Mark Linett Billboard Interview About SMiLE

[The Shift]

8ruce mentioned his H&V acetate some years ago on the BBB - yellow - board.  Also stated that he'd added it to the contents of a time capsule being buried beneath the foundations of a building on Hawaii. A Bruce-ism, one hopes!

Yellow  board is probably the best place to grill him about it.

[bsten]

What I would like to have in the box set (if it comes out - we've heard it all before, haven't we... ;/ ) is a dvd where someone explains in detail the intelligent moves of the tracks. Like in "Cabinessence", right after "mellow", where the lead and the banjo intertwines (or how to say it - sorry my English is not so good). I hadn't noticed how clever it was until I read a story about it - or was it an interview in a documentary? Please help...

[Mike's Beard]

Don't we all own the completed version of Cabinessance several times over already? If the set is to be called Smile Sessions then it should only feature what was recorded up 'till May '67. The whole point of the project is to show to the fullest extent what Brian achieved before he scrapped everything. Y'know, to show what could have been possible if it had been released back then. We all know how Cabinessance turned out with overdubs 18 months later, so wouldn't that make it's inclusion redundant?

[lance]

I see what you are saying, and indeed, it will not be a big deal for us if its half-completed. However, in my opinion, bending the rules a little would not be out of order. There are at least reasons to include the 20/20 reasons.

1. It's one of the GREATEST songs of all time. Anybody buying this due to hype who has only be exposed to the hits needs to hear it--the backing track is brilliant, but the vocals versions put it over the top.

2. It will make disc 1 all that more listenable, and I think that this will be a historically important disc, disc one needs to be listenable above all.

Definitely if there isn't a version that would represent a completed version as of 1967 somewhere on this set, I'll be disappointed, and surprised. But I vote, in the interests of overall listenability and commercial and wide-spread critical appeal that it be the completed version on disc 1--which is all we are really talking about, I think we all trust the sessions will be done at least as well as Pet sounds..

I'm split on my druthers regarding Surf's Up. I have never been fully convinced by any Surf's up mish-mash of demo and backing track,(and ditto on Barnyard and other mash-ups I've heard) on the other hand, the casual listener or novice listener won't mind. Also I think the 1971 version just can't be beat what with the CIFOTM tag and all. I would also vote, for reasons of listenability to include the Surf's Up version(and the demo/backing track on one of the other discs. )

[The Shift]

2. It will make disc 1 all that more listenable, and I think that this will be a historically important disc, disc one needs to be listenable above all.

Definitely if there isn't a version that would represent a completed version as of 1967 somewhere on this set, I'll be disappointed, and surprised. But I vote, in the interests of overall listenability and commercial and wide-spread critical appeal that it be the completed version on disc 1--which is all we are really talking about, I think we all trust the sessions will be done at least as well as Pet sounds..

I think you've struck on something there: I suspect that that CD1 might be released in stand-alone form sometime in the future, just as POB was in the wake of its Legacy edition. All the more reason to snap up the limited editions before those tracks go out-of-print.

[Les P]

If we've had this much debate about 2 songs, I can't imagine the discussion that will arise among the individual Beach Boys (mostly Mike, Al and Bruce) when they hear Boyd/Linett's first draft.  Many of us probably have a better idea what exists than they do (because they have real lives and aren't insanely obsessed with a 44-year old unfinished album).

[guitarfool2002]

After writing about "Inside Pop" and Cabinessence, yet again the thought of how amazing the missing/unused CBS footage really was to have captured the Smile scenes in full color...it's overwhelming if you're a fan of Smile to think "what if?" in this case.

Damn, I wish something would break with that case.

[TheLazenby]

I can't believe people are ALREADY planning on making their own tracklists.

People... THIS IS "SMILE"!  If you thought Brian Wilson's "Smile" was the final say, this is the REAL final say!  This is "Smile", as recorded and released by the Beach Boys!  The album everyone's been waiting 44 years for!  No, it's not "complete", but then you can't miraculously go back and make Brian finish it.

You wanted "Smile" to be released, you're getting "Smile".  Period.  This is the absolute final say of how Brian wants it.  PERIOD.

[juggler]

I can't believe people are ALREADY planning on making their own tracklists.

People... THIS IS "SMILE"!  If you thought Brian Wilson's "Smile" was the final say, this is the REAL final say!  This is "Smile", as recorded and released by the Beach Boys!  The album everyone's been waiting 44 years for!  No, it's not "complete", but then you can't miraculously go back and make Brian finish it.

You wanted "Smile" to be released, you're getting "Smile".  Period.  This is the absolute final say of how Brian wants it.  PERIOD.

Uh, sorry, no.  I don't think that there will be a "final say" on Smile until the last Beach Boys fan in the world is dead.   

And even after that, the debate might be continued by robots.

[Dunderhead]

Brian Wilson 2011 is not the same Brian Wilson as Brian Wilson 1966. And Neither of those Brian Wilsons is the same Brian Wilson as Brian Wilson 1967. So I really don't think this will be anything close to a final definite say.

[18thofMay]

Brian Wilson is alive and well he did not die when Smile did. People can say that Brian is not the same, his ex his mates his hangers on.. They have changed too, matured, aged, progressed..Brian did his thing in 66-67. We will hear what he did, we can go and buy it, show our friends and hear it critiqued. the time has come Smile will arrive! Its like january 67

[Mr. Cohen]

After thinking about it more, I'd be happy with "Surf's Up" 1971 if they got rid of that damn organ overdub! That's why I don't like it as much. I think they added the organ to make it fit in with "Tree" & "Til I Die", which both featured strong organ parts, but it was still a mistake.

[brother john]

Brian Wilson 2011 is not the same Brian Wilson as Brian Wilson 1966. And Neither of those Brian Wilsons is the same Brian Wilson as Brian Wilson 1967. So I really don't think this will be anything close to a final definite say.

Quite. Brian began by making beautiful music to soothe his soul; much of his motivation was to do with working through very personal feelings via the medium of music, but with Smile he created this kind of voracious serpent that started to endlessly replicate itself and ended up getting completely out of control, and in this sense it was quite an accurate reflection of (and partly responsible for) Brian's mental/emotional state and his ultimate breakdown.

For me (and this is entirely subjective) I think Smiley Smile is the closest we'll get to a finished Smile: it has many of the elements that he spoke of in terms of humour, has moments of great beauty, and is avant garde enough to interest the intellectually/musically curious (I wish they'd do an official stereo release). So much of Smile is rambling and repetitive, childish and simplistic, and was too far from the place where the great Brian Wilson operated for it ever to be successful (in my humble and very personal opinion).

Yes, there are great things accomplished as part of Smile, both musically and vocally, but how much is genuinely great? Not much.

But having said that, I can't WAIT for the box set!  

[Andrew G. Doe]

Brian Wilson is alive and well he did not die when Smile did.

Indeed.  Brian Wilson is alive and well, and working on a much less ambitious project. 

[buddhahat]

Yes, there are great things accomplished as part of Smile, both musically and vocally, but how much is genuinely great? Not much.

It's tempting to think that it's mythical nature has exaggerated Smile's greatness way beyond the reality of what would've been but Heroes and Villains, Cabinessence, Surf's Up, Wonderful, Good Vibrations, Worms, Child are all solid evidence of its greatness, and that's putting aside a lot of beautiful material such as Barnyard, OMP and The Elements sections that we don't know what he'd have done with.

It may not have been commercially successful had it been released, it may not even have worked conceptually very well, we just don't know, but aesthetically it would've stood the test of time I'm sure. You just have to listen to the verse of Child to get a sense of how awesome Brian's talents were at this point.

Also part of Smile's greatness is now interwoven with it's unfinished-ness - that it's an interactive album: An amazing puzzle with all these little jewels that can be eternally reconfigured.

[Mooger Fooger]

I am in two minds about Cabinessence. When I listen to the track I prefer listening to the 20/20 version. I like it being complete. While I understand historical accuracy falls into play here, I would not be opposed to a mono mix of the track using the 1968 vocal. However, I would like to see it as a remixed _non-synthetic stereo_ vocal. That I could happily and unashamedly live with. An asterix and liner note disclaimer about that track and as far as I'm concerned everything is sweet.

[buddhahat]

I'm in two minds too. I'd be amazed if they didn't use the 20/20 version for the playable album disc though. If Mark is talking about the possibility of recording new vocals for that disc (although I doubt it will come to that) using the original cabinessence has to be a given.

However, if they keep it purely 66/67 that will be sweet. I find the Cabinessence backing track in some ways more incredible without the lead, as you can really focus on those beautiful doing doings. (My kids love it and request 'doing doing' quite a bit!)

I have no problem with Mark doing an Anne Wallace with Surf's Up, and will be interested to hear his mix.

As somebody else mentioned, the only mix that would make my toes curl is if they fly the humble harv vocals in over the barnyard track. That's never worked on any boot. I'd imagine the quality control on this will be pretty high, so hopefully non of it will sound too fan-mixy.

Finally I'm intrigued to think how they might handle H&V for the playable album. The best bet imo is that they just use BWPS as a template for the tracklisting, but maintain the original structure of the songs themselves i.e. don't start trying to do a BWPS mix of Heroes. If they try and remix heroes a la BWPS surely they'd have to fly in bits of Smiley Heroes, there's the difficult transition between Gee and the start of Heroes (the keys don't work) and also how will they segue Western theme into Worms without Darian's 04 link section? What the purple chick mix made apparent to me was that in many instances the original tracks just can't be segued into one another due to key or tempo mismatches - Look into Child is a good example. If they keep the original song structures, then they can just fade without any problems. Of course I'm no studio engineer - maybe they can do the Purple chick mix par excellence in which count me in.

[hypehat]

The BWPS template for H&V is entirely possible if they just get rid of the Surf's Up quote played by the orchestra right at the end. No reason why that can't be left off.


I don't know much about the mentality of the bootlegger, but how appealing is the prospect of returning tapes?

Also the official BW press release, http://www.brianwilson.com/news/press_03-14-11.html in which Al, casual as ever, mentions playing his old Smile acetates just the other day.... You smug git, Jardine 

[Fun Is In]

The BWPS template for H&V is entirely possible if they just get rid of the Surf's Up quote played by the orchestra right at the end. No reason why that can't be left off.


I don't know much about the mentality of the bootlegger, but how appealing is the prospect of returning tapes?

Also the official BW press release, http://www.brianwilson.com/news/press_03-14-11.html in which Al, casual as ever, mentions playing his old Smile acetates just the other day.... You smug git, Jardine 

Interesting how history is related in that official release, beginning w/  "The reason SMiLE did not see a release in early 1967 had more to do with back room business that obscured the creative side of the program than anything else."

[buddhahat]

The BWPS template for H&V is entirely possible if they just get rid of the Surf's Up quote played by the orchestra right at the end. No reason why that can't be left off.


I don't know much about the mentality of the bootlegger, but how appealing is the prospect of returning tapes?

Also the official BW press release, http://www.brianwilson.com/news/press_03-14-11.html in which Al, casual as ever, mentions playing his old Smile acetates just the other day.... You smug git, Jardine 

Wow thanks for the link - hadn't seen that yet.

Great quote about Jardine playing his old acetates. Makes the prospect of unbooted material more promising.

As for following the BWPS template exactly, I'm not so sure. For instance, the newly recorded link track between Heroes and Worms is essential in BWPS as the songs are in different keys, so how would they get around that if they intend to Purple Chick it? Also Child and Look are in different tempos so editing them together has got to be triky unless they pitch shift one of the tracks, but then Wonderful, Look, Child and Surf's Up all have to segue into one another. I'd wager they will use BWPS loosely to structure the thematic grouping and running order of the tracks, but that the internal structure of the songs as indicated from the original sessions will remain.

[Roger Ryan]

The completed backing track to THE CHILD IS FATHER OF THE MAN alone demonstrates why "original intentions" and BWPS-template don't always jibe. I think it would be in the best interest to present an assembly that differs from BWPS so it could have it's own identity. I have no problem with the sequencing arrived at in 2003/2004 - it's different from what was expected, but was very palatable. I agree, go ahead and sequence the original tracks in that order, but allow them to exist as separate entities in the form they were left in '67 when possible. I don't think there's any need to try and stitch them together.

[The Shift]

The completed backing track to THE CHILD IS FATHER OF THE MAN alone demonstrates why "original intentions" and BWPS-template don't always jibe. I think it would be in the best interest to present an assembly that differs from BWPS so it could have it's own identity. I have no problem with the sequencing arrived at in 2003/2004 - it's different from what was expected, but was very palatable. I agree, go ahead and sequence the original tracks in that order, but allow them to exist as separate entities in the form they were left in '67 when possible. I don't think there's any need to try and stitch them together.

That's how I've interpreted what's been said so far. Touch wood...

[Runaways]

i think they'll put it together to make the best album they can.  which is what i want.  To me this means they'll have to include stuff that didn't make it into BWPS.  

[Cliff1000uk]

On the subject of dates, I agree that if the boxset is going to be called, 'The Smile Sessions', then it seems wrong including any tracks, whether vocal or instrumental, that were recorded after May '67

Now....where would the start date be from? AGD's timeline states that the Dumb Angel Sessions started in Sept '66 but obviously the GV sessions started during PS.

Do we assume that sessions for GV won't be included?

Just throwing out a question

[buddhahat]

The completed backing track to THE CHILD IS FATHER OF THE MAN alone demonstrates why "original intentions" and BWPS-template don't always jibe. I think it would be in the best interest to present an assembly that differs from BWPS so it could have it's own identity. I have no problem with the sequencing arrived at in 2003/2004 - it's different from what was expected, but was very palatable. I agree, go ahead and sequence the original tracks in that order, but allow them to exist as separate entities in the form they were left in '67 when possible. I don't think there's any need to try and stitch them together.

That's how I've interpreted what's been said so far. Touch wood...

I'm with you dudes on this but something I was forgetting ...

Let's imagine they use BWPS to structure the tracklist, but keep the internal song structures vintage where possible, that would mean using the alt version of H&V to represent that song, but then you're losing all those cool Heroes sections like Western theme and Gee. I'm not saying I'm for it, but I can see the incentive to re-edit the actual songs to match their BWPS counterparts, certainly as far as Heroes goes. As one of the flagship songs they may want to build a slightly more majestic version than the alt 67 mix, or one that at least incorporates western theme.

Then this leads onto another question: Is it acceptable to create a mix of heroes that uses parts of the smiley version i.e. Sunny Down Snuff?