I think Roger's done a good job of summing up the general consensus on this.  More casual enthusiasts have generally been quite favorable while some diehards have been more critical:  The fly-ins have been a source of controversy (most notably in Look, Holidays and Dada), while others object to the use of the BWPS template (as opposed to the traditional back cover 12 track listing).  I think that the 'approximation' piece was bound to be controversial, but I've heard less complaints about the raw sessions (the Dada/CCW material and the Wonderful takes were particular highlights).  

I also concur with RR about the new assemblages, particularly V-T and that great rough version of H&V that they tucked away at the end of disc 4.  The new Child edit felt choppy to me as well.  I thought the '67 Surf's Up was interesting, but it certainly didn't supplant the original.  Most folks love the vocal montage, myself included.

So on the whole, given the level of expectation here, I think the new set has fared pretty well, though some longtime fans have dissented.

SMiLE is certainly raking in the accolades.  I wonder how much of an effect it's having on the sales.  Obviously, all of the hardcore types bought it right away, but how many new listeners were enticed to check it out as a result of the good reviews?  Hopefully, holiday sales will help to give it another bump.

[Hell, we all have visions and grand schemes and plans and great novels we'd love to write, great movies we'd love to direct, classic albums we'd like to write and produce, but we can't do it all on our own.]

I don't buy the "Brian's vision" line either. Not as the whole story. How many times on this board has someone written something along the lines of (myself included) "Yes, Brian needed the band to help realize his vision.  Those songs required the lovely, complex group harmonies to really flourish.  He needed a confident front man like Mike to go out there and sell it to the audience.  And of course, as Brian's personal problems caught up to him, the rest of the band had to pick up the slack--first in terms of their live performances and eventually in terms of the songwriting/arrangements too"? ..... Just isolate that sentence and think about it for a moment. That line represents a sizable chunk of what the Beach Boys are and I don't see the logic of stating such and then going, yeah, yeah, well, sure, but, but.... it's all about Brian's vision! Hell, we all have visions and grand schemes and plans and great novels we'd love to write, great movies we'd love to direct, classic albums we'd like to write and produce, but we can't do it all on our own. Brian had vision but he also had a lot of motivation fostered upon him by the other Beach Boys. He had these guys who's voices blended so wonderfully, he had a Chuck Berry obsessed, guitar playing little brother, he had a clocky/confident lead singer in Mike who had the nerve to put himself out in front, he had Dennis who somehow managed to learn to bash the drums very well seemingly overnight. he had Al, not even a relation, but who somehow sounded liked he belonged in harmony with the others, he had Mike (and others) providing lyrics and the narrative/emotional identity for a great number of the songs: in other words he had a band! Give these guys their due.

Sure.  Any of us could score dozens of top forty hits and come up with timeless, critically acclaimed works of art if we just had a talented band behind us to help make it happen.     If some give the rest of the Boys short shrift, it seems that others are intent on resentfully undercutting Brian's accomplishments.  As I stated, Brian got a lot of help over the years, not just from the band but also from his other songwriting collaborators and all of the talented session musicians involved--none of this should be lightly dismissed.  Obviously, he wasn't magically making it all happen by himself, but in my view, Brian's writing/arranging/producing talents were the one truly indispensable component in this equation and the notion that they could have even gotten off the ground, much less have thrived without him is ludicrous.  (And before you say "Kokomo", that hit never would have happened if they weren't already major stars selling the sound that Brian played such a large role in developing.)

[Maybe he just doesn't want to do the reunion, doesn't feel that all of the stress and anxiety is worth the reward.]

Maybe he just doesn't want to do the reunion, doesn't feel that all of the stress and anxiety is worth the reward.  ... Why try to force the old guy out for a nostalgia tour when his heart's clearly not in it?  

Pray, share with us this information you have that tells you Brian clearly wants no part of this reunion. I for one would dearly like to know of it, for several reasons.

BTW, stating in one sentence he "maybe" doesn't want to do something, then in a succeeding line saying he "clearly" doesn't want to is kinda... oh, can you say "contradictory" ? "Inconsistent" ?

From Rolling Stone in late September:

Not all the wounds have healed, though – in a recent interview, Wilson sounded ambivalent about a reunion. Asked if he's looking forward to the anniversary, he responds, "Not particularly," adding, "I don't really like working with the guys, but it all depends on how we feel and how much money's involved. Money's not the only reason I made rec­ords, but it does hold a place in our lives."

You're right, I shouldn't have said 'clearly', but to me, this doesn't sound like someone who's eager to go out and 'do it again'.  He's been extremely ambivalent on the topic all year.  I get the feeling that those around him want him to do it, but he's just not feeling it.  That's my impression.

The legacy belongs to The Beach Boys too. Including Carl, and Dennis who I dare anyone to accuse of not deserving it. Say what you will about Mike.

These guys, formed the band with Brian, went to bat for the band, showed up for the damn gigs, sang like angels, played their instruments, wrote songs for the band/lyrics, sang wonderful leads with each member's personality and voice being distinct with the public. How in hell does this belong to Brian and Brian only! How come you never hear anyone yelling and screaming that The Rolling Stones are JUST Mick and Keith. How come Charlie, Bill, Mick Taylor, Ron Wood all get back slapped with great acclaim, yet Dennis, Carl, Dave, Bruce, Mike, Al are accused of being coattail riders to the guy who's barely shown his face onstage for the band's entire damn career? It sickens me! Some people just can't deal when the word genius is tossed around! YES YES YES Brian IS A  F*ck#ng GENIUS! Get over it! Move on! Brian was a freaking genius IN A BAND!!!!! A band that could survive and thrive with or without him, not to mention!!!! Sure is an easy thing for a bunch of no-talents to manage, right?

Ok, where's my bottle of scotch?

Hold on a sec.  Wirestone rightfully responded to the absurd comment that Brian needs to go out and claim the Beach Boys' legacy.  He doesn't.  He has nothing to prove to anyone at this stage in his career, no matter how many fans might desperately want to see this reunion.  Anyone who knows anything about the band knows that Brian was the driving creative force, the author of most of their best music and the architect of their sound.  This is certainly not to diminish the considerable contributions of the other members.  Yes, Brian needed the band to help realize his vision.  Those songs required the lovely, complex group harmonies to really flourish.  He needed a confident front man like Mike to go out there and sell it to the audience.  And of course, as Brian's personal problems caught up to him, the rest of the band had to pick up the slack--first in terms of their live performances and eventually in terms of the songwriting/arrangements too.  Still, the Beach Boys would not exist without Brian's vision.  

"Brian Wilson is the Beach Boys. He is the band. We're his fucking messengers. He is all of it. Period." --Dennis Wilson

Maybe he just doesn't want to do the reunion, doesn't feel that all of the stress and anxiety is worth the reward.  Maybe he feels like he can express himself better as a solo artist than he can within the complicated interpersonal/business constraints of the Beach Boys.  This isn't to say that he's somehow crapping on the Beach Boys legacy, just that the old band format doesn't work for him anymore.  Why try to force the old guy out for a nostalgia tour when his heart's clearly not in it?  Wouldn't that potentially do more harm to the legacy than sitting it out?  Why do some fans seem to think that Brian owes them something more than we've already been given?  

[is]

I tend to balk at notions that something "should" be a certain way, particualrly in relation to creativity.   I'd also suggest that there is a "vague musical resemblance", it's in the melody line being sung.  

Even the vocal melody here isn't that similar, and if you take away the lyrics, no one would know that this was Worms.  Moreover, it doesn't evoke the feel of the original, nor does it reposition it in an interesting way.  Like I said, it's just VDP's words over strumming.  I'm not sure that this kind of stripped down acoustic approach to SMiLE makes much sense, given the palette of instruments that Brian was working with and the non-traditional song structures.  At least, it didn't in this case.

I saw that the performer has taken note of this thread on YouTube, noting the "Jackal-like disparagement".  He also mentioned that he tossed the cover off in a matter of minutes.  Well, it shows.

Cover versions are supposed to be different from the original. If he just tried to replicate Briain's DYLW he might as well not have bothered.

I tend to agree, but a cover should at least bear some vague musical resemblance to the original.  This one really doesn't.  If you replaced the lyrics with Mr. Tambourine Man or some other folk song, no one would even recognize the music as being Worms.  Basically, he just sang VDP's lyrics over some nondescript strumming. 

I'd really love to hear a great cover of Worms that incorporates all of the lyrics and maybe even that new melody line we hear on TSS.  I'm hoping that we'll hear more interesting SMiLE covers in the wake of the new set.

Ironic, given the date (dec but John Lennon saw Ram as being full of subtle insults towards him and Yoko.

I think John was being a little thin skinned there.  "Too many people preaching practices" isn't exactly a damning indictment (plus the picture of one beetle screwing another).  But I've always found John's How Do You Sleep? to be a scathing and unpleasant counter-attack.  Too Many People can be enjoyed on its own terms without knowing those particulars, but HDYS just beats you over the head.

Pitting The Beach Boys against The Beatles? Forget that crap. BEACH BOYS WIN EVERY DAMN TIME.

Agreed, this should be the new motto of this board.

Nonsense.  I don't get some of the Beatles bashing that goes on around here.  Obviously, it's a Beach Boys board, so they come first here, but that's no reason to slam one of the greatest rock bands of all time.  I think Brian thought pretty highly of them. . .

Is it really that big a deal to have a very specific theoretical model applied (and re-applied...) to a really exciting work? I mean, I'm not a fan of psychoanalytic literary theory, but if an article appears in a journal using that model, I don't have to engage with it. But if I do, frustratingly, I usually learn something I hadn't considered before.  And it never hurts to be civil, or at least, to tone down the condescension.  BT's been around these boards long enough to deserve better.

I agree.  Like most true believers, he may take his arguments to ridiculous extremes at times (I still ain't hearing 'Fresh Zen air'!), but I think his interpretation is fascinating and valid in its way.  It is one way of approaching this extraordinary work of art, but not THE way.

Also, I'm only interested in stereo and I can't help thinking that next year, they'll release stereo and 5.1 versions (as they did with Pet Sounds). It's probably already in the can.

Man, I hope you're right about this, but I doubt it.  Part of this comes down to some of the rough sources they needed to turn to for some of these tracks.  Hell, we can't even get a stereo version of GV at this point, so it's hard to imagine tracks like Child or IIGS sounding right in surround.  Beyond that, I just don't think that 5.1 market ever took off in a big way, unfortunately, so I'm not sure it would be worth the investment in these lean economic times.

I had heard that they actually prepared a 5.1 version of Surf's Up at one point, but it's still in the can.  What are you waiting for, guys?

I would take out each band's weaker albums such as Beatles For Sale because clearly they were being rushed out with lots of filler.

Increasingly, I think this album gets a bum rap.  Sure, there are a few duds on it and they resorted to some covers, but this was the point where John's songwriting really started to mature with his Dylanesque phase:  No Reply, I'm A Loser, Baby's In Black, Eight Days A Week, Every Little Thing, I Don't Want To Spoil The Party.  If Paul had been able to keep pace, BFS would have been regarded as a big step forward, IMO.

Both bands really had to churn the product out in these early years, so it's not surprising that these albums are uneven.

Great music certainly can evoke a spiritual experience, as all world religions know.  Perhaps more than any other piece of music that I can think of, SMiLE does that for me.  And I do believe that this was a large part of Brian's initial inspiration with this project, his teenage symphony to God.  Did his reach exceed his grasp?  Maybe, but there were more than enough moving revelations in these sessions to validate the experiment.

I think it is interesting to interpret SMiLE from a Zen perspective.  It is accurate to assume that Brian and Van were interested in eastern philosophy, as hip folks increasingly were at the time.  It is something else entirely to assert that this is specifically what they had in mind with SMiLE and that every little bit of it relates back to Zen somehow.  Brian had all sorts of different ideas buzzing in his brain at that point, too many--humor, American history and manifest destiny, physical fitness and healthy living, innocence and experience, etc.  Trying to reduce it all down to one thing is a gross distortion.

I don't get the Jim Gordon reference...

I just thought that it was funny that he kept talking about how Denny's drumming got overlooked in favor of Hal Blaine, but then he didn't mention Gordon's contributions either, which kind of gets back to the point you made earlier.  It seems like some of these musicians (Kaye and Blaine, in particular) have been more successful at preserving their legacy while others get left behind, not because they were inferior players, but due to circumstance, bad luck, etc.

That does make sense, I just wasn't sure but wanted to clarify! Another factor is that some of them were better at the art of self-promotion than others, and may have been bigger personalities than others who may have been more quiet.

 I don't see Jon trying to gloss over Jim Gordon's contributions; all I read is he wants Denny to get the credit he deserves for HIS OWN drumming, which is being lost to Hal.  Jim's credits are an entirely different matter, and while he certainly deserves them, if they ultimately get washed away, I'd ventuire its on account of his actions in the other matter. Just or not, "for every action there's a reaction"

I was just kind of kidding there.  Hell, up until recently, I wasn't even aware of Gordon's contributions with the Beach Boys and was surprised at how prominently he featured in the SMiLE sessions.  I just assumed it was Hal there.

I don't get the Jim Gordon reference...

I just thought that it was funny that he kept talking about how Denny's drumming got overlooked in favor of Hal Blaine, but then he didn't mention Gordon's contributions either, which kind of gets back to the point you made earlier.  It seems like some of these musicians (Kaye and Blaine, in particular) have been more successful at preserving their legacy while others get left behind, not because they were inferior players, but due to circumstance, bad luck, etc.

You're a drummer and founding member of a band. YOU played on the classic Beach Boys versions of Surfer Girl, Catch A Wave, Hawaii, In My Room, Little Deuce Coupe, Don't Worry Baby, Little Saint Nick, Fun Fun Fun, The Warmth Of The Sun, I Get Around, Wendy, All Summer Long, Little Honda, Hushabye, Girls On The Beach, Don't Back Down, Dance Dance Dance, When I Grow Up To Be A Man, I'm So Young, She Knows Me Too Well, Girl Don't Tell Me, You're So Good To Me, That's Not Me, Holidays, Wild Honey, I Can Hear Music,  etc... But 90% of the music aficionados who think they know a little bit about music history assume that someone else was the drummer on all of this stuff. When they hear this stuff on the radio or on TV or in movies they are listening with the thought in mind its that Wrecking Crew genius Hal Blaine playing those classic drums parts because he's an artist and you were only a clubber. And when they comment they say that you got replaced in the studio because you were not good enough. Sure, you were fun to watch in concert...but not skilled enough for the studio. To me the disrespect that Dennis Wilson routinely gets, not by low information fans, but by people who think of themselves as knowledgeable is sickening. ANY drummer would be thrilled to have a fraction of the memorable credits that Dennis should be remembered for, but more often than not he gets zero credit for. To me the point you made vs. this crime in progress do not compare. And I'm not saying YOU were comparing them...but the above is exactly why some of us get a little freaked out when someone like Glen or Hal or Carol take credit for something that wasn't theirs. It spreads like an infection, and in the end you get the constant drip that the Beach Boys were inferior musicians who could not cut it in the studio. I want to be one of the people who turns that perception back towards something closer to the truth.

Fair enough, Denny deserves more credit, but then why do you keep glossing over the not inconsiderable drumming contributions of Jim Gordon, sir?     Seriously though, he did some fine work for the Boys.  I just realized that's him pounding away on I'm Waiting For The Day.

I agree about the Monkees too.  For me, one of the coolest things about that band was the way they staged their rebellion (largely at Mike's urging) and seized control of their musical destiny on Headquarters (not to mention the subversive self parody of Head!).  Yes, a lot of people still buy the pre-fab myth, but fortunately, the Monkees have a strong and devoted following out there, counteracting the misinformation (as we see on the Hoffman board regularly).

I listened, and I don't understood a word in 09:11
"I'm between starting to thinking about...version in next year"

The quote is "...between starting to think about the 50th anniversary next year and the fact that EMI looks like it's being taken over by Universal...everything is a bit 'fluctual' if that's a word."

Yeah, this might explain why they're so non-committal on the subject of future projects.  There are probably several they would like to try, but given the current business realities, who knows how feasible they might be financially? 

I'm definitely still interested in this project.  I've been holding off on trying to 'roll my own' and in some respects, TSS doesn't make it as easy as it could have.  I'm not really an expert when it comes to the technical details, so I'd appreciate the assist.  That Fanmixer's Toolkit sounded like just the ticket for me.

What do people consider to be the best editing software for a PC, particularly for a relative novice like myself?

All of the reasons, in different measure, contributed to the end of SMiLE. While we won't know which, if any, figured most heavily in Brian's decision, I'm sure the combined weight of them was crushing.

I think you've summed it up nicely in your post.  I also liked Bruce's Mt. Everest analogy.  By the early part of 1867, the whole thing became a big albatross around Brian's neck, so he threw it away and pursued a less demanding aesthetic.

And what's next in the reissue program?

No idea!  They kind of dodged that one, actually.  You'd think it would make sense to pick up where TSS leaves of with Smiley and Wild Honey, but since when did the Beach Boys make sense?   

I bet that if the Wrecking Crew guys had any idea -- in the 60s -- how important the records they played on would become, we would have much better documentation. For that matter, folks like Dennis would probably have spoken up more about their actual contributions, too. Few folks realized at the time -- I bet -- that the LA pop music of the 60s would end up taking such a totemic place in our culture.

Absolutely no disrespect meant to the Wrecking Crew guys, but couldn't it just be that at least some of them, being jazz veterans, were just a bit too "snobby" to realize how great some of the pop music they were working on was? I mean, it's not like they were recording with local indie bands... It seems to me that if you're playing on records that literally sell millions of copies, you shouldn't need a time machine to realize that some of these songs just might turn out to become timeless classics.

And haven't we heard some of these musicians say that they enjoyed working with Brian more?  It's not surprising by the time you hit '65/'66.  The stuff he was cooking up for SMiLE was a bit closer to jazz, more challenging and satisfying to work on for pros like that, I imagine.

[He was getting it the way he wanted but when he did he didn't want it.]

Whatever paranoia is, I do not see where it was present at or affected the creation, recording and development of SMiLE either.

I suppose it is possible, the one effect it did possibly have illustrates my interpretation: Fire. He got it the way he wanted it, it got bagged by his feeling about it after he had it. Paranoia, superstitious thinking, he said because it was too scary, but whatever  it was not because he couldn't get what he wanted or couldn't pull it together, it was bagged after he got it together for his feelings about it. Still  after all of our arm diagnosis, pulling it together and knowing how the songs fit to together or obsessiveness or any of the usual suspects weren't the problem. Brian was pulling it together and did know what he wanted with each session and revision [and he spelled it out], the problem was he didn't like it after he did pull it together. He was getting it the way he wanted but when he did he didn't want it. He didn't stop because of any problems putting the songs together he stopped pulling them together. He didn't point to paranoia  or confusion or any of the rest as the problem. The problem was he didn't like it when/after he did get it. He thought the lyrics were too arty, the music too elaborate, old fashion, scary, they weren't satisfying after the hard work of getting them, he wanted a new mood and approach, all the reason he actually gave at the time. [broken record I]

Can you see why that bolded statement seems a little confusing?  If he wasn't happy with the results, then either he didn't execute properly or the thing he thought he wanted wasn't really what he wanted.  Either way, it suggests uncertainty on the part of the author.

You raise an interesting point with the Fire sessions.  I think that November/December time frame was where SMiLE began to sour and it was effectively dead in the water by the beginning of the year.  Up until that point, things were humming along pretty well.  As you say, he did execute with Mrs. O'Leary's Cow and paranoia that emerged after the fires broke out put a real scare into him, causing him to doubt the nature of the project he'd embarked on with such high hopes only a few months before.  He never regained his confidence in SMiLE and that's where all of the second guessing crops up (going back to Wonderful repeatedly being one of the more baffling examples).

How do you explain what happened with H&V?  He records a dizzying array of diverse sessions--countless different bits, some recycled from other tracks, most of which likely never would have made a finished single (even a two parter).  He labored over that one for two month at no small expense and still he couldn't come up with an edit that satisfied him, apparently.  (We have the possibly apocryphal story of him playing one mix for an acquaintance and then chucking it when that person wasn't enthusiastic.  Personally, I think he was batty because there's plenty of material there for a great track, but that's beside the point!)  So he embarks on another attempt at a single that doesn't come together.  If he was so confident and clear in his vision, why did he spend so much time working on tracks that didn't come together?  To say that he didn't like the results suggests to me that he didn't really know what he wanted in the first place.

Darian is talking about "finished" in terms of the sequence of Smile, not the specific recording in 2004.

I got the impression that he was talking about BWPS there, including bringing in VDP to finish tracks like Worms and Dada (though I don't think this is any kind of slight against TSS at all on Darian's part).  In the eyes of BW and VDP, I think that BWPS is SMiLE, the project brought to completion, and I can certainly respect that point of view.  For me, nothing will ever surpass the haunted magic of those original sessions, fragmentary though they may be.  

I always LOVED that more elaborate vocal intro there (sounds a bit more SMiLE-like to me) and wish that it had been featured on one of the official releases of this song.  I definitely hope that we're treated to more CWTL sessions at some point in the future.

I'm just saying, the history books are what they are, but what standards do we apply to who gets a fair shake in those books? I'd say Jim Gordon hasn't gotten his due, and the morality debate enters into it when we consider whether his actions in later years should affect our perception of his *body of work*, no matter what those actions are or were. There is no right answer, but I'd say in Jim Gordon's case it would be worth considering his work as a drummer and musician on a separate sheet and put it into the historical context it deserves, because he was absolutely one of the best drummers in LA and among the best ever.

Again there is no right or wrong answer, but when should the history outweigh the events of later years?

Jim Gordon was indeed an outstanding musician with a very impressive resume (including great work with The Byrds, Frank Zappa, Steely Dan, Traffic and many more) and I think he's deserving of recognition.  I was surprised to see his name crop up so frequently on the TSS sessionography, since I'd always assumed that it was primarily Hal on drums there.  He committed an unfathomable crime, but while I don't know all of the details about his personal life, I believe he did suffer from acute schizophrenia.  For me, that means that he was probably incapable of controlling his actions.  This strikes me as a somewhat different case than Carol Kaye, who appears to intentionally distort to the facts and then viciously attacks those who attempt to set the record straight.  Since she appears to be of sound mind, she should be able to control her behavior better, but I guess these kinds of psychological questions can get pretty subjective.  I imagine that, in her own mind, she's absolutely right and justifiably defending her legacy.