Previously released material on The Smile Sessions?

[Been Too Long]

How about this article from 1966:

New Musical Express,   No. 1036,     18 November 1966

"Meanwhile ... what's Brian doing back at base?"
HOLLYWOOD, Tracy Thomas
While the Beach Boys are rocking Europe, BB-mastermind Brian Wilson, has not been resting on his and their laurels !
This week Brian’s working on the next Beach Boys’ single, another adventure in pop music called “Heroes And Villians,”…

Brian’s also working simultaneously on the next BB album, now entitled “Smile.”
“This LP will include ‘Good Vibrations’ and ‘Heroes And Villains’ and ten other tracks,” says Brian…

November 1966, sure, no doubt it would be on the next album because Good Vibrations had already been released as a single by the time of that article and was becoming a worldwide smash hit song. But when Brian started recording Good Vibrations in Feb '66, was he recording the song for Smile? Unless Tony Asher wrote some Smile lyrics we know nothing about, the answer is no. That was my point: original intent.

Good point. In November 1966, GV (Released in October 10, 1966) was already number one.

Not number one, not until December 10, 1966 according to AGD's site. That week (ending November 18th)  it was number 4, it's first week in the top ten.
But the question was, would Good Vibrations have been a part of the Smile album in '66-'67? According to Brian Wilson in 1966, Good Vibrations was a track on the Smile album.

[BiG GRiN]

How about this article from 1966:

New Musical Express,   No. 1036,     18 November 1966

"Meanwhile ... what's Brian doing back at base?"
HOLLYWOOD, Tracy Thomas
While the Beach Boys are rocking Europe, BB-mastermind Brian Wilson, has not been resting on his and their laurels !
This week Brian’s working on the next Beach Boys’ single, another adventure in pop music called “Heroes And Villians,”…

Brian’s also working simultaneously on the next BB album, now entitled “Smile.”
“This LP will include ‘Good Vibrations’ and ‘Heroes And Villains’ and ten other tracks,” says Brian…

November 1966, sure, no doubt it would be on the next album because Good Vibrations had already been released as a single by the time of that article and was becoming a worldwide smash hit song. But when Brian started recording Good Vibrations in Feb '66, was he recording the song for Smile? Unless Tony Asher wrote some Smile lyrics we know nothing about, the answer is no. That was my point: original intent.

Good point. In November 1966, GV (Released in October 10, 1966) was already number one.

Not number one, not until December 10, 1966 according to AGD's site. That week (ending November 18th)  it was number 4, it's first week in the top ten.
But the question was, would Good Vibrations have been a part of the Smile album in '66-'67? According to Brian Wilson in 1966, Good Vibrations was a track on the Smile album.

"Good Vibrations" number one in UK on November 17th and December 4 1966 in USA.

[BiG GRiN]

Sorry, it was December 10th in USA.

[Jeff]

Exactly, and it becomes another myth to add to the one where someone other than a random house artist at Capitol designed the Smile font for some deeper reason than he thought it looked good.

This was a dust-up I had on another board years ago. I still say this: Good Vibrations was written and started during "Pet Sounds" sessions, and was targeted as a single after Brian nearly gave the song away before being convinced by people like Anderle that it could be a great Beach Boys release to keep for himself.

If "Good Vibrations" was quote *meant to be* on Smile all along, would we suggest Brian officially started recording Smile when he tracked Good Vibrations take one in mid-February 1966? His mind was on Pet Sounds at that time, period. It goes to original intent, no matter where the song eventually ended up on an album or project.

I'm not sure original intent is relevant.  Let's Go Away for a While was supposed to get lyrics originally - does that mean Brian was forced to include it unfinished as an instrumental because he was running late delivering the Pet Sounds album?  Of course not. When Brian started GV there was no Smile (or Dumb Angel).  After it was finished and released as a single, AND became successful, there is every indication it was planned to on the album - just as every successful single (and some not so successful) ended up on an album.  Now if the single had tanked - like Little Girl I Once Knew - maybe it would not have been considered for the album.

I'll play Devil's Advocate for this discussion and ask whether original intent is a song-by-song deal, because discussions a few months ago centered on the Fire-H&V Intro track. As it appeared on BWPS they were joined, and that was the "Fire" element in that section. Yet the argument of original intent was the basis for saying it was a David Leaf creation and not Brian's original intent for the tracks in 1966-67. And thousands of people who didn't own the bootlegs and heard the track for the first time on BWPS now know that track as Fire because that's how it eventually appeared, no matter what Brian's intent would have been.

With Fire and H&V Intro appearing for the first time officially as one track, original intent from 1967 was relevant, but with Good Vibrations it's not?

Wow, talk about apples and oranges.  I think this argument makes it obvious that you're just trollinig.

[guitarfool2002]

Exactly, and it becomes another myth to add to the one where someone other than a random house artist at Capitol designed the Smile font for some deeper reason than he thought it looked good.

This was a dust-up I had on another board years ago. I still say this: Good Vibrations was written and started during "Pet Sounds" sessions, and was targeted as a single after Brian nearly gave the song away before being convinced by people like Anderle that it could be a great Beach Boys release to keep for himself.

If "Good Vibrations" was quote *meant to be* on Smile all along, would we suggest Brian officially started recording Smile when he tracked Good Vibrations take one in mid-February 1966? His mind was on Pet Sounds at that time, period. It goes to original intent, no matter where the song eventually ended up on an album or project.

I'm not sure original intent is relevant.  Let's Go Away for a While was supposed to get lyrics originally - does that mean Brian was forced to include it unfinished as an instrumental because he was running late delivering the Pet Sounds album?  Of course not. When Brian started GV there was no Smile (or Dumb Angel).  After it was finished and released as a single, AND became successful, there is every indication it was planned to on the album - just as every successful single (and some not so successful) ended up on an album.  Now if the single had tanked - like Little Girl I Once Knew - maybe it would not have been considered for the album.

I'll play Devil's Advocate for this discussion and ask whether original intent is a song-by-song deal, because discussions a few months ago centered on the Fire-H&V Intro track. As it appeared on BWPS they were joined, and that was the "Fire" element in that section. Yet the argument of original intent was the basis for saying it was a David Leaf creation and not Brian's original intent for the tracks in 1966-67. And thousands of people who didn't own the bootlegs and heard the track for the first time on BWPS now know that track as Fire because that's how it eventually appeared, no matter what Brian's intent would have been.

With Fire and H&V Intro appearing for the first time officially as one track, original intent from 1967 was relevant, but with Good Vibrations it's not?

Wow, talk about apples and oranges.  I think this argument makes it obvious that you're just trollinig.

Do you want me to reply to that sh*t Jeff? Check my posts before calling me a troll, pal. Not cool at all.

[Jason]

I'll determine who the trolls are here, thank you very much. I see no evidence of trolling here, just discussion. Certainly, the affected/offended parties can PM me to plead their respective cases.

[guitarfool2002]

I'm not suggesting GV was not to have appeared on Smile at all, I'm suggesting GV was already a hit single in spite of Smile and it was originally recorded during Pet Sounds when Brian was working with Tony Asher and was not part of the Smile concept to the degree other Smile tracks are considered. The debate goes back to when some suggested GV appearing on BWPS was the way it always was to be, and that's simply not true as the Pet Sounds memo from 2/66 proves.

[guitarfool2002]

I'll determine who the trolls are here, thank you very much. I see no evidence of trolling here, just discussion. Certainly, the affected/offended parties can PM me to plead their respective cases.

Nothing to plead here, just I don't care for this guy calling me a troll, as it's unwelcome and unwarranted in light of my history of posts in the past year or so. Discussion is discussion.

[BiG GRiN]

I'm not suggesting GV was not to have appeared on Smile at all, I'm suggesting GV was already a hit single in spite of Smile and it was originally recorded during Pet Sounds when Brian was working with Tony Asher and was not part of the Smile concept to the degree other Smile tracks are considered. The debate goes back to when some suggested GV appearing on BWPS was the way it always was to be, and that's simply not true as the Pet Sounds memo from 2/66 proves.

Exactly what I had in mind when I started to talk about GV and SMiLE.

[Jason]

The issue with this board is that if an opinion isn't 100% in agreement with the Brian Wilson-fellating majority (affectionately and collectively known as Brianistas) the poster is considered to be trolling the board. Trust me, I've been there. It's one thing to post utter gobbledegook and be a troll and another to post worthy, if even controversial discussion and be a troll because some misty-eyed Brianista doesn't agree with the opinion.

I seriously think we need to have a troll challenge...if you think someone else is trolling, report it to the mods. If the mods find no evidence of any trolling, you (the one reporting the alleged trolling) are banned. How's that? Everyone wins!

[Jonas]

I heard Mike Love wrote Smile, any truth to this? Pretty sure he did.

[Jason]

TROLL!

[bgas]

I'm not suggesting GV was not to have appeared on Smile at all, I'm suggesting GV was already a hit single in spite of Smile and it was originally recorded during Pet Sounds when Brian was working with Tony Asher and was not part of the Smile concept to the degree other Smile tracks are considered. The debate goes back to when some suggested GV appearing on BWPS was the way it always was to be, and that's simply not true as the Pet Sounds memo from 2/66 proves.

I really don't see why GV being a hit already, discounts it IN YOUR MIND from being an integral part of Smile.
If you check all the recording dates for GV: http://www.esquarterly.com/bellagio/gigs66.html    you'll see that the first one, as "Untitled" was only a week before the memo date, and there were only two more before PS was released; the bulk of the sessions happened AFTER the PS release and in the midst of the Smile recordings( but you know that)
So, again, I'll say Brian's intent was to include it on SMiLE.  

[hypehat]

I heard Mike Love wrote Smile, any truth to this? Pretty sure he did.

Yeah, Brian Wilson would be pumping gas if wasn't for Mike Love!

[Jason]

The California Sound...the Beach Boy sound...the Sound Of Success...THE MIKE LOVE SOUND!

[BiG GRiN]

The California Sound...the Beach Boy sound...the Sound Of Success...THE MIKE LOVE SOUND!

And remember, "don't fck with the formula, never".

[BiG GRiN]

Some brilliant and profound quotes from the head master Mike Love.

"The problem with popularity is that if it gets too popular everybody leaves and goes somewhere else."
Mike Love, 1975

"I am always thinking of those kinds of things when I am writing a lyric--same as I did with 'Kokomo', which was No. 1 in 1988, whereas Brian's solo album came out and didn't have one hit record on it."
Mike Love, 1993

"And one of the greatest things that interested me was that he (the Maharishi) said 'You don't have to give up your Rolls Royce...and forsake all your pursuits of material pleasures...to develop innerspiritual qualities'. That sounded real good to me."
Mike Love, 1968

Wisdom words to meditate...

[Wirestone]

The issue with this board is that if an opinion isn't 100% in agreement with the Brian Wilson-fellating majority (affectionately and collectively known as Brianistas) the poster is considered to be trolling the board. Trust me, I've been there. It's one thing to post utter gobbledegook and be a troll and another to post worthy, if even controversial discussion and be a troll because some misty-eyed Brianista doesn't agree with the opinion.

This really seems beyond the pale to me.

Number one, the post is homophobic. Calling BW fans Brian-fellating is calling them gay -- as a slur. It's not appropriate.

Number two, if pro-Mike sentiment is really so frowned upon, what board have I been reading for the past year? There certainly has been no shortage of Darian-Scott Totten (really?!) analogies, attacks on Van Dyke and insistence that Mike really, sincerely wanted Smile to come out -- his own words and actions of the past 40 years notwithstanding. Let's not even get into the spirited defenses of Mike's subpar TV appearances and relentless shredding of Brian's.

This board has seen the slow defection of many people who are mainly Brian fans, and the ascendance of others who feel the BBs and BW are best understood and appreciated as a band. At that's okay. But to ignore that this shift has happened -- and insist that Mike fans, etc., are still being persecuted by some nefarious cabal of Brianistas -- is to ignore reality.

[Jason]

Dude...you are reading WAY too much into that post. I am by no means even implying that anyone is gay, nor am I even attempting to display any kind of homophobia. And I've used the phrase so many times with no similar response, so the current response to my post comes off as grossly reactionary.

I mean, come on now. That's ridiculous. And I am leaving this topic at that because I am not about to get into any kind of debate about anyone's sexuality on here. It's none of my or anyone else's business AND it's for PMs only.

[SMiLE Brian]

Can't we just all compromise that Brian and Mike are  both important to the music success story known as the Beach Boys. Before the offstage craziness consumed both of them, they were just two cousins wanting to perform in band and make music. That music turned out in the long run as the greatest music ever written. So lets just raise a glass and appreciate the three brothers, cousin, and a friend from Hawthorne California.

[Jason]

Can't we just all compromise that Brian and Mike are  both important to the music success story known as the Beach Boys. Before the offstage craziness consumed both of them, they were just two cousins wanting to perform in band and make music. That music turned out in the long run as the greatest music ever written. So lets just raise a glass and appreciate the three brothers, cousin, and a friend from Hawthorne California.

I'll drink to that. I have ever since I became a fan.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Number one, the post is homophobic. Calling BW fans Brian-fellating is calling them gay -- as a slur. It's not appropriate.

Ummm...it's a figure of speech. He's not saying they are literally providing Brian with oral gratification -_-

[Shady]

Can't we all agree that Mike is a dick, and that's exactly why we love him

[Jeff]

The issue with this board is that if an opinion isn't 100% in agreement with the Brian Wilson-fellating majority (affectionately and collectively known as Brianistas) the poster is considered to be trolling the board. Trust me, I've been there. It's one thing to post utter gobbledegook and be a troll and another to post worthy, if even controversial discussion and be a troll because some misty-eyed Brianista doesn't agree with the opinion.

I seriously think we need to have a troll challenge...if you think someone else is trolling, report it to the mods. If the mods find no evidence of any trolling, you (the one reporting the alleged trolling) are banned. How's that? Everyone wins!

OK, OK, I continue to take issue with the post I complained about, but I will keep that to myself, and will concede that most of that poster's posts are quite a bit better.  In the meantime, I would ask that no banning take place at least until after the Smile set is released (which I guess in Phil Cohen's world would mean I never have anything to worry about). 

[Jason]

The issue with this board is that if an opinion isn't 100% in agreement with the Brian Wilson-fellating majority (affectionately and collectively known as Brianistas) the poster is considered to be trolling the board. Trust me, I've been there. It's one thing to post utter gobbledegook and be a troll and another to post worthy, if even controversial discussion and be a troll because some misty-eyed Brianista doesn't agree with the opinion.

I seriously think we need to have a troll challenge...if you think someone else is trolling, report it to the mods. If the mods find no evidence of any trolling, you (the one reporting the alleged trolling) are banned. How's that? Everyone wins!

OK, OK, I continue to take issue with the post I complained about, but I will keep that to myself, and will concede that most of that poster's posts are quite a bit better.  In the meantime, I would ask that no banning take place at least until after the Smile set is released (which I guess in Phil Cohen's world would mean I never have anything to worry about). 

We might not make it that far!