The Smiley Smile Message Board

Who is it..?  So faint but I think it sounds like Carl..?

It's nobody. No vocals were ever recorded.

Did you mean to say "Don't Run Away"?

or "Don't Talk"?  ;D

I believe it was Rocky! ;)

Who was singing in tribute to Lorren Daro's wife.

OP, do you mean "We'll Run Away"?

on the fadeout I'm 99% sure there are 'do do' backing vox - listen closely

could be instruments I guess but to me sounds like a voice

isn't it possible the track was worked on at a session for another tune, so not logged..?

Where, exactly  ? From when to when ?

Eh, never mind - just listened in mono, stereo, on speakers, with cans, Spotify, CD.

Nothing. Nada. Rien. Zilch. Zippo.

I've always thought I heard something that sounded like a vocal there too -- the new melodic "doo doo do do" part that comes in at 1:54 and stays til the end. It's not on the mix without the string overdub on the box, but it is on both mono and stereo mixes, so that suggests that whatever it actually is, it's part of the string overdub.
I wouldn't swear there's a vocal there -- and I'm more than happy to believe there isn't given the utter absence of any documentary evidence for it -- but there's something on there that sounds vocal-ish, if you see what I mean. I'd even go so far as to say that something about it makes it sound specifically like *Marilyn's* voice -- even though I can't swear it's there at all.
But I wouldn't put it past Brian's abilities at all at that point to be able to create a string part that sounded like a voice...

I hear the da doo da doo.
it's called a snare drum  ::)

No, I'm not talking about the snare.
Between 1:42 and 1:50 there's a bit of musical material -- horn melody, strummed guitar, snare drum and timpani. Some other stuff as well, but those are the major instruments.
From 1:54 onwards, that musical material repeats, but with the addition of the strings, and with an additional countermelody -- a countermelody that isn't on the mix without strings, as I said -- and the snare drum clearly *is* on that mix. *That countermelody* is what we're talking about. It sounds to some of us like there might be a vocal part in the mix there.
Perhaps rather than assuming other people are so stupid they don't know what a drum is, you might try paying attention to what's being said.

I listened from before then. No vocals.

i'll have another go and put my dog ears on

edit: I meant my comment in humour

I hear it.  And I always assumed it was a female singer.

Flute.

I just listened to the stereo mix through good headphones - the flute would be a good guess, but I hear that doubling the oboe on another line. I believe the part in question is played by the two violas. Violas can sometimes sound "vocal-like".

It's the same instrument/sound that appears between 1:22 and 1:24, right?

EDIT: BTW, I just noticed that the soundwave for the stereo mix of Let's Go Away For Awhile is inverted when compared to the mono mix (and to the backing track that's missing the string overdub.) I wonder if the other stereo mixes in the PS sessions box are also inverted...

EDIT #2: Wouldn't It Be Nice and You Still Believe In Me are inverted as well (meaning that in the soundwave the peaks become valleys and vice-versa). Interesting...

EDIT #3: And... the SACD stereo mix has the same polarity as the mono mix.

Yeah that's it - I've always heard it as vox from the very first time I heard it in mono 20 odd years ago: 'doo doos' - to me it sounds like Carl.

But I can hear the 'd' on the 'doo doos'.

I've never heard it as anything but vox.

Best guess would then be a wind instrument, of which flute and oboe were the two present on the overdub. If the line which I previously described as flute doubling oboe is actually the sax section from the basic track, then that would mean that they mystery line COULD be the flute or oboe on the overdub. I think the "doo doo" effect could reasonably be achieved by the woodwind player "enunciating" that hard percussive consonant sound on the first note of each line, at Brian's direction. Whatever it is, it's bathed in echo, which can make it sound altogether different than what it would normally sound like.

EDIT: on comparing the basic track to the overdubbed track, I'm gonna say at least one of the woodwinds is definitely playing a separate line on top of the sax section (most noticeable between 1:28 and 1:32), and that sounds like an oboe to me, so if it is a woodwind playing the "doo doo" line in the background, then it is likely the flute, as Josh suggested - perhaps an alto flute, which would sound "mellower" than a normal concert-pitch flute. But I would think it could still sound the way it does if the player enunciated it with a hard "d".

Cheers - interesting thoughts.  I know odd things can happen in mixes but to me it sounds so much like a voice that I think its a voice :)

I can't think of an example of a woodwind that sounds like that.

I stand to be corrected but wouldn't a simpler explanation be that its a vox mixed low..?

According to wikipedia, the track for Let's Go Away For Awhile was recorded on 1/18/1966, and the string overdubs were recorded the next day. And according to the internet, the (touring) Beach Boys were in Japan from 1/7 to 1/23. So, assuming no further recordings were done for the song, it's impossible that any of them are singing or playing on the track.

Thanks Cristian.  Could have been Brian.  Could have been Carl at a later date - or I could be wrong :)

The reason I'm convinced though is purely because to me it sounds like a human voice.

Guys, Brian was just humming something..

The track sheet for LGAFA is labeled thus:
1 - track
2 - drums
3 - horns
4 - strings

The flute and oboe were recorded at the same time as the strings, so they must be on Track 4 as well. There is no indication that a dubdown was made to a second-generation tape, so whatever is making that sound HAS to be on Track 4, with the violins, violas, cellos, flute and oboe.

Very interesting.  You mean it was recorded on a 4 track and all 4 tracks were filled up at the session..?

For a long time I thought there was a voice harmonizing at exactly 0:56. Later on I figured it was a woodwind instrument.

Oh yeah I'd never noticed that before - sounds more like vibes to me though.  I'd say its the same thing I'm hearing at the end.

It's very interesting I believe to note the date vocals for LGAFA were scheduled to be recorded, Capitol scuttled the mission so to speak and had Brian do the PS album mixdown instead

Tracks 1-3 were utilized on the basic tracking session of January 18. You can hear how that corresponds to the basic track stereo mix on the box set - Track 2 (drums, then later temple blocks, and eventually tympani) is panned to the left, Track 3 (the horns) is panned to the right, and Track 1 (labeled "track", and obviously meaning everything else: vibes, guitars, piano, basses) is positioned in the center. The fourth track was utilized the following day (January 19) for the string overdub (and obviously the woodwinds, meaning oboe and flute).

It sounds like pet owls to me. "Could we bring an owl in here?"

Shame Brian said in an interview that when he listened to the track, he decided it was complete as it was and didn't bother asking Tony to write lyrics. BTW, by "mixdown" I think you mean "mastering". April 16th.

Would those be the owls that were jumping in Alan's bed ?  ;D

Brian was trying to put a good face on the missing LGAFA vocal outcome saying that the song was better off without words--and while true enough it may well not've been Tony Ashers's original plan at all.  Brian saved his most difficult piece for very last and when the day came to record vocals Capitol pulled the studio time plug, not wanting to risk yet another possible string of recording sessions on a album they already knew they'd serious misgivings about

You're probably right. I have difficulty differentiating between certain instruments.

Us and Them by Pink Floyd reminds me a lot of Let's Go Away for a While. Anyone else feel this way?

And your source for this is... ? Mine is some guy called Tony Asher.

Andrew maybe you could ask Tony about the BV thing..?

You guys, it really is flute.  I mean seriously.

this thread is likely going to go on for about 20 pages

Why ? One, he wasn't there for the vocal sessions... two, he told me Brian decided after he'd mixed the track that it didn't need vocals (hence, no lyrics)... and three, there are no vocals on the track anyway. Craig says so (and if he told me something was recorded on February 38th, 4603 BC, I'd believe him), the session dates preclude it and there's not verifiable source for what one poster claims about Capitol forcing Brian to master the album.

... because you can't tell someone something they don't want to hear.

The 'doo doo' sounds..?  I'm really really trying but I can't hear it as a flute.

The thread won't go on and on as there's no way of resolving it.  Although the records show no vocal sessions it still sounds like BVs to me.

If its definitely not BVs I'd love to know what combination of instruments it is to get that sound - its one of my favourite moments on any BBs track.

The sound is there again (I think) at 1:22 - it makes a brief phrase.  Doesn't sound like a flute to me or even a combination of things.

Could it be a musician making a vocal sound into a woodwind rather than just blowing it..?

I hear the sound you're hearing at both those spots, Mike, but it's not a vocal.  It is some kind of an orchestral instrument or instruments with a lot of reverb on it/them.  It's the reverb - which is the dominating sound - and the instrument(s) sitting in the background that's giving the illusion to you that it's a voice.

If I had my headphones handy I might take a stab at identifying the instrument(s) - it sounds to me like it's actually the string section but I can't tell for sure without the cans on - but it's definitely not a voice.  It's just how far back the melody sits in the mix that makes it sound that way.  Also, at 1:22, the sound overloads the reverb and/or room sound (someone can tell me which) and resonates in such a way that for a second it sounds like a voice, but if you follow the melody line up you'll hear it resolves into the string section.  You can hear it more clearly on the stereo remaster.  It's just part of the orchestra buried deep in the mix so you're mostly hearing the melody line, and the reverb/room sound, which in the mix sounds a bit like a vocal (which covers the same range and roughly the same reverb sound).

Cheers for the input. Try as I might I can't hear it as anything but a voice and I AM trying :)

It sounds so much like a voice to me that I can hear the throat contractions making the phrases.

Its not confirmation bias I've just never heard it as anything else since I first heard the album in 1988.

Are you able to listen to it on cans anytime soon..?

I'm not insisting I'm right btw just that I can't hear it as instruments.

Could it be plucked strings maybe combined with woodwind..?  All playing unison..?

I've always heard it as Murry singing lead on "GV", but no-one will believe me...

I think this may be the case. And as mentioned, the echo on the track is creating the effect we're hearing.

meh - some people think the sounds are BVs - this is because they are hearing what sound like BVs

if its not BVs I think its very interesting trying to find out how it was done

we all know Tony Asher (originally) had songwriting credit on LGAFA

I've got it!!! ..... It's a bass swanee whistle, played by an owl through a Leslie speaker.

It's definitely not.  It's flute.

If iisten carefully and let my mind wander a little bit, it kind of sounds like there is a semi-high pitched "oooh" vocal, but it's some kind of woodwind instrument, I think. I don't hear anything that sounds like "doo doo".

totally sounds like a flute to me, if they mean the medium to high pitched sort of sigh at :56 then the repeated warble toward the end.

Hi Josh - how can you tell..?  I'm willing to believe it but where is the 'd' on the 'doo-ee-oos' coming from..?

I just can't hear a flute - I'd guess maybe plucked string and flute together..?

yeh that's the one but I can't think of ever hearing a flute sound anything like that.

I'd love to know how they did it - are we saying its just 1 flute with a load of reverb on it..?

Anybody tried listening to the 5.1 mix of PS from the "DVD Audio" release, and/or isolations from that mix? Granted, it was something a bit closer to a 4.0 mix (with little in the center channel or subwoofer), but perhaps there's a bit more separation or isolation there to hear this bit better?

Listening to flute music for 30 years?  The only thing I can think of that could be giving you the illusion of a dental plosive is the snare reverb return leaves a signature in rhythm with the flutes but delayed from the attack of the actual snare transient, which is somewhat obscured by the flutes playing the same rhythm, giving you the illusion of some kind of human mouth sound?

But it is beyond me how you could not hear a flute when it is clearly a flute, and could only be a flute, based on hard documentary evidence supplied by two of the top Beach Boys experts in the world.

I think I'm so strident about this because there are much more interesting and indeed actually mysterious mysteries out there.  Let's go solve those.

nah gotta be vocals, I've been brainwashed by this thread.   :lol
you say something long enough, anyone will believe it.
try again aeijtzsche.  sooner or later someone might hear  :lol

Not on the internal Capitol memorandum dated February 23rd, 1966, which detailed the preliminary track list and composers. The composer credit there reads as it does now (although the selection itself went by another name at the time).

Really ? Despite Tony telling me, and several others down the decades, in private conversation that he'd not written any lyrics to it at all ? This "we" doesn't know, nor do the "wes" at BMI. Can we have a source for this stunning new information, please ?

OK now that's really interesting - that's the kind of detail I was looking for.

You think just 1 flute or a couple..?  Nothing else - no plucked strings or somesuch in unison..?

And yes I've really really tried to hear it as a flute but I can't.  To me it sounds like Carl singing - its uncanny.  Can you hear the 'doo-doos' at all..?

Its one of the most beautiful sections of music I've ever heard.  The session guys must have been impressed.

I'm not insisting I'm right.  Its a discussion.  Discussion is how you learn - right..? :)

Very likely two flutes, played by Jules Jacob and possibly Steve Douglas.  No pizzicato strings, no.  I don't hear any sort of doo-doo, but I can understand why it might evoke that phoneme?  Another reason it might sound alien to you is that it's rare to hear flutes exploit the lower possibilities of the instrument.  And it is possible that these are alto flutes, which would even further remove the sound from your expectation of what a flute sounds like.

But let me ask you this, Occams razor time:  All the hard evidence points to it being flute.  So isn't it probably flute?

More interesting to me is whether there was ever any actual lead melody to the song floating around Brian's head. No evidence suggests Asher wrote lyrics for it. But if Brian at *any* point considered writing lyrics, they would have needed a lead melody. Or, even if lyrics were never intended or even considered, I'm curious if Brian ever considered writing a lead melody.

Unlike "Summer Means New Love", which has the guitar playing the lead melody (which is what Brian and Scott Bennett wrote their lyrics to), "Let's Go Away for Awhile" doesn't have any lead melody so to speak. Another example of this, based on previous extant recordings, would be something like "Look" from "Smile."

here ya go.... ;D
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uzy-DgihFy8

I was thinking about it at work and wondered if it might be vibes in there too doubling..?

Yeah I'm a big proponent of Occam's razor.  In a case like this though a live OD at the session isn't a crazy assertion (I'm not trying to say this definitely happened btw its just one thing I considered).

Just to be sure we're talking about the same part I'm going to roughly program it and stick it on soundcloud.

If its flutes its flutes though - doesn't spoil it in any way.

since as I'd said Tony Asher had songwriting credit for LGAFA yes that's evidence of lyrics, if unused

No, definitely not vibes. aeijtzsche's idea that it's alto flutes seems by far the most likely explanation to me. But while I'm not the greatest at picking out woodwind instruments, I'd recognise the sound of a vibraphone a mile off, and there's not one playing that melody.

Except that Asher never had credit for that song, and has said himself that he never wrote any lyrics.

Here you go - this is just to make sure we're all talking about the same part.

Its a 5 mins Garageband job - not very accurate but enough to identify what I'm on about.

https://soundcloud.com/spooky-music

'lets go'

(ref vibes:  could be really washed out ones with the attack softened right out..?)

yes mr asher used to have songwriting LGAFA credit - you must check older pressings and printed music to confirm

he didn't get songwriting LGAFA credit because he contributed to writing the music, otherwise his name would still appear credited today

It really really just sounds like plain old flute with some reverberation to me.

Try as I might I can't hear flute at all.  I'm not insisting it isn't a flute but I hear a voice (or something that closely resembles one).  Regardless of what it is its interesting that it can sound so different to different people.  I think its more a brain than ears thing.

 Which pressings ? I've yet to hear of one.

BTW the Garageband track 'Lets go' is what I programmed just now - its not isolated from the Pet `Sounds track.

Well, I have to hand it to you Hideo, this sheet music book:
(http://i64.tinypic.com/izrpc0.jpg)

shows this:
(http://i67.tinypic.com/106f3t4.jpg)

But I'm looking at a Capitol first pressing US mono copy right now, and it's credited to "Brian Wilson," and a UK first pressing, and it's credited to "Wilson."  I don't have a first pressing Japanese copy to compare.  Maybe bgas will show me up and post his...

This thread has over 2300 reads, in just a couple of days.  Mike, have you thought about writing a book about the Doo Doos?

Nah, I searched every pressing I have and I can't find one record from anywhere in the world that has anything except a "Wilson" credit. ( I checked my Japanese LP & EP; and numerous other countries)
But as you show, it seems that every songbook has it credited to Wilson and Asher.It's also in "The Beach Boys Complete" which preceded "very complete"
 Here it is in the UK Pet Sounds Songbook: 

    (http://i68.tinypic.com/2jbabk6.jpg)

Hey man wouldn't a series of podcasts or webisodes be more millenial :)

I've got it:  Tony wrote the 'doo doos' :)

this thread is a testament to Brian's genius, that we can still discuss and possibly hear something new in a piece we've heard so many times.

I never heard anything that struck me as a vocal on LGAFA... until now.
still not sure if we're all talking about the same part(s), but I hear the do-doo's now and it doesn't strike me as flute. i believe it's a vocal-like effect created by strings, but I can't be sure. there is some tonal similarity to Brian or Carl, or even Marilyn as someone already stated.

speaking of tonal similarity, I've always thought the theremin line in IJWMFTT sounds uncannily like Brian.

here you go - I made this to show which part I'm on about - programmed in garageband

https://soundcloud.com/spooky-music

'lets go'

i don't think your soundcloud clip does justice to the bit in question, but I'm definitely hearing the do-doo's in the fade of the song. it's one of the only things in LGAFA that resembles a melody really. it's beautiful and I never really heard the vocal quality until you pointed it out, but I think it's just the strings fooling our ears. there's another ghostly "dooo" at around :57 (an Eb note) that sounds more like vibes to me

Yeah it could be all instruments but its uncanny how much it sounds like Carl to me.

And yeah my soundcloud clip is about 10 mins work just to show which part I'm talking about.  Pretty rough.

Yeah the Eb I think is purely instrumental although could still be BVs at the end.

and to clarify, the hard "doo" sound we hear in the fade is a B note.

we should keep in mind Brian was very into combining instruments at this time to create a "new" instrument or sound, a la Phil Spector.

we may be hearing strings and flute in unison and/or something else

ha - dog ears :)

so why can't some of the others hear it..?  I can hear the dog whistle at the end of Pepper but I don't think its a true ultra-sonic sound

yeh that's what I've been saying all along - still sounds like Carl to me though :)

All I hear is a voice saying "KILL, KILL KILL!!!!!!!" now I have to play the song to see if I hear anything... :lol

No, isn't vibes nor could it be.  It is not a vocal.  Carl was in Japan.  Flute players were at the session.  If what you're hearing is not flute, arguendo, where does the flute play?  I cannot believe that this is being debated.

Can't tell someone something they don't want to hear.

Josh did you listen to the clip I put on soundcloud..?

have you read bossaroo's comments..?

vibes:  'I used a lot of musicians on the track; twelve violins, piano, four saxes, oboe, vibes, a guitar with a coke bottle on the strings for a semi-steel guitar effect.'

no mention of flute above either (he could just have forgotten though)

Not Carl..?  Carl done later..?  Maybe not a voice at all..?

I can believe its being discussed because its interesting and some of us are hearing it very differently

this thread is classic  :lol  can't believe this is being debated either.  Maybe the background vox will be more prominent on the 50th set  :lol

yeh 'hear' is the key word :)  it doesn't sound ANYTHING like a flute to me so that makes it interesting

Jules Jacob – flute
Julius Wechter – vibraphone, tympani

I think it could be vibes and something else - maybe flute but I can't hear it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vibraphone

This is just flabbergasting, though.  I mean my lord.  It's flute.  There is no room for difference of opinion, it's an objective fact, documented on paper and on audio tape.  So, I'm out.

Well unfortunately ''Let's Go Away For Awhile [Unreleased Background Vocals]'' isn't on the 50th anniversary edition's tracklisting, so the debate rages on.

Oh, it's not vibes - (1) they're on the basic track and not the overdub...and the sound being debated is definitely on the overdub, (2) the vibes, which are quite audibly NOT the sound in question, appear earlier in the song but drop out by that part of the song when the player, Julius Wechter, swiches to tympani (again - on the basic track), and (3) that sound is nothing like vibes. It is either a flute (maybe an alto flute) or violas buried in echo. Josh's ears tell him flute, so I'm good with that.

Isn't it possible that Carl could have contributed vocals via telephone while the flute player was in the bathroom?

:lol

it could be a ghost....let's call TAPS and have them investigate...

If it is flute/woodwind I think there's something else playing rather than just reverb decays.  Not sure why you're so convinced it can't be vibes.  To me it sounds tonally like they could be in there.

Apart from whatever instrument it is I'm interested in why some of us can clearly hear a certain sound and some seemingly can't.

See, this is the reason why people can get irked. Craig has access not to merely the session documentation but also, when required, the tapes themselves. That's why he's convinced it's not vibes. He's gone to the ultimate source and given you a very detailed answer, yet you're still questioning his accuracy. I'm thinking he could play you the discrete tracks and you'd still go "yeah, well, I still think...". Like I said, you can't tell someone something they don't want to hear. You think it's vibes. It isn't.

Craig is conviced it's not vibes because there was no vibraphone player on the overdub session, and because it doesn't sound anything, at all, even slightly, like there's a vibraphone playing that part.

Right - I missed that there was no vibes player at the OD session.

I wasn't insisting its vibes I was trying to work out what it is exactly - people's favourite seems to be flutes with massive reverb combining with other reverbs.

Whatever it is I'm hearing I'm interested in why some of us can hear it and some can't.  Josh can't hear the sound I'm talking about.

Everyone's hearing and aural perception is different. Thankfully.  :)

Carol Kaye is singing on it...I'm sure she's going to announce it any time soon...  :lol

Pitch bent vibes..?

Asked a mate of mine who's a producer/string arranger for BBC and loads of others.  Here are his comments:

Pretty sure that's not vocals.   Don't think it's flute either though.  Sounds more like a vibraphone note that's being bent somehow - hard to say as it's very reverby.  it's quite sine wavy so could be anything including e.g. a filtered vocal but that's reaching - there's no sonic indications to me that it's that over and above another sound.

I think it's this

http://www.malletjazz.com/audio/02_01_02.wav

that's a vibraphone being pitchbent through player technique

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KyHSZ71bnxk

(André Cayer - Vibraphone - Method of bending tone (2014)
Now on Amazon! More information on www.andrecayer.com André Cayer - Vibraphone - Method of bending tone (2014) pitch bend, pitch bending Vibraphone : André C...
youtube.com
Chat conversation end)

There is such a wide gulf here between opinions that I just presume some of us are talking about different parts..?

In other news: black is white.

Have you read the whole thread properly and listened to LGAFA and also the vibes pitch bending audio/video..?

So once more Craig's accuracy is questioned. Remember, he's  stated there are NO VIBES on the discrete track in question. Seriously, guys...

And yet here's an extremely experienced working producer/arranger who has picked out the sound and suggested something that sounds almost exactly like it.

No flutes no vibes (no vox either to be fair).

Craig has access to the AFM sheets for the actual recording session. He has access to the multitracks and session recordings. Your friend has neither.

On the evidence of my own flawed ears alone, I would have been prepared to believe there might be a vocal in the mix, but people with better knowledge than me say otherwise, so there's not. It's a flute.

But why are you so obsessed with this idea that it's a vibraphone? When there was no vibraphone player at the session that produced that part? When it doesn't sound to anyone but you and now apparently your friend like a vibraphone? When people who have access to the tapes say it's not a vibraphone? This is just strange now.

Hence my comment.

Seriously, I doubt there is anyone on this board that wouldn't love to discover something like this. No-one's saying no for the hell of it. Some of these people just know the ins and outs, that's all. There's no malicious intent.

I remember years ago I was sure I heard a girl singing "bye bye" behind John Lennon's last "bye bye" at the very end of She's Leaving Home. It is hard for me to not hear it whenever I listen to the song today. Nevertheless, I accept that it's just some sort of trick my brain is playing on me that's making me hear that because I know there is no evidence that says that there is a girl singing at the end of that song. Unless someone eventually shows me otherwise...

You're saying Craig has pulled out and listened to the multis..?  (AFM sheets are not 100% accurate)

If he has we must be talking about different parts.  The part I'm talking about sounds nothing like a flute.

I'm not obsessed that its vibes it just sounded to me like there might be vibes in there.

Sure but a few of us don't hear a flute in the part I'm talking about and that includes a very experienced producer with top of the range gear to listen to it on.

Even if a few people heard the "bye bye" part that I'm hearing along with an experienced producer, I'd still be inclined to trust the evidence that exists.

f*** it, I've had enough. Yes Mike, you're right and everyone else is wrong, including Craig. Never mind there's no vibes on the part you're listenting, you're right. They're vibes. Satisfied ?

I get you but this is an actual clearly audible part that to a few people at least doesn't sound at all like a flute.

Did Craig get the multis out..?  Did I miss something..?

You know very well that session sheets aren't always 100% accurate.

I think its worth pursuing if there's any doubt what the sound is.

Anyone who's not interested:  STOP READING THE THREAD.

I finally had a chance to listen to this closely.  Definitely sounds like a flute to me.  At the very least, I don't hear a voice.  That's my two cents anyway...

Its very puzzling. Maybe its more than 1 thing playing unison..?  That would account for the different things people are picking out..?

Playing devil's advocate:

Reminds me of those who insisted there was autotune audible on a 10-second cel phone video clip of Brian and Zooey D tracking vocals in the studio, then further all of those who insisted, then defended those who swore they heard all of the "excessive" autotune up and down No Pier Pressure's vocals, suggesting we all hear and perceive things a different way and should be allowed to express and defend those perceptions as either pure observation or as basis for criticism (i.e. 'I didn't like the album because there was too much autotune on the vocals') whether true or not.

The proverbial shoe on the other foot?

I don't see the potential for a vocal on LGAFA as analogous to the NPP autotune discussions.

If someone had access to all of the ProTools (or whatever software they're using) multitrack files used to mix each NPP track and could testify that no pitch correction plug-in was used, then these two situations would be comparable.

Can't tell which side you're playing devil's advocate for :)

Different people are hearing this differently that's for sure - that in itself is interesting to me.

I think the discussion has thrown up some very interesting posts from Josh and the others and most recently my mate - did anyone else here know you can pitch bend vibes..?  I sure didn't.

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

No one has ever given proof that there was autotune applied on NPP to the extent some were saying "ruined" the album for them, and no one has posted anything more than a less-than one-half second snippet of a digital residue noise on one of the vocals to back up the claim. Yet, those that swore up and down they heard it and used that perception to insist it was there were defended, because that was what they heard. And despite what was factual, those opinions based on perceptions from those listeners were sufficient enough to say there was autotune on NPP.

Whether there was or not. Whatever the actual truth of the matter may be...opinions from listeners who claim they heard it are on the same level of fact as the actual fact, and the storyline is there was excessive use of autotune on NPP to the point of ruining the album.

So the shoe being on the other foot, Mr. Moseley hears something in the track being discussed here, and his perception of what he hears, that perception which is being suggested runs counter to the actual fact of what was recorded and mixed on the track, is being dismissed outright and very strongly.

Why not afford Mr. Moseley's perceptions and observations the same leeway if not defense as those who swore there was excessive autotune on NPP? I mean, no one has yet proven there is autotune on NPP and it's all based on perception despite the facts and what can be actually heard.

The devil's advocate position. Why one and not the other...

I think most any theory should be given a hearing, and this LGAFA issue has. Nobody just immediately dismissed it. It looks like we all went back and listened again, Craig and others dug up documentation and other evidence and expertise, and mostly eliminated this interesting and intriguing but likely incorrect theory.

Overall, I think that, while that issue and the NPP autotune issue are not comparable, both were given fair hearings from most of the folks here.

To me, the "there are vocals on LGAFA" position is closer, though still not fully analogous, to the "there's no autotune on NPP" argument.

As for the NPP stuff, there was no single position held by any large contingent of fans. Some people thought autotune ruined NPP, some people didn't like it but didn't feel it ruined it, some people heard it and it didn't bug them at all, some didn't care, and some said it wasn't there at all. All sides were voiced in that debate.

I could say having also studied and researched the methods of 60's recording and mixing techniques to the point of duplicating those techniques on various studio projects, having heard various multitracks and session tapes from that era including Pet Sounds, having owned and operated a recording and production studio that used autotune on various vocal tracks, and other peripherals to add to my resume of previous work from the past 30 years or so...

...There is just no hard evidence for the excessive autotune on NPP theory, and tons of evidence against it.

Shoe on other foot.  :)

Oh I see - well I'm not insisting its vox (although it still sounds like them to me).

I don't think its flute either - or at least not flute alone.

What it IS I don't know but bent vibe notes sure seems a good stab by my producer bud.

In a live set up couldn't an instrument nearby be ringing in some way and be picked up even if not being played..?  If a mic near it was live..?  I'm not saying I think that must be what happened its just a thought.

But nobody (as far as I can recall) claimed there was "hard evidence" of autotune on NPP. Most simply said they believed it was there, and from time to time called on some level of familiarity with it to reach that opinion, always acknowledging there's no proof one way or the other.

There's a slew of hard documentary evidence on the LGAFA issue that doesn't exist for the NPP issue.

I'm not insisting there are vocals though.  I think its possible they are there but no probs if not.

I'm not convinced its just flute or even flute at all.  If I'm audibly proved wrong no problem.

I think the vibes pitch-bending video is very very interesting.  Suggested by a very sharp and un-biased pair of ears (who also doesn't hear any vox).
 

I believe during that discussion I made a point to note that autotune at this point has become a general term for voice correcting software.  Like how a lot of people say Kleenex when really it is one of many brands of tissue.  Of course now we're getting a bit off topic here.

This thread is not about NPP, has never been about NPP, and it's super weird to see a mod attempt to derail this thread with a year-old argument he apparently hasn't been able to let go of.

You're understating the level of those discussions related to NPP and autotune, it was not only insisting it was used, but insisting it was used based on the proof "I can hear it", which is the same criteria Mike Moseley is using to suggest he hears something playing a line besides the flute on the passage in question.

Yet not a single one of those people claiming this overuse of autotune on NPP could produce (or have produced) even a single passage for us to listen to and judge as an example of autotune on NPP. What was produced was basically a millisecond of digital residue that anyone who has recorded and mixed in digital for the past 25 years or so would say could be the result of things that happen when working with digital.

There is also evidence to suggest those trying to say there was "excessive", "intrusive", or other adjectives to describe the use of autotune on NPP were full of hot air. Since there is no proof offered as of yet to say emphatically and factually "there is autotune all over NPP". Not a single bit of proof to back it up.

So it's all perception. Just like Mike M's perception of hearing something on that line of LGAFA.

Give it up, sport. It didn't work when you tried it before.

Right you are.

Continue your consequence-free frolic through the Smiley Smile board, Craigy.

Come on guys, let's not go down this road again.

I have no interest in going back through the drudgery of that NPP autotune discussion, but I recall that there were people who said they detected autotune who mentioned specific songs and specific sections of songs that they heard it on. It basically boiled down to most everyone on either side agreeing that it couldn't be proven one way or the other, and only a very small group of people (or person) who didn't feel that level of acquiescence on the point was good enough.

As for the "I can hear it" comparison, while I don't think there's anywhere near the same grounds to make these two very disparate claims (vocals on LGAFA and autotune on NPP), beyond saying *anything* is technically an opinion (I say I hear Foghat, Kermit the Frog, a cement mixer, and crackling Rice Krispies on every "Pet Sounds" track, doesn't mean my "opinion" is as credible as any other on any topic), even if I grant that the "I can hear it" observation/opinion should carry the same weight in both cases, there are two very different sets of available evidence to refute these two claims.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of autotune on NPP? Nothing. That doesn't mean it's there. But it doesn't *disprove* the theory.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of a vocal overdub on LGAFA? Quite a bit. Basically, the contents of c-man's posts. Essentially, the ability of some level of forensic-style examination of the recording elements.

I'm not insisting there's vox on the track.

I expect its probably combined instruments I'm hearing.

I don't hear any auto tune on "LGAFAW". None whatsoever. But that's just my opinion, of course.

Don't worry. You'll get the autotune on the bonus 6th disc for the new PS set; Best Buy's exclusive featuring a Joe Thomas stereo remix. Oboes, nylon string guitars, and claves overdubbed on every song.....

And Toby Keith sings the bridge lead on WIBN.

lol

Absolutely, truly hilarious - Tom Lehrer standard wit.

As for me:  well lookee - pedantic borderline OCD behaviour on a message board which is powered by the stuff - how odd :)

Seriously, I typically don't like the "crack a joke in the middle of a serious debate because you don't give a f***" sorts of posts. I didn't meant to be dismissive of anyone, and I really do give a f***.

To be honest, my joke was all about the autotune stuff, nothing to do with the original LGAFA topic.

And I agree, I'm not sure why the NPP autotune stuff had to be dredged up again, but it's best to stay back on the original topic.

To that end though, I think all the evidence has been laid out there. There have been other debates that were much less clear-cut, basically boiling down to subjective listening and no other evidence. I think the extant tapes tell as much of the tale for LGAFA as there is.

Can anyone email me mp3s of any of the multis..?  I know there's stuff on the box but I don't have it with me.

I'm honestly baffled by the split opinions about this piece and I'd love to listen from a different angle.

It's not a vocal, you have your definitive answer. Please close the thread!

I haven't identified what it is to the degree that I'd like.

And how do you know what it is/isn't..?  were you at the session..?  Have you got the multis..?

 :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall :wall

or...

 :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse :deadhorse

I see a comparison between the two issues, and primarily in the strong defense of one and the outright dismissal (almost with prejudice) of the other. On one hand there is a poster saying he hears something *possibly* in addition to or as much more of a stretch of the facts in place of that flute line. For the record, I think it is flutes, but one thing I'll tip my hat to Mr. Moseley for is getting me to listen closer to the tracks in question, to listen with a different focus and perspective, and try to hear what he is hearing. Also, posting the video showing how vibraphone notes can be "bent" was informative - Whether or not those sounds are on the actual track, I'm sure a lot of people who bothered to watch learned something about that instrument and how it is played beyond the norm.

It reminds me of when I and "H" and others were having similar discussions about various sounds on Pet Sounds. For one, I found and posted some information about the famous "triple bellows shake", "double bellows shake", and other techniques isolated to playing the accordion which only accordion players and those who have had to write for and learn accordion (raising my hand as one) would know. As soon as that video could be seen that showed *how* that sound was made in 1966, it also answered the question what was making that sound. And it is a very specific and challenging technique which would not be common to even those familiar with the accordion.

Reminds me too of the famous WIBN guitar intro. What was it? How was it played? etc. There were discussions about that part being played on a detuned 12-string guitar...to which I objected because not only do I play and own electric 12-string guitars but I also know that detuning a 12-string electric guitar then playing it on either the 15th or 16th fret position versus having it standard tuned and hitting the pattern on the 14th fret...just consider detuning it would be pointless and would actually do more harm to the sound than good because the intonation on those slackened strings would be shot.

Lo and behold, it turns out the part was played by Barney Kessel on that 12-string electric mandolin as pictured in the original PS Sessions booklet, plugged direct into the board as we already knew and treated to Gold Star's heavenly echo chambers.

Why was there instead a Danelectro Bellzouki shown in the L&M studio scene? Simply because a Gibson hybrid electric mandolin like Barney played on the session was not able to be found...and after Barney's family was consulted, it was clear Barney did play that Gibson mandolin on the actual date. But why the Bellzouki? I'll save that for another time and discussion lest I be accused again of derailing threads.

So what is or what isn't actually played on Pet Sounds isn't always cut and dry, despite the AFM sheets, multitrack tapes, and the rest. Some things were up for discussion and debate, and fortunately some of them like the Barney Kessel mystery did end up getting solved.

So if Mr. Moseley hears something in that track, I'll take a listen. Whether it's factual or just his perception, I'm fascinated enough by those sounds Brian and the musicians created to at least listen with a fresh set of ears, and see if anything new jumps out of the tracks. If I'm given access to a vibraphone demo that shows a relatively rare technique used to play the vibes, and one which someone says they might hear, I'll listen to the demo and the track.

It's the fun of discovery. That's just me.

Contrast that to what I still consider one of the most pathetic things I've seen in BB and BW fandom, those people declaring that the NPP album was full of autotune to the point of declaring it sucked.

If someone perceives autotune on a track or tracks that simply isn't there, or in the case of that cel phone clip autotune that wouldn't even be audible if it were there never mind it was not there, and then uses that perception to criticize the album or even bash it outright declaring that it sucks because of all the autotune or pitch correction or whatever the case however it is spun...

That is defended? Beyond that, there were no specific examples given to back up that perception followed by criticism. Absolutely no examples beyond a millisecond of digital residue that can hit anyone working with digital audio for a variety of reasons.

Moseley here at least gave specific examples, gave demos to watch, and even recorded the specific part so people listening can focus in on the line and listen for themselves.

What was perfectly acceptable and defended on one hand, declaring that NPP sucked because of all the autotune with nothing but perception (and false perceptions at that - topic for another discussion), is in this case dismissed and challenged to the point of almost saying "how dare you!" to the person hearing something different.

For the record, again, I hear flute. Always did. But thanks to M. Moseley I had a chance to go back and listen more specifically and more critically, and also got to see some interesting techniques on playing mallets described in a tutorial video I had not seen before.

I'll say it again, on one hand some folk here defended those declaring based solely on perception that NPP was full of autotune while armed with ZERO proof and no worthwhile examples, plus a total ignorance of how the individual tracks were actually recorded and mixed...yet swarm in on someone who heard something different on a PS track and was exploring possibilities and providing examples on what could have been influencing his perception on what he was hearing.

Did the session sheets or multitracks prove that Barney Kessel was playing a modified Gibson electric mandolin, or was it a case of old fashioned detective work and talking to people close to those involved to get the answer? Obviously, it was the latter...yet is only the tracks and sheets were the guide and the standard, it could suggest Barney was playing a plain old electric 12-string guitar on that date.

Seeing all sides.

Mike Moseley, I'm trying to hear what you're hearing, I'm a bit confused by the exact timecode that you are referring to. Which timecode in the song?

now THAT's a post  8)

(and just to summarise:  

I think I can hear a voice but happily accept it could be my brain tricking me

I can't hear any flute and BOY have I tried - it could be a flute though, just embedded in a way I've never come across before

I can hear a presence which feels like vibes and so can a very experienced engineer/producer/string arranger friend of mine - he also can't hear any flute on the part

I'm not arguing for the sake of it - I want to know what the sound is and I know session logs aren't 100% reliable)

Hi

https://soundcloud.com/spooky-music

'lets go'

I programmed it in a few mins - pretty rough but close enough to show people which part I mean

I don't hear vibes on the overdubbed 4th track...or vocals for that matter. If I were to guess, it would be a mix of viola and maybe a flute playing in unison.

Got it. Well I really don't think there's any vocals there. I do, however, think that this melody of which you speak sounds like the sort of beautiful melody that Brian would have turned into a wordless vocal part (or doubled with a wordless vocal part) if he had ever recorded vocals on the song.

Incidentally--I have heard the overdub by itself.  

Mike, have you ever learned to play the flute and then rented an alto flute and learned to play that specifically so you could play Beach Boys parts?  I have.

Also, the name people are calling me isn't my name anymore so please stop calling me it, thanks.

Sounds like what its , bleed.

Very interesting - so what's playing on that OD section - flute and..?

And do you think the effect I'm hearing is live bleed at the session or happening between the multis..?

I would in my opinion  ::)  say it's the bleed we are hearing.  remember everyone was in close proximity during the sessions,
no isolation booths or even acoustic screening between anybody.  my hunch from the beginning was the combination of instruments
causing a 'overtone' sound if you will that we describe as 'bleed' which changes the way other instruments sound on adjacent microphones.
a sound you can't achieve by isolation. this is why Brian's, Spector's records have that 'spring' to them that cannot be reproduced in those original
recordings.  mic placement also contributes so much to the 'bleed' of other instruments.  whether this was intentional or not, this is why
we are here discussing it.  :)

yeah a few people think bleed - so it would be flute playing the melody and possibly several other instruments bleeding in..?

or as I suggested further up could be something thats not being played ringing..?  like a piano or whatever not being played but near a hot mic..?

No I haven't rented a flute :)

Is there no chance there's doubling..?  I wish we could all hear the OD.  Is it available anywhere - not on the PS box..?

yeah Mike, I would think that's probably what your hearing, and I hear after hearing the mono and stereo versions of the song and can see exactly where you are coming from.  exactly about the ringing, and the whether those instruments are causing phase issues that are pleasant to our ears? don't know.
I don't think it's voices, but a blend of overtones of instruments, and instruments reaching microphone points at different times in the room, maybe causing some new sound that is present. but, on a serious note, I'm not against you, as you are hearing what you are hearing.  but my impression is the instruments that we are aware of, mic placement, 'spill' onto other mics, and the room sonics all blending in to create that 'background' vox sound. but who knows?
that's my serious opinion on this thread.  
These guys in the day also balanced the 'bleed', either by limitation or as Brian said one time, you put 'one instrument with another to make one sound'.  
in this interview, he was mainly talking about an organ and guitar (bass, I suspect), but along those lines, like Spector, Brian learned how 'bleed' can become a part of 'the sound'.  these sounds sometimes can't be reproduced unless the conditions are correct.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJ8G99sV-ww

 

Cheers BAHIH - if I had my PS box set here I could listen to the mono and stereo and I'm sure I'd learn something, however they're back home.

I would love love love to hear the ODs on their own.

hey man, after this discussion and dissection of the track, hearing the OD"s, wouldn't we all  ;D

Delete.

Again, Mike, the overub on LGAFA consists of the string section (8 violins, 2 violas, 2 cellos), one flute (possibly alto flute), and one oboe. The oboe is definitely playing a line along with the horn section (the horn section was recorded the day before as part of the basic track, which was actually spread across three tracks at the time of recording). To my ears, the mystery sound could be either violas (which sometimes sound very un-string like: examples would be The Beatles' "Hello Goodbye" and I think "Lovely Rita") OR alto flute, possibly with fast attack on the compression to accentuate the percussive, plosive "d" sound at the top of the line. But no vibes. Definitely no vibes.

For years, I thought there was a backing vocal on "Caroline, No", but I now know it's an alto sax. Incidentally, there are tenor flutes and bass flutes on THAT song...and alto flutes on "God Only Knows" - Brian loved using different kinds of flutes by this point!. I also used to think that the overdubbed sound playing behind the marimbas on the intro to "Holiday" from SMiLE was strings - but know I know it was a flute section. Tom Petty and Carl Wilson are both on record saying the plucked intro to "Wouldn't It Be Nice" was a harp (Carl flat out stated it, whereas Petty alluded to it when discussing the sounds of Pet Sounds, but it was clear to me that he was speaking of that song). I can give other examples of professional musicians and music experts mis-identifying sounds - no one's ears are perfect, and some instruments can masquerade as others (the faux baritone sax solo on "I Know There's An Answer", which is really a bass harmonica, comes to mind).

Thanks very much - very interesting.  Yeah someone else said its possibly strings playing it but H says its definitely flute.

Also I'm sure I can hear vibes in that end section but could just be on the pad as in the start of the tune..?  Or it could be artifacts - isn't the pad without the ODs on the PS box set..?

I'm not insisting any of this its just what I can hear.

You may hear vibes. That doesn't alter the fact that they're simply not there.

Not on the pad/backing track..?  I haven't got my box set so I can't check - if you've checked the backing track and they aren't there then just say so.

I'm not saying I can hear them play a melody there.

I think we had enough of this!
Let's get back to Rocky topic ;D

Threads are definitely a very laborious way of discussing this type of thing.

Sat round a table and armed with audio it would be much quicker to resolve.

I doubt it, honestly. I think that, with more or less reason, people have different opinions here and face-to-face or not, it doesn't seem to be changing.

Well it would depend on the audio available I think.  If I could hear the end of the backing track and there's no vibes at all on it then I'd accept it and everyone would see that and that would be the end of that small disagreement  :)

Of course there are vibes on the basic track... but, as Craig has pointed out so many times, not on the overdub you're talking about. He's told you what it is. The only problem is, he's not telling you what you want to hear, so you're  running it into the ground.

Bottom line ? Doesn't matter. It being vibes won't cure cancer or bring back 30-odd Belgiansi from the dead.

Or you could believe the leading sessions researcher, who has listened to the discrete tracks.

I'm talking about the basic track.  I'd like to listen to it regardless of this discussion - can you email it to me..?

I own the box set but haven't got it handy.

Or can anyone else post it..?  There's a chunk of the session on youtube but only about 30 odd seconds.

I can email you the mp3's from the box, pm me with your email.

Aeijtzsche - I'm wondering if it's not a clarinet rather than some kind of flute? The part at 1:58 and again at 2:06 has qualities that I would call "saxophone-like". A clarinet has qualities of both alto flute and saxophone...

I think being able to hear the ODs would be very revealing.

I thought I could hear snatches of 'the voice' on the basic track but I think its just my brain putting it in because its used to hearing it there.

Definitely no vibes on the end section track-only from the box set.

Well here's a question for you:  I have not seen the actual AFM sheet for the OD, just the list of people on it--and I've seen a list with Steve Douglas on it and a list without him on it.  Jules Jacob seems like a jack-of-all trades woodwinds kind of guy (he played on some Zappa records).  If both of them are on there, I would concede that maybe Steve is playing flute and Jules is playing a clarinet in unison.  I agree that there's a reedy cast to it, but I still hear, fundamentally, a flute.

I really wish we could all sit round a table and play the track - preferably with a flute there so H could demo what he means.  I've tried and tried to hear flutes but what I'm hearing sounds like vibes and a voice in unison and always has since I first heard it in mono in 1988.  I'm not arguing that's what it is though  :3d

I had a good look through youtube trying to find flutes doing something similar but couldn't.  There must be something out there though.

What she means.

OK.

Can you think of any examples on youtube..?  I'm all ears. I'd love to hear flutes doing that kind of sound.
 

Mike M - Watch this video (this is the stereo remaster), and for my own sake, and to know exactly what to listen for, post the exact track times where you're hearing the sounds and would like to get other ears on it. Since this is stereo, maybe list which channel the specific sounds are heard as well:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbAA4_B8k0I (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BbAA4_B8k0I)

With so many versions and so I'm not grabbing the wrong version, let's use this one as a reference for now, then we can build on it and post others more specific.

Yeah sure - the 'sighs are at 0:57 and 1:22 - much clearer at 1:22 which is the one my producer buddy thinks is a pitch-bending vibraphone.

The 'voice' comes in at 1:54 and continues to fade - the 'voice' to me has a similar sound to the 'sighs' which would make sense if its all flutes as H thinks.

I'm not strongly arguing for what it is - I can't hear any flute in those 3 places though and neither can my producer buddy.  He thinks there are vibes on the end section.  However on the mix of the pad I heard today there aren't any.  Could be on the OD even though not logged.

I don't think its impossible some BVs are on there whether logged or not (or even possibly some kind of vocalizing through an instrument at the tracking) but I'm not arguing for it.  If its flutes its flutes.

and to identify it precisely (ish) my sketch of the 'voice' part - this is programmed by me and is just a flute and reverb/algorithm thing doubled

https://soundcloud.com/spooky-music

'lets go'

OK - In the interest of having everyone's ears listening to the same thing, and getting more ears on the case and letting those ears be the judge, here are the two most prominent examples of the sounds Mike M. has been posting about. I did some quick edits and repeated each segment 5 times, then put them up on YouTube.

First one is "LGA", the pitch-bending/vibrato heard at 1:22 on the original:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRqRUSD_ebs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRqRUSD_ebs)

Second is "LGA 2", from approx. 1:54 on the original

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPcPw20AEZE (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gPcPw20AEZE)




Commentary: I'm doubting my own ears on the first LGA. There is a pitch bend or waver up and down that a flute or most double or single reed woodwinds would not do quite that way, but which that pitch-bent vibes technique could produce. There is a specific modulation and waver in that sound which is unique and unusual. I just don't know at this point.

LGA2: I hear a combination of woodwinds playing in unison, several instruments combining to create that "new" timbre...I hear what could be an alto flute combined with a clarinet played in its lower register, or even an upper register of a bass clarinet. (The reason I put that photo of Jay Migliori in the video is because in that same film, he's shown with a bass clarinet at that particular GV session)

Let your ears be the judge.

superb :)

in lga2 I can hear what sounds to me like a vibes strike at 0:12 - could be an artifact

a few of you are hearing flutes so there must be a flute range I've never heard before - if so I've learned something :)

My ears have judged that  a flute cannot play in that register, but an alto flute can.

As a (just school-level) flute player, it still sounds like flute to me. I think that the 'bend' in the 'sigh' can be done through breath modulation plus a quickly tapped note warble. I agree there's an alto flute involved in the end bit.

in lga2 I'm sure I can hear bending though - I think that's partly why I'm not hearing it as a flute

I don't think its impossible there's something in there bending..?

I'm pretty confident the 'bend' in lga2 is another quickly tapped warble with a single breath played through on the flute.
It has that breathiness that vibes don't have. I definitely feel it's a wind instrument and of the wind instruments its timbre seems most like a flute.
Edited to correct auto-corrections.

This is an example of an alto flute played by a virtuoso session woodwind player, Ronny Lang, improvising a solo on Henry Mancini's album "More Music From Peter Gunn". Lang takes the alto flute through its lower to mid range up to the higher notes, so in one solo you get a sense of where the alto's range could go. Mancini was one arranger who used the entire flute family often, and examples of how to both write for and play a flute, from alto to piccolo, can be heard in Mancini's charts.

Click on the link here, if there is no YouTube ad you'll be right at Lang's alto flute solo:

https://youtu.be/5-9CAxE6e2c?t=1m54s (https://youtu.be/5-9CAxE6e2c?t=1m54s)

flute vid not available - guitarfool are you in the USA..?

yes

Those outside the US who cannot see the video, try this link instead:

https://youtu.be/f7khjaHbh-c?t=1m53s (https://youtu.be/f7khjaHbh-c?t=1m53s)

still no - I'll do a search for UK flute hunters

Yeah, I can't help beyond posting two different links if it's being blocked outside the US. Look up the track "Goofin At The Coffee House" from Mancini's "More Music From Peter Gunn" and listen to the alto flute solo.

ok - got to dash now but will later

bending on alto flute at the beginning of this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QVe9QGGVqu0

And Guitarfool2002, I love that Mancini you posted. Thank you!

I believe Jules Jacobs is playing oboe on the LGAFA overdub...Brian mentions oboe as one of the instruments in that very detailed 1967 description of the ensemble he utilized for this piece of music (he doesn't mention flute, but he doesn't mention clarinet either). I can hear the oboe in the overdub playing the new line which sits on top of the horn line from the basic track. Jacobs frequently played oboe, so I imagine he played it here. Steve Douglas IS on the overdub AFM contract (he was the session leader), and I think he's playing the mystery instrument: he frequently played sax, flute, and clarinet for Brian. So the two woodwinds on the overdub are not playing in unison at all.

Well I can hear oboe even less than I can hear flute on the section - However I'm prepared to believe it is if that's what it is :)  I'm going to check out some oboe stuff on youtube.

I suppose I could use some recordings and try to replicate the effect but I don't think it would come  to much - I think the room will have had a lot to do with it.

I'm minded of a thread some years ago where a poster insisted that there was a few seconds of the original "God Only Knows" used in the video of Brian's rerecording for the Target CD. That thread went well past the point of screaming insanity too.

Don't read the thread.

We were told it was definitely a flute.  Now it might be an oboe.  Someone else thinks its strings. 

Some of us are obviously interested in trying to pin down exactly what is on the track.

Why do people keep jumping into threads they've got no interest in..?
 

sorry double post - can mods delete this one..?

Because, originally, someone was 90% certain it was vocals, and when that was proven not to be the case, someone else claimed it was some instrument that's not actually on the overdub or AFM sheet.

Yeah it was me 90% sure and I'm still not convinced there isn't a voice in there - its definitely not been proved there isn't - but I'm not arguing for it any more, if its flutes its flutes.

You know that session logs aren't 100% reliable.

I'd love to hear the OD that H has heard although if its swimming in reverb with a few things going on it could still be difficult to define.

The mystery sound is not an oboe - at this point, I'm convinced it's either alto flute or clarinet - Emily, as you are familiar with the characteristics of the alto flute, would you please do us a favor and listen to the section of LGAFA from 1:56 to 2:10 (this is the timecode from the stereo mix - I assume the mono is the same, or very very close to it). Starting at 1:56, we hear the mystery sound (as we have earlier in the song), then at 1:58 that same mystery instrument plays a line that sounds very similar (to me) to a saxophone (either alto or high tenor), so that's what makes me think it might possibly be a clarinet (an instrument which possesses sonic characteristics of both low flute and high saxophone). That phrase is repeated at 2:06. If you say an alto flute is capable of producing that sound, then it's a done deal in my mind, and I will officially consider it to be an alto flute until the end of time. Yes, that same instrument does have some "vocal-like" qualities here-and-there in this song, particularly when it enters at 1:22 and again at 1:56. There is a slight "d" plosive - I can hear it, no problem - but it's the effect of blowing into the woodwind, accentuated by the echo and possibly by a compressor. Of that I am convinced.

As for the oboe - that enters at 1:24, and is playing a line on top of the horn section's line. To understand what I'm talking about, first listen to the basic track (Track 21 of Disc One in the official Capitol Pet Sounds Sessions box set), starting at 1:24. You will notice that the top line you're used to hearing is absent - that is because it's played by the oboe on the string/woodwind overdub session. Now, if you listen to the stereo mix itself (Track 6 from the same disc), or the original mono mix, starting at 1:24, you can hear the oboe join the horn section, and at 1:28 it splits off into it's own top line, climbing higher than the horns. That part is the oboe - it is absent form the basic track mix on Track 21, but it is present on the final mix. It's much more "up front" than the mystery sound, and it's not submerged in echo as the mystery instrument is. Both the oboe and the alto flute/mystery instrument were added at the same overdub session as the 12-piece string section, and they occupy the same track as the string section. That is why they are not on the basic track (available in a stereo mix made up of three separate tracks - all recorded simultaneously during the basic track performance of January 18th- on Track 21), but yet they ARE on the final mix (the complete stereo mix of which is on Track 6, and which consists of all four tracks from the 4-track tape, including the string/woodwind overdub of January 19th).

Great.  Thanks.

I've already edited/looped and posted the first example here for those interested:




The alto flute video that Emily posted shows a portamento bend of the note downward several steps and the technique related to doing so. The sound Mike originally keyed in on is not that kind of a bend, it's a slight modulation of the pitch up and down, like a guitar playing a wide finger vibrato but with an even more unusual modulation technique. It is possible to "bend" a flute's note up and down but it does not produce quite the same characteristic as heard on the video "LGA" above.

I thought it may be a slapback or echo residue as well, but with that fast of a delay time (the original attack versus the echo'ed sound coming back) there wouldn't be that pitch wavering. And in order to trigger that echo to that extent, the note would probably have to have a hard attack (like popping a "p" vocally) rather than a smooth attack.

This is why I was questioning it too - It's a very unusual sound or effect to be coming from a flute...not that it isn't, but it's unexpected to hear an alto flute play it.

It's been proved to the extent that, I dunno, relativity has been proved.


You keep saying this but I've found them to be remarkably accurate, which really is not surprising considering being on there facilitated getting paid for services rendered.


If you can't tell that the overdub is utterly awash in reverb without hearing it isolated...well, that might explain why you think the Double Rock Baptist Choir is on there...

That's some pretty impressive analyzing sir :)  I wish we could hear the ODs on their own.

I'd have a go at mimicking the sound but I've only got Garageband at home, its too crude.

The later "mystery" after 1:50 I don't think was in doubt after a certain point, it sounds like alto flute/woodwind and to me always did. reference video above "LGA2". It's the other one that's the mystery. And no, there are not vocals audible.

OK H I may sound pedantic to you but its not for the sake of it.

In these kinds of discussions I've seen it repeated over and over again that logs aren't 100% reliable.  Someone could be booked but dropped out of the arrangement - I'm not saying that happened here but its an obvious thing that could happen, no mystery.

Sorry but it hasn't been proved to me that there isn't a vox or some form of vocalizing on there.  I've gone from 90% sure to like 5% sure so I am definitely listening with great interest to what you say.

Yes yes I can hear all the reverb on the OD but hearing it alone would be ideal.

On my phone, so listening is not top notch at this point (neither is posting).
I agree the video is not the same sort of bend; I was just posting it to show that flutes are more flexible than one might think. I think the sound at the end was done in the way I described above. Which I can come close to doing even on a bass recorder. But when I get home I will listen more closely to consider a clarinet. I don't know how to describe it in words, but I'm assuming we're talking about the extended through note with the single warble in the middle that's repeated on GF2002's 2nd video. On the earlier one is the 'sigh' which is more of a straightforward, but very slight, bend, right?

For me I think the second one heard in "LGA2" is pretty cut-and-dry at this point. It's the one heard in my "LGA" (first video) with the pitch wavering as it does and how it does. That is not an oboe, and it's seemingly not the kind of pitch bend and waver you'd hear on demand from an alto flute.

EDIT:
This one - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRqRUSD_ebs (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vRqRUSD_ebs)

I can't hear well what it's doing after the first measure, just before and after the horns (or whatever - uh oh) come in, but the first measure sounds like bending with the breath and vey quick, light note tapping.

You hear note tapping? I'll listen for it! I was trying to zero in on the key sound, like a light trill effect to explain the pitch, but I still hear it as more of a portamento type bend up and down, more smooth than if it were done with the keys.

I'd also consider in all seriousness sharing that video "LGA" with some musician friends, preferably flautists or arrangers/composers who have written for flute, and ask them what they think that initial sound heard in the video could be. If I remove myself from it I probably wouldn't say "alto flute" as the first impression.

I think that's a good idea. I think the smooth bend is done with the breath, as you can hear someone doing in the video I posted, but I also hear a tap in there. Just toward the end of the measure.
Edit: Should have relistened just before posting. The tap seems to be toward the beginning of the first measure.
Edit again: so I think what you are considering a smooth bend, I'm considering a very light quick tap. What I'm considering a very slight bend comes after that.

I think it would be really interesting to see what some non BBs musicians think of it but also engineers as I think they are more used to the bleeds/FX etc that recordings can have.

I'd expect any musician to be highly impressed with the track, esp the fade-out, its stunning.

Engage some trained ears that exist outside the Beach Boys fan universe, play that specific sound in the LGA video for them, and ask what it is they're hearing...or what is producing that sound. It would go a long way toward stepping outside the bubble and getting some totally fresh ears on it.

aha - at 1:51 I just noticed what could be a part of the 'voice' in the percussion - can anyone else hear what could be part of the plosive (is that the right word..?) the 'd' there..?

Or is there some string plucking..?  Or percussion + strings..?

I can't hear it on the backing track which would mean its from day 2..?

This is the most fascinatingly dumb thread. I feel like I've learned both something and absolutely nothing from it at the same time.

If something leads me to revisit a track with a different perspective, perhaps try to hear something new in the familiar, or to step into another person's perspective and try to hear something a different way, I'd consider it worthwhile, to a degree.

And you got to hear perhaps more alto flute examples here in the past 24 hours than perhaps anywhere online besides a flute players' forum.  ;D

hehe - I think its interesting but then if something interests me I can explore it to the nth degree.

I wouldn't sit talking to myself though - if other people stop posting the thread will drop off.

Are you flutefool2002 on there? ;D

I've been exposed!  :lol

This thread spilled the beans! :lol

I stand to be corrected, but I've always assumed the AFM contracts were drawn up after the session (or possibly during), not before. Thus, if you're on the sheet, chances are you were there.

So what's that at 1:51 just before the 'voice' comes in..?

Its not on the pad so could it be plucked strings..?

Its sounds a bit percussiony to me bu no percussion on day 2..?

I'm liking this thread! My thoughts:

The earlier "bend" sound: I'm in agreement with guitarfool that the style of the bend is reminiscent of a guitar in its smoothness, but of course it doesn't sound like a guitar. Is it possible that this is the oboe and the reverb is boosted just for this bit and not the other oboe parts? In either case, the reverb is the main thing here, it's so thick and making the instrument sound so other-worldly that it's nearly impossible to tell what it actually is.

The outro doubled instrument: I'm hearing a woodwind doubled by a string instrument (viola?).

my producer buddy and one or two others thinks strings in the outro - could there be a bit of plucking..?

There are a few pizzicato/plucked notes before the melody comes in, but I'm hearing bowed/sustained notes on the melody.

That's what I'm hearing, too.

yeah but could be plucked in there too in the melody - not clearly audible but adding to presence..?  just a thought as I don't think the plucks have been mentioned till now

errr just listened again and not sure

The strings - at least some of them - are definitely being plucked in the outro. Prior to that, when you hear strings, they are being bowed. And they have nothing to do with the mystery sound that spawned this epic thread.

guitarfool2000 wrote:

"Reminds me too of the famous WIBN guitar intro. What was it? How was it played? etc. There were discussions about that part being played on a detuned 12-string guitar...to which I objected because not only do I play and own electric 12-string guitars but I also know that detuning a 12-string electric guitar then playing it on either the 15th or 16th fret position versus having it standard tuned and hitting the pattern on the 14th fret...just consider detuning it would be pointless and would actually do more harm to the sound than good because the intonation on those slackened strings would be shot.

Lo and behold, it turns out the part was played by Barney Kessel on that 12-string electric mandolin as pictured in the original PS Sessions booklet, plugged direct into the board as we already knew and treated to Gold Star's heavenly echo chambers.

Why was there instead a Danelectro Bellzouki shown in the L&M studio scene? Simply because a Gibson hybrid electric mandolin like Barney played on the session was not able to be found...and after Barney's family was consulted, it was clear Barney did play that Gibson mandolin on the actual date. But why the Bellzouki? I'll save that for another time and discussion lest I be accused again of derailing threads."


Guess I missed this revelation on whatever thread it appeared - other Craig (or someone else), would you care to point me to it?

the top two videos on this page show flutes with notes tapped lightly enough that the tap is inaudible:
http://www.altoflute.co.uk/02-pitch/trills-and-tremolos.html

This article mentions how Brian introduced the song at his latest concert: http://13thfloor.co.nz/reviews/concert-reviews/brian-wilson-civic-theatre-march-26-2016/

”Here’s a song with no voices, just instruments”, he announced preceding the instrumental, Let’s Go Away For Awhile

Emily - have you had a chance yet to consider the clarinet as the mystery instrument, due to the somewhat sax-like line late in the song? The parts at 1:58 and 2:06...

I'm sure everyone is sick to death of this thread by now...which is why no new replies have been posted for days...but I'm still hoping for replies to questions I had posed to two of the contributors:

Emily - have you had a chance to decide if you think the "mystery sound" at 1:58 and at 2:06 in the song possibly sounds more like clarinet than alto flute?

guitarfool2000 - where was it determined unequivocally that Barney Kessel played a Gibson hybrid guitar-mandolin rather than a Danelectro Bellzouki on WIBN? It that was in a separate thread, I've been unable to find it with the search function, and would very much like to see it.

Thanks in advance to both of you!  :)

C-man and Guitarfool = I remember the discussions from years ago about the intro to WIBN.  It might have been me that mentioned that guys used to detune their acoustic 12's to relieve the neck pressure.  I don't know or even think electric 12s needed to do that.  But the intro to WIBN sounds like it has very flexible strings, looser than what I would expect on an electric 12.  You can hear that in the outtakes where the left hand finger pressure easily pulls the guitar sharp.  So it could be a shorter-than-normal scale.  What is the scale of a bellzouki?  24.5 inches I believe, which is the same as a Gibson - not exactly short-scale.  Or maybe the guitar had high action.  I don't own one but I played one briefly at a vintage store and after doing so I thought it might be the guitar used.

The hybrid instrument theory was refuted by someone who noted that there doesn't seem to be a pickup on it in the picture from the PS box set.  OTOH, I don't know why Mr. Kessel would order a specially made instrument for session work that didn't have a pickup!  I've tried to find alternate pictures of him holding that mando but with no success.

I still don't know what guitar/instrument it was

Scott.

There were 12-string mandolins made by a variety of companies and luthiers, though they were very rare. The issue with those "traditional" 12-string mandos was how the strings were grouped. There were 4 sets of 3-string groupings, so instead of the regular mandolin, you would be fretting three strings instead of two. So essentially it's still 4 individually tuned strings, but tripled rather than doubled.

The instrument shown in that photo, and I'll paste it here, shows 6 groups of 2-string groupings, which is more of a guitar based setup like a guitar 12-string rather than the 4-string mandolin setup.  This is the PS box photo that I posted to several forums years ago when trying to figure this out and it's still on Google images from those forums, lol:

(http://i115.photobucket.com/albums/n295/guitarfool2002/barneymandofull.jpg)

Note again the 6 sets of paired strings, like a 12-string guitar but in mandolin scale, and as many of these session guys did like Tedesco when reading for mandolin, tuned like a guitar. Add the two extra strings and Barney would essentially have a mini-guitar that produced mandolin sounds and effects, which he could read charts and do voicings as if he were playing a regular guitar.

The pickup issue is definitely something that stands out. Some Gibson electric mandolins had the pickup just under the heel of the neck, which is where Barney's hand is resting. Maybe he had a pickup installed after this photo, I just don't know.

The information came from a conversation with someone directly involved with the L&M film. That's all I want to say about that, and all I will say.

I too thought it could be a Bellzouki, but according to the conversation, the Bellzouki was chosen for the film for reasons other than it being what was actually played in '66 and because a Gibson hybrid mandolin comparable to Barney's was not available.

The Kessel family was consulted on this instrument history, again according to the discussion.

I have also been disputing very strongly the notion that it was a 12-string tuned down. There is just no reason to make an instrument already challenging to play above the 10th fret or so even more challenging to play in tune by dropping a whole step! No rational reason to do that...but acoustic 12-string players would do that for neck and tension issues, and if they had to play 'standard' tuning, a lot of them would capo the 2nd fret. But doing it specific to this WIBN intro would be redundant and would make it even harder to play since you'd be on the 16th instead of the 14th. Goodbye, intonation.

Consider Barney's Gibson mandolin - He could play the WIBN intro arpeggios at the 2nd fret, basically open position, if he used that 12-string mandolin.

I think there may have been a misunderstanding about the "custom" nature of this instrument - It would make sense for Barney to have ordered a special build to allow him to play and read parts for mandolin on sessions using guitar tuning and layout, but on a mandolin body. It wouldn't make sense for him to order a special build for one Brian Wilson session - I think this Gibson could have just been one of many in his session arsenal which he used on WIBN.

I wonder if anyone in Brian's camp ever asked him exactly what kind of guitar Barney used on WIBN. If shown a picture, he might remember - the closest he's come was a couple of late '90s remarks, one where he identified Barney Kessel as the player, and another where he spoke of the "ringy-ding" characteristic of the guitar (in such a way as to imply there was something unique about that particular guitar). Oh, and a third where he just stated that the intro was two guitars, one played high up on the neck, and the other played normally.

this thread, which started off so strange, has become more interesting as it hangs on and on, and morphs into something else entirely.

Except Barney's instrument has to be tuned precisely like a 12-string guitar because we can hear him tuning and playing notes lower than an instrument tuned to play the intro in open position could handle.

That being said, the instrument is absolutely the one in the photo.  No question any more.

Sorry c-man, you're right that I hadn't been in this thread for a bit.
I'm wondering if the bits I'm focusing on are the same bits other people are focusing on, because I don't hear a change at 1:58 or at 2:06.
I hear, in my mono version:
-starting at 1:49, a sax-like, but I believe clarinet, doing a four measure line that, after a few string plucks, bends up high then ends at 1:53.
-then starting at 1:53, I hear a flute with a much breathier "sigh" sound than one usually gets with a clarinet. The flute is doing the repeated line that I think Guitarfool2002's second video focuses on.
-at 2:10 the clarinet repeats.
That's what I think I hear.
?

Edited to add: If there's reason to think those two parts are played by the same instrument, it would be a clarinet - a very dexterous clarinet player might be able to make the flutey sound, where no flute player could make the clarinety sound.

As frustrating and flat out inane as this thread has been, it's light years preferable to the ludicrous excrement peddled on any topic polluted by the presence of The Rockster.  ;D

I absolutely have considered this mandolin - for years I was sure it was this instrument, but then you guys had me reconsider.  I agree that the instrument used on WIBN was tuned in the guitar register as you can hear some open E's and G's in the outtakes and they are not up an octave.  While I think Barney's mandolin might appear to be a bit larger than a standard mandolin scale, it's still considerably shorter than a guitar scale, which would lead to very slack strings if tuned in the guitar register (which could be pulled out of tune easily).  Also Barney has some trouble playing the higher notes cleanly which could also indicate a scale-length he wasn't used to.

Question for GF and H and C-man and anyone else: are you sure the mic stand in the foreground is meant for this instrument?  The lower portion we see could just be the elbow, as if the top of the stand is pointing somewhere high.  The mic stand is out of focus, maybe the photog used a large aperture (making the focal plane very narrow) or maybe it's considerably closer than we think.

Scott

That mic stand placement is a mystery, I wish the photo was done in a wider angle so we could see more! It could be a mic for Barney's instrument, or perhaps it was pointed at an amp next to Barney or even a musician sitting next to Barney? It's both blurry and cropped, so I just can't tell for sure and it could be any possibility. One element of Barney's "hybrid" Gibson in that photo is he could play it and have it mic'ed as a pure acoustic for the traditional mandolin sounds, or if it were outfitted with a pickup, he could hit those sounds too if he plugged in for other uses.

I agree about Barney seeming to fluff some of those notes, it stuck in my mind too because Barney was without question a virtuoso guitarist with impeccable touch and technique, yet he seems to be fretting out some of those notes as he's working out the intro between takes. It would definitely suggest a possible issue with the neck or the scale of the instrument. When you hear Barney on those Poll Winner or Julie London albums, he's near-flawless 99% of the time.

It's also funny in a way to see other session photos from this era at Gold Star, Western, etc...they have 4 guitarists on metal chairs lined up side by side with their amps lined up side by side, then acoustic players mic'ed up sitting close by...with little or no baffling. Leakage back then was part of the magic, compared to what would be done later in terms or baffling and isolating parts to ridiculous degrees.