Waves of Love

[Steve Latshaw]

I have been driving around Burbank all afternoon listening to this track.  Amazing! According to the liner notes this was recorded backstage at Merv Griffin resort in Atlantic City by the touring band including Ed Carter, Mike Meros andMike Kowalski... I assume mostly live. That soaring chorus with Al, Carl and Matt in harmony ("I'm sailing... On the waves of love") is now one of my favorite Beach Boys moments... A powerful upbeat track with the band sounding great (especially Kowalski with that kick drum on the chorus). I assume this was recorded the last week of August 1996?
Any other information about this track?

[Alan Smith]

Have a read-up here: http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california

[Eric Aniversario]

Have a read-up here: http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california

Thanks! I had somehow never read that portion of the interview. About the song itself, it's a song i really want to like, but for some reason I just can't connect with it.

[Alan Smith]

It's a great interview and read; good detail about the songs' technical and "what's the song about" perspectives, with the right balance of anecdotal/historical discussion about how the songs came about.  The thanks go to DM Beard - great stuff.

I quite like Waves of Love; it's sorta jaunty and zippy, and I dig the corny dit dits and Carl's impassioned vox on the chorus    

Having said that, lyrically the "Waves" analogy thing is a bit predictable in post 90s BB age - and given the issues Al had with Mike in those days, I'm suprised Al didn't change the Love references - especially the "Love Vibrations" bit, which could well have been drafted by His Bald Eminence.

[Micha]

The remake of it from this decade is way better IMHO.

[Steve Latshaw]

I'm listening to the version on Postcards From California. What is the remake you're referring to?

[HeyJude]

I'm listening to the version on Postcards From California. What is the remake you're referring to?

There are two nearly completely different versions of the song. There are numerous threads from 2012 getting into the nuts and bolts of the differences. I break down the differences in my review of the Japan CD pressing of Al’s album on my blog (linked at the bottom). (Confusingly, the Japan CD offers a third slightly different version of the song as well).

The “CD” version sounds much more like a live soundcheck performance, while the “download” version sounded like a virtual re-record, different key, much more “produced” sounding, and with Carl’s vocal isolated on his bits.

The recording details are still pretty sketchy on exactly who is playing what and when on either version, and why (or if) they intended on issuing two completely different versions of the songs. Dvoskin’s descriptions partly explain, and also make things even more confusing.

[Micha]

I'm listening to the version on Postcards From California. What is the remake you're referring to?

I'm talking about the one that starts with a saxophone. That saxophone is the worst about it. The other one I think starts with a Rhonda riff rip off, IIRC.

[Jim V.]

I'm listening to the version on Postcards From California. What is the remake you're referring to?

I'm talking about the one that starts with a saxophone. That saxophone is the worst about it. The other one I think starts with a Rhonda riff rip off, IIRC.

I know nobody agrees with me, but the saxophone version is totally the "finished" version. No way that this was a soundcheck recording. Just listen to Al's dit-dits later in the song. Or just the general recording ambiance. Whereas on the other hand, the version with the "Rhonda" rip-off organ part definitely sounds like a run through a soundcheck. I'm honestly kinda surprised that version has even gotten released, as it's really rough with Al singing in too high a key and Carl's vocal leaving a bit to be desired. Al's vocal sounds much, much better on the saxophone version, and Matt's (?) vocals combined with Carl's on that version works a lot better.

[Steve Latshaw]

The "saxophone" version on Al's CD sounds like a finished beach boys track. The download version is interesting but sounds unfinished.

[Alan Smith]

I know nobody agrees with me, but the saxophone version is totally the "finished" version. No way that this was a soundcheck recording...

I agree with you, dude - but let's take into account that we're talking about Al Jardine, who can take 20-30 or more years to finish a track, so ya never know...

[Gabo]

Lol about Al Jardine considering Postcard his Pet Sounds

[Micha]

Lol about Al Jardine considering Postcard his Pet Sounds

Why Lol? Maybe Postcard is the best album he'll ever make, just as Pet Sounds is Brian's best?

[HeyJude]

I'm listening to the version on Postcards From California. What is the remake you're referring to?

I'm talking about the one that starts with a saxophone. That saxophone is the worst about it. The other one I think starts with a Rhonda riff rip off, IIRC.

I know nobody agrees with me, but the saxophone version is totally the "finished" version. No way that this was a soundcheck recording. Just listen to Al's dit-dits later in the song. Or just the general recording ambiance. Whereas on the other hand, the version with the "Rhonda" rip-off organ part definitely sounds like a run through a soundcheck. I'm honestly kinda surprised that version has even gotten released, as it's really rough with Al singing in too high a key and Carl's vocal leaving a bit to be desired. Al's vocal sounds much, much better on the saxophone version, and Matt's (?) vocals combined with Carl's on that version works a lot better.

I don’t think either version of the song is a pure, undubbed soundcheck recording. Both versions clearly have had additional overdubs/work done.

But the ambience of the “saxophone” version (aka the “CD” version) sounds very much like a live, recorded-on-stage recording. The lineup of instruments also sounds much more like something that could have come from the live touring lineup at that time, complete with Richie Cannata saxophone. Also, while Dvoskin’s comments kind of make things more confusing, one thing that does make sense is that he says the initial extant recording they first had available had Carl’s vocal locked on the same track/mix as Matt Jardine’s voice. This totally lines up with the “CD” version of the song, where Carl’s voice is buried in the mix with other voices. Clearly at some stage, I would guess pretty early on, Al added some stacked background “dit dit” vocals. But this recording does not have any aural evidence of 2010-era mass overdubs.

Conversely, the “download” version sounds much more up-front, dry, and sounds nothing like an on-stage track. The sax is nowhere to be heard, there is more polished slide guitar work, and a lot of the guitar work sounds very dry and up front. Also, if you’ve heard the “alternate mix” on the Japan SHM CD, you’ll hear that it is the “download” version minus some of Al’s vocals (and I think it also is missing the very beginning of the intro). This also lines up with the “download” version being the later version, as Al later added the “but to keep it fresh….”  vocal line. I think some weird stuff was going on with this recording, as the song is indeed in a different key. Al does have a bit more difficulty on this version staying in that higher key, but I don’t think that indicates anything other than they changed the key on the later version. Al’s voice sounds younger on the “CD” version than this download version as well, strongly suggesting there is indeed a 15-plus year gap. We know for sure that in the 2010-ish timeframe a lot more overdubs were added to the song, as Matt Jardine posted online mentioned a new vocal session, and this “download” version sounds much more like it benefitted from a big group background vocal session. Also, on this version we now have Carl’s voice isolated and up front, and I wonder if they changed the key of the song partly to accommodate Carl’s now-isolated vocal in the key that Carl’s pulled-apart harmony vocal now fit best into. It appears that they either discovered the multi-track with Carl’s isolated vocal by this stage, or somehow digitally manipulated the old recording to isolate Carl’s voice. There’s something kind of wonky-sounding about Carl’s voice on the recording, so I’m not sure if that has something to do with it.

The big question to me is if they actually intended to issue two completely different versions of the song. I’ve sometimes wondered if Al had the two versions, the earlier version and the newer, more overdubbed “finished” version, and then at the eleventh hour swapped the newer version out for the older version because he was still hoping he could use the “newer” version as the basis for the Beach Boys version he was lobbying to record. I suppose in this scenario, somehow they inadvertently left the newer version on the “download” version of Al’s album.

Further confusing things is that it is the “download” version, my proposed “later” version, that replaces the “CD” version on the Japan SHM CD pressing (and then the additional bonus track consists of that same version, with the mix differences mentioned earlier). This suggests a pretty deliberate release of that later “download” version rather than an accidental release, though.

[Micha]

HeyJude, my impression on these two versions is exactly the other way round...

[Eric Aniversario]

Perhaps someone on this board with the know how could create a new version using the strengths of each existing version?

[startBBtoday]

I feel like everyone's who's discussing this track is kind of ignoring this: http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california

[startBBtoday]

HeyJude, my impression on these two versions is exactly the other way round...

I'm with you Micha and this (http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california) backs that up completley. They don't have Carl's isolated vocal anymore, so the version that starts with the Rhonda/CG rip has got to be the old version.

The saxophone version is the new one. Once again, that link backs that up. It has the Matt/Carl vocals, the sax, the dit dits, etc.. On the new version:

"With a “fresh coat” of musical paint provided by myself (production wise), and my musical team in Boston (Nate Christy and Taylor Barefoot), the song has evolved into a crisp modern sounding record with all the good feelings and innocence of a classic Beach Boys sound. Richie Cannata’s blazing sax is like a call to action right off the bat, and with the recent “Bringing Saxy Back” press about Lady Gaga and Katy Perry both having hits with the sax, the instrument is back in vogue as never before."

I'm not sure how this is really being debated. The sax was recorded in Larry Dvoskin's New York apartment. The sax version sounds crisper because Dvorskin spruced it up with his crew.

[startBBtoday]

Also, Waves of Love absolutely should have been on TWGMTR, though if the rest of the band (aka Brian) heard the version with no saxophone, it sounds too much like a Rhonda/California Girls retread. Starting with the sax somehow completely eliminates that for me.

[HeyJude]

HeyJude, my impression on these two versions is exactly the other way round...

I'm with you Micha and this (http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california) backs that up completley. They don't have Carl's isolated vocal anymore, so the version that starts with the Rhonda/CG rip has got to be the old version.

The saxophone version is the new one. Once again, that link backs that up. It has the Matt/Carl vocals, the sax, the dit dits, etc.. On the new version:

Here’s where some of the confusion may lie: Looking at these two “versions” of the song, apparently we can all agree they sound vastly different. They have little in common beyond apparently use of Carl’s vocal track. But calling one version “old” and one “new” may be confusing things. Here’s what I think: Both versions of the song have had recent recording and/or mixing. Makes sense, since both versions have been issued. They were/have been both considered for latter-day release. The question is why do they sound so different?

I think they first went back to the extant recording they had. Dvoskin says "at the moment that vocal has been misplaced somewhere.”

I think they found a rough mix of the version from the 90’s, with Carl and Matt’s voices locked together and Cannata’s saxophone, and first tackled “finishing” that version of the song.  

At some point after that, they must have found the multitrack with Carl’s isolated voice, and then tackled virtually re-recording the song around Carl’s vocal. Different key, much more up-front, dry instruments and mixing.

Have you heard the alternate mix on the Japan SHM CD pressing? It clearly adds extra evidence that the version without sax, the version with the "Rhonda" organ intro, is a later recording and later mix of the song. That alternate mix features missing elements found on the standard version, including Al's lead on the "keep it fresh" line. Clearly, *after* that mix was done, additional work was done on it. You can even heard a slight difference in the recording quality and timbre of Al's voice on the "keep it fresh" line. This "version" of the song clearly had recent overdubs added. Why would they add recent, new overdubs to the "old" version of the song?

More than anything else though, my experience with recording technology and studying recordings including live and studio BB recordings, tells me that the version without sax is a newer recording, and has little to no elements used from any live, on-stage recording (I would wager Carl's vocal is the only prominent thing left), whereas the other version with sax sounds much more like an on-stage recording (the recording is less dry, sounds much more like something recorded on stage in a hall).

I like both versions of the song, but there is absolutely no way that the version without sax is the "old" version. Everything about the version with sax screams rough/early, whatever you want to call it. It even meanders to its end. The version without sax has a more tight arrangement.

Again, the big question is why two vastly different versions exist, and also why both versions were released. My only guesses are:

1.   They intended to issue both versions simply to offer two variations.
2.   They didn’t intend for the more polished, updated, non-sax version to be issued because perhaps at the eleventh hour they wanted to use that version as the basis for the Beach Boys recording.

Another possibility, again suggested by the shuffling of two different versions being released in 2012, is that the “sax” recording is older, then they did the virtual re-record with the “Rhonda” organ intro, and then after that still went back to the “sax” version and took a stab at polishing that version up.

But as I’ve said before, Dvoskin’s comments confuse as much as they explain. There’s nothing modern or crisp-sounding about the version with the sax. I like both versions, truly. But I can say objectively, regardless of which version one prefers, that the version without the sax and with the “Rhonda” organ intro sounds like a more modern, crisp recording sonically.

[startBBtoday]

HeyJude, my impression on these two versions is exactly the other way round...

I'm with you Micha and this (http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california) backs that up completley. They don't have Carl's isolated vocal anymore, so the version that starts with the Rhonda/CG rip has got to be the old version.

The saxophone version is the new one. Once again, that link backs that up. It has the Matt/Carl vocals, the sax, the dit dits, etc.. On the new version:

Here’s where some of the confusion may lie: Looking at these two “versions” of the song, apparently we can all agree they sound vastly different. They have little in common beyond apparently use of Carl’s vocal track. But calling one version “old” and one “new” may be confusing things. Here’s what I think: Both versions of the song have had recent recording and/or mixing. Makes sense, since both versions have been issued. They were/have been both considered for latter-day release. The question is why do they sound so different?

I think they first went back to the extant recording they had. Dvoskin says "at the moment that vocal has been misplaced somewhere.”

I think they found a rough mix of the version from the 90’s, with Carl and Matt’s voices locked together and Cannata’s saxophone, and first tackled “finishing” that version of the song.  

At some point after that, they must have found the multitrack with Carl’s isolated voice, and then tackled virtually re-recording the song around Carl’s vocal. Different key, much more up-front, dry instruments and mixing.

Have you heard the alternate mix on the Japan SHM CD pressing? It clearly adds extra evidence that the version without sax, the version with the "Rhonda" organ intro, is a later recording and later mix of the song. That alternate mix features missing elements found on the standard version, including Al's lead on the "keep it fresh" line. Clearly, *after* that mix was done, additional work was done on it. You can even heard a slight difference in the recording quality and timbre of Al's voice on the "keep it fresh" line. This "version" of the song clearly had recent overdubs added. Why would they add recent, new overdubs to the "old" version of the song?

More than anything else though, my experience with recording technology and studying recordings including live and studio BB recordings, tells me that the version without sax is a newer recording, and has little to no elements used from any live, on-stage recording (I would wager Carl's vocal is the only prominent thing left), whereas the other version with sax sounds much more like an on-stage recording (the recording is less dry, sounds much more like something recorded on stage in a hall).

I like both versions of the song, but there is absolutely no way that the version without sax is the "old" version. Everything about the version with sax screams rough/early, whatever you want to call it. It even meanders to its end. The version without sax has a more tight arrangement.

Again, the big question is why two vastly different versions exist, and also why both versions were released. My only guesses are:

1.   They intended to issue both versions simply to offer two variations.
2.   They didn’t intend for the more polished, updated, non-sax version to be issued because perhaps at the eleventh hour they wanted to use that version as the basis for the Beach Boys recording.

Another possibility, again suggested by the shuffling of two different versions being released in 2012, is that the “sax” recording is older, then they did the virtual re-record with the “Rhonda” organ intro, and then after that still went back to the “sax” version and took a stab at polishing that version up.

But as I’ve said before, Dvoskin’s comments confuse as much as they explain. There’s nothing modern or crisp-sounding about the version with the sax. I like both versions, truly. But I can say objectively, regardless of which version one prefers, that the version without the sax and with the “Rhonda” organ intro sounds like a more modern, crisp recording sonically.

I think you might have hit the nail on the head.

It's odd that the non-sax version is newer. Why the hell would they go out of their way to emulate Rhonda with a new, good song?

I like the sax version a lot more. Al sounds better, Carl sounds a lot better, it doesn't sound like Rhonda. The dit dits add a lot. I don't adore the sax, but it doesn't take away anything for me.

[Sangheon]

HeyJude, my impression on these two versions is exactly the other way round...

I'm with you Micha and this (http://www.examiner.com/article/al-jardine-discusses-a-postcard-from-california) backs that up completley. They don't have Carl's isolated vocal anymore, so the version that starts with the Rhonda/CG rip has got to be the old version.

The saxophone version is the new one. Once again, that link backs that up. It has the Matt/Carl vocals, the sax, the dit dits, etc.. On the new version:

Here’s where some of the confusion may lie: Looking at these two “versions” of the song, apparently we can all agree they sound vastly different. They have little in common beyond apparently use of Carl’s vocal track. But calling one version “old” and one “new” may be confusing things. Here’s what I think: Both versions of the song have had recent recording and/or mixing. Makes sense, since both versions have been issued. They were/have been both considered for latter-day release. The question is why do they sound so different?

I think they first went back to the extant recording they had. Dvoskin says "at the moment that vocal has been misplaced somewhere.”

I think they found a rough mix of the version from the 90’s, with Carl and Matt’s voices locked together and Cannata’s saxophone, and first tackled “finishing” that version of the song.  

At some point after that, they must have found the multitrack with Carl’s isolated voice, and then tackled virtually re-recording the song around Carl’s vocal. Different key, much more up-front, dry instruments and mixing.

Have you heard the alternate mix on the Japan SHM CD pressing? It clearly adds extra evidence that the version without sax, the version with the "Rhonda" organ intro, is a later recording and later mix of the song. That alternate mix features missing elements found on the standard version, including Al's lead on the "keep it fresh" line. Clearly, *after* that mix was done, additional work was done on it. You can even heard a slight difference in the recording quality and timbre of Al's voice on the "keep it fresh" line. This "version" of the song clearly had recent overdubs added. Why would they add recent, new overdubs to the "old" version of the song?

More than anything else though, my experience with recording technology and studying recordings including live and studio BB recordings, tells me that the version without sax is a newer recording, and has little to no elements used from any live, on-stage recording (I would wager Carl's vocal is the only prominent thing left), whereas the other version with sax sounds much more like an on-stage recording (the recording is less dry, sounds much more like something recorded on stage in a hall).

I like both versions of the song, but there is absolutely no way that the version without sax is the "old" version. Everything about the version with sax screams rough/early, whatever you want to call it. It even meanders to its end. The version without sax has a more tight arrangement.

Again, the big question is why two vastly different versions exist, and also why both versions were released. My only guesses are:

1.   They intended to issue both versions simply to offer two variations.
2.   They didn’t intend for the more polished, updated, non-sax version to be issued because perhaps at the eleventh hour they wanted to use that version as the basis for the Beach Boys recording.

Another possibility, again suggested by the shuffling of two different versions being released in 2012, is that the “sax” recording is older, then they did the virtual re-record with the “Rhonda” organ intro, and then after that still went back to the “sax” version and took a stab at polishing that version up.

But as I’ve said before, Dvoskin’s comments confuse as much as they explain. There’s nothing modern or crisp-sounding about the version with the sax. I like both versions, truly. But I can say objectively, regardless of which version one prefers, that the version without the sax and with the “Rhonda” organ intro sounds like a more modern, crisp recording sonically.

Hi Thank you for these informations. But I'm confused.

Are there 3versions of this song?These are The CD version,The download version and Japanese CD version,right?
and,which version is this link?
http://youtu.be/hUy9TqulQoU

If I'm wrong,please correct me.

[Micha]

Looking at these two “versions” of the song, apparently we can all agree they sound vastly different.

Yup, we sure do!

Have you heard the alternate mix on the Japan SHM CD pressing?

I'm not sure - I have two mp3s of the non-sax version, they differ one second in length, apart from that they sound the same to me. Can you tell me a time spot where the difference is especially audible?

[Mr. Wilson]

I listened to WOL on that link above me and My My what a cool song.. Carl + Alan's vocals were really nice..!! I think Brian should have put this in TWGMTR..  Just take out the Rhonda riff at the start.. Hope this gets released By BB on a cd that's for sure.. Thank you for the link.. Anybody know why Brian wasn't impressed with this song.?

[JK]

This may be of passing interest:

http://thebeachboys.forumsunlimited.com/index.php?/topic/6654-larry-dvoskin/