New album info (as it rolls out...)

[Mr. Cohen]

Basically, the production reminds of High School Musical or something, and Brian sounds responsible for maybe a quarter or a third of the arrangements (if you include the vocals). Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective. Overall, it's a decent album, but the freaks aren't going to like. Nostalgic old people will probably get a kick out of it, though.

[Zach95]

So, I'm seriously digging Shelter, Strange World, and It Isn't Time more and more.  Strange World is really, REALLY interesting. I'm going to love this album, and I think a lot of critics will too.

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

I think this is the perfect last album, perfectly describes the boys,

A few duds, a few catchy "jinglish" songs, and a few that are the pinnacle of art. This has it all folks, and some AMAZING harmonies.

[Domino]

It seems like Brian wrote The Private Life of Bill and Sue in 2009. This is a translation from a 2009 swedish interview:

Is it easier for you to write music today?
- No, it's really not. I wrote the album That Lucky Old Sun, but nowadays it's a little harder for me.

Why?
- I don't know... I'm not sure I can do it anymore.

Not sure you can?
- Maybe if I really wanted. I have tried my best. By the way, I wrote a song last week called The Private Life of Bill and Sue. It goes like this: "The private life of Bill and Sue. It does not matter what They do." I havn't finished the lyrics yet, but the melody is done.

Brian Wilson begins to sing:
- "The private life ..." I can't do it by heart, but I have it on tape.

[Autotune]

. Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective.

And you base this statement based on...??

[Wirestone]

It seems like Brian wrote The Private Life of Bill and Sue in 2009. This is a translation from a 2009 swedish interview:

Is it easier for you to write music today?
- No, it's really not. I wrote the album That Lucky Old Sun, but nowadays it's a little harder for me.

Why?
- I don't know... I'm not sure I can do it anymore.

Not sure you can?
- Maybe if I really wanted. I have tried my best. By the way, I wrote a song last week called The Private Life of Bill and Sue. It goes like this: "The private life of Bill and Sue. It does not matter what They do." I havn't finished the lyrics yet, but the melody is done.

Brian Wilson begins to sing:
- "The private life ..." I can't do it by heart, but I have it on tape.

Good catch! So yes, smack in the middle of his "five year dry spell," as he put it in the June '11 CBC interview, Brian just managed to write a song one week. I bet you anything that Brian manages to write songs during his periods of "writer's block." It's probably just not as frequent or fulfilling as the periods when he's inspired every day.

. Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective.

And you base this statement based on...??

Thank you for the note of skepticism there. From the sound of the record so far, I'd say Brian was much more directly involved in terms of arrangement and production than he was for "Imagination." The songwriting is harder to tell, but all but a couple of the songs sound like his creations to me.

[drbeachboy]

. Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective.

And you base this statement based on...??

Dada, tell us about a 1/4 of the arrangements too? Is this an inference from what you heard, or do you know for sure?

[Zach95]

It seems like Brian wrote The Private Life of Bill and Sue in 2009. This is a translation from a 2009 swedish interview:

Is it easier for you to write music today?
- No, it's really not. I wrote the album That Lucky Old Sun, but nowadays it's a little harder for me.

Why?
- I don't know... I'm not sure I can do it anymore.

Not sure you can?
- Maybe if I really wanted. I have tried my best. By the way, I wrote a song last week called The Private Life of Bill and Sue. It goes like this: "The private life of Bill and Sue. It does not matter what They do." I havn't finished the lyrics yet, but the melody is done.

Brian Wilson begins to sing:
- "The private life ..." I can't do it by heart, but I have it on tape.

Wow. Great stuff. Glad to hear this, makes me appreciate Sue a little more, I'm excited to hear it entirely.

[Wirestone]

. Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective.

And you base this statement based on...??

Dada, tell us about a 1/4 of the arrangements too? Is this an inference from what you heard, or do you know for sure?

I would seriously doubt anyone except but Brian, Joe and the session musicians know the facts here. And if Joe did that much of it, they certainly wouldn't tell anyone.

[Autotune]

. Songwriting wise, it's hard to say, but probably only a couple songs are completely written by Brian from a chord and melody perspective.

And you base this statement based on...??

Dada, tell us about a 1/4 of the arrangements too? Is this an inference from what you heard, or do you know for sure?

I would seriously doubt anyone except but Brian, Joe and the session musicians know the facts here. And if Joe did that much of it, they certainly wouldn't tell anyone.

Right. Harsh criticism is fine. But enough with the bold statements based on very limited data (or lack of thereof).

Just one thing regardings Brian's alledged writer's block. It's likely that he's less productive than he was 40 years ago. Or that it takes longer for him to finish a song. But, based on the interviews he gives, it's like he calls "writer's block" whichever period that goes by without him writing a new song. If the interview falls into one of those periods (that may last probably a couple days or a week sometimes) he'll clam to be suffering from a writer's block.

[startBBtoday]

Maybe I had very low expectations, but after finally listening to the iTunes previews... this is pretty damn good. I like it more than the BW solo stuff/anything Beach Boys related since at least 1977. Think About the Days, Summer's Gone, Pacific Coast Highway, Strange World, Shelter all sound great so far.

[FatherOfTheMan Sr101]

WHY NO LOVE FOR THE BEST? FROM THERE TO BACK AGAIN?

I love the lyrics

"Don't you understand the words are singing in the wind? I wish we the could get from here to back again!"

The title and the "Da-Da-Daaa" after the lines "Pacific Coast Getaway" are AMAZING. AND THAT FLUTE MAKES ME CRY.

[Ron]

Maybe I had very low expectations, but after finally listening to the iTunes previews... this is pretty damn good. I like it more than the BW solo stuff/anything Beach Boys related since at least 1977. Think About the Days, Summer's Gone, Pacific Coast Highway, Strange World, Shelter all sound great so far.

Yeah man!  Good time to be a fan.  Can't wait for the album, it's going to be excellent.

[Wirestone]

WHY NO LOVE FOR THE BEST? FROM THERE TO BACK AGAIN?

I love the lyrics

"Don't you understand the words are singing in the wind? I wish we the could get from here to back again!"

The title and the "Da-Da-Daaa" after the lines "Pacific Coast Getaway" are AMAZING. AND THAT FLUTE MAKES ME CRY.

I think the cool part of FTTBA is that it has sections -- and the clips we've heard so far has mainly been Al's introductory piece. So it's harder to judge, perhaps, then the rest of the songs. But it does seem very pretty.

[Ziggy Stardust]

Why did Joe Thomas had to enter into Brian Wilson's life... why.

[Matt Allison]

I just listened to the tracks on iTunes. As someone that has used pitch correction software for over 10 years (both Autotune and Melodyne), I have to say that I don't hear any egregious pitch correction on ANY of these songs.

What I do hear is a fair amount of the Eventide harmonizer effect that is commonplace on almost all major label recordings. This is a stereo effect where the left side is pitched down a few cents, say 12, and the right side is pitched up a few cents, say 12. This is then blended with the dry vocal to provide a thickening, chorusy-type effect. It's been used on Mike Love's vocals in the live setting for probably at least 20 years.

I like what I've heard of the album so far. Seems to easily be their best since the L.A. album, and probably surpasses it. That's a rather monumental achievement in my estimation.

[Zach95]

I just listened to the tracks on iTunes. As someone that has used pitch correction software for over 10 years (both Autotune and Melodyne), I have to say that I don't hear any egregious pitch correction on ANY of these songs.

What I do hear is a fair amount of the Eventide harmonizer effect that is commonplace on almost all major label recordings. This is a stereo effect where the left side is pitched down a few cents, say 12, and the right side is pitched up a few cents, say 12. This is then blended with the dry vocal to provide a thickening, chorusy-type effect. It's been used on Mike Love's vocals in the live setting for probably at least 20 years.

I like what I've heard of the album so far. Seems to easily be their best since the L.A. album, and probably surpasses it. That's a rather monumental achievement in my estimation.

You know, something like this is refreshing.  Thanks for the info Matt, I, and I assume many others, appreciate it.  Many people here claim to be experts, many probably are, and many other simply make broad generalized statements like "this is slathered in autotune!" without really knowing what it is/does. 

So what's worse, an Eventide harmonizer effect or Antares Autotune? The fact is, it simply doesn't matter. Some people might be grateful or relieved to hear that auto-tune hasn't been applied to these vocals.  Others might dismiss the idea. Whatever the case, it just doesn't freakin matter.  I guess if the vocals upset you so much that you refuse to purchase the album or whatever, fine.  But that the Boys are releasing a brand new album, full of what seem to be promising new brilliant tracks, then I could care less what program has been used to enhance their vocals.  Auto-tune has become such a dirty word that people associate with modern pop acts that the mere thought of it on a Beach Boys album turns them off.  What if everyone started saying, "Oh, this has Eventide harmonizer effects on it, I won't listen to this".  People would think they were mad.  But for some reason, "Oh I hate this because of the auto-tune" is a justified argument.  Get what I mean?

I guess I'm sort of rambling here, but I'm trying to make a point and I'm having a hard time formulating words for how I feel.  I don't know.  This is going to be a friggin great album.

[monicker]

I just listened to the tracks on iTunes. As someone that has used pitch correction software for over 10 years (both Autotune and Melodyne), I have to say that I don't hear any egregious pitch correction on ANY of these songs.

What I do hear is a fair amount of the Eventide harmonizer effect that is commonplace on almost all major label recordings. This is a stereo effect where the left side is pitched down a few cents, say 12, and the right side is pitched up a few cents, say 12. This is then blended with the dry vocal to provide a thickening, chorusy-type effect. It's been used on Mike Love's vocals in the live setting for probably at least 20 years.

I like what I've heard of the album so far. Seems to easily be their best since the L.A. album, and probably surpasses it. That's a rather monumental achievement in my estimation.

You know, something like this is refreshing.  Thanks for the info Matt, I, and I assume many others, appreciate it.  Many people here claim to be experts, many probably are, and many other simply make broad generalized statements like "this is slathered in autotune!" without really knowing what it is/does. 

So what's worse, an Eventide harmonizer effect or Antares Autotune? The fact is, it simply doesn't matter. Some people might be grateful or relieved to hear that auto-tune hasn't been applied to these vocals.  Others might dismiss the idea. Whatever the case, it just doesn't freakin matter.  I guess if the vocals upset you so much that you refuse to purchase the album or whatever, fine.  But that the Boys are releasing a brand new album, full of what seem to be promising new brilliant tracks, then I could care less what program has been used to enhance their vocals.  Auto-tune has become such a dirty word that people associate with modern pop acts that the mere thought of it on a Beach Boys album turns them off.  What if everyone started saying, "Oh, this has Eventide harmonizer effects on it, I won't listen to this".  People would think they were mad.  But for some reason, "Oh I hate this because of the auto-tune" is a justified argument.  Get what I mean?

I guess I'm sort of rambling here, but I'm trying to make a point and I'm having a hard time formulating words for how I feel.  I don't know.  This is going to be a friggin great album.

No man, it's a sound. Who cares what the name of the software is?

[Landlocked]

I don't think a lot of people--myself among them--dislike things like Autotune because they are associated with vapid pop acts, but because they seem to be used typically as band-aids. Adding an echo, or some delay, or reverb, whatever, is usually done to add a certain dimension to a sound, not to cover up the fact that the sound was bad in the first place. That's my beef with Autotune, and I imagine the beef of many others. If they are honestly using pitch correction for artistic reasons, just like they'd use distortion on a guitar or reverb on vox, more power to them. But if they are doing it because they don't think the Boys' voices are up to snuff any more, then that's pretty lame. In my opinion.

[Zach95]

I just listened to the tracks on iTunes. As someone that has used pitch correction software for over 10 years (both Autotune and Melodyne), I have to say that I don't hear any egregious pitch correction on ANY of these songs.

What I do hear is a fair amount of the Eventide harmonizer effect that is commonplace on almost all major label recordings. This is a stereo effect where the left side is pitched down a few cents, say 12, and the right side is pitched up a few cents, say 12. This is then blended with the dry vocal to provide a thickening, chorusy-type effect. It's been used on Mike Love's vocals in the live setting for probably at least 20 years.

I like what I've heard of the album so far. Seems to easily be their best since the L.A. album, and probably surpasses it. That's a rather monumental achievement in my estimation.

You know, something like this is refreshing.  Thanks for the info Matt, I, and I assume many others, appreciate it.  Many people here claim to be experts, many probably are, and many other simply make broad generalized statements like "this is slathered in autotune!" without really knowing what it is/does. 

So what's worse, an Eventide harmonizer effect or Antares Autotune? The fact is, it simply doesn't matter. Some people might be grateful or relieved to hear that auto-tune hasn't been applied to these vocals.  Others might dismiss the idea. Whatever the case, it just doesn't freakin matter.  I guess if the vocals upset you so much that you refuse to purchase the album or whatever, fine.  But that the Boys are releasing a brand new album, full of what seem to be promising new brilliant tracks, then I could care less what program has been used to enhance their vocals.  Auto-tune has become such a dirty word that people associate with modern pop acts that the mere thought of it on a Beach Boys album turns them off.  What if everyone started saying, "Oh, this has Eventide harmonizer effects on it, I won't listen to this".  People would think they were mad.  But for some reason, "Oh I hate this because of the auto-tune" is a justified argument.  Get what I mean?

I guess I'm sort of rambling here, but I'm trying to make a point and I'm having a hard time formulating words for how I feel.  I don't know.  This is going to be a friggin great album.

No man, it's a sound. Who cares what the name of the software is?

I guarantee numerous people here would be thrilled to hear Autotune is not being used and that would placate them.   

[Zach95]

I don't think a lot of people--myself among them--dislike things like Autotune because they are associated with vapid pop acts, but because they seem to be used typically as band-aids. Adding an echo, or some delay, or reverb, whatever, is usually done to add a certain dimension to a sound, not to cover up the fact that the sound was bad in the first place. That's my beef with Autotune, and I imagine the beef of many others. If they are honestly using pitch correction for artistic reasons, just like they'd use distortion on a guitar or reverb on vox, more power to them. But if they are doing it because they don't think the Boys' voices are up to snuff any more, then that's pretty lame. In my opinion.

So, if they "aren't up to snuff" should we have been satisfied with poor vocal performances?

I personally think they ARE up to snuff, and that the vocal enhancement may have been unnecessary.  I don't mind however. If the performances really were that bad you rather have listened to poor performances?

[bcdam]

I just listened to the tracks on iTunes. As someone that has used pitch correction software for over 10 years (both Autotune and Melodyne), I have to say that I don't hear any egregious pitch correction on ANY of these songs.

What I do hear is a fair amount of the Eventide harmonizer effect that is commonplace on almost all major label recordings. This is a stereo effect where the left side is pitched down a few cents, say 12, and the right side is pitched up a few cents, say 12. This is then blended with the dry vocal to provide a thickening, chorusy-type effect. It's been used on Mike Love's vocals in the live setting for probably at least 20 years.

I like what I've heard of the album so far. Seems to easily be their best since the L.A. album, and probably surpasses it. That's a rather monumental achievement in my estimation.

that Melodyne effect is being used on the high parts of a track like "Isn't It Time" ("isn't it tiiime"), where it's slightly distracting (if you're hoping for more "real" or "raw" sounding vocals). But you don't hear fairly egregious autotune on a track like "Spring Vacation" ("hal-lel-u-jah")? Again, it's a matter of taste and if it doesn't bother you, it doesn't bother you - but it's there...

[Landlocked]

I don't think a lot of people--myself among them--dislike things like Autotune because they are associated with vapid pop acts, but because they seem to be used typically as band-aids. Adding an echo, or some delay, or reverb, whatever, is usually done to add a certain dimension to a sound, not to cover up the fact that the sound was bad in the first place. That's my beef with Autotune, and I imagine the beef of many others. If they are honestly using pitch correction for artistic reasons, just like they'd use distortion on a guitar or reverb on vox, more power to them. But if they are doing it because they don't think the Boys' voices are up to snuff any more, then that's pretty lame. In my opinion.

So, if they "aren't up to snuff" should we have been satisfied with poor vocal performances?

I personally think they ARE up to snuff, and that the vocal enhancement may have been unnecessary.  I don't mind however. If the performances really were that bad you rather have listened to poor performances?

Did you see the QVC performance tonight? Those were live songs, and they all sounded pretty good. They would obviously sound better in the studio, without the aid of any things like Autotune.

Plus, just because vocals aren't perfectly polished, doesn't mean they aren't good. Raw can sound good. Could you imagine Bob Dylan's albums if they had that slick studio quality? OK, Dylan isn't the BB--fair enough. How about Pacific Ocean Blue? How about Love You? I personally would rather hear "rougher" vocals than Autotune'd ones. They are more natural, and therefore more emotive.

[Zach95]

I don't think a lot of people--myself among them--dislike things like Autotune because they are associated with vapid pop acts, but because they seem to be used typically as band-aids. Adding an echo, or some delay, or reverb, whatever, is usually done to add a certain dimension to a sound, not to cover up the fact that the sound was bad in the first place. That's my beef with Autotune, and I imagine the beef of many others. If they are honestly using pitch correction for artistic reasons, just like they'd use distortion on a guitar or reverb on vox, more power to them. But if they are doing it because they don't think the Boys' voices are up to snuff any more, then that's pretty lame. In my opinion.

So, if they "aren't up to snuff" should we have been satisfied with poor vocal performances?

I personally think they ARE up to snuff, and that the vocal enhancement may have been unnecessary.  I don't mind however. If the performances really were that bad you rather have listened to poor performances?

Did you see the QVC performance tonight? Those were live songs, and they all sounded pretty good. They would obviously sound better in the studio, without the aid of any things like Autotune.

Plus, just because vocals aren't perfectly polished, doesn't mean they aren't good. Raw can sound good. Could you imagine Bob Dylan's albums if they had that slick studio quality? OK, Dylan isn't the BB--fair enough. How about Pacific Ocean Blue? How about Love You? I personally would rather hear "rougher" vocals than Autotune'd ones. They are more natural, and therefore more emotive.

No no I agree with you!  I guess I read your post differently than you intended.  I was just saying that I rather have enhanced vocals than poor vocals with bum notes and all.  The Love You argument is tough to make though.  The bum notes and singing in that album add to its charm, but if that was the Beach Boys product released in 2012, I gotta say I would be pretty upset.  Love You is Love You because of its history and charm and uniqueness, but if it was released on June 5 of this year it would have, well, very little of that.  Maybe I feel this way because I wasn't alive when it was released. 

[Landlocked]

I don't think a lot of people--myself among them--dislike things like Autotune because they are associated with vapid pop acts, but because they seem to be used typically as band-aids. Adding an echo, or some delay, or reverb, whatever, is usually done to add a certain dimension to a sound, not to cover up the fact that the sound was bad in the first place. That's my beef with Autotune, and I imagine the beef of many others. If they are honestly using pitch correction for artistic reasons, just like they'd use distortion on a guitar or reverb on vox, more power to them. But if they are doing it because they don't think the Boys' voices are up to snuff any more, then that's pretty lame. In my opinion.

So, if they "aren't up to snuff" should we have been satisfied with poor vocal performances?

I personally think they ARE up to snuff, and that the vocal enhancement may have been unnecessary.  I don't mind however. If the performances really were that bad you rather have listened to poor performances?

Did you see the QVC performance tonight? Those were live songs, and they all sounded pretty good. They would obviously sound better in the studio, without the aid of any things like Autotune.

Plus, just because vocals aren't perfectly polished, doesn't mean they aren't good. Raw can sound good. Could you imagine Bob Dylan's albums if they had that slick studio quality? OK, Dylan isn't the BB--fair enough. How about Pacific Ocean Blue? How about Love You? I personally would rather hear "rougher" vocals than Autotune'd ones. They are more natural, and therefore more emotive.

No no I agree with you!  I guess I read your post differently than you intended.  I was just saying that I rather have enhanced vocals than poor vocals with bum notes and all.  The Love You argument is tough to make though.  The bum notes and singing in that album add to its charm, but if that was the Beach Boys product released in 2012, I gotta say I would be pretty upset.  Love You is Love You because of its history and charm and uniqueness, but if it was released on June 5 of this year it would have, well, very little of that.  Maybe I feel this way because I wasn't alive when it was released. 

Fair enough. Perhaps the "raw" vocals wouldn't work on songs like TWGMTR, but we'll never know I suppose. As far as "Love You," yeah, I agree--it'd be an odd release for 2012.

P.S. I wasn't born when it was released, either