Add vocals only where lyrics are of 1960's vintage

[Runaways]

not putting the 68 cabin on disc one would be really stupid i think.  I know we wanna stay historically accurate, but 2 years is close enough.  they're trying to put together a one disc album as best they can with what they got.  NOT putting it on there is almost irresponsible.  i think even brian would give a "what the hell are you talking about" if there was a suggestion of not using that vocal. 

[drbeachboy]

...and Ron, it is not so much about the amount of years as it is about the shape of their voices. Up through Carl's work on Surf's Up in 1971, there is little change in their voices. Three years later though, you start to hear real changes in the voices of Brian, Dennis and Mike. If it is finally decided to use later vocals, then they have to be vocals that match to the 1966 vocal sessions for continuity sake.

[Ron]

^^ You're being subjective again.  It's just your opinion... therefore it's inherently not fair.  The only fair, objective way to do it is to not use anything after the album was abandoned. 


It's not my opinion that they abandoned the album in 1967.  It's not my opinion that they didn't record the cabinessence or Surf's Up lead before they dropped the album.  There's a clearly drawn deliniating line there. 

I like the Live version of Heroes and Villians on that live album they put it out.  Hell, lets mix it into disc 1.   That's my subjective opinion.  Lets put it in there because to me it sounds better, and also, the band still sounded good then! 


















If it's cool to put vocals done years later on the album, then it's cool to put vocals done years later on the album.  Hopefully Mike is recording the lead to "I wanna be around" as we speak. 

[Ron]

May I also point out that just because you don't understand something, doesn't make it Rediculous.  It just makes you stubborn. 

[Ron]

Hey! I just thought of a great idea.  They still have Brian's vocal tracks from the 2004 album, just throw those on there.  OH WAIT, is 2004 past the line we're imagining and making up? 

[bgas]

Hey! I just thought of a great idea.  They still have Brian's vocal tracks from the 2004 album, just throw those on there.  OH WAIT, is 2004 past the line we're imagining and making up? 

Carol Kaye: No, Of course not. That's just your Imagination, Running away With You

[drbeachboy]

Brian 2011 does not sound like Brian 1966. Carl 1968 does sound like Carl 1966. I don't care about time, I care about it sounding consistent. I care that the casual fan gets a chance to hear completed tracks on Disc 1. Disc 1 is supposed to be as close to a completed album, as possible. There will be 3 other discs to have what you want. It is to the point of stupid to go through this exercise.  We all know that it will most likely be want Brian wants anyway. Plus, I'm sure they want all 6 members represented on Disc 1. It is a Beach Boys release. Anyway, like Brian with Smile, I'm losing interest in this subject real fast. Ron, make sure you pass your last post (#54) on to Misters Linett & Boyd. They probably need a good chuckle this evening.

[Dove Nested Towers]

God only knows how fervently I (and everyone here of course) wish that, at the very least, the "Sandwich Isles" lyrics from DYLW, and the "Great Shape" & "Barnyard" vocals in other than Humble Harv form (which I assume is a term for the H & V demo on the Endless Harmony soundtrack), synched to their respective tracks, had been recorded in '66! Stating the obvious, I know, but to paraphrase Dr.Smith, "THE PAIN, THE PAIN...."

[buddhahat]

.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

not putting the 68 cabin on disc one would be really stupid i think.  I know we wanna stay historically accurate, but 2 years is close enough.  they're trying to put together a one disc album as best they can with what they got.  NOT putting it on there is almost irresponsible.  i think even brian would give a "what the hell are you talking about" if there was a suggestion of not using that vocal. 

But we already have the 68 Cabin - I'd rather hear what was the state of the song when the Smile sessions ended.

[pancakerecords]

I am completely against the idea of 2011 vocals being slapped on the old recordings, but something just occurred to me...

If the DID record them, then decided against releasing them, we would be falling all over each other trying to get bootlegged versions of these tracks.

Ironic, no?

[desmondo]

You know what, I'm game for new vocals if they be done well...

You killed the idea right there. 

Nice one and spot on

[Cam Mott]

Mark and Alan will have to define some parameters; it will be interesting to see what they are and how they defined them.

To me the list would define the cd 1 comp. The era would define the sessions sides. In the sessions sides the list would define the bulk also but there would be a seperate collection of leftovers, like HGS, Hoildays, field recordings, skits. The era would end before ILTSDD but it and the other 'tweeners would be near-era bonus tracks.

[drbeachboy]

I know this can all change in a blink of an eye, but really, do not  think that you are going to get Smile as the 2-sided LP as slated in 1967. If it stays 3-sides as now planned, it has to be longer than originally planned. Disc 1 is not only the 1966 Smile tracks, it is also an album presentation of those tracks. I am not going to let myself get hung up over these changes. I'm just going to accept this as the way Brian wants it, now. I don't think he looks at this in the same historical context that a lot of us here do. I know I'll be happy no matter what they do.

[Roger Ryan]

A number of heavier gram vinyl albums getting released these days put less music on each side to increase fidelity. U2's THE JOSHUA TREE (a single album in '87) has now been issued on two discs with three songs per side. Perhaps the SMiLE vinyl will be 39 minutes of music, 13 minutes per side?

[drbeachboy]

That's what I mean. The original Smile track listing on the cover was approx. 28-30 mins of music. I'm guessing they will be expanding on or adding material that may or may not have been on the intended original version.

[Roger Ryan]

That's what I mean. The original Smile track listing on the cover was approx. 28-30 mins of music. I'm guessing they will be expanding on or adding material that may or may not have been on the intended original version.

I was trying to offer you some hope that the release could be closer to the proposed original album length!

Let's try this: the three sides of vinyl may contain no more that 10 minutes of music each...or maybe this SMiLE release will be shorter than FRIENDS and only contain about 7 minutes of music per side of vinyl. 

[bgas]

That's what I mean. The original Smile track listing on the cover was approx. 28-30 mins of music. I'm guessing they will be expanding on or adding material that may or may not have been on the intended original version.

where does the 28-30 come from?( I don't recall any track lengths being listed)  
 I figure 3 to 3-1/2 minutes per selection X 12 which means 36-42 minutes for the original.

[drbeachboy]

That's what I mean. The original Smile track listing on the cover was approx. 28-30 mins of music. I'm guessing they will be expanding on or adding material that may or may not have been on the intended original version.

where does the 28-30 come from?( I don't recall any track lengths being listed) 
 I figure 3 to 3-1/2 minutes per selection X 12 which means 36-42 minutes for the original.

It was just based on a typical LP with an average of 14 to 15 mins per side.

[Jeff]

Pet Sounds was, what, 36 1/2 minutes?  I can't imagine why anyone would think Smile would be shorter than that given the amount of material available.  Remember that most of their earlier albums were so rushed that BW sometimes resorted to using non-music tracks like Bull Session to fill them out.  No such problems with Smile.

Hasn't the consensus been that the technology of the time would have allowed for an LP of up to about 45 minutes without a significant loss in sound quality?

[Chris Moise]

I know this can all change in a blink of an eye, but really, do not  think that you are going to get Smile as the 2-sided LP as slated in 1967. If it stays 3-sides as now planned, it has to be longer than originally planned. Disc 1 is not only the 1966 Smile tracks, it is also an album presentation of those tracks. I am not going to let myself get hung up over these changes. I'm just going to accept this as the way Brian wants it, now. I don't think he looks at this in the same historical context that a lot of us here do. I know I'll be happy no matter what they do.

I could be way off but I get the feeling from the press relese and interviews that Brian might not be that involved with putting this thing together. I'm sure he'll have to sign off on it and may insist on some changes but I don't get the impression this box is "his baby" or anything.

[drbeachboy]

Mark refers to him in the interview. The 3-sided Smile is Brian. I'm sure as they assemble a track listing that Brian will be involved in not only song selection, but sequencing, as well. Unless they go verbatim with BWPS, who else would know better that Mark or Alan could turn to? Brian may not be involved in the day to day work, but he's involved. He has to be. This is his legacy, as well as The Beach Boys, on the line.

[bgas]

Mark refers to him in the interview. The 3-sided Smile is Brian. I'm sure as they assemble a track listing that Brian will be involved in not only song selection, but sequencing, as well. Unless they go verbatim with BWPS, who else would know better that Mark or Alan could turn to? Brian may not be involved in the day to day work, but he's involved. He has to be. This is his legacy, as well as The Beach Boys, on the line.

Really?  I didn't take it that way;  I took it that Alan and Mark would develop what they feel will be the best of everything, and then get the approvals of Brian and the BBs, but without specific input into all of it, unless something just doesn't feel right to someone/ Brian

[drbeachboy]

So this is The Beach Boys Smile as Mark & Alan envision it? That is not what I read in Mark's interview.

[bgas]

So this is The Beach Boys Smile as Mark & Alan envision it? That is not what I read in Mark's interview.

You're probably right, and I disremembered it.