Smile Box set: Ghost melodies, clues, hints, and new mysteries

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I think he's confident in giving an example to a musician.

But he's not giving the melody as an example to a musician. The parade drummer doesn't need to hear the melody to know what tempo to play. Brian sings the melody in order to check with himself to make sure the tempo fits the melody - he says, "Right, Van?" checking with the other songwriter, to make sure the tempo is right for the song's melody. Again, I think this is pretty clear but let's suppose what you're saying is correct - why wouldn't he sing the melody of the song, rather than, say, make up one?

[Mikie]

Where's the damn Truck Drivin' Man lyrics isolated on the new set(s)?  

[mammy blue]

My two cents - this can't be considered definitive. It just can't. It feels to me like loads of people are jumping in just because this 'invalidates' part of BWPS to their way of thinking, which pleases them in some way.


MattB

Man, that's not a fair thing to say. I love BWPS too, but this melody is so amazing that I just can't believe it's a throwaway. Do you still need a Prior Mandate to hear it?

[rab2591]

It is the melody or it isn't the melody. We will probably never know. And thus we shouldn't jump to conclusions about it. It is irrational to claim that it is definitive...but it is also irrational to claim it isn't.

At this point it is nothing more and nothing less than a melody Brian sings before the take.

[homeontherange]

I think it's obvious that this beautiful melody is part of the original verse melody. It's not complete but it's part of it. "Right, Van?". That's not the kind of melody you just improvise to the session musicians.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

The "new" melody fits the track better and is more fully realised.

Are you kidding? It doesn't fit! That's part of what has caused so much discussion here. And fully realized? We're talking about one-half of a single line of lyric! It's like saying you know how God Only Knows goes by hearing a hobo sing the words "I may not always love you." It's suggestive, sure, but it sure ain't realized.

As far as I'm concerned, the boxset melody is now the definitive melody, for me anyway.

Half of one line of a lyric. Is now the definitive verse melody. Really. Really?

For Me Anyway. AN OPINION. Learn to read

And yes it does fit, very well.

Please don't get so angry when someone posts what they explicitly state is an opinion.

That offends me as much as you were offended by supposed homophobia, seriously.

Respect my opinion and don't be so bloody catty when you read something you don't agree with.

[Wirestone]

For Me Anyway. AN OPINION. Learn to read

It can't be "definitive" if it's half of a line of lyric. Your opinion, however firmly held, cannot change the meaning of words. More broadly applied, this is a serious problem with much of our current culture.

And yes it does fit, very well.

As stated by myself and several others, it does not.

Please don't get so angry when someone posts what they explicitly state is an opinion.

I wasn't angry. I was engaged in vigorous and lively debate. And having a good time, I thought.

That offends me as much as you were offended by supposed homophobia, seriously.

I very much doubt that.

Respect my opinion and don't be so bloody catty when you read something you don't agree with.

I do respect your opinion. That's why I was engaging with it.

[Joshilyn Hoisington]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

[Chris Brown]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

Thanks for that Josh, you've proven that the new melody can indeed fit quite nicely over the verse.

Good points being made all around - my first inclination was that this was a backing vocal/response line to the melody we all know from BWPS, but the more I think about it and read people's insights, I'm really beginning to think it was a snippet of the unrecorded lead vocal.  Of all things for Brian to sing to check the tempo, why would he choose anything but the lead?  And moreover, Josh's earlier point about the BWPS melody being pretty bland by '66 standards makes a lot of sense as well.  The fact that he sang it on the spot with Darian doesn't necessarily mean it's vintage.

[Dunderhead]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

This is so good.

[Wirestone]

I do like it. Interesting.

Now I'd like to hear someone do it as call-and-response.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I do like it. Interesting.

Now I'd like to hear someone do it as call-and-response.

That's might be interesting but a little less meaningful since there is no evidence that the 2004 melody ever existed in 1966.

[Wirestone]

That's might be interesting but a little less meaningful since there is no evidence that the 2004 melody ever existed in 1966.

There is no evidence the 1966 melody ever existed outside of these few seconds at a tracking session.

And for that matter, the fact that aeijtzsche can record a YouTube video of his own interpretation of how the melody could fit is meaningful in only a limited way. It shows how a fit could be accomplished musically. It doesn't mean such a thing was ever written or even attempted in 1966.

[adam78]

i just posted this in another thread then read this one and so fits perfectly in this discussion. my take on the DYLW vocal...

the moment i heard this, i thought, if you follow the timing he sings "once upon the sandwich isles..." you can sing that melody with the rest of the words right through to upon hawaii all in the first line. Drawing out "upon hawaii" and singing it the exact same way they do in BWPS. maybe thats something he remembered in 2004? just start singing the moment the music starts and it works perfectly, isn't rushed and totally in keeping with his descending vocals as per heroes and villains, so it's not even a stretch of an idea that it may have gone like this. of course, who knows?

i think the fact he calls out to van to check and then sings is significant. it's like he's looking for agreement, so strengthens the case to me that he's singing a genuine melody, rather than made up on the spot!?!

[Chocolate Shake Man]

That's might be interesting but a little less meaningful since there is no evidence that the 2004 melody ever existed in 1966.

There is no evidence the 1966 melody ever existed outside of these few seconds at a tracking session.

In other words, there is evidence that a melody existed in 1966 while there is exactly zero evidence to suggest that the 2004 melody existed then. But I appreciate the rhetorical acrobatics that you're employing to try to overcome this.

[buddhahat]

I have to side with Matt B and Wirestone on this one. I'm dubious that the little scatty part Brian sings is the main melody to Worms. It sounds a bit half baked to me and slightly improvised even if it does sort of fit. I think a lot of people underestimate the brilliance of that remembered BWPS Worms melody. Just because it's simple doesn't mean it's not vintage and it syncopates perfectly with the backing track in a way that seems very Smile to me.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

i think the fact he calls out to van to check and then sings is significant. it's like he's looking for agreement, so strengthens the case to me that he's singing a genuine melody, rather than made up on the spot!?!

Of course. And the fact that he's testing the tempo against the melody. I mean, you really have to purposefully bury your head in the sand to think otherwise.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I have to side with Matt B and Wirestone on this one. I'm dubious that the little scatty part Brian sings is the main melody to Worms. It sounds a bit half baked to me and slightly improvised even if it does sort of fit. I think a lot of people underestimate the brilliance of that remembered BWPS Worms melody. Just because it's simple doesn't mean it's not vintage and it syncopates perfectly with the backing track in a way that seems very Smile to me.

OK, but I think the 2004 BWPS melody to Worms is great. I just don't think it's vintage. I never had any real reason to before and now I definitely don't. So where does that put me?

[adam78]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

hahaha... i love it!! this guy is singing it the EXACT SAME WAY I naturally continued the melody myself! can it really be argued that you couldn't fit it when it clearly does...in this form. whether you like it or not is different but the point is...it fits.

[adam78]

if that clip was played back to brian, i wonder what his response would be? i'm sure he'd dismiss it considering past form but imagine if he suddenly went "oh yeah! thats how it goes!" Now that's a question for Mr Linnett surely?

[Wirestone]

In other words, there is evidence that a melody existed in 1966 while there is exactly zero evidence to suggest that the 2004 melody existed then. But I appreciate the rhetorical acrobatics that you're employing to try to overcome this.

These are rhetorical acrobatics? I think of it as common sense.

There's no evidence that the 2004 melody existed in 1966. Quite so. But there's still -- barring new evidence -- no way to know that the half-line sung in this session every amounted to or meant anything else. Some of us wish it did. Doesn't make it true.

Calling to Van could just as easily have to do with a musical question as a lyrical one -- Parks both played on and led some of the sessions, so Brian clearly had him there for purposes other than lyrical checks.

I'm not being contrary for the sake of it, believe it or not. I just think that BB folk have a tendency to rush way past where actual evidence takes them. Check out threads where people are still asking if "Little Red Book" was a Smile outtake. And people still sometimes unhappy at the lack of 15-minute H&V mixes, even though we've never found a 60s-era one. How about that great Smile track "Here Come De Honey Man"?

The point is, someone has to be cautious about this stuff.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

These are rhetorical acrobatics? I think of it as common sense.

Well, that's another rhetorical trick, but moving on:

There's no evidence that the 2004 melody existed in 1966. Quite so. But there's still -- barring new evidence -- no way to know that the half-line sung in this session every amounted to or meant anything else. Some of us wish it did. Doesn't make it true.

Calling to Van could just as easily have to do with a musical question as a lyrical one -- Parks both played on and led some of the sessions, so Brian clearly had him there for purposes other than lyrical checks.

But, of course, neither me nor anyone here is suggesting that Brian is calling on Van to check about the lyrics. To be honest, I've stated this very clearly as have others in this thread, so I can only conclude that you're just making up our position in order to discredit it. The fact is Brian indeed WAS calling to Van with a musical question. I think part of the problem is that you don't quite know what's going on here in this recording. Brian is instructing Jim Gordon on how  fast to keep the tempo. He demonstrates it, says, "Right, Van?" (because he and Van wrote the song together) and then sings the melody in question to make sure it's the right tempo. Now of course it doesn't take a genius to know that if he was indeed trying to make sure the that the tempo was right by singing a melody over it that it would be the actual melody, not a made up one, since a made up one wouldn't tell you anything at all about whether the speed was right or not. He says "Right, Van?" since Van wrote the song with him, and therefore also knows the melody (more so than any other musician in the room) and therefore would be a crucial voice for Brian in terms of knowing how fast or slow the song should go. Now if this isn't common sense, I really don't know what is.

Check out threads where people are still asking if "Little Red Book" was a Smile outtake. And people are still unhappy at the lack of 10-minute H&V mixes, even though we've never found one. How about that great Smile track "Here Come De Honey Man"?

Well, how about this, then? Why don't you try and find one single thread where I am asking a question like that, and then you can come back here and make such a retort. Until then, I'm not interested in having my stance on this devalued because of what other people say.

[Wirestone]

You're quite right about what seems to be going on with Brian and Van Dyke here. I was wrong to suggest that you -- or others -- thought otherwise.

[Les P]

The melody as is fits just fine.  If you start right on the downbeat, and sing it just as Brian does, it fits very naturally, until it goes away.  To wit, with my own interpolative blending:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZYu12MpBqdU

I'm not saying that's how it would have gone, only that it can fit.

Excellent, thanks!  I'm with those who think he was singing the melody, and this seems a very logical way the line ended.  I've always thought the BWPS melody was fine, but this one is more inventive.

[runnersdialzero]

I don't understand how it "doesn't fit". We know there are unused verse lyrics, there may have been more, there may have been words added or omitted to make it fit the melody. We don't have the complete melody. I've still yet to find the complete melody as people are claiming, it's similar in rhythm to the "My Only Sunshine" part if that's what's being referred to, but the melodies are different. Even if they were the same, how many melodies occur twice on two different Smile tracks? Many.

I don't see the evidence in it being counterpoint, and I certainly don't see it as being evidence of something he pulled out of his ass then and there. He sings the melody while going into the verse. I've never heard Brian sing a counterpoint melody or a backing vocal during a tracking session.

Using the BWPS melody as evidence, something that was on a version of the record created 38 years after it was initially started, doesn't make a strong case.

There is no evidence the 1966 melody ever existed outside of these few seconds at a tracking session.

What? You're trying way too hard, at this point. Not trying to be mean when I say that, but there are how many other Smile things that only exist once? Gonna discredit those things, too?