I'm not stepping into the debate, but the question was asked of how it works. I have a rackmount vocal processor with the original Antares Autotune, and can answer a few rudimentary questions, leaving the really techie stuff to the engineers on the board.

Autotune recognizes what we hear as pitches (notes) by analyzing the waveform, calculating the pitch of that waveform, and correcting it. It's a digital process, nothing mechanical about it. It can be adjusted fast which doesn't allow breath or vibrato to come out (and maxing this out is the T-Pain effect), or slow, so it corrects the pitch but leaves breath and vibrato and other vocal bends and all that as part of the sound.

Two parts to remember about Autotune are that you need to "program" it in a way depending on the key of the song. If it is in the key of C or A minor, for example, you would program all the notes of that scale telling it to trigger on and correct to those notes. If you have a melody that goes beyond the straightforward key, you can program those chromatic notes as well, and omit certain notes of the scale calling them blank notes so it won't correct everything and will sound more natural, and allow the melody to go in and out of tune ever so slightly.

Or, you could have the Autotune completely off except for a few notes, so the vocal can be natural on the majority of the melody notes being sung but if they have a hard time hitting a really high note, you could trigger the Autotune to only hit and correct that note up to pitch, leaving the others natural.

If Autotune is used "live", the singer's monitor mix would probably only have his/her actual notes audible while the audience's mix would have more of the Autotune signal, otherwise the singer would be hearing Autotune working in their monitor mix and try to pitch their voice to that, and it doesn't work as well.

And engineers should be able to get a fairly "natural" sound using Autotune, like compression which was designed to not be detected as an "effect" unless deliberately over-applying it or maxing it out is the desired effect.

My external Autotune rack unit is several years old now, and the effect itself is about 15 years old when it was developed for ProTools, so if anyone can shed any light on the newer developments or revisions, please do!

I love threads like this! From what I've found and read, along with trying on my own through the years, a lot of it is trial and error, just getting a sound which is close and trying out different drawbars, seasoning to taste. I also have heard that some if not many Hammond players are secretive about their drawbar settings, I remember Paul Shaffer who is actually a master historian on B3 sounds has said that some players have flat out refused to reveal their settings when he asked them.

One important thing which I've heard on more than a few classic BB's B3 tracks is the percussion/key click setting, or lack thereof - that can make a huge difference but I'm sure everyone in this thread knows this already... And running through a real mechanical Leslie is crucial, IMO, though I'm sure some non-mechanical simulators can come closer now than before. Any suggestions on that front?

I do have some sample drawbar settings in my library from a few famous players, unfortunately nothing BB's related, but if those would help out let me know and I'll post them when I can.

I was at a record show today where a vendor had a small box of original issues of Beach Boy Stomp and Add Some Music, the original smaller stapled copies, for sale. They dated back to 1979, up to 1988. I was wondering if there was any collector interest in these, or any value, beyond what fans would pay for them.

Nothing else of real interest to report, just a nice original PS of the Capitol 409 single, and assorted vinyl. And a backstage pass that looked like the early 80's tours. Retail prices on that stuff...

In the GV vid link posted upthread.

Ah yes, I had to brighten it up a bit to spot this on my monitor, I was watching the clip but not seeing the back row of players!

Just curious, is this something new for him to be playing bass lefty, or is it the kind of bass he's using that stood out?

The draft issue with Carl happened in January 1967, so either it was a total coincidence or unrelated. That is, if the September 1966 airdate is correct, but still the episode would have been written months earlier. Quite a coincidence, though.

Interesting, Mikie D is playing left-handed bass.

Where are you seeing this?

because his guitar lick sounds more like the record than Brian's shows usually do.  Maybe he's got a little nuance that others do slightly different?

Interesting observation, another reason why it is great to have him on stage. He and Carl learned guitar from the same teacher, apparently, and were part of the same scene, surrounded by the same music at the same time. It's like playing classic soul music with musicians from California or the UK then playing the same songs with musicians from Memphis - the feel and the groove is just flowing naturally in their blood because they learned within that style versus copying it.

Great to see David there, great to hear that he's taking leads and playing authentic 60's California surf guitar, and great to see FENDER GUITARS on stage!

Recession? 

I gotta say, that's a pretty cool looking stage backdrop in that RS photo: At first it looks like a drive-in movie screen, then looking closer it looks kind of like those 40's/50's Bakelite radios like the one from the new single. Kind of a dual-meaning thing going on there. Very nice.

Cheers to the designer(s), although Brian and his piano look a little too far out of the center-stage area. Maybe he'll be closer at future shows.

Just in case someone here hasn't yet seen it, Rolling Stone online has this concert headlined under their "Top Stories" section, complete with a positive review, full setlist, and photo. I thought it was a pretty big deal to make headline news like that!

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/beach-boys-kick-off-50th-anniversary-tour-in-tucson-20120425

Would like to see a close-up of Al's Strat. If it has a seafoam green pick guard, then that's the one (or similar) that he gave to Fender to have cloned.

Same here - the photo posted above is a little too low-res to see, but that pickguard does look a little minty green to me. And it has a rosewood neck (Yay!). The question will become whether Al is playing the original or the clone in the future, because Fender's "Custom Shop" does amazing work on aging guitars to exact copies of the classics.

I love those mint green Fender guards, but it wouldn't look as nice on my red Strat as on a white one. http://www.musiciansfriend.com/accessories/fender-american-standard-stratocaster-11-hole-pickguard--mint-green

Just curious - having experienced it, was the meet-and-greet worth it? It sounds like the soundcheck access was a nice premium though the logistics got a bit messed up, but the m+g wasn't as good.

Thanks for the reviews and firsthand reports, much appreciated!

Wow. Wonder if Gibson was pissed off at them for doing this.

Was the company Asher worked for as high profile as the company in Mad Men?
Only seen a few episodes of that show, until I lost interest in the characters. Pretty well done show, though.

Yes, Carson Roberts was *very* high profile, and was described as the biggest ad agency in Los Angeles. Asher worked there alongside future Monty Python filmmaker Terry Gilliam. They produced some very progressive and very slick ad campaigns. Here is a link to one of their "psychedelic" 1966 TV ads for Life Savers candy, of all things: http://www.dangerousminds.net/comments/1966_psychedelic_life_savers_tv_commercial_by_terry_gilliam

And here is the obit for one of the founders who died in the 80's: http://articles.latimes.com/1989-01-09/news/mn-38_1_roberts-advertising

They were a pretty big deal and are still remembered even though the company name "Carson Roberts" hasn't existed for decades.

Think of Mad Men and their fictional firm, then place Tony Asher into the real thing, the only difference being Tony was in LA and Mad Men is NYC. But it's the same ad agency culture playing out every week as Tony lived at that time - which is why asking him a few questions would be a neat thing.

I also just thought of something ironic - not sure if it is actually irony or just coincidence - but how about Brian's Pet Sounds collaborator Tony Asher and how his true-life history fits into all of this with Mad Men featuring that song, which he wrote with Brian?

Remember that Tony Asher was working at the ad agency Carson Roberts at nearly the same time as Mad Men has been set in history for the past two seasons, 1965-66, and he took a leave of absence to work on lyrics with Brian.

Consider that Tony as a copy writer was working in the same kind of atmosphere as Mad Men, and had he been at the fictional firm in NYC, he'd have Don Draper as his boss as the creative director and he'd probably be working with Peggy and her team of creative copy writers and designers.

If he would be willing, it would be neat to pepper him with a few questions *unrelated* to Pet Sounds for a change of pace, and unrelated to Brian for a change, and ask him what he thinks of Mad Men, if he even watches it, and how his experiences working at an actual advertising agency in 1965-66 compares with the impression people are getting from watching Mad Men. If I could do it I'd ask him!

Tony Asher - Brian's collaborator and one of the original "Mad Men". Pretty neat.

Remember when Brian was on QVC selling his stuff and performing? It's actually quite a profitable and smart way of selling product, it's getting a direct line to millions of potential buyers and viewers who are admittedly mostly women who have credit cards ready to spend, and I've seen several top-tier artists go on QVC just like Brian did and sell quite a bit of albums.

Here's the trick: QVC is located in West Chester PA. You can book studio tours at their location there. If the BB's are going to actually travel to the PA studios, I will/would look into booking a QVC studio tour for that day when they will be there, if that can be done. That would be cool. Just a random thought, if anything like that could be possible. Keep that in mind, residents of PA/NJ/DE/NY, West Chester is an easy drive.

"LTTC" riff played by Louie Shelton, or at least that is what the Internet told me.  I think he also did that great riff in "Valleri" -- which is a classic no matter who played it.

The internet was right, that was Louie Shelton who also played Valleri - both versions! One of the best guitar solos of the 60's. It was a neat touch that Guitar World listed how to get Louie's super-compressed tone on Clarksville (the original used a McGuinn-like opto compressor for *heavy* compression, a classic 60's guitar sound), and I have used that track to demonstrate the sound of those classic compressors for students in the past.

Louis Shelton - another guitar hero of mine whose music I loved for years but whose name I didn't know until I got older. That guy was an incredible guitarist, just a fantastic soloist. Go to his website and check out his credits and bio, so many absolute classic songs to his credit:

http://www.louieshelton.com

Thanks for the info on the reel tape, I also assumed for some reason that Pet Sounds didn't get released on reel-to-reel by Capitol until after '66. But now we know, and thanks again for the clarification!

http://www.musiciansfriend.com/portable-field-recorders
That is a good selection of field recorders from a place I deal with often, Musician's Friend. Free shipping, express shipping if requested, and a good return/guarantee policy. These are better than iPhones or Pads or whatever, anything with the stereo x-y mic capsules should deliver a good quality recording from the audience. Just don't have the mic in contact with a shirt pocket or any other fabric, you'll get a lot of that horrible noise if you do.

And don't forget the lesson which Rerun had to learn the hard way when those mean-looking dudes recruited him to bootleg a Doobie Brothers show on the classic episode of "What's Happening!". Anyone considering bootlegging a show should watch this and seriously consider whether you want to be a Rerun, or be cool with the Doobie Brothers and just enjoy the show:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e3Lb7Y4_zYk

I'm hoping a collector can answer this: Was there a reel tape version of Pet Sounds released by Capitol in '66? If not in '66, what year? I know I've seen several come and go on auction sites, usually either a "Duophonic" Capitol reel or a mono reel from the UK, but none of the auctions as far as I can recall have listed a specific release date for that copy being sold.

And was the catalog prefix number of the Capitol reels a "Y"? I have seen only one reference to something other than the vinyl issues from 66, and it was prefixed with a Y.

Thanks in advance for the info! I thought this would be a good place to ask since it's being discussed...

I wanted to let folks here know about this because it seemed to be an inspired decision from Guitar World's editors, and there are more than a few Monkees fans and guitarists who are members of this board. I just got the most recent issue this morning in the mail, dated June 2012, and "Last Train To Clarksville" is one of the featured guitar/bass transcriptions this month. I think this is terrific, and overdue. It was great to see the music of The Monkees being presented this way, as a song worthy of being learned and performed by the guitar community at-large. I know that seems like such a niche thing to say or even get excited about, but how many decades have Monkees fans had to "win over" other listeners and even other musicians by pointing out how *good* some of the music really was, versus the image?

Maybe this is a sign that things have changed, and that now a truly great and exciting 60's single like Last Train To Clarksville can go beyond the television/bubblegum depiction and be thought of as a good song in general, no strings attached.

I'm also thinking magazines like this could be persuaded to start including other 60's acts we love here, like *ahem* THE BEACH BOYS, in much the same way they featured the Monkees. I have a mid-sized collection of these and the only BB's transcription I can cite offhand is "California Girls", published in the late 80's. Maybe if positive reaction to The Monkees sheet music starts hitting the inbox of the editor, and some praise and requests for Beach Boys starts coming in, more "new" fans and readers will jump on board as well. Just a thought.

Here is the website: Unfortunately I think the May issue is still featured but you can find the new one somewhere on the site. If this is something you like, drop them a line and tell them "Thanks" and mention the BB's as well for upcoming featured music.

http://www.guitarworld.com/

Here are my thoughts...although the song was used in the episode, the characters weren't necessarily listening to it...dig:

The psychiatrist told 'em that it's important to take LSD with a positive attitude, an open mind, and optimism. IJWMFTT isn't exactly the theme song of optimism and positivity! Plus, given that most of the characters in the room were considerably older than the Pet Sounds target audience (Jane was probably the youngest by far), it's doubtful that the lady would have a Pet Sounds reel among her collection.

I think the song was just used as soundtrack music - rather than something the characters actually heard (the reel was probably something else) - to underscore Roger's own realizations.

I enjoyed reading this and considering it, nice thoughts! I also remember hearing several songs overlap during the scene, along with conversations and whatnot. I'll have to watch it again and see if I can see what you're suggesting, how another song was really played on that reel and Pet Sounds was more of a commentary.

It definitely stood out that Pet Sounds would probably not have been played by that demographic, but then again the cases of busting the old stereotypes of who listened to what are what makes it interesting!

And it was interesting for me to see Roger's realizations while on LSD, all of those subconscious thoughts coming to the fore, all of the searching for the deeper meaning and enlightenment, led him to exactly the same person he has been since episode number one! His trip showed us not too much more than the fact that the Roger we've seen in the office and in various scenarios was the same Roger he found when he was getting deep into himself to find the truth. he may have been the only one - his wife couldn't be honest with him the next day about what she told him, the people in the room were acting all trippy and crawling on the floor or doing the physical-synergy thing with their limbs, and Roger just grabbed a bottle of booze and poured a drink, which is what he always does anyway! Then he looked at advertising in a magazine, looked to Don for advice even though the doctor had become Don as a guide, then he saw Cooper's face on the bill, and Bert Cooper was always the bankroll/money of the partnership. And in the mirror he saw himself, more or less.

So Roger saw his reality as his inner truth, not much difference between his search for the truth and his regular life. At least that's how I saw it. Is he that one-dimensional or was he truly one of the few in that show who was honest with who he really was? And in that way I guess Brian's song was a fitting soundtrack.

I remember wanting to love this album when I ordered it, wanting to have it to play at those gatherings where new and old music is passed around and given a chance to reach new ears - "Check *this* out, it's Brian Wilson!", I remember seeing a television special where various artists are shown recording vocals with Brian and performing...and the album never became a favorite. The question asked in this thread is basically the same one I kept asking - "Why?"

I think the production, the overall sound and sheen of the album, was a factor. I can't even explain exactly what it was, but it sounded too processed, too digital, almost to cold and too much like it was trying for a slick Brian Wilson sound to still sound like elements of "Summer Days" while updating his overall sound for the late 90's.

It's a tough sell, because, quite frankly, the man made some of the most exciting records in all of popular music for a period of about 3 years, songs that still sound fresh and exciting no matter how old they get. So here was a "new" album that featured a re-cut song from that same 60's period which Brian specifically never liked his lead vocal, so he decided to re-cut it and "fix" the original which he even had vetoed from the 93 box set. But the original had become one of my favorite Beach Boys tunes, and I was putting it on all kinds of mix tapes and listening to it all the time in the year or so before "Imagination". I heard that he was remaking "Let Him Run Wild", and was excited at first but then hesitant until I actually heard it, and that one song, especially the contrast between how a record was made in 1965 versus the late 90's played itself out right there, on Brian's album, for everyone to hear. It was a dividing line between personal tastes, and the difference that 30+ years of advances in recording technology could make on a song that the lead vocalist was never happy with, and could now remake it to his satisfaction using the best technology.

But the original 60's version holds up better, lead vocal warts and all, and I think trying to recapture a stylized version of those classic sounds can be more precarious of a pursuit than just letting the tape roll. Maybe that was my issue with the whole sound of that disc, it just felt overly stylized into a certain ideal of how a Brian album needed to sound.

I liked hearing some of the tunes live, but interestingly he really didn't hold on to too many of the Imagination songs in his future setlists, did he? I saw him on what could have been called the "Imagination" mini-tour in the states, and I can't remember if he did more than a few from the disc. The highlights were the Pet Sounds tracks (amazing) and "In My Room", honestly...where you'd think more of the newest album would have been featured.

I was surprised: Add this to that weird Dennis Hopper video a few years ago for surprise appearances of Pet Sounds album tracks on mainstream TV.  They always sound great in these cases.

I tried to remember if there were an earlier episode with a Beach Boys song - specifically that one where Don goes to California on one of his trips to see the "real" Mrs. Don Draper just as she was getting sick, and they go to a California bar where a song is playing on the jukebox. I guess I was thinking Beach Boys in my memory but I believe it was Jan And Dean. Anyway...

It's great that Pet Sounds got an airing last night in a pretty neat but idealized scene of a terrific show, and is getting a lot of buzz on the web this morning, but was Pet Sounds really *that kind* of an acid album in summer 1966 or did it pick up that kind of cache by the year 2012? Just curious. I'm just speculating that Ravi Shankar or Ornette Coleman or even a beat poetry album of bongos, acoustic bass, and spoken-word exclamations would have stood as much of a chance of being on those doctors' reel-to-reel as Pet Sounds in summer '66...or even the classical that came blaring out of Roger's booze bottle. But it made for a pretty compelling scene last night, which is all that matters.

And like other Mad Men songs, I'll bet if you check the iTunes sales lists this week, you'll see IJWMFTT selling more than usual.

I've heard a wealth of information about the systems in Canada and Western Europe. I would be willing to go along with them if I wasn't required to sign away over 40% of my wages in order to prop up the system (I have a British friend in my area who left the UK specifically because he was sick and tired of paying 60% of his wages for an ineffectual system). And THAT is the problem. This is a similar situation to insurance companies in the United States. It's a socialized system. The other main reason I don't want the United States government delivering medical care is a simple one but one that goes over even the most astute and logical of heads. In business they tell you to ONLY associate with vendors that have "not a lot of debt". The United States government is $16 trillion in the hole. Do you REALLY want that corporation delivering your medical care? The United States is bankrupt and nobody wants to admit it. That's the BEST reason I can think of to want the government OUT of the medical business.

Business is the key word. Too many government agencies do not depend on making a profit in order to be sustainable. Most depend on public funding - taxes - in order to operate. If they run into financial hardships, there isn't quite the same motivation to improve much of anything if a system is in place which will dictate how much more the taxpayers will have to pay in taxes in order to make up for the shortfalls or the outright failures of the government operations. If "Operation X" is running into a funding crisis, government as an entity will suggest stripping some funding from "Operation Y" in order to give more money to "Operation X" to save it for another year, then it may suggest raising taxes to "increase revenue" to not only re-fund "Operation X" but also to re-energize "Operation Y" and keep them both going.

Meanwhile, lost somewhere in that maze is the business element of making improvements, re-thinking strategy, developing new initiatives, and perhaps replacing some employees in favor of new ones with fresh ideas or more experience and/or knowledge. There is no motivation to improve if the funding is not dependent on performance in a competitive field.

If there is no motivation to improve in order to "do better" in a financial sense, as any business would do when setting a goal for the day, week, month, quarter, year, etc. in order to adapt their business practices accordingly, I worry that we will settle for even more mediocrity and corruption than we've already seen. That is one of my worries re: health care.