Upcoming BW interview in Village Voice (June 8)

[desmondo]

Really nice thread going on here

Just a reminder about the recording of BWPS in which Mark Linett has a lot of things to say about Brian's fades and hard edits http://www.soundonsound.com/sos/Oct04/articles/smile.htm and how he approached them

Interestingly they took the same approach on BWPS in terms of recording the sections rather than the songs, I think with the exception of parts of H&V and GV - the details are in the article s I may be wrong

The use of hard edits and fades in Smile are a symptom of the modular style of writing and recording - just a fantastic and new approach back in the day.

As for the 12 banded tracks - fades, hard edits and segues could still have been used within those named tracks - CE and DYLW are good examples and of course GV

[desmondo]

I disagree with you guys...respectfully.

BWPS is faithful to the original vision IMHO. The problem is that folks have not successfully recreated that original vision for themselves...they have not connected with the creator's process.

That's why when Brian says SMiLE was too advanced & inappropriate music to be making his honesty does not fall on empathetic ears.

Yes Bill - I agree

[Roger Ryan]

Re-reading that SOUND ON SOUND article, this passage jumped out at me..

...According to Mark Linett, it was physically snipped off and added to a separate compilation reel (which also included the multitrack master of the track 'Wonderful') so that Brian's brother Dennis could add a vocal. Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968) exist as evidence of this, but the comp reel itself has disappeared.

Is this accurate? Did Dennis record his vocal for "You Were My Sunshine" in '68? Or does the article mean that the mono mixdown was done in '68? Is the article simply wrong and the writer meant that the "Cabin Essence" lead vocal was recorded in '68?

[Micha]

When I said "respectfully" it was meant to salute the manner & style of this thread as well as the posters!

And that's the way I interpreted it. When I said "And I don't mean that ironically" I didn't imply you were ironic when you said "respectfully", I only wanted to make clear I wasn't ironic about it. I'm fond of the manners here too!

[desmondo]

Re-reading that SOUND ON SOUND article, this passage jumped out at me..

...According to Mark Linett, it was physically snipped off and added to a separate compilation reel (which also included the multitrack master of the track 'Wonderful') so that Brian's brother Dennis could add a vocal. Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968) exist as evidence of this, but the comp reel itself has disappeared.

Is this accurate? Did Dennis record his vocal for "You Were My Sunshine" in '68? Or does the article mean that the mono mixdown was done in '68? Is the article simply wrong and the writer meant that the "Cabin Essence" lead vocal was recorded in '68?

..... or was more work done on Smile tracks in 68 but they never made it to 20/20???

[Andrew G. Doe]

Re-reading that SOUND ON SOUND article, this passage jumped out at me..

...According to Mark Linett, it was physically snipped off and added to a separate compilation reel (which also included the multitrack master of the track 'Wonderful') so that Brian's brother Dennis could add a vocal. Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968) exist as evidence of this, but the comp reel itself has disappeared.

Is this accurate? Did Dennis record his vocal for "You Were My Sunshine" in '68? Or does the article mean that the mono mixdown was done in '68? Is the article simply wrong and the writer meant that the "Cabin Essence" lead vocal was recorded in '68?

Hello ?

"Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968)"

Mixes, not recording. Do you see the word "recording" in this sentence ?  I don't see the word "recording" in this sentence. 

[bgas]

Re-reading that SOUND ON SOUND article, this passage jumped out at me..

...According to Mark Linett, it was physically snipped off and added to a separate compilation reel (which also included the multitrack master of the track 'Wonderful') so that Brian's brother Dennis could add a vocal. Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968) exist as evidence of this, but the comp reel itself has disappeared.

Is this accurate? Did Dennis record his vocal for "You Were My Sunshine" in '68? Or does the article mean that the mono mixdown was done in '68? Is the article simply wrong and the writer meant that the "Cabin Essence" lead vocal was recorded in '68?

Hello ?

"Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968)"

Mixes, not recording. Do you see the word "recording" in this sentence ?  I don't see the word "recording" in this sentence. 

Sure I see "recording " twice. Once in each of your sentences; what'syer point? 

[Roger Ryan]

Re-reading that SOUND ON SOUND article, this passage jumped out at me..

...According to Mark Linett, it was physically snipped off and added to a separate compilation reel (which also included the multitrack master of the track 'Wonderful') so that Brian's brother Dennis could add a vocal. Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968) exist as evidence of this, but the comp reel itself has disappeared.

Is this accurate? Did Dennis record his vocal for "You Were My Sunshine" in '68? Or does the article mean that the mono mixdown was done in '68? Is the article simply wrong and the writer meant that the "Cabin Essence" lead vocal was recorded in '68?

Hello ?

"Mono mixdowns of 'Wonderful' and 'You Are My Sunshine' performed from this reel (the latter in 1968)"

Mixes, not recording. Do you see the word "recording" in this sentence ?  I don't see the word "recording" in this sentence. 

Well, I did ask if this meant a mono mixdown was done in '68 as one of the possible options. The oddness of the term "performed" made me question what the writer was getting at.

So...anyway...a mono mixdown of "You Are (Were) My Sunshine" was done in '68, huh? Was this done around the same time that "Cabinessence" and "Our Prayer" were being prepared for release on 20/20? It seems odd that such a short piece would receive additional work unless somebody thought it could work out of context as a b-side or as an album track.

[MBE]

From time to time, The Beach Boys would go back and play or mix something from another project. Carl in particular seemed fond of doing this. I am sure the general idea that something could be used was there, but part of it was for personal enjoyment and/or organization.

[Chris Moise]

I disagree with you guys...respectfully.

BWPS is faithful to the original vision IMHO. The problem is that folks have not successfully recreated that original vision for themselves...they have not connected with the creator's process.

Sigh. According to every source when work was started work on Smile in 2003 it was to be a **live presentation of Smile material**. In other words, the Smile material was arranged or adapted for a live concert. When Brian Wilson was putting in countless hours at Western in 1966 he wasn’t working on how to present the songs for a live concert. I’m not trying to be snarky but can you see the difference?

Think about it...was Brian’s“original vision” to use samples of harpsichord and tack piano sounds triggered from a keyboard instead of a real harpsichord and tack piano? Surely the “original vision” included the voices of Carl, Dennis, Al and Mike right? Did the original vision include the 2004 lyrics for Holidays, Child and the song now known as Song For Children?

I can totally respect the opinion that BWPS is, let’s say, the best thing Brian has ever done but to state it is “closer to the original vision”...I don’t see how anyone can put together an argument for it.

[desmondo]

I disagree with you guys...respectfully.

BWPS is faithful to the original vision IMHO. The problem is that folks have not successfully recreated that original vision for themselves...they have not connected with the creator's process.

Sigh. According to every source when work was started work on Smile in 2003 it was to be a **live presentation of Smile material**. In other words, the Smile material was arranged or adapted for a live concert. When Brian Wilson was putting in countless hours at Western in 1966 he wasn’t working on how to present the songs for a live concert. I’m not trying to be snarky but can you see the difference?

Think about it...was Brian’s“original vision” to use samples of harpsichord and tack piano sounds triggered from a keyboard instead of a real harpsichord and tack piano? Surely the “original vision” included the voices of Carl, Dennis, Al and Mike right? Did the original vision include the 2004 lyrics for Holidays, Child and the song now known as Song For Children?

I can totally respect the opinion that BWPS is, let’s say, the best thing Brian has ever done but to state it is “closer to the original vision”...I don’t see how anyone can put together an argument for it.

Sorry but I'm with Bill on this - for me Brian's vision was a series of songs recorded in a modular way with VDP supplying the lyrics to match the breadth of the music.

Yes there are new lyrics but the original lyrics for Worms and Barnyard were used.

Yes it was originally a live production but quickly developed into a finished Smile

Instruments - the digital stuff didn't exist in 1966 and there was a desire to use proper instruments but Darian and Mark have said the ones they found weren't up to scratch

Yes to using the BB as vocalists but sadly two of them are no longer with us and in 2004 I doubt whether the quality of Mike and Al and Bruce would have matched Brian's band and it appears that in 2004 Brian didn't want to work with them anyway.

For me the 66 Smile would have been different if it had been finished and I don't believe the 2004 performances match those completed in 66 - Brian's band are not the Wrecking Crew or the Beach Boys.

I find it incredibly sad that Smile wasn't finished in 66/67 but am more than happy with the 2004 rendition.

Each to their own as they say

[Peter Reum]

I happen to agree with what Richard said word for word in that last post. There are simply too many factors pointing that way. The music from 66-67 is magnificent, but Smile is a realized vision, not just unreleased music from 44 years ago. That it didn`t happen then is tragic, but that it happened is a triumph of human struggle and ultimate victory over internal and circumstantial barriers.

[desmondo]

I happen to agree with what Richard said word for word in that last post. There are simply too many factors pointing that way. The music from 66-67 is magnificent, but Smile is a realized vision, not just unreleased music from 44 years ago. That it didn`t happen then is tragic, but that it happened is a triumph of human struggle and ultimate victory over internal and circumstantial barriers.

Thank you Peter

[Andrew G. Doe]

I disagree with you guys...respectfully.

BWPS is faithful to the original vision IMHO. The problem is that folks have not successfully recreated that original vision for themselves...they have not connected with the creator's process.

Sigh. According to every source when work was started work on Smile in 2003 it was to be a **live presentation of Smile material**. In other words, the Smile material was arranged or adapted for a live concert. When Brian Wilson was putting in countless hours at Western in 1966 he wasn’t working on how to present the songs for a live concert. I’m not trying to be snarky but can you see the difference?

Think about it...was Brian’s“original vision” to use samples of harpsichord and tack piano sounds triggered from a keyboard instead of a real harpsichord and tack piano? Surely the “original vision” included the voices of Carl, Dennis, Al and Mike right? Did the original vision include the 2004 lyrics for Holidays, Child and the song now known as Song For Children?

I can totally respect the opinion that BWPS is, let’s say, the best thing Brian has ever done but to state it is “closer to the original vision”...I don’t see how anyone can put together an argument for it.

Sorry but I'm with Bill on this - for me Brian's vision was a series of songs recorded in a modular way with VDP supplying the lyrics to match the breadth of the music.

Yes there are new lyrics but the original lyrics for Worms and Barnyard were used.

Yes it was originally a live production but quickly developed into a finished Smile

Instruments - the digital stuff didn't exist in 1966 and there was a desire to use proper instruments but Darian and Mark have said the ones they found weren't up to scratch

Yes to using the BB as vocalists but sadly two of them are no longer with us and in 2004 I doubt whether the quality of Mike and Al and Bruce would have matched Brian's band and it appears that in 2004 Brian didn't want to work with them anyway.

For me the 66 Smile would have been different if it had been finished and I don't believe the 2004 performances match those completed in 66 - Brian's band are not the Wrecking Crew or the Beach Boys.

I find it incredibly sad that Smile wasn't finished in 66/67 but am more than happy with the 2004 rendition.

Each to their own as they say

The third 'movement' didn't exist in any form whatsoever before summer 2003. According to some guy called Wilson. As for "the original vision", I don't doubt for a moment that in late summer 1966 Brian had a general outline in his head, but there's no evidence whatsoever that this was ever refined into a detailed game plan, much less that it was implemented. Ergo, no "original vision" to base BWPS on.

[desmondo]

I disagree with you guys...respectfully.

BWPS is faithful to the original vision IMHO. The problem is that folks have not successfully recreated that original vision for themselves...they have not connected with the creator's process.

Sigh. According to every source when work was started work on Smile in 2003 it was to be a **live presentation of Smile material**. In other words, the Smile material was arranged or adapted for a live concert. When Brian Wilson was putting in countless hours at Western in 1966 he wasn’t working on how to present the songs for a live concert. I’m not trying to be snarky but can you see the difference?

Think about it...was Brian’s“original vision” to use samples of harpsichord and tack piano sounds triggered from a keyboard instead of a real harpsichord and tack piano? Surely the “original vision” included the voices of Carl, Dennis, Al and Mike right? Did the original vision include the 2004 lyrics for Holidays, Child and the song now known as Song For Children?

I can totally respect the opinion that BWPS is, let’s say, the best thing Brian has ever done but to state it is “closer to the original vision”...I don’t see how anyone can put together an argument for it.

Sorry but I'm with Bill on this - for me Brian's vision was a series of songs recorded in a modular way with VDP supplying the lyrics to match the breadth of the music.

Yes there are new lyrics but the original lyrics for Worms and Barnyard were used.

Yes it was originally a live production but quickly developed into a finished Smile

Instruments - the digital stuff didn't exist in 1966 and there was a desire to use proper instruments but Darian and Mark have said the ones they found weren't up to scratch

Yes to using the BB as vocalists but sadly two of them are no longer with us and in 2004 I doubt whether the quality of Mike and Al and Bruce would have matched Brian's band and it appears that in 2004 Brian didn't want to work with them anyway.

For me the 66 Smile would have been different if it had been finished and I don't believe the 2004 performances match those completed in 66 - Brian's band are not the Wrecking Crew or the Beach Boys.

I find it incredibly sad that Smile wasn't finished in 66/67 but am more than happy with the 2004 rendition.

Each to their own as they say

The third 'movement' didn't exist in any form whatsoever before summer 2003. According to some guy called Wilson. As for "the original vision", I don't doubt for a moment that in late summer 1966 Brian had a general outline in his head, but there's no evidence whatsoever that this was ever refined into a detailed game plan, much less that it was implemented. Ergo, no "original vision" to base BWPS on.

Oh well -we will have to agree to disagree - respectfully of course

[Andrew G. Doe]

Oh well -we will have to agree to disagree - respectfully of course

Of course. 

[18thofMay]

Fact, BWPS was put together for a live performance to demonstrate the music and lyrical collaboration between Van and Brian of SMiLE music between 66-03/04.

[Mike's Beard]

Fact. I'm gonna be playing the Smile Sessions boxset a lot more then I do BWPS.

[18thofMay]

Fact. I'm gonna playing the Smile Sessions boxset a lot more then I do BWPS.

You wont be Robinson Crusoe on that either!

[doinnothin]

It's up. http://www.villagevoice.com/2011-06-08/music/brian-wilson-s-songs/

... or at least something resembling an interview is.

[Peter Reum]

The interview has a great narrative of the interviewer`s dad with Brian...the interview itself is only four questions long!

[Chris Brown]

The interview has a great narrative of the interviewer`s dad with Brian...the interview itself is only four questions long!

I enjoyed the narrative immensely, it's quite an amazing story.  The interview was almost an afterthought, but it was worth reading just for that story.

[Bill Tobelman]

Andrew G. Doe said:

The third 'movement' didn't exist in any form whatsoever before summer 2003. According to some guy called Wilson. As for "the original vision", I don't doubt for a moment that in late summer 1966 Brian had a general outline in his head, but there's no evidence whatsoever that this was ever refined into a detailed game plan, much less that it was implemented. Ergo, no "original vision" to base BWPS on.

A few years ago I wrote an article for either ESQ of Open Sky. The article had to do with the 3 part religious experience Brian had-- based upon the Surfing Saints article in CHEETAH!

In the article Brian points to the climax of the experience as the "moment of clear light." His words are "what you really look for is a moment of clear light, it's only happened to me once..." So the basic idea is that Brian's great trip is 3 part in nature. The pre-clear light, the clear light, and the post clear light. This same process in such vague terms must have likely occurred for more than a few people in the sixties. This is a 3 movement process & what I believe BWPS is (on one level of understanding) based upon. Another way to represent this SAME process is along the lines of birth--and death---and rebirth which is the terminology that Brian used to sum his whole life (in the Jules Siegel article). In this way a 3 movement BWPS IS based upon the "original vision."

Brian's explanation for his spiritual music (to Tom Nolan) indicates a singular experience based upon 2 LSD trips.

Peter Reum's documenting of Brian's claim of a 3 movement piece back in the seventies tends to support the 3 movement theory(as well as something along the lines of an original vision).

Also perhaps of note is Arthur Koestler's book The Act Of Creation which is actually two books in one. The 2 book book is based upon 3 levels of creativity which is illustrated across a triptych (some fans may remember Frank Holmes' use of the triptych). In any case this 2 and 3 dynamic is very interesting to note with regard to SMiLE as one can contrast the 2 sided record with a 3 movement live performance. Vega & Tables makes Vegetables.

One element that I believe is in BWPS which is a classical in nature is the Night Journey motif where a hero goes to the depths only to emerge renewed & reinvigorated. On BWPS I find this at the end of movement #2 & the beginning of #3 as well as at the beginning of "In Blue Hawaii." This Night Journey process has the same 3 movement dynamic as does the clear light idea and the birth & death & rebirth motifs. All of these 3 part forms are classic hallmarks of the spiritual religious experience.

Brian Wilson's '66 claim that he was creating "a teenage symphony to God" indicates an original vision for SMiLE and the 3 movement structure of BWPS does not contradict Brian's claim.







 

[Micha]

I fail to see the point in people trying to "prove" that BWPS is not done faithful to "Brian's original vision". OF COURSE it is different to what WOULD have been released in 1967 as "SMiLE". But even if there has been a completely thought out concept of what SMiLE should consist of - and I doubt that, as Brian stated he never came around to decide on a final running order - Brian junked his "original vision", tried to salvage as much of the music as he could and turned it into Smiley Smile.

An important part of Brian's vision in 1966/67 was to compose and record a great album that would stun people, using the musical material and lyrical content that he worked on at the time. Though the 2004 recordings mostly don't sound as good as the 1966 ones, I think he did achieve that with BWPS, and in doing so he was faithful to his vision of a great album - and to the content and what he was trying to say with it.

This is my interpretation: Brian was unable to decide how to assemble the parts of his "original vision" in 1966/67. And these decisions were finally taken in 2003/04. And the result is much closer to his "original vision" than anything we got before, notably Smiley Smile.

Now what I'm interested in is: What was Brian's original vision of "Heroes And Villains"...?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Regarding all these recent interviews with Brian, this salient point should be borne in mind: they were all phoners, everyone got tops ten minutes and it's evident that Brian was in one of his more monosyllabic moods. To me, the most interesting aspect of the whole process is the continuing interest in interviewing someone who is such a notoriously mercurial interview.