Holy Bee returns with latest crackpot theory: SMiLE almost done in Nov 66

[guitarfool2002]

And again, in good faith and in the spirit of the discussion, if someone can produce anything close to a finshed-sounding mix of Heroes or Vegetables, or a version of Cabinessence with a lead vocal, or Child Is Father with lyrics, or Worms with a main melody other than Brian humming a line on a talkback mic, or Surf's Up with a full structure, vocals, and backing track together...any of those made prior to 1967, I'll be more open to the theory it was nearly complete in 1966.  

[Cam Mott]

Maybe I'm catching on. I guess I don't see H&V as modular, just sectional. When he was doing test edits it was from a hand full of select sections that he had already identified as to the sequence [ie. verse, chorus, bridge, part 2, part 3, fade] for the then currently conceived/defined state of H&V. Some parts held over from the previous conception of H&V and some parts recorded new to replace the previous part 2 etc. or recorded or borrowed to replace the previous fade etc.. To me his labeling of all of the parts as to sequence/placement and then there being successive parts labeled for the same position indicates that he never was considering every section for H&V as in play in the then current conception of H&V. He had a defined and identified set of parts for each conceived state of H&V [and Vt]. Something like he had done with GV. Apparently making multiple test edits for multiple conceived states of H&V.

Since there is missing material from the SMiLE era I suppose no one will ever be able to prove or disprove the actual extent of the finished or unfinished state of the album.

[The_Holy_Bee]

"finshed-sounding mix of Heroes or Vegetables, or a version of Cabinessence with a lead vocal, or Child Is Father with lyrics, or Worms with a main melody other than Brian humming a line on a talkback mic, or Surf's Up with a full structure, vocals, and backing track together..."

Here I think we're agreeing more than not. Was Surf's Up backing track fully recorded or leads done for several key tracks? Could finished mixes be done without those recorded? No. But my contention is that in all other respects the album was basically done in November - and as a conception, existed far more solidly than seems to be thought.

[soniclovenoize]

Bumping this cool thread with some of my thoughts, maybe Bee and others can chime in too...

One thing I thought of (that I used on my SMiLE mix) was to somehow explain I'm In Great Shape on the handwritten tracklist... 

We know that Brian wanted a farm/agriculture/barnyard suite with four songs, right?  Well, what could those pieces be?
1) obviously Barnyard
2) I'm In Great Shape definitely has to do with farming & agriculture 

These two are in the same key, and can easily be hard-edited together...  I like Barnyard preceding I'm In Great Shape myself.  We know they both originated from H&V, but so did a lot of things, didn't they?  I see H&V as like the starting point, the GO on a Monopoly board, that created a plethora of musical ideas that at first were meant to be a part of H&V, but as the section was or was not cut, it began a life of it's own...  Barnyard and IIGS clearly were cut, but maybe they were supposed to go together all along, they were joined and became their own separate song called I'm In Great Shape, just like the Sleep A Lot was cut and became Vege-Tables... 

So anyways, that leaves two more...  But we know that Workshop & IWBA was credited as part of I'm In Great Shape on the tapebox.  Many people say that was an error, but can we really say that for certain?  Do we have a primary source, like the engineer who wrote that, saying "Oh yeah, my mistake, that was supposed to be The Elements, sorry!"  I don't think so, because it's just easier to think it can be grouped with The Elements...  "Rebuilding after the fire..."  Who said that?  Was it in jest?  Or should be taken literally?

So if we connect Workshop & IWBA to IIGS, then we suddenly have a complete four-piece suite, fitting the farm/barnyard/agriculture theme.  It comes out to be about 2:00 long (or 2:30 if you extend Workshop, as I did), and might sound something like this:
http://www.mediafire.com/?7fh87z8dryhks4y

Also, assuming this is correct, this construction of I'm In Great Shape might also be a better contender of the Earth element...  Surely a suite about the barnyard and the great shape of the agriculture is more appropriately connected to the earth, than a song about eating vegetables and brushing your teeth?   

[Biggus Dikkus]

I have to agree, sonic. After listening to your mix quite a few times it seems that those songs work very well together and I wouldn't be surprised if that's how they were supposed to go together. I also thought that the comment  "Rebuilding after the fire..." was pretty interesting, do you think that "The Elements: Fire" should precede the "farm/agriculture/barnyard" suite?

[soniclovenoize]

I have to agree, sonic. After listening to your mix quite a few times it seems that those songs work very well together and I wouldn't be surprised if that's how they were supposed to go together. I also thought that the comment  "Rebuilding after the fire..." was pretty interesting, do you think that "The Elements: Fire" should precede the "farm/agriculture/barnyard" suite?

No, I honestly think that was a tongue-in-cheek quip, made in jest (by Carol Kaye, correct?).  I honestly don't think that it would have necessarily been the rebuilding after the 'Fire', especially when the fire could just as easily be burning down the building built in Workshop song (thus making it Workshop --> Fire)...  Or rather, would the 'water' have to put out the fire before they can rebuild (Fire -> Da Da -> Workshop)?

My point of view is that a chronological narrative is and was ignored when Brian was constructing the songs, for the sake of a musical whole.  I know someone recently constructed a H&V that supposedly creates an actual storyline of the pioneer...  But we all know the released version and even the Cantina version is not telling us a traditional story with a narrative.  It was designed to SOUND the best, you know what I mean?

Take my edit of IIGS for example...  Wouldn't it make more sense that the IIGS fragment be first because it's the farmer waking up in the morning and eating breakfast?  And THEN he feeds the animals in Barnyard?  And THEN the workers build a house?  And THEN they go to sleep on a Friday Night?  But if you constructed it that way, it would not sound as cohesive.  I know it's my construction, yes, but my point is that by design, IIGS is a "middle piece."  It needs some sort of introduction--that's why Darian composed one for it on BWPS, based around the Cantina bridge.  As as alternative, I used Barnyard, which could stand as either a "middle piece" or a "beginning piece" you know what I mean?  

My point is that I think you need to look at how the fragments will musically fit together, rather than the chronology of a distinct storyline.  That's why Workshop doesn't necessarily have to follow Fire, because it doesn't necessarily have to be rebuilding after the fire.  It could, but I'd say it better completes the IIGS suite, which in itself becomes "earth" in The Elements.  

[Summertime Blooz]

Bumping this cool thread with some of my thoughts, maybe Bee and others can chime in too...

One thing I thought of (that I used on my SMiLE mix) was to somehow explain I'm In Great Shape on the handwritten tracklist... 

We know that Brian wanted a farm/agriculture/barnyard suite with four songs, right?  Well, what could those pieces be?
1) obviously Barnyard
2) I'm In Great Shape definitely has to do with farming & agriculture 

    I don't remember reading that the so-called "barnyard suite" consisted of four songs. But if we are making the assumption that a Smile track entitled IIGS would indeed have been that famed barnyard suite then we also must assume that it was  an offshoot of H&V. If that's so, wouldn't Fade (TSS 2-28), All  Day, and Do A Lot also be contenders as sections? They all have ties to H&V.
    Full disclosure: I am in the camp that believes IWBA/FN was intended to represent the earth  element

[Beach Head]

We know that Brian wanted a farm/agriculture/barnyard suite with four songs, right?

Do we? Do we really know that? What's the support for it?

This is probably going to come across as heresy, but I've never bought into the idea of a "Barnyard" suite. As far as I know, there's only ever been one mention of it by anyone involved with Smile - and that's a questionable reference in my opinion.

I've been a fan of the group since the 1960s, and over the years I tried to stay current on any and all Smile information that surfaced. To the best of my knowledge, there was no mention of a "Barnyard" suite (as opposed to a single song) in any of the articles and interviews that were concurrent with the recording of Smile. Nor was it mentioned by Carl or anybody else during the press hoopla when there was an attempt to assemble the album circa 1972.

In fact, the first mention of a "Barnyard" suite was in Byron Preiss's book in 1978, when he quoted a single short comment by Brian that mentioned it. My impression at the time - as it has been ever since - was that Brian was confused and mixing up "Barnyard" with the "Elements" suite. (I'd live to hear a recording or see a transcript of Preiss's interview with Brian to try to put the comment in context.) Since that time, I haven't seen any further documentation or support for such a suite - and, let me tell you, I've been looking for it!

Am I wrong? Have I missed something? Or could it be, as I suspect, that there never was a "Barnyard" suite, and we've just been running around like Pavlov's dogs trying to create something to match up with an erroneous off-hand comment by Brian?

Heresy? I'm sure some here will immediately jump to that conclusion, but I'd really love to see some serious discussion of my theory.

[soniclovenoize]

Bumping this cool thread with some of my thoughts, maybe Bee and others can chime in too...

One thing I thought of (that I used on my SMiLE mix) was to somehow explain I'm In Great Shape on the handwritten tracklist...  

We know that Brian wanted a farm/agriculture/barnyard suite with four songs, right?  Well, what could those pieces be?
1) obviously Barnyard
2) I'm In Great Shape definitely has to do with farming & agriculture  

    I don't remember reading that the so-called "barnyard suite" consisted of four songs. But if we are making the assumption that a Smile track entitled IIGS would indeed have been that famed barnyard suite then we also must assume that it was  an offshoot of H&V. If that's so, wouldn't Fade (TSS 2-28), All  Day, and Do A Lot also be contenders as sections? They all have ties to H&V.
    Full disclosure: I am in the camp that believes IWBA/FN was intended to represent the earth  element

Why should we assume it need to be an offshoot of H&V?  Unused pieces from one song would go to another (see Bicycle Rider, see False Barnshine).  The origins of the fragments are incidental...  The question is if it's about a barnyard or not.  

We know that Brian wanted a farm/agriculture/barnyard suite with four songs, right?

Do we? Do we really know that? What's the support for it?

This is probably going to come across as heresy, but I've never bought into the idea of a "Barnyard" suite. As far as I know, there's only ever been one mention of it by anyone involved with Smile - and that's a questionable reference in my opinion.

I've been a fan of the group since the 1960s, and over the years I tried to stay current on any and all Smile information that surfaced. To the best of my knowledge, there was no mention of a "Barnyard" suite (as opposed to a single song) in any of the articles and interviews that were concurrent with the recording of Smile. Nor was it mentioned by Carl or anybody else during the press hoopla when there was an attempt to assemble the album circa 1972.

In fact, the first mention of a "Barnyard" suite was in Byron Preiss's book in 1978, when he quoted a single short comment by Brian that mentioned it. My impression at the time - as it has been ever since - was that Brian was confused and mixing up "Barnyard" with the "Elements" suite. (I'd live to hear a recording or see a transcript of Preiss's interview with Brian to try to put the comment in context.) Since that time, I haven't seen any further documentation or support for such a suite - and, let me tell you, I've been looking for it!

Am I wrong? Have I missed something? Or could it be, as I suspect, that there never was a "Barnyard" suite, and we've just been running around like Pavlov's dogs trying to create something to match up with an erroneous off-hand comment by Brian?

Heresy? I'm sure some here will immediately jump to that conclusion, but I'd really love to see some serious discussion of my theory.

Well, you yourself just said you thought Brian was confused.  How can I argue the logic that you thought he was confused?  

Also, if you're making the claim that this never occurred, and that it all originated from a singular quote that was misinterpreted, an you post the quote please? 

[Chocolate Shake Man]

When you think of it -- if Brian was really desperate to complete the album, Barnyard and I'm in Great Shape would have been perfect choices to shift to The Elements for Earth and Air. Hence any Elements Suite really could be also called a Barnyard suite.

[soniclovenoize]

When you think of it -- if Brian was really desperate to complete the album, Barnyard and I'm in Great Shape would have been perfect choices to shift to The Elements for Earth and Air. Hence any Elements Suite really could be also called a Barnyard suite.

That's true!  And I think we all agree that both suites were sort of a catch-all for the miscellaneous instrumentals anyways.  It's just a matter of which instrumentals "feel" like an element, or a farm.     Do we believe a tape box?  Or do we believe Carol Kaye?  Or can we take both into account and say IIGS includes Workshop, which IIGS itself is the earth part of The Elements?

And of course the flaw in my logic, as is in all of ours, is that The Elements is listed separately from Wind Chimes, IIGS and VT, thus implying that those three are not a part of The Elements at all...   

[Chocolate Shake Man]

That's true!  And I think we all agree that both suites were sort of a catch-all for the miscellaneous instrumentals anyways. 

Well, I'm not so sure about that. First of all, I'm really unconvinced that there was any plans for a Barnyard Suite in 66-67 -- there's absolutely no evidence from that time to suggest such a thing ever existed. I also don't think that The Elements was a dumping ground for miscellaneous instrumentals -- maybe it was never more than Fire, maybe there was going to actually be four pieces that captured the sound of an Element the way that Fire did (and the way that no other song from the sessions themselves have done, unless that "Under water" piece recorded after the Surf's Up session had something to do with it but I doubt it). Maybe all of these things but for whatever reason it didn't happen.

It's just a matter of which instrumentals "feel" like an element, or a farm.    

Well, not necessarily. There should be some kind of historical evidence before we're sure. Keep in mind that Fire was actually referred to as The Elements - a distinction that no other song from that era has.

Do we believe a tape box?  Or do we believe Carol Kaye?  Or can we take both into account and say IIGS includes Workshop, which IIGS itself is the earth part of The Elements?

Well, I think both the tape box and the Kaye comment would need more verification. Right now all the evidence we have seems to suggest that the I Wanna Be Around session was mislabelled. And Carol Kaye...well, I'll just leave it at that.

And of course the flaw in my logic, as is in all of ours, is that The Elements is listed separately from Wind Chimes, IIGS and VT, thus implying that those three are not a part of The Elements at all...   

Yes, because I don't think they ever were and there is no evidence to suggest they were. All I'm saying that is that if Brian wanted to get the album out in a rush in, say, February 1967, he could have pushed Barnyard and Great Shape over to The Elements.

[Phoenix]

I've always felt (check my old posts) "Barnyard (Suite)" referenced by Priess = "The Old Master Painter" from the Capitol list: "Banyard"/"The Old Master Painter"/"You Were My Sunshine"/"Barnshine" and considering that's how they almost appeared in 2004 and fully appeared in 2011, I think my theory proved to be correct.

I suspect the omission of "Barnshine" in 2004 had to do with the three movements idea.  Since "Barnshine" has the feel of definite ending, it would have left "Cabin Essence" as a stand alone track with no real place in the actual movements.

Your mileage may vary but to me it was always a no-brainer.

Similarly, I've long thought (since Endless Harmony) that IIGS = "I'm In Great Shape"/"I Wanna Be Around"/"Workshop" and saw that theory "proved" right with the RAH premiere.  I think the reason for moving the actual "IIGS" segment on the Smile Sessions was to group together most of the pieces that began their life as part of "Heroes And Villains".

[Summertime Blooz]

I meant that the piece from TSS 2-5 'I'm In Great Shape' is plainly identified as being part of H&V. If, later, a seperate track called IIGS is listed on the Capitol memo, I think it's a pretty safe assumption that it could be considered an offshoot of H&V. The Piano Demo (TSS2-36) is further evidence that the two are connected. It's not an established fact, of course, but we're all just spitballing here, and I'm willing to make that rather small leap even if you're not.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I've always felt (check my old posts) "Barnyard (Suite)" referenced by Priess = "The Old Master Painter" from the Capitol list: "Banyard"/"The Old Master Painter"/"You Were My Sunshine"/"Barnshine" and considering that's how they almost appeared in 2004 and fully appeared in 2011, I think my theory proved to be correct.

Maybe, but when was this the case? Barnyard was at least part of Heroes from October 20th to November 4th, when he previewed Heroes, Great Shape, and Barnyard. Maybe by the 14th when there is a session for OMP/Sunshine things had changed but I'm really uncertain with what either of those songs have to do with Barnyard.

Similarly, I've long thought (since Endless Harmony) that IIGS = "I'm In Great Shape"/"I Wanna Be Around"/"Workshop" and saw that theory "proved" right with the RAH premiere. 

Again, I'm really not sure about this either. Again, I'm in Great Shape and I Wanna Be Around are two very different types of songs and, of course, they had to construct a whole introduction for Great Shape because Great Shape from the Smile Sessions doesn't really have a beginning. It sounds more like a section of something else, which makes its inclusion on the Capitol list a real head scratcher.

[Summertime Blooz]

I've always felt (check my old posts) "Barnyard (Suite)" referenced by Priess = "The Old Master Painter" from the Capitol list: "Banyard"/"The Old Master Painter"/"You Were My Sunshine"/"Barnshine" and considering that's how they almost appeared in 2004 and fully appeared in 2011, I think my theory proved to be correct.

I suspect the omission of "Barnshine" in 2004 had to do with the three movements idea.  Since "Barnshine" has the feel of definite ending, it would have left "Cabin Essence" as a stand alone track with no real place in the actual movements.

Your mileage may vary but to me it was always a no-brainer.

Similarly, I've long thought (since Endless Harmony) that IIGS = "I'm In Great Shape"/"I Wanna Be Around"/"Workshop" and saw that theory "proved" right with the RAH premiere.  I think the reason for moving the actual "IIGS" segment on the Smile Sessions was to group together most of the pieces that began their life as part of "Heroes And Villains".

I agree with the first part of what you wrote, but i think IIGS works better paired with Barnyard. But yeah, my current way of thinking  is Barnyard Suite= IIGS (IIGS,Barnyard,Do A Lot,IIGS) + Old Master Painter (OMP, YAMS, Barnshine).

[soniclovenoize]

Well, I'm not so sure about that. First of all, I'm really unconvinced that there was any plans for a Barnyard Suite in 66-67 -- there's absolutely no evidence from that time to suggest such a thing ever existed. I also don't think that The Elements was a dumping ground for miscellaneous instrumentals -- maybe it was never more than Fire, maybe there was going to actually be four pieces that captured the sound of an Element the way that Fire did (and the way that no other song from the sessions themselves have done, unless that "Under water" piece recorded after the Surf's Up session had something to do with it but I doubt it). Maybe all of these things but for whatever reason it didn't happen.

I see what you are saying, but the entire concept of elemental forces are that there are four of them, and how they interact and balance each other out.  It would be absurd to only have one of them...  Haven't you played like any Final Fantasy?   

Also, I don't think it's a stretch to listen to the instrumental pieces and determine if they fit into an element or not...  I Love to Say Da-Da just sounds like a babbling brook...  The way the chords progress and the starts and stops, remind me of a stream of water, flowing down a rocky bed....  And that didn't become a baby babbling until SMiLE was scrapped, right? 

Earth and Wind, yeah, no idea what that could be.  But to my ear, Fire and Water was created.  It could be very possible that Fire was the only one Brian got around to create...  Or at least the only one that was directly labeled... 

Well, not necessarily. There should be some kind of historical evidence before we're sure. Keep in mind that Fire was actually referred to as The Elements - a distinction that no other song from that era has.

See above.  And claiming "well there should be some evidence..." is clearly a cop-out, for a subject where not a lot of evidence exists.  Analysis is required, which is what I assumed this thread was platform for? 

Well, I think both the tape box and the Kaye comment would need more verification. Right now all the evidence we have seems to suggest that the I Wanna Be Around session was mislabelled. And Carol Kaye...well, I'll just leave it at that.

What is the exact evidence that the box was mislabeled? 

Yes, because I don't think they ever were and there is no evidence to suggest they were. All I'm saying that is that if Brian wanted to get the album out in a rush in, say, February 1967, he could have pushed Barnyard and Great Shape over to The Elements.

He certainly could have!   

[The_Holy_Bee]

Wow, interesting stuff since I last checked in. Have been "off the grid" spending some time with my 96 year old grandmother (still living by herself and, somewhat terrifyingly, legally driving) so haven't been able to check in. Even now am grabbing five minutes to check email at the local library, so will have to keep my response brief. Will read through properly and do a full reply when i get back tomorrow.

"I'm in Great Shape" doesn't exist. It was a section of "Heroes" - we know this from the session logs and it's confirmed by the Humble Harv demo - until at least November 4, and after that no work was done on the song ("H & V") until January. Someone obviously decided in December that it should be its own track (I would suspect, but it's just my own hunch, that it's a clearing house of the "H&V" sections intended for the original version which were rejected it was decided that single needed a major overhaul - this has all been discussed earlier in the thread), but no more recording was done for it. Unless one includes "Workshop" (subtitled (Great Shape) on the tapebox/logs [which again?]), which might well have been recorded to preface or follow IIGS and Barnyard to create an actual song, possibly together with "The Old Master Painter". And here's yer actual Barnyard suite to boot.

But as a recorded and/or fully conceived song? Never existed, hence the confusion over it for decades. It was Heroes until mid-November, and then it wasn't. (And, once again, the premise of this thread is that SMiLE pretty much started collapsing itself in December when it was decided to start reworking and splitting off potential singles.) At the very least, I can see absolutely no contemporary data to suggest it was ever a part of The Elements, save for the "rebuilding after the Fire" comment... and that can be read ambiguously at best.

[Beach Head]

Can you post the quote please?

Sure. Herewith, the only reference ever made in the history of The Beach Boys to a "Barnyard" suite:

"The Barnyard Suite, that was going to be four songs - in four short pieces - combined together, but we never finished that one. We got into something else."

And since it's an isolated quote, we have no real idea of the context in which it was said or what question Brian might have been asked or even whether the printed quote is pieced together or edited from several comments.

Since the quote originates with Preiss and isn't lifted from another source, it apparently dates from late 1977, when Preiss was working on his book. Read or listen to any other interview Brian did around that time and it's obvious he wasn't in such great mental shape.

So how much weight should be given to what appears to be a random one-off comment? Doesn't it bother anybody else that there's no other support or documentation anywhere for a "Barnyard" suite?

Think about all that's been said and written over the years about Brian's "Elements" suite. Surely, if he'd been planning two such suites, somebody else would have noticed and said something at the time. But no one did. All the talk was about the "Elements" suite." In fact, if you left off the first three words of the Preiss quote ("The Barnyard Suite"), everybody would think you're talking about the "Elements"! And I think there's a good chance Brian actually was.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I see what you are saying, but the entire concept of elemental forces are that there are four of them, and how they interact and balance each other out.  It would be absurd to only have one of them...  Haven't you played like any Final Fantasy?  

Well, I think it's more likely that it would have been a four-piece suite but with this gap in knowledge we could assume lots of things - maybe Brian wanted to spread The Elements over four albums...Maybe The Elements was just a clever title...this is pure speculation. Really that line was a bit of a throwaway to explain that there are many possibilities that are inevitable when we don't have access to the real plan.

Also, I don't think it's a stretch to listen to the instrumental pieces and determine if they fit into an element or not...  I Love to Say Da-Da just sounds like a babbling brook...  The way the chords progress and the starts and stops, remind me of a stream of water, flowing down a rocky bed....  And that didn't become a baby babbling until SMiLE was scrapped, right?

Well, but here's the thing - I Love to Say Da-Da doesn't sound a bit to me like water. Nothing like it. And the song never had a title that I know of that evoked Water - "All Day" and "Love to Say Dada" don't suggest Water. Certainly not the way that "The Elements: Fire" does.

Earth and Wind, yeah, no idea what that could be.  But to my ear, Fire and Water was created.  It could be very possible that Fire was the only one Brian got around to create...  Or at least the only one that was directly labeled...

And called "The Elements: Part One: Fire" in the studio when it was being recorded.  

And claiming "well there should be some evidence..." is clearly a cop-out, for a subject where not a lot of evidence exists.  Analysis is required, which is what I assumed this thread was platform for?  

Maybe it is. Analysis doesn't work if you don't have evidence. With Smile I think we have to accept what we have - an unfinished masterpiece. I think a lot of people like to believe that there are clues in the music itself that will tell us how to piece it together but I don't think that's the case here.

What is the exact evidence that the box was mislabeled?  

None. Upon further inspection, the sheet for I Wanna Be Around was stuck with Friday Night (I'm in Great Shape) so there could have very well been a connection being made at this point.

Yes, because I don't think they ever were and there is no evidence to suggest they were. All I'm saying that is that if Brian wanted to get the album out in a rush in, say, February 1967, he could have pushed Barnyard and Great Shape over to The Elements.

[soniclovenoize]

Can you post the quote please?

Sure. Herewith, the only reference ever made in the history of The Beach Boys to a "Barnyard" suite:

"The Barnyard Suite, that was going to be four songs - in four short pieces - combined together, but we never finished that one. We got into something else."

And since it's an isolated quote, we have no real idea of the context in which it was said or what question Brian might have been asked or even whether the printed quote is pieced together or edited from several comments.

Since the quote originates with Preiss and isn't lifted from another source, it apparently dates from late 1977, when Preiss was working on his book. Read or listen to any other interview Brian did around that time and it's obvious he wasn't in such great mental shape.

So how much weight should be given to what appears to be a random one-off comment? Doesn't it bother anybody else that there's no other support or documentation anywhere for a "Barnyard" suite?

Think about all that's been said and written over the years about Brian's "Elements" suite. Surely, if he'd been planning two such suites, somebody else would have noticed and said something at the time. But no one did. All the talk was about the "Elements" suite." In fact, if you left off the first three words of the Preiss quote ("The Barnyard Suite"), everybody would think you're talking about the "Elements"! And I think there's a good chance Brian actually was.

Thanks for the info!

I still disagree with you, but I appreciate the quote. 

[soniclovenoize]

None. Upon further inspection, the sheet for I Wanna Be Around was stuck with Friday Night (I'm in Great Shape) so there could have very well been a connection being made at this point.

Well there you go. 

 

[Summertime Blooz]

Can you post the quote please?

Sure. Herewith, the only reference ever made in the history of The Beach Boys to a "Barnyard" suite:

"The Barnyard Suite, that was going to be four songs - in four short pieces - combined together, but we never finished that one. We got into something else."

And since it's an isolated quote, we have no real idea of the context in which it was said or what question Brian might have been asked or even whether the printed quote is pieced together or edited from several comments.

Since the quote originates with Preiss and isn't lifted from another source, it apparently dates from late 1977, when Preiss was working on his book. Read or listen to any other interview Brian did around that time and it's obvious he wasn't in such great mental shape.

So how much weight should be given to what appears to be a random one-off comment? Doesn't it bother anybody else that there's no other support or documentation anywhere for a "Barnyard" suite?

Think about all that's been said and written over the years about Brian's "Elements" suite. Surely, if he'd been planning two such suites, somebody else would have noticed and said something at the time. But no one did. All the talk was about the "Elements" suite." In fact, if you left off the first three words of the Preiss quote ("The Barnyard Suite"), everybody would think you're talking about the "Elements"! And I think there's a good chance Brian actually was.

What you're saying makes sense, but we do have a mystery track (IIGS) from the Capitol memo, and an H&V section that, lyrically, sounds like it could be related to living on a farm in the country. Since people love to solve mysteries, over the years, for a lot of people, IIGS has become the aforementioned "barnyard suite". The Piano Demo further fanned the flames for this notion.

[Beach Head]

What you're saying makes sense, but we do have a mystery track (IIGS) from the Capitol memo, and an H&V section that, lyrically, sounds like it could be related to living on a farm in the country. Since people love to solve mysteries, over the years, for a lot of people, IIGS has become the aforementioned "barnyard suite". The Piano Demo further fanned the flames for this notion.

Understand that I'm not saying there wasn't a song/track/section titled "Barnyard." There most definitely was. It was part of "H&V" at one time, then was excised when that song was re-thought. What I'm saying is that I don't think there was a four-part "Barnyard" suite.

As for "IIGS," it too was excised from "H&V," but unlike "Barnyard," Brian intended to do something with it as a standalone track - not as part of a non-existent "Barnyard" suite that so many keep trying to construct, but under it's own title. That much we can deduce from the handwritten track list. Exactly what he intended to do with it, though, we'll probably never know. Unfortunately, that's just the way it is with some details of Smile.

[Phoenix]

As for "IIGS," it too was excised from "H&V," but unlike "Barnyard," Brian intended to do something with it as a standalone track - not as part of a non-existent "Barnyard" suite that so many keep trying to construct, but under it's own title. That much we can deduce from the handwritten track list. Exactly what he intended to do with it, though, we'll probably never know. Unfortunately, that's just the way it is with some details of Smile.

Similarly, I've long thought (since Endless Harmony) that IIGS = "I'm In Great Shape"/"I Wanna Be Around"/"Workshop" and saw that theory "proved" right with the RAH premiere.  I think the reason for moving the actual "IIGS" segment on the Smile Sessions was to group together most of the pieces that began their life as part of "Heroes And Villains".