compilations/live records go, this is one of their stronger covers of recent years.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Heartical Don on April 08, 2009, 08:18:20 AM
As far as compilations/live records go, this is one of their stronger covers of recent years.

Hmmm... I don't like the lettering. It's not satisfying aesthetically. The picture's nice though. When did they first use this letter type? KTSA?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 08, 2009, 08:21:17 AM
Agree, the lettering's not in keeping with the mood of the pic at all. Still, it's corporate identity I guess!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: phirnis on April 08, 2009, 09:11:35 AM
As far as compilations/live records go, this is one of their stronger covers of recent years.

Hmmm... I don't like the lettering. It's not satisfying aesthetically. The picture's nice though. When did they first use this letter type? KTSA?

I believe they used it on the front cover of 15 Big Ones for the very first time and it never fails to remind me of 50s jukebox nostalgia...

They probably should be using the Pet Sounds font instead, which is kind of uninspired yet totally inoffensive and easy to recognize as another typical Beach Boys lettering.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Rocker on April 08, 2009, 10:22:28 AM
As far as compilations/live records go, this is one of their stronger covers of recent years.

Hmmm... I don't like the lettering. It's not satisfying aesthetically. The picture's nice though. When did they first use this letter type? KTSA?

I believe they used it on the front cover of 15 Big Ones for the very first time and it never fails to remind me of 50s jukebox nostalgia...

They probably should be using the Pet Sounds font instead, which is kind of uninspired yet totally inoffensive and easy to recognize as another typical Beach Boys lettering.


IIRC Dean Torrence created this logo for "15 Big Ones"


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shady on April 08, 2009, 02:34:51 PM
Cover art:

               (http://myfunbox.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/bb.jpg)


Boring and cheap, but I'll buy it anyway  ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: lance on April 09, 2009, 06:40:11 AM
I think Capitol should release a massive one time only box set of the entire Beach Boys catalouge(including the weird stuff like Lady Liberty) in mono, and release a second volume of the same exact thing in stereo. I'm tired of buying 30 cd's just for a handful of mixes I need.
These things are probably good for new fans and for the business, but regarding the stereo mixes, I wish they would release a comp with just the 'new stereo mixes' that they've done over hte last ten years. I like them, and I would pay money for more of them--but not if I have to also buy a bunch of 'old mixes that I already have' alongside htem.

And yeah, I'd also like more unreleased stuff...released.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 09, 2009, 07:40:34 AM
... regarding the stereo mixes, I wish they would release a comp with just the 'new stereo mixes' that they've done over hte last ten years. I like them, and I would pay money for more of them--but not if I have to also buy a bunch of 'old mixes that I already have' alongside them.

Trouble is they'd call it "Summer Remixes", and compile all the remixes of recent years, freshly re-remixed for this special release!  There ain't a cat in Hell's chance that it'd be straight forward!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: donald on April 09, 2009, 12:29:55 PM
That Coca Cola logo came soon after they were playing with Chicago didn't it?   Who coincidentally also have a Coca Cola logo.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TonyW on April 09, 2009, 01:11:02 PM
It's kind of mind-boggling how Forever could be left off a Beach Boys Love Songs compilation - also would have been nice to see more people exposed to Cuddle Up. Still we get Fallin' In Love  ... just hope they get the licencing issues with Parlophone right ths time around  ;)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shane on April 10, 2009, 10:16:19 PM
I really don't like that "coca cola" logo for the Beach Boys.  All I can think of when I see it is the cover of 15 big ones with a bearded, overweight, spaced-out looking Brian on the cover.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Smilin Ed H on April 11, 2009, 12:45:09 AM
S-h-i-t-t-y cover.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: doc smiley on April 11, 2009, 08:04:52 AM
Alright... so nobody's asked the question... I will


Dennis Wilson and Rumbo  released  Lady/Sound of Free  as a single..


on the new compilation we have  "Falling in Love"   unreleased Dennis Wilson track...

the question should be... is this just a stereo mix of the track from 1970.. ( then why a name change??)
or is this a newer recording... didn't Dennis re-cut this track in '78 and rename it then?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Jon Stebbins on April 11, 2009, 08:57:54 AM
Alright... so nobody's asked the question... I will


Dennis Wilson and Rumbo  released  Lady/Sound of Free  as a single..


on the new compilation we have  "Falling in Love"   unreleased Dennis Wilson track...

the question should be... is this just a stereo mix of the track from 1970.. ( then why a name change??)
or is this a newer recording... didn't Dennis re-cut this track in '78 and rename it then?
I think if this track had been released on a BB's LP in '70/71 it was going to be called "Fallin' In Love", but anyway, the version on the new comp. is the same '70 track in a different and much improved mix.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: doc smiley on April 11, 2009, 09:31:45 AM
Thanks Jon

as always.. your insight is greatly appreciated...

So "Flowers Come in The Spring" from later in the 70's remains available for a future Dennis comp...
 :)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Wrightfan on April 12, 2009, 07:49:13 AM
I noticed that In the Parking Lot is on this comp. Is that gonna be a new stereo version also (it was mentioned that it was one of the songs found on the master tape)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on April 12, 2009, 02:53:10 PM
I noticed that In the Parking Lot is on this comp. Is that gonna be a new stereo version also (it was mentioned that it was one of the songs found on the master tape)

I don't think there's a whole lot more one could do with that, since the track would be recorded in mono and the vocals were already spread out fairly balanced.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on April 12, 2009, 02:54:05 PM
I noticed that In the Parking Lot is on this comp. Is that gonna be a new stereo version also (it was mentioned that it was one of the songs found on the master tape)

I don't think there's a whole lot more one could do with that, since the track would be recorded in mono and the vocals were already spread out fairly balanced.

An a capella mix, on the other hand, would be a frighteningly good idea.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Don't Back Down on April 12, 2009, 03:42:42 PM
In The Parking Lot would be a great one, always loved that intro. I'd love a "Stack-o-Vocals" compilation of the Beach Boys. That would be a fantastic idea for a new comp. (imo)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: petsite on April 12, 2009, 07:23:52 PM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: PhilCohen on April 12, 2009, 08:49:29 PM
But...do the newly discovered tapes contain anything further than what's being released on "Summer Love Songs".....material that could be used on future CD's?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on April 12, 2009, 09:34:46 PM
But...do the newly discovered tapes contain anything further than what's being released on "Summer Love Songs".....material that could be used on future CD's?

If you mean material like new stereo mixes, only "Pom Pom Playgirl" would really benefit, as I believe that had the same recording/mixing process as "Don't Worry Baby" and a few of the other songs on Shut Down Vol. II.  "Denny's Drums" may have also been recorded in stereo, though I'm not sure.  Whether they'll ever go to the trouble of remixing two tracks typically regarded as filler by fans has yet to be seen.

The other stuff on the tapes, the tracking sessions, the vocal outtakes, all of it, is all stuff that could be complied on a new rarities compilation, albeit in an edited, digested, BRI approved form.

I'd love to hear whatever backing tracks there are.  And perhaps a few of the tracking sessions.  It's time for another Stack-O-Tracks volume, please.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on April 12, 2009, 11:46:54 PM
I've always really liked "Pom Pom Play Girl" with its many unusual modulations at the end, but
it's kind of quirky and wouldn't fit well with the summer love song theme. Too bad, a new
stereo mix of it would be great and I actually like it slightly better than "In the Parkin' Lot", +
I didn't think that the latter was one of the songs on the newly rediscovered masters and would
appear in a new mix. ???

Great about the new extended intro to "Why do Fools Fall in Love".



Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on April 12, 2009, 11:53:16 PM
I was wrong, Jon said that "In the Parkin' Lot" was on the recovered masters, but it sounds like
it wasn't possible to do a new mix of it. Too bad. Still great news overall! :)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 13, 2009, 12:29:12 AM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........

Nope - not OK at all. Someone actually got paid for that ?  And someone else said "yeah, that's fine" ??   ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 13, 2009, 08:20:33 AM
Pass.

There's just too much good stuff out there to be spending my money on, without re-re-re-re-buying stuff I already have.  I didn't bite on the Greatest Hits 1, 2, 3 or these latest "Summer" varieties.  Nor did I bite on the $100+ "singles" boxset nonsense.  Total debacle.  Not that I mind re-buying -- I've got all the 90s twofers and all the 2000 twofers (as well as a few of the 80s/90s single disc albums.) -- and I'd buy them AGAIN if they were remastered, packaged like POB, and given a bonus disc of stereo mixes, alts, single mixes.  Hell yeah!!!!!

I would have gotten the Singles box if it weren't so ridiculously over-priced with a meaningless "book" with zippy content or facts/notes on the singles. It was a missed opportunity for a potentially great release.  If I were in those meetings, I would have fought for something better.   >:(  (I guarantee, I would have given the label a revered Singles box and true collectors item with impressive sales.  This one will be forgotten.)

But with so much unreleased Brian Wilson/Beach Boys stuff in the vault -- no way.  The "It's a beautiful day" thread reminded me of how much wonderful music is collecting dust.   :'(

I know there's label issues and band-member issues around releasing that stuff...but I've got principles and they're not worthless.  There's a price, they have value.  I want Adult Child, California Feeling, etc.  I need that stuff.  I don't need this.  I'd bite on a HITS compilation if it were all remixes....but that's it.  It's called making a playlist...I'm too lazy to ever make them...but I'm too cheap to pay someone to do it for me.

I applaud Capitol's awareness of heavy-fans while releasing nice comps for new fans.  They probably don't need to waste time and money on finding and remixing classic material, but they do anyway.  They're trying to please both camps -- which is commendable.  But they'd be doing it on my dime if I bought it.  And I believe there's two separate, distinct markets there -- one of which isn't being served.  I would like to be served and I will pay for that service -- but I will not compromise.  The vast majority of fans, casual they are -- can pick this up if they need it.  Although Sounds of Summer is still in stores and that has probably held them over.  I'm still waiting however.

And that's a well-written paragraph on why none of us should be buying this.    :lol


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on April 13, 2009, 08:37:50 AM
And here's why we should be buying this (and why I will).

We're fans. It's what we do.


Title: Re: Details on
Post by: Jonas on April 13, 2009, 08:59:43 AM
Not in this economy...


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Fun Is In on April 13, 2009, 09:08:18 AM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........

Nope - not OK at all. Someone actually got paid for that ?  And someone else said "yeah, that's fine" ??   ;D

Reminds me of the poster for the Endless Summer surfing film.   The graphic "artist" probably borrowed from that.   http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HkigL1rqL._SL500_AA280_.jpg


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Fun Is In on April 13, 2009, 09:20:07 AM
Interesting to me is that they name the person who returned the tape and there seem to have been no negative repercussions for the person.....so I'm optimistically imagining that there may be some others out there who will feel like the time is right and the situation conducive to returning other "lost tapes".   

Just a dream I suppose, but somewhere over the rainbow there must be more tapes in private hands.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: JeffRetro on April 13, 2009, 09:28:13 AM
Pass.

There's just too much good stuff out there to be spending my money on, without re-re-re-re-buying stuff I already have.  I didn't bite on the Greatest Hits 1, 2, 3 or these latest "Summer" varieties.  Nor did I bite on the $100+ "singles" boxset nonsense.  Total debacle.


Actually, you shouldn't pass on the Greatest Hits 1, 2 & 3, because these are the only comps that feature the correct single mixes for ALL the tracks on them - and I'm including the U.S. SINGLES box in that comparison.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 13, 2009, 09:51:11 AM
Pass.

There's just too much good stuff out there to be spending my money on, without re-re-re-re-buying stuff I already have.  I didn't bite on the Greatest Hits 1, 2, 3 or these latest "Summer" varieties.  Nor did I bite on the $100+ "singles" boxset nonsense.  Total debacle.


Actually, you shouldn't pass on the Greatest Hits 1, 2 & 3, becasue these are the only comps that feature the correct single mixes for ALL the tracks on them - and I'm including the U.S. SINGLES box in that comparison.

I know!  Stop telling me that!!!!!!! You're not helping!!!!  I'm an addict!!!!!!    :smokin


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: JeffRetro on April 13, 2009, 09:58:23 AM
Pass.

There's just too much good stuff out there to be spending my money on, without re-re-re-re-buying stuff I already have.  I didn't bite on the Greatest Hits 1, 2, 3 or these latest "Summer" varieties.  Nor did I bite on the $100+ "singles" boxset nonsense.  Total debacle.


Actually, you shouldn't pass on the Greatest Hits 1, 2 & 3, becasue these are the only comps that feature the correct single mixes for ALL the tracks on them - and I'm including the U.S. SINGLES box in that comparison.

I know!  Stop telling me that!!!!!!! You're not helping!!!!  I'm an addict!!!!!!    :smokin

Oh, and I should probably add that the UK Best Of The Brother Years is preferable to the US GH 3 disc as it has the single edit of HCTN and the long fade version of "Sumahama" from the original 45. :-)  The songs dropped to make room for those were simply album tracks that are available on the two-fers.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 13, 2009, 10:06:12 AM
Damn you rocky pamplin.

 >:(


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: JeffRetro on April 13, 2009, 10:10:45 AM
Damn you rocky pamplin.

 >:(

Hey, just be happy they haven't reissued THE ROCK on CD; then you'd really be in a quandry.



Unless ultra tepid, totally limp, poorly-sung tenth rate disco is your bag.  8)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TdHabib on April 13, 2009, 10:30:45 AM
Damn you rocky pamplin.

 >:(
Thank God, normal-sized, black text! Hallelujah!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 13, 2009, 10:32:05 AM
:-D

OMG. "The Rock?"  :o  Well...if it's so bad, it may contain "train-wreck" entertainment value.  But...no probably a good thing it's Out Of Print.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 13, 2009, 10:35:05 AM
Damn you rocky pamplin.

 >:(
Thank God, normal-sized, black text! Hallelujah!

Just curious...black text?  I have white text on a dark grey background ??  ???


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Rocker on April 13, 2009, 12:42:03 PM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........

Nope - not OK at all. Someone actually got paid for that ?  And someone else said "yeah, that's fine" ??   ;D

Reminds me of the poster for the Endless Summer surfing film.   The graphic "artist" probably borrowed from that.   http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HkigL1rqL._SL500_AA280_.jpg

Interesting, because I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and haven't thought about the covers being so alike. But you're totally right...


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TdHabib on April 13, 2009, 01:34:35 PM
Damn you rocky pamplin.

 >:(
Thank God, normal-sized, black text! Hallelujah!

Just curious...black text?  I have white text on a dark grey background ??  ???
So do I...you're good...very good... ;)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TonyW on April 13, 2009, 01:49:49 PM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........

Nope - not OK at all. Someone actually got paid for that ?  And someone else said "yeah, that's fine" ??   ;D

Reminds me of the poster for the Endless Summer surfing film.   The graphic "artist" probably borrowed from that.   http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/41HkigL1rqL._SL500_AA280_.jpg

Interesting, because I'm listening to the soundtrack right now and haven't thought about the covers being so alike. But you're totally right...

While the Beach Boys/Capitol camp have been ripping off Bruce Brown's intellectual property for over 35 years I believe this cover art is inspired/approprated from the classic surf film, Morning Of The Earth and the iconic scene of Rusty Miller and Steve Cooney picking there way across the coral reef on their way out to surf Bali's Uluwatu for the very first time.

Given the litigious nature of some whithin the Beach Boys organisation when it comes to the subject of intellectual property I am amazed at their lack of compunction when it comes to ripping off surfers who struggle to make a dollar!

Whether it Bruce Brown's Endless Summer or Albie Falzon's Morning Of The Earth it's still a rip off!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Fun Is In on April 13, 2009, 02:00:29 PM
It this

http://media.photobucket.com/image/%252522morning%20of%20the%20earth%252522%20film%20poster/wilkoop0/MOTE-1.jpg

 the mentioned Morning Of The Earth poster?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TonyW on April 13, 2009, 03:50:56 PM
It this

http://media.photobucket.com/image/%252522morning%20of%20the%20earth%252522%20film%20poster/wilkoop0/MOTE-1.jpg

 the mentioned Morning Of The Earth poster?

Yeah, that's a Morning Of The Earth poster but it's for the 25th Anniversary live concerts which were held last year in Australia. To get a better idea of the image I mention see this video footage on You Tube - the Miller/Cooney images occur at around 25 seconds and for any hardcore surfer these are seminal images: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DHJY4ar91XY&feature=related

I retrospect the new album cover probably does more to rip off the poster for Bruce Brown's Endless Summer II than it does either the original Endless Summer or Morning Of The Earth. Here is the ESII poster: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm1087932928/tt0109729

Actually as a symbolic image of surfers and their girlfriends in the 60s & 70s the album cover it totaly bogus ..... eveybody knows that surfers only took their girlfriends to the beach to "look after their towels" ... and besides "chicks don't surf" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YCE7w7ombrk&feature=related


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shady on April 13, 2009, 07:07:37 PM
I'm actually really excited for this comp..can you pre order yet?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: lance on April 13, 2009, 07:43:50 PM
Anybody know if 'Please Let Me Wonder' is the stereo mix that was on Warmth of the Sun?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: petsite on April 13, 2009, 08:21:06 PM
(http://www.newscom.com/cgi-bin/pub/thumb/wmark/prnphotos080300?doc=PRN/prnphotos/docs/080/300&size=512&logo=logo)

Ok..........

Nope - not OK at all. Someone actually got paid for that ?  And someone else said "yeah, that's fine" ??   ;D

That's what I meant Andrew....as we say in the states....."UM........Ok............" (meaning really? really? this is the best you can do?) And yeah, it is EndLess Summer......or a poor man's copy of it.


(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51KM4HFQMBL._SS500_.jpg)
(http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/519SAYE1XML._SS500_.jpg)


Why can't we get somehting really really good? Hell, the boxset with the board for the cover was better.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: alanjames on April 13, 2009, 10:20:45 PM
http://www.amazon.com/Summer-Love-Songs-Girls-Beach/dp/B001XJNZ7M/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1239686300&sr=8-1


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TonyW on April 13, 2009, 10:40:03 PM
Why can't we get somehting really really good? Hell, the boxset with the board for the cover was better.

Good point. Somebody like Rick Rietveld could do a good retro Beach Boys album cover without falling into the Wyland Gallery cliches of the SIP cover. Here's Rick's stuff: http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/surfartist-rick-rietveld-c-21_86.html


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 14, 2009, 07:50:18 AM
Why can't we get somehting really really good? Hell, the boxset with the board for the cover was better.

Good point. Somebody like Rick Rietveld could do a good retro Beach Boys album cover without falling into the Wyland Gallery cliches of the SIP cover. Here's Rick's stuff: http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/surfartist-rick-rietveld-c-21_86.html

Trouble is, it's so objective. Rick Rietveld's stuff doesn't appeal to me at all.

Best BBs' album cover? Surf's Up gets my vote, the Holland, then In Concert. Frank Holmes' SMILE cover would have been right up there if it'd been released. Of the pre-66 albums, only Surfin' Safari.  Maybe this needs its own thread?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 14, 2009, 08:24:52 AM
Why can't we get somehting really really good? Hell, the boxset with the board for the cover was better.

Good point. Somebody like Rick Rietveld could do a good retro Beach Boys album cover without falling into the Wyland Gallery cliches of the SIP cover. Here's Rick's stuff: http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/surfartist-rick-rietveld-c-21_86.html

Yeah!  I like it a lot.  DEFINITELY for Brian's next solo album!!!!!!


(http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/images/Midnightlight.jpg)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Shift on April 14, 2009, 10:20:22 AM
Why can't we get somehting really really good? Hell, the boxset with the board for the cover was better.

Good point. Somebody like Rick Rietveld could do a good retro Beach Boys album cover without falling into the Wyland Gallery cliches of the SIP cover. Here's Rick's stuff: http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/surfartist-rick-rietveld-c-21_86.html

Yeah!  I like it a lot.  DEFINITELY for Brian's next solo album!!!!!!


(http://www.waveridersgallery.net/catalog2/images/Midnightlight.jpg)

See, for me, that combines the Smiley Smile, MIU and SIP covers, but with a dose of visual syrup that suggests it'd be more suitable for a compilation that included Deirdre, Tears in the Morning, The Nearest Faraway Place and most of Going Public.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Smilin Ed H on April 14, 2009, 11:04:46 AM
Yuck.  The kind of art that appeals to 12 year-old girls.  All it needs is a jumping dolphin.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 14, 2009, 11:23:18 AM
It does have a Summer In Paradise resemblance - although this is more surreal.  I digs it.  I dig the Smiley overtones too...but it's not as damp and gloomy.  And the MIU wave curl should be on every B.B. record!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: TonyW on April 14, 2009, 03:05:45 PM
Art is purely subjective ... whenever I go to the Australian National Gallery is see people lined up and looking at Jackson Pollock's "Blue Poles", me I turn around and look at Willem De Kooning's "Woman V" ...

The thing with a guy like Rietveld is that the images displayed on that website are for the mass market, the people who think Wayand Galleries are art and that jumping dophins are "lovely" ... at the end of the day an artist has to pay the bills (greatest hits tours anyone?).

Rietveld has "surfing cred" something the Beach Boys camp strives for but always misses the mark of and instead ends up with kooks and gumbies. Rietveld when given commissions by the movers and shakers of the surf industry has always delivered including posters for events such as The Quiksilver Pro in Java and the Eddie Akaiu Big Wave Invitational in Hawaii - amongst some of the biggest and best surf contests ever ... and not a jumping dolphin in sight!

Rietveld is just an example of the talent which is out there.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 14, 2009, 03:57:16 PM
Yuck.  The kind of art that appeals to 12 year-old girls.  All it needs is a jumping dolphin.
I know what you mean...but that's not what this is.  This has elements of the sublime.  Look at it a little longer.  Notice the dialogue in the foreground.  Lamp post?  Sidewalk?  No...there's no Waldo.  :)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: MBE on April 14, 2009, 08:41:38 PM
I like photos of whatever group or singer it is on album covers. I like seeing where they are visually, it helps me interpret the music better. For the Beach Boys I dig Sunflower, Good Vibrations (the 1970 LP) Close Up, 20/20, Stack O Tracks (my favorite), Summer Days, Today, Pet Sounds, Shut Down 2. If I had to pick a drawing or non Beach Boys cover I like Surfin USA a lot, Little Deuce Coupe is also cool. I don't mind MIU at all, in fact I think it's very pleasent.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 15, 2009, 09:53:17 AM
I like photos of whatever group or singer it is on album covers. I like seeing where they are visually, it helps me interpret the music better. For the Beach Boys I dig Sunflower, Good Vibrations (the 1970 LP) Close Up, 20/20, Stack O Tracks (my favorite), Summer Days, Today, Pet Sounds, Shut Down 2. If I had to pick a drawing or non Beach Boys cover I like Surfin USA a lot, Little Deuce Coupe is also cool. I don't mind MIU at all, in fact I think it's very pleasent.
With Elvis in the 70s, they just used early 70s photos of him I believe....which obviously was intended to hide "where he was visually."

But that's an interesting point you make.  I do like having pictures of them in the package, absolutely ... but MIU works well by providing us a great design and visual on the cover, and on the back you get the bums!  :-D

I love the 15 Big Ones cover -- for exactly the reason you mention.  It's so "...well ... here we are."  Wouldn't that have been a daring cover for them?  Mainly Brian's "OMG" appearance...then again, people were used to seeing him in this state:  SNL, Rolling Stone, etc.  Love You is perfect for the music inside -- comforting and homemade, kind of like a quilt or some simple child's toy.

Friends has a cool concept, but the visuals don't work for me.  Surfin' Safari is sooooo iconic -- love it.  Not a big fan of Keepin the Summer Afloat.  It's interesting...just doesn't say Beach Boys to me -- don't think I like the concept.  It's like a joke, you hear it once and you get it.  LA is nice -- but once again, to your point, no photo.  I would have liked a photo.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: variable2 on April 15, 2009, 12:12:53 PM
my favorite album cover is probably All Summer Long.. perfect.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Rocker on April 15, 2009, 12:37:07 PM
I like photos of whatever group or singer it is on album covers. I like seeing where they are visually, it helps me interpret the music better. For the Beach Boys I dig Sunflower, Good Vibrations (the 1970 LP) Close Up, 20/20, Stack O Tracks (my favorite), Summer Days, Today, Pet Sounds, Shut Down 2. If I had to pick a drawing or non Beach Boys cover I like Surfin USA a lot, Little Deuce Coupe is also cool. I don't mind MIU at all, in fact I think it's very pleasent.
With Elvis in the 70s, they just used early 70s photos of him I believe....which obviously was intended to hide "where he was visually."


No, they used mostly fairly recent pictures of him for his albums. In fact I wish they'd use a different one for the "Promised land"-album

My favorite BBs-cover would probably be "Surfer girl" (I totally love those Paradise Cove-shots. They are just fascinating imo), "Wild honey" "Smiley Smile" or "Surf's up". The covers of those albums show exactly what is on the record and they are cool to look at


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: MBE on April 15, 2009, 03:58:19 PM
I like photos of whatever group or singer it is on album covers. I like seeing where they are visually, it helps me interpret the music better. For the Beach Boys I dig Sunflower, Good Vibrations (the 1970 LP) Close Up, 20/20, Stack O Tracks (my favorite), Summer Days, Today, Pet Sounds, Shut Down 2. If I had to pick a drawing or non Beach Boys cover I like Surfin USA a lot, Little Deuce Coupe is also cool. I don't mind MIU at all, in fact I think it's very pleasent.
With Elvis in the 70s, they just used early 70s photos of him I believe....which obviously was intended to hide "where he was visually."



No, they used mostly fairly recent pictures of him for his albums. In fact I wish they'd use a different one for the "Promised land"-album

My favorite BBs-cover would probably be "Surfer girl" (I totally love those Paradise Cove-shots. They are just fascinating imo), "Wild honey" "Smiley Smile" or "Surf's up". The covers of those albums show exactly what is on the record and they are cool to look at
Let's see with Elvis he looked pretty good until 1975 so no need to really hide him before then. Not counting the reissues, Good Times, Today and Moody Blue, were the only ones with old photos.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: chris.metcalfe on April 17, 2009, 04:50:28 AM
And here's why we should be buying this (and why I will).

We're fans. It's what we do.

But of course Capitol are trying to sell to two different audiences with one catch-all release.

Never mind the Beatles, here's what you get if you're a Bee Gees fan:

http://www.amazon.com/Odessa-CD-Deluxe-Bee-Gees/dp/B001HZ9ABM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1239968978&sr=1-1


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Bean Bag on April 19, 2009, 04:42:23 PM
And here's why we should be buying this (and why I will).

We're fans. It's what we do.

But of course Capitol are trying to sell to two different audiences with one catch-all release.

Never mind the Beatles, here's what you get if you're a Bee Gees fan:

http://www.amazon.com/Odessa-CD-Deluxe-Bee-Gees/dp/B001HZ9ABM/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1239968978&sr=1-1

That's exactly what I'm talking about!!!  Thanks so much for posting that.  I was beginning to feel alienated!!  You see that Capitol?!?!?!?!  You could be charging 40 bux for Surfin' Safari.  $40 for each original album!!

I don't mind the comps...they're great for people who don't buy CDs and only have a dozen or so TOTAL in their collection.  Summer Love songs is for them.  Hardcore Beach Boy fans have to buy how many collection to get the singles?  BOGUS.

At least we got Brian.  He's workin' for us.  God Bless him.  The last thing we got from Capitol was Hawthorne, in what, 2001?  Before that it was the 96 Pet Sounds Box and then the 93 GV box.  I think the 2008 "Shingles" box was supposed to be our most recent bone.   :lol


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Jon Stebbins on April 19, 2009, 06:55:52 PM
At least we got Brian. He's workin' for us. Signing off on this compilation is part of that.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Wrightfan on May 15, 2009, 12:35:35 PM
The Beach Boys official site has the full new stereo remix of Don't Worry Baby on the main page to listen:
http://thebeachboys.com/

Amazon also has samples up:
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B001XJNZ7M?ie=UTF8&tag=emilink214-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=1789&creativeASIN=B001XJNZ7M


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: shelter on May 15, 2009, 12:45:57 PM
The last thing we got from Capitol was Hawthorne, in what, 2001?  Before that it was the 96 Pet Sounds Box and then the 93 GV box.  I think the 2008 "Shingles" box was supposed to be our most recent bone.   :lol

You forgot Endless Harmony and Ultimate Christmas...


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: b00ts on May 16, 2009, 09:19:14 AM
At least we got Brian. He's workin' for us. Signing off on this compilation is part of that.

Jon -

Do you have any idea of when BRI will open the floodgates?! They have so much material they are sitting on, and a rabid fanbase, at least in my household. I didn't purchase Sights and Sounds of Summer or Warmth of the Sun (although I enjoyed the podcast series immensely.)

As someone mentioned a few pages back - maybe it was you - they are trying to cater to two very different markets with releases such as these. I am getting sick of it. A few new stereo mixes and an official version of "Fallin' in Love" would be cool if they were buffered by some more unreleased material.

It's odd to me that Endless Harmony came out in 99 and Hawthorne, CA came out around 2001 (correct?) yet in the decade since, they haven't seen fit to release another archival collection.

Is this because of their plans to sell rarities online?

- b00ts


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Surfer Joe on May 16, 2009, 10:54:19 PM
Some of the covers I love are Smiley Smile and Wild Honey; All Summer Long and Summer Days (And Summer Nights!!).

The worst thing associated with the band is the stuff for the box set discs: an air-brushed orange exploding in outer space?  Yeah, that expresses Brian's muse perfectly.

As to the 70s logo-


I believe they used it on the front cover of 15 Big Ones for the very first time and it never fails to remind me of 50s jukebox nostalgia...


The perfect phrase- that's it exactly.  It's a shame the Bach Boys never had a good, definitive logo in the sixties, like the Beatles' "drop 'T' ".  I agree that they should try to market the Pet Sounds font.

I think the new cover is fine- I like it a lot better than the bland nature photography of the last two.  They really haven't known quite how to rebrand the Beach Boys in a long time.  I actually don't think this is lifted from the "Endless Summer" art because (1) it doesn't resemble either of those in color or composition and (2) it's just two different flat styles, neither of which is that novel.  "Endless Summer" is a sort of a silkscreen look with jarring, unnatural colors, and this cover is just a common Photoshop effect called "posterizing" which I've used a billion times. The similarity, I guess, is surfers seen from behind, silhouetted, in flat colors, and- big surprise- the sun appears in both. That sounds pretty close, I agree, but there's more than enough different that I don't think it's a lift.

Unfortunately, the story of these cover designs is in this question: who are they trying to sell to?  Nobody on this board, unfortunately.





Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: PongHit on May 17, 2009, 06:03:53 AM
What's this 'outro' on "Girls On The Beach"?

And I'm glad they decided to reverse the order of the first 2 tracks; would have been weird to have a cover as the opener.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The Heartical Don on May 17, 2009, 06:19:16 AM
my favorite album cover is probably All Summer Long.. perfect.

That, and Wild Honey. Both perfect, as someone once said.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Awesoman on May 17, 2009, 07:41:21 AM
How can it be seen as something like a new part to "Sounds of summer" and "Warmth of the sun" when some of the tracks are the same?
Anyway, great to have "Lady". I guess this might be because of POB's succes as a re-release. maybe we'll really get more Dennis-material in the future.

Agreed. But did 'Lady' really never surface on CD before?

Sure did.. Super Furry Animals included it on their 2005 Under The Influence compilation. "Feel Flows" is on there too.

But on the Super Furry Animals comp it's a vinyl transfer of the original mono B-side.  And despite the press release says, "Lady" was originally mixed in stereo for the original "Sunflower" lineup.  Let's hope they use that original stereo mix, 'cause it's gorgeous.

And people wonder why sometimes I get a bit tetchy. Guy asked if "Lady" was ever on CD before... I give the CD it was on, only for someone to start with the "buts". "Lady" has been on CD before. No buts. It has.


But...!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: PongHit on May 17, 2009, 12:52:43 PM
What's this 'outro' on "Girls On The Beach"?

I can answer my own question now (I just heard it): it sounds like a brief vocal-only snippet from "Don't Worry Baby."


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shady on May 17, 2009, 02:48:55 PM
Out tomorrow  ;D


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Wrightfan on May 19, 2009, 08:23:56 AM
Bought the new tracks last night. My review:

Don't Worry Baby sounds great. The new remix really improves the old mix by a lot.

Why do Fools Fall in Love really doesn't need that intro imo. Feels tacked on. The rest of the song this amazing. Sounds wonderful in stereo. I may even go as far as saying it's the best stereo remix of a BB song so far.

Hushabye really doesn't sound too much different then it's original mix but it's in better quality that's for sure.

I'm So Young starts off in mono but then kicks in stereo after the vocal intro. There's an organ in here that I've never heard before. Decent stereo remix.

Good to my Baby packs a punch especially in the intro and chorus. Much better then I thought it was gonna be.

Fallin' in Love is amazing. Unlike others, I really love the intro and the part where it goes into the "old intro" gave me the chills in a good way.

Time to Get Alone is a waste of time. Just clearer background vocals and as Andrew Doe has said, the effect on "deep and wide" is ruined. Unless you're a completist, stay way.

If I had to rank them, I'll go:
1. Fallin' in Love
2. Why Do Fools fall in Love
3. Don't Worry Baby
4. Good to My Baby
5. I'm So Young
6. Hushabye
7. Time to Get Alone


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on May 19, 2009, 09:11:41 AM
I guarantee it well sell a million in January.

BTW, am I the only one who likes the cover art for Keepin' The Summer Alive? It's cheesy, but so are the late 70s BBs. If it had Brian hunched over a piano in the corner smoking a cigarette it would have been perfect.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: The infamous Baldwin Organ on May 19, 2009, 09:28:21 AM
I guarantee it well sell a million in January.

BTW, am I the only one who likes the cover art for Keepin' The Summer Alive? It's cheesy, but so are the late 70s BBs. If it had Brian hunched over a piano in the corner smoking a cigarette it would have been perfect.

I love it too, but we are a small minority. I love that whole album.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: donald on May 19, 2009, 11:18:27 AM
After hearing the new release and the versions of Hushabye, WDFFIL, DWB etc........I wondered what had been done to the mixes.  Weren't these to have been original master recordings....as they were intended?

They sound nice but....altered.  Seemed to me the harmony parts were louder and more upfront, something I don't mind cause that is one fine harmony.  At the same time, some lead vocal and guitar seemed to recede into the background just a bit.  Time to get alone's rhythm seems to dance back and forth between the stereo speakers..  Interesting but a little much on first hearing.  Sort of disconcerting.

Comments?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Lady on May 19, 2009, 12:35:08 PM
"Fallin' In Love" is beautiful.

The new mixes? Although it's a wonderful story how they were found... IMO-- bottom line: new mixes sound layered and a few sound cavernous; some of the new digital remasters sound so clean they're almost sterile.

It would have been nice to see one of Dan Mackin's paintings used for the CD cover.  He collaborated with Brian Wilson on some paintings:

www.danmackin.com


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shady on May 20, 2009, 01:12:31 PM
Capitol really under estimate the Beach Boys, out of stock already on amazon.co.UK  ::)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on May 20, 2009, 01:38:39 PM
Capitol really under estimate the Beach Boys, out of stock already on amazon.co.UK  ::)

Well, one of those was mine... wonder who bought the other one ?  ::)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Shady on May 20, 2009, 03:30:13 PM
Capitol really under estimate the Beach Boys, out of stock already on amazon.co.UK  ::)

Well, one of those was mine... wonder who bought the other one ?  ::)

LMAO

It's not that bad is it.  ;D

Sad thing is, it's actualy charting well on amazon in America, Canada UK and stuff.. and on the the iTunes pop charts, so we can expect a few more comps on the way


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: sockittome on May 20, 2009, 08:03:50 PM
Downloaded 5 of the tunes last night from Amazon.  That way I can make my own comp and skip the songs/mixes I already have.

WDFFIL is incredible in stereo.  I agree with the poster who said it may be one of the best remixes ever.  The intro is interesting; I can't help but wonder what the story is behind that.  Things like that didn't show up on BB albums until about two years later.

I'm So Young and Good to My Baby are pretty good, although a little narrow on the stereo for my tastes.

Time to Get Alone is just a step below excellent for me.  The clarity is a big plus; it's nice to get away from that late 60s muddiness.  You can really hear all those intricate vocals now.  Contrary to some other opinions, the "deep and wide" part actually works for me.  I always thought the original segment of that was a little jarring...but that's just me.  The part I do have a little trouble with is getting used to the extra reverb on the lead vocals.  Added reverb on remixes usually doesn't bother me, but on this one it seems to take some of the intimacy out of the song.  Minor nitpick, though.  I will most likely get used to it.

Fallin' in Love....never heard it before now, so I have nothing to compare it to.  I can't think of a grand enough word to describe it.  Wow!  That's all I can say.  For some reason the instrumental part reminds me of Ennio Morricone!

Bottom line:  as always, I'm happy to have these remixes and I will listen to them often.  BTW, I passed on downloading Don't Worry Baby after hearing the sample.  Believe it or not, I've always liked that original split style vocal.  The new mix was done very well, but sadly, it makes the song a bit boring for me.  Please, I hope this nitpick doesn't deter anyone.  It's a matter of taste.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: petsite on May 21, 2009, 09:13:34 AM
Got my copy yesterday and listened to with headphones last night. I still dunno. While it is always interesting to hear things mixed differently than I have heard before, it is getting to the point of being overload. And WHY or WHY did they do that to Fallin' In Love?! I mean, I like it, but I also have the original (from a digital source which sounds amazing!). If only one shoudl be out in the public domain, it should be the original. The other new mixes, are well, as Mark as said numerous times, they are mixing things with an ear towards the IPOD/MP3 market......so it has to be bright and loud. So some of this sounds that way on good equipment.

I know, I am being picky. I am over 50 now. I am allowed to be!

Bob


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Lady on May 21, 2009, 10:31:05 AM
.....Time to Get Alone is just a step below excellent for me....


I agree.  I love the way you can hear the violins, and Carl's voice really comes through. 


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: sockittome on May 21, 2009, 05:00:41 PM
While it is always interesting to hear things mixed differently than I have heard before, it is getting to the point of being overload.

I think it's great that Mr. Linett is giving us these choices.  I imagine everyone is going to have different reactions to them.  That's why in my post above, I threw in the disclaimer about the new mix of Don't Worry Baby (which basically carries over to the remixes of In the Parkin' Lot, etc).  Just because they don't do anything for me, it doesn't mean other people aren't going to embrace them.  I still have my '90 twofer and probably always will (although it's too bad I can't graft the new mix of Why Do Fools onto it...well, I could make a cd-r, I suppose).   

Anyway, "different strokes" and all that.  There's nothing wrong with being picky; it's what we do.  We're Beach Boys fans!


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: grillo on May 21, 2009, 08:02:07 PM
[. [/quote]


Anyway, "different strokes" and all that.  There's nothing wrong with being picky; it's what we do.  We're Beach Boys fans!
[/quote]
Exactly 8)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on May 22, 2009, 07:38:26 AM
Quote
which basically carries over to the remixes of In the Parkin' Lot, etc

Where has "In the Parkin' Lot" been remixed?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: phirnis on May 22, 2009, 09:49:35 AM
Time To Get Alone doesn't sound right to me. It's nice to hear all the details, but to my ears Carl's original production sounds much more elegant and vigorous. Not particularly fond of the increased reverb on the lead vocals, too.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Glenn Greenberg on May 22, 2009, 10:22:09 AM
I really don't like how the "deep and wide" part sounds in the remix of Time To Get Alone.  All the power has been sucked out of it.

And the new version of Fallin' in Love is a bit of a disappointment.  I prefer the original mix, with the stark opening and with Dennis's vocals more prominent.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on May 22, 2009, 12:17:59 PM
I really don't like how the "deep and wide" part sounds in the remix of Time To Get Alone.  All the power has been sucked out of it.

And the new version of Fallin' in Love is a bit of a disappointment.  I prefer the original mix, with the stark opening and with Dennis's vocals more prominent.

I used to love the "power" of the original "deep & wide" line, but as I became more aware of studio effects and realized that the sound of it was achieved by many layers of echo, I found
it hard to listen to without being aware of the artificial tone of it. IMO, if it has been made to
sound more natural, like the gorgeous, relaxed Hawthorne, CA version, that's a good thing
(apologies to Martha Stewart). :)


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: petsite on May 22, 2009, 01:29:00 PM
Getting use to the new mixes of Lady and Dont Worry Baby. I would really like to know what that piece of music is at the begining for Why Do Fools Fall In Love. Doesn't sound like it was part of that song. Unless it is a riff from the backing track. Mark? Alan?


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Rocker on May 22, 2009, 01:36:29 PM
Getting use to the new mixes of Lady and Dont Worry Baby. I would really like to know what that piece of music is at the begining for Why Do Fools Fall In Love. Doesn't sound like it was part of that song. Unless it is a riff from the backing track. Mark? Alan?


Neither Mark nor Alan, but to me it sounds like a experiment with Spector's sound. Probably vocals would've been added. I imagine it being in the form of the beginning and ending to "In the parkin' lot". Maybe Brian got the idea to that from his first version of WDFFIL or vice versa


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: sockittome on May 22, 2009, 05:06:10 PM
Quote
which basically carries over to the remixes of In the Parkin' Lot, etc

Where has "In the Parkin' Lot" been remixed?

Nowhere, I guess.  For some odd reason I was thinkin' it was remixed.  Try "Hushabye".


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Jon Stebbins on May 22, 2009, 07:16:24 PM
Getting use to the new mixes of Lady and Dont Worry Baby. I would really like to know what that piece of music is at the begining for Why Do Fools Fall In Love. Doesn't sound like it was part of that song. Unless it is a riff from the backing track. Mark? Alan?
WDFFIL intro was recorded at the same Gold Star session as the rest of the song, but obviously not used on the orig. release. Nobody would have known this intro even existed if the multi-track master had not been found recently, which it was. I think the intro and the new mix sound great....classic Brian meets Spector stuff.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: grillo on May 22, 2009, 09:03:44 PM
Getting use to the new mixes of Lady and Dont Worry Baby. I would really like to know what that piece of music is at the begining for Why Do Fools Fall In Love. Doesn't sound like it was part of that song. Unless it is a riff from the backing track. Mark? Alan?
WDFFIL intro was recorded at the same Gold Star session as the rest of the song, but obviously not used on the orig. release. Nobody would have known this intro even existed if the multi-track master had not been found recently, which it was. I think the intro and the new mix sound great....classic Brian meets Spector stuff.
Yeah, that intro sounds like it would have some talking over top of it
(as someone in one of these threads mentioned about a week or two ago). Real melodramatic like the shangri-las or darlene love


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: Aegir on May 22, 2009, 09:47:12 PM
The intro just sounds like Brian playing variations on Be My Baby.


Title: Re: Details on \
Post by: phirnis on May 23, 2009, 03:20:39 AM
The intro just sounds like Brian playing variations on Be My Baby.

I agree. It also reminds me of a song that would only materialize many years later, "This Isn't Love".