gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 09:05:24 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Upcoming BW interview in Village Voice (June 8)  (Read 35216 times)
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #150 on: June 13, 2011, 02:25:21 AM »

Lately I've left Brian's bio out of the discussion because of your staunch dismissal of it.

Not just me - every major BB commentator since 1991 has dismissed it as plagiaristic rubbish mixed with Landy's 1990 agenda re: the upcoming court case, including a guy called Brian Wilson. It's a deplorable piece of work, as anyone with a working knowledge of The Beach Boys and the literature devoted to them will realise.

Quote
However, if one is to simply consider the 'unconscious' accounts in the book---the 3 LSD trips & the bookstore acid flashback---then the connection process explodes & a whole other layer of meaning is totally brought to life. SMiLE is transformed.

IYHO.  Smiley
« Last Edit: June 13, 2011, 02:27:29 AM by Andrew G. Doe » Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Bill Tobelman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 537



View Profile WWW
« Reply #151 on: June 13, 2011, 05:35:21 PM »

IMHO is right. Those bio based accounts tipped me off that there was something else going on in SMiLE in the first place and it just snowballed from there.

Off the top of my head if you number Brian's LSD trips #1, 2, and 3 and his acid flashback as #4 is goes sort of like this:

Our Prayer = 3
Gee = 4
Heroes & Villains = 2
Do You Like Worms = 1 + 2
Barnyard = 2
Old Master Painter = 3 + 4
You Are My Sunshine = 3 + 4
Cabin Essence = 1 + 2
Wonderful = 3 + 4
Look = 3
Child I Father = 3 + 4
Surf's Up = 2 + 3
I'm In Great Shape = 3
I Wanna Be Around = 3 + 4
Workshop = 3
Vega-Tables = Koestler
Holidays = 3 + 1
Wind Chimes = 1
Mrs. O'Leary's Cow = 2
Love To Say DaDa = 3
Good Vibrations = 3

Of course there are more variables, especially Koestler, but there you go. If you remember Brian's comments to Tom Nolan #2 & #3 were the real inspiration....and there they are: the fire & water elements.

Of course #3 really belongs with each track as it is the reason they all exist in the first place.

I totally understand that this kind of thing isn't for everyone and SMiLE is certainly a big enough piece of art as to accommodate each on their own level (much like many religions do).

I think I've messed up along the way my trying to convince folks that seeing this other level in SMiLE is the way everyone should see it. Sorry about that. I'll just keep the ideas out there so that those who want to take things a bit further might have a better chance to do so then they would otherwise.
Logged

"Connect, Always Connect..." - Arthur Koestler

"No discovery has ever been made by logical deduction..." - Arthur Koestler
Loaf
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 838


View Profile
« Reply #152 on: June 14, 2011, 02:32:17 AM »


I totally understand that this kind of thing isn't for everyone and SMiLE is certainly a big enough piece of art as to accommodate each on their own level (much like many religions do).

I think I've messed up along the way my trying to convince folks that seeing this other level in SMiLE is the way everyone should see it. Sorry about that. I'll just keep the ideas out there so that those who want to take things a bit further might have a better chance to do so then they would otherwise.

Cheers for posting, Bill. I love your interpretations. They really fit with my way of seeing Smile. Keep posting!
Logged
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #153 on: June 14, 2011, 06:03:59 AM »

IMHO is right. Those bio based accounts tipped me off that there was something else going on in SMiLE in the first place and it just snowballed from there.

Off the top of my head if you number Brian's LSD trips #1, 2, and 3 and his acid flashback as #4 is goes sort of like this:

Our Prayer = 3
Gee = 4
Heroes & Villains = 2
Do You Like Worms = 1 + 2
Barnyard = 2
Old Master Painter = 3 + 4
You Are My Sunshine = 3 + 4
Cabin Essence = 1 + 2
Wonderful = 3 + 4
Look = 3
Child I Father = 3 + 4
Surf's Up = 2 + 3
I'm In Great Shape = 3
I Wanna Be Around = 3 + 4
Workshop = 3
Vega-Tables = Koestler
Holidays = 3 + 1
Wind Chimes = 1
Mrs. O'Leary's Cow = 2
Love To Say DaDa = 3
Good Vibrations = 3

Of course there are more variables, especially Koestler, but there you go. If you remember Brian's comments to Tom Nolan #2 & #3 were the real inspiration....and there they are: the fire & water elements.

Of course #3 really belongs with each track as it is the reason they all exist in the first place.

I totally understand that this kind of thing isn't for everyone and SMiLE is certainly a big enough piece of art as to accommodate each on their own level (much like many religions do).

I think I've messed up along the way my trying to convince folks that seeing this other level in SMiLE is the way everyone should see it. Sorry about that. I'll just keep the ideas out there so that those who want to take things a bit further might have a better chance to do so then they would otherwise.

Bill, this is a classic example of your basic problem. You obviously know what you're talking about (much like the people who write the operators manual for, well, pretty much anything these days), but to anyone else, it just looks like you've allotted random numbers to songs by pulling them out of a hat. There's no explanation of why the numbers go where they do. Frankly, it looks nonsensical, and make about as much apparent sense as James Camping's calculations. Why is Prayer" #3 ?  Why is "Worms" 1 + 2 ?  "Because I say so" seems to be the only answer. Care to
elucidate ?
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
theCOD
Guest
« Reply #154 on: June 14, 2011, 07:16:36 AM »


I totally understand that this kind of thing isn't for everyone and SMiLE is certainly a big enough piece of art as to accommodate each on their own level (much like many religions do).

I think I've messed up along the way my trying to convince folks that seeing this other level in SMiLE is the way everyone should see it. Sorry about that. I'll just keep the ideas out there so that those who want to take things a bit further might have a better chance to do so then they would otherwise.

Cheers for posting, Bill. I love your interpretations. They really fit with my way of seeing Smile. Keep posting!

Agreed! Definitely keep those ideas out there. I've been reading your interpretations since I started listening to SMiLE and I've always enjoyed them.
Logged
pixletwin
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 4925



View Profile
« Reply #155 on: June 14, 2011, 07:38:14 AM »

Has anyone else had a conversation with someone who was utterly convinced that man has never landed on the moon, how Nostradamus' prophecies are real, or that Paul really is dead? This conversation reminds me of that.  LOL
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 07:39:12 AM by pixletwin » Logged
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #156 on: June 14, 2011, 07:49:06 AM »

Has anyone else had a conversation with someone who was utterly convinced that man has never landed on the moon, how Nostradamus' prophecies are real, or that Paul really is dead? This conversation reminds me of that.  LOL

True - there are Moon Conspiracy theorists who, were you to fly them there and show them the landing sites, would still say something like "well of course that was only put there just before we arrived"... or more likely, given their essential nature "you drugged me and implanted post-hypnotic memories: it never happened at all". It's on a par with trying to explain to a Little Monster that Lady Gaga is roughly 0.5% as original and edgy as they think she is.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #157 on: June 14, 2011, 09:19:16 AM »

Has anyone else had a conversation with someone who was utterly convinced that man has never landed on the moon, how Nostradamus' prophecies are real, or that Paul really is dead? This conversation reminds me of that.  LOL

True - there are Moon Conspiracy theorists who, were you to fly them there and show them the landing sites, would still say something like "well of course that was only put there just before we arrived"... or more likely, given their essential nature "you drugged me and implanted post-hypnotic memories: it never happened at all". It's on a par with trying to explain to a Little Monster that Lady Gaga is roughly 0.5% as original and edgy as they think she is.

Whoa dude. I was right there with you til you attacked The Lady.
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇
Pissing off drunks since 1978
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 11844


🍦🍦 Pet Demon for Sale - $5 or best offer ☮☮


View Profile WWW
« Reply #158 on: June 14, 2011, 09:37:06 AM »

Quote
It's on a par with trying to explain to a Little Monster that Lady Gaga is roughly 0.5% as original and edgy as they think she is.

LMFAO
Logged

Need your song mixed/mastered? Contact me at fear2stop@yahoo.com. Serious inquiries only, please!
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #159 on: June 14, 2011, 09:40:42 AM »

Has anyone else had a conversation with someone who was utterly convinced that man has never landed on the moon, how Nostradamus' prophecies are real, or that Paul really is dead? This conversation reminds me of that.  LOL

Who are you guys comparing to tin-foil-hatted conspiracy theorists -- those who believe there was remixing done from the multis, or those who say the new "mix" is simply a left-channel faux-mono fake? Because the second option, frankly, seems more improbable to me. Personally, I don't know WHAT to believe, but I keep returning to the Mike Love "over and over" vocals -- they're DIFFERENT, and they're LOUDER on the MOJO single. If Carl's lead vocal tracks are indeed MIA, then my best guess is that some kind of digital jiggery-pokery (CEDAR or some such) has been done to extract some of the parts, so that a new mono mix could be attempted. The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix. No idea what the truth is, but a simple left/right channel extraction doesn't sound like THAT, and I don't think you could get this result (on Mike's vocal or indeed the entire track) with EQ alone. I promised AGD I would stop yapping about this, but I can't HELP it, gol-durnit!
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #160 on: June 14, 2011, 09:47:10 AM »

The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix.

Care to make a small wager ?  LOL
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #161 on: June 14, 2011, 09:59:06 AM »

The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix.

Care to make a small wager ?  LOL

No fair -- you've got cards up your sleeve!   Razz
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: June 14, 2011, 10:00:14 AM »

The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix.

Care to make a small wager ?  LOL

OK, I'll put on my tin-foil hat -- the "over and over" vocals are NEW vocals from Mike, ca. 2011. How's THAT for crazy?
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
The Heartical Don
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4761



View Profile
« Reply #163 on: June 14, 2011, 10:03:52 AM »

The one thing that I've learned over the years is to not believe anything Brian says in interviews.

Hehe. I am suddenly reminded of an interview Brian once (IIRC around the '88 album) gave to an (UK?) inteviewer, might have been in Q Magazine.

Question: 'Brian, how much money did you spend on drugs?'

Brian: 'Oh, $ 100,000'.

I had to change my underpants and shorts after that.
Logged

80% Of Success Is Showing Up
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #164 on: June 14, 2011, 10:25:59 AM »

The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix.

Care to make a small wager ?  LOL

OK, I'll put on my tin-foil hat -- the "over and over" vocals are NEW vocals from Mike, ca. 2011. How's THAT for crazy?

As a famous scientist (Einstein ? Fermi ?) once said, "your theory is crazy - but not crazy enough to be correct"
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #165 on: June 14, 2011, 10:26:30 AM »

The one thing that I've learned over the years is to not believe anything Brian says in interviews.

Hehe. I am suddenly reminded of an interview Brian once (IIRC around the '88 album) gave to an (UK?) inteviewer, might have been in Q Magazine.

Question: 'Brian, how much money did you spend on drugs?'

Brian: 'Oh, $ 100,000'.

I had to change my underpants and shorts after that.

Thing that made me laugh was, he didn't miss a beat.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Mike's Beard
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4265


Check your privilege. Love & Mercy guys!


View Profile
« Reply #166 on: June 14, 2011, 10:32:21 AM »

Come on, Brian probably spent that amount on drugs in 1980 alone.
Logged

I'd rather be forced to sleep with Caitlyn Jenner then ever have to listen to NPP again.
The Heartical Don
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4761



View Profile
« Reply #167 on: June 14, 2011, 11:01:13 AM »

The one thing that I've learned over the years is to not believe anything Brian says in interviews.

Hehe. I am suddenly reminded of an interview Brian once (IIRC around the '88 album) gave to an (UK?) inteviewer, might have been in Q Magazine.

Question: 'Brian, how much money did you spend on drugs?'

Brian: 'Oh, $ 100,000'.

I had to change my underpants and shorts after that.

Thing that made me laugh was, he didn't miss a beat.

Yes. It's an odd combination of being eager to please, provide an answer, and his weird humour...
Logged

80% Of Success Is Showing Up
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #168 on: June 14, 2011, 12:00:28 PM »

Has anyone else had a conversation with someone who was utterly convinced that man has never landed on the moon, how Nostradamus' prophecies are real, or that Paul really is dead? This conversation reminds me of that.  LOL

Who are you guys comparing to tin-foil-hatted conspiracy theorists -- those who believe there was remixing done from the multis, or those who say the new "mix" is simply a left-channel faux-mono fake? Because the second option, frankly, seems more improbable to me. Personally, I don't know WHAT to believe, but I keep returning to the Mike Love "over and over" vocals -- they're DIFFERENT, and they're LOUDER on the MOJO single. If Carl's lead vocal tracks are indeed MIA, then my best guess is that some kind of digital jiggery-pokery (CEDAR or some such) has been done to extract some of the parts, so that a new mono mix could be attempted. The only explanation for the difference in Mike's vocals at the end are (a) they were extracted from the two-track master and isolated, and then dropped back on top of the mix, or (b) the 1966 multis of the backing track DO exist, and the second part of the song (from about 1:55 to the end) is indeed a new remix. No idea what the truth is, but a simple left/right channel extraction doesn't sound like THAT, and I don't think you could get this result (on Mike's vocal or indeed the entire track) with EQ alone. I promised AGD I would stop yapping about this, but I can't HELP it, gol-durnit!
Just a thought on the fold down theory. If Mike's vocal is centered on the stereo version, wouldn't his vocal be raised at least 2db louder?
« Last Edit: June 14, 2011, 12:01:57 PM by drbeachboy » Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #169 on: June 14, 2011, 01:14:51 PM »

Just a thought on the fold down theory. If Mike's vocal is centered on the stereo version, wouldn't his vocal be raised at least 2db louder?

Just performed a quick fold-down on the stereo 20/20 mix, and Mike's vocal is even MORE buried in the mix in the fold-down -- sounds like he's singing from the back of a tunnel. In addition, Carl's vocal is a little more buried too, and it has that fuzzy phasy-ness you get when you fold down a track with ADT'd vocals. On the MOJO single, Carl's vocal is clear and crisp, and Mike's vocal at the end is as prominent as a lead vocal. IMO, the mystery continues.
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #170 on: June 14, 2011, 01:20:34 PM »

Did you try it in Audacity isolating the right or left track and then folding down?
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: June 14, 2011, 01:33:07 PM »

Did you try it in Audacity isolating the right or left track and then folding down?
I'm on a Mac, and the software I use has a "Mixdown" command that does it for me. Even doing it "manually" (reduce levels, copy-and-paste one channel into the other) I get the same results.
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #172 on: June 14, 2011, 01:52:25 PM »

I just isolated the left channel where Mike's vocal is loudest and I come no where close to duplicating the Mojo 45. I woiuld guess it is not a single track fold down in the true sense of the word.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #173 on: June 14, 2011, 01:54:50 PM »

I just isolated the left channel where Mike's vocal is loudest and I come no where close to duplicating the Mojo 45. I woiuld guess it is not a single track fold down in the true sense of the word.

Ummm... exactly how do you fold down a single isolated track ?  Wink
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
seanmurd
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 224


View Profile
« Reply #174 on: June 14, 2011, 02:28:23 PM »

I just isolated the left channel where Mike's vocal is loudest and I come no where close to duplicating the Mojo 45. I woiuld guess it is not a single track fold down in the true sense of the word.

Ummm... exactly how do you fold down a single isolated track ?  Wink

I think drbeachboy and myself are talking about two different things -- he seems to be talking about a single-channel "mono" track (deleting either the right or the left, and saving the result as a mono file), whereas what I'm talking about (traditionally called a "fold-down") is combining BOTH channels into one mono track. I've tried both, BTW, and can't come close to what I hear on the MOJO single.  Grin
Logged

---------------------------
Sean Murdock
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 1.112 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!