Alan Boyd Lecture

[Cal Muse]

Hey Justin,

Man, you were f_cking busy taking notes, young man...it's nice to see that spirit! Next time you're in town, I'll have some mixes for you @ the store. My wife said you already stopped in since AB's gig.
Jeff AKA Cal Muse

[The_Holy_Bee]

Interesting to see the comments above - and hear a couple of excellent fan mixes - of a hypothetical H&V version one!  There was a long discussion about this stuff in a thread I kicked off a few months back - and probably dozens before that one! Don't forget the first version (May '66) is believed to have also featured Your Are My Sunshine.

This has been asked, and probably would have been answered by now if it could be, but is there ANY suggestion of what newly discovered Smile pieces are? Seems remarkable they've been spoken about so legitimately but no actual info about what they entail has hit the wider sphere.

[mike s]

well in my current mix I am using 'who ran the iron horse'

this is not as whacky as it sounds:  I think that the H&V 'intro' section is very similar to WRTIH and does sound a bit 'train-like' with the whistles and all, and H&V had the train whistle in the Cantina mix, so I think there was a train vibe there

so in other words I am substituting 'intro' with WRTIH

whats good is that WRTIH fits chordally with bicycle rider so that can then be smoothly slipped in there - in fact the transition from WRTIH >> BR (and vice versa) is fantastic and very natural sounding

Interesting to see the comments above - and hear a couple of excellent fan mixes - of a hypothetical H&V version one!  There was a long discussion about this stuff in a thread I kicked off a few months back - and probably dozens before that one! Don't forget the first version (May '66) is believed to have also featured Your Are My Sunshine.

This has been asked, and probably would have been answered by now if it could be, but is there ANY suggestion of what newly discovered Smile pieces are? Seems remarkable they've been spoken about so legitimately but no actual info about what they entail has hit the wider sphere.

[runnersdialzero]

"Barnyard" is indisputably the tag because it fades. Brian couldn't have possibly applied the fade after it was cut from "Heroes" if it ever was in the first place in the ever-changing jigsaw puzzle that is "Heroes". Nevermind that the "Barnyard" acetate didn't include it as part of "Heroes" in the first place, I'm right and you're wrong.

I have "Who Ran The Iron Horse" in my "Heroes" mix for absolutely no good reason.

[punkinhead]

Hey Justin,

Man, you were f_cking busy taking notes, young man...it's nice to see that spirit! Next time you're in town, I'll have some mixes for you @ the store. My wife said you already stopped in since AB's gig.
Jeff AKA Cal Muse

Why thank you Jeff, here's someone who believes me.

[mike s]

hi whats the point of this post..?  you shouldn't use fake quotations its malicious

can you give any examples of fades on acetates which were not tags..?  I'm not saying it never happened but I can't think of any

if you actually properly read my post about 'who ran the iron horse' you will see I have a very well thought out reason for adding it - however I am 100% certain this section was never ever considered for inclusion in 'Heroes...', its a compromise to try to make a version which sounds good and flows together - it fits musically and thematically and keeps the ethos of sections repeating in different songs

cheers

"Barnyard" is indisputably the tag because it fades. Brian couldn't have possibly applied the fade after it was cut from "Heroes" if it ever was in the first place in the ever-changing jigsaw puzzle that is "Heroes". Nevermind that the "Barnyard" acetate didn't include it as part of "Heroes" in the first place, I'm right and you're wrong.

I have "Who Ran The Iron Horse" in my "Heroes" mix for absolutely no good reason.

[punkinhead]

hi whats the point of this post..?  you shouldn't use fake quotations its malicious

can you give any examples of fades on acetates which were not tags..?  I'm not saying it never happened but I can't think of any

if you actually properly read my post about 'who ran the iron horse' you will see I have a very well thought out reason for adding it - however I am 100% certain this section was never ever considered for inclusion in 'Heroes...', its a compromise to try to make a version which sounds good and flows together - it fits musically and thematically and keeps the ethos of sections repeating in different songs

cheers

"Barnyard" is indisputably the tag because it fades. Brian couldn't have possibly applied the fade after it was cut from "Heroes" if it ever was in the first place in the ever-changing jigsaw puzzle that is "Heroes". Nevermind that the "Barnyard" acetate didn't include it as part of "Heroes" in the first place, I'm right and you're wrong.

I have "Who Ran The Iron Horse" in my "Heroes" mix for absolutely no good reason.

Sorry, that post was about something.
Examples? I was just quoting what alan said, I'm not particularly sure how to answer your question. I was just writing what he said, no specific examples were given.

[mike s]

hi punkinhead - I was referring to the post by 'runnersdialzero' not one by you

cheers
Mike

hi whats the point of this post..?  you shouldn't use fake quotations its malicious

can you give any examples of fades on acetates which were not tags..?  I'm not saying it never happened but I can't think of any

if you actually properly read my post about 'who ran the iron horse' you will see I have a very well thought out reason for adding it - however I am 100% certain this section was never ever considered for inclusion in 'Heroes...', its a compromise to try to make a version which sounds good and flows together - it fits musically and thematically and keeps the ethos of sections repeating in different songs

cheers

"Barnyard" is indisputably the tag because it fades. Brian couldn't have possibly applied the fade after it was cut from "Heroes" if it ever was in the first place in the ever-changing jigsaw puzzle that is "Heroes". Nevermind that the "Barnyard" acetate didn't include it as part of "Heroes" in the first place, I'm right and you're wrong.

I have "Who Ran The Iron Horse" in my "Heroes" mix for absolutely no good reason.

Sorry, that post was about something.
Examples? I was just quoting what alan said, I'm not particularly sure how to answer your question. I was just writing what he said, no specific examples were given.

[punkinhead]

hi punkinhead - I was referring to the post by 'runnersdialzero' not one by you

cheers
Mike

hi whats the point of this post..?  you shouldn't use fake quotations its malicious

can you give any examples of fades on acetates which were not tags..?  I'm not saying it never happened but I can't think of any

if you actually properly read my post about 'who ran the iron horse' you will see I have a very well thought out reason for adding it - however I am 100% certain this section was never ever considered for inclusion in 'Heroes...', its a compromise to try to make a version which sounds good and flows together - it fits musically and thematically and keeps the ethos of sections repeating in different songs

cheers

"Barnyard" is indisputably the tag because it fades. Brian couldn't have possibly applied the fade after it was cut from "Heroes" if it ever was in the first place in the ever-changing jigsaw puzzle that is "Heroes". Nevermind that the "Barnyard" acetate didn't include it as part of "Heroes" in the first place, I'm right and you're wrong.

I have "Who Ran The Iron Horse" in my "Heroes" mix for absolutely no good reason.

Sorry, that post was about something.
Examples? I was just quoting what alan said, I'm not particularly sure how to answer your question. I was just writing what he said, no specific examples were given.

oh, ok....thanks.

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

So has anyone put together a "long" fan edit of H&V that seems to work?

[mike s]

well here's the one I currently have:

opening verses as usual into
verse just with scat BVs
dead stop with 11 note fanfare
fast my children
3 score and five
repeat verse just with scat BVs but should prob repeat the opening verse - no ideal but no other lyrics to use
stand or fall
a capella harmony break
slow my children/I've been in this town so long
bicycle rider to fade

pause then barnyard

then 'part 2' later on album mix which is cantina into with me tonjght

in all about 6 mins and works pretty well but compromised on the re-use of the scat verse after 3 score and 5

however I want to do a new one inc barnyard/iron horse/bicycle rider

cheers

So has anyone put together a "long" fan edit of H&V that seems to work?

[smile-holland]

@ runnersdialzero: I've seen you doing this before, and let me give you a warning right now.

You might consider this as funny, but fake quotations, or altering quotations from others is not in line with the board rules and therefore not permitted !

[Phoenix]

So has anyone put together a "long" fan edit of H&V that seems to work?

My "Heroes And Villains" runs five and a half minutes.  And foolish as it may sound, I honestly think it's what Brian put together as his final "long" edit, before finally cutting it down to create the released single version.

As I've stated several times, it's the "intro" (which in 2004 he wound up using as part of "Mrs O'Leary's Cow"), the Cantina version without the "Barnshine" fade, and the single version, starting from the beginning of the first chorus. 

Granted it's not as "epic" as a lot of people's speculations or some of Brian's earlier experiments but I really believe that's where he was before finally bowing to pressure (real or imagined) to keep the single closer to a "normal" mid-60's length.

As always, your mileage may vary. 

[runnersdialzero]

@ runnersdialzero: I've seen you doing this before, and let me give you a warning right now.

You might consider this as funny, but fake quotations, or altering quotations from others is not in line with the board rules and therefore not permitted !

teh heck? Legit? I've seen this done on literally every other board I've been to without warnings, probably because it's obvious that it's a joke and meant to be a good-natured means of poking fun at something someone has said. His original post is still there, after all.

I felt it was obvious that I was just kidding and meant no malice toward this kind fellow while also basically summing up what he was saying. The post basically insisting that "Barnyard" ended "Heroes" and that everyone who disagreed was totally wrong came off as a little odd/rude, that's all.

[Dunderhead]

Brian had a system of naming his sections:

Part 1: The Verse
Part 2: The Chorus
Part 3: The Bridge
Part 4: The Fade

These were the the four basic components of any song in Brian's mind (and in most people's minds as well). No matter what he recorded it would be one of those four things and he used that general taxonomy all throughout the recording of Good Vibrations and Smile. It's important to realize though that he had no qualms about having multiple bridges and just because there are 4 categories doesn't mean the final song would only have 4 sections.

A typical song would be structured as:
Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 3 / Part 4

And Part 4, the fade, would usually be a straight reprise of the music from the chorus.

The original May 11th version of Heroes was probably structured in exactly that way. The April 9th and May 4th Good Vibrations sessions were complete takes of the backing track using the conventional verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/fade structure. It wasn't until the May 24th Sunset session for Good Vibrations that Brian started auditioning different bridges and choruses separately.

My Only Sunshine was most probably used as a bridge for the May 11th version of Heroes, and this is further supported by the fact that it precedes the fade in the November 14th recording of those two parts. The whole idea of a separate Barnyard 'suite' or what have you is totally bunk in my opinion. Brian simply decided during that period that he would record every section as a separate take to capitalize on the success he had using that method for Good Vibrations.

The Cantina section, Bag Of Tricks, Swedish Frog, all of those sections were only first recorded after January 1967 and I really don't believe that a 1966 version of Heroes would have used any of them. Brian only started recording new parts at the beginning of the new year once he realized that the Autumn 1966 material he had recorded was unsatisfactory, and that 'second' version of Heroes was probably:

1st Verse / I'm In Great Shape / 2nd Verse / Barnyard / You Are My Sunshine / Fade

Brian then auditioned several new sections on January 3rd and January 27th. The January 3rd session produced Do A Lot, Bag of Tricks, and a new Tag suggesting that You Are My Sunshine, and The Fade were both on the chopping block. The recording of 'pickup to 3rd verse' is also interesting, and perhaps Brian was intending to sequence the final song as:

1st Verse / I'm In Great Shape / 2nd Verse / Barnyard / 3rd Verse / Do A Lot / Bag of Tricks / Tag to Part 1

Brian likely recorded what he needed at that particular moment, he was making his own Smile mix but actually had the ability to record entirely new sections whenever the mood struck him. He didn't plan ahead or record with the long-term completion of the project in mind, he just ran to the studio to audition some new parts that he thought would strengthen the final song. When he actually sat down to edit the additional sections into the track, and still found himself unhappy with the result, he booked more studio time to audition other sections.

The January 27th Session yielded the Cantina section and a new bridge and the 'Alternate' version that was officially released on the Good Vibrations boxset is the track that resulted from all this recording, even after completing an acceptable single version however he remained unsatisfied and did still more recording at the end of February for a bevy of new Part 2s, 3s, and 4s.

[Quzi]

@ runnersdialzero: I've seen you doing this before, and let me give you a warning right now.

You might consider this as funny, but fake quotations, or altering quotations from others is not in line with the board rules and therefore not permitted !

I agree with Runners here, this seems a little rash. It's not like he was taking the altered quote out of this thread and into another with the ~malicious intent of defamation~ or anything. If you are reading the thread chronologically, you'd see mike's original post + from there it's pretty clear Runners' post is not personal, but a satirical way of making a point (as are most of his posts - yet people on this board have to have a hard time understanding that for some reason, even after three and a half thousand of them  ) Are we seriously discouraged from creative posts here? It seems like this policy is being enforced at the expense of some of the fun 'round here 

[Aegir]

completely agree with runners and Quzi that I don't see a problem with that at all and it's a common thing that happens on forums and most people should have understood exactly what was going on.

[mike s]

ok it was me he did it too and I was highly annoyed by it:  it was faking what I'd said

because he had quoted me I almost didn't bother to read it all - as I knew what I'd said - so I could have carried one without realising my words had been changed

and he's at it again by misrepresenting what I said:  'The post basically insisting that "Barnyard" ended "Heroes" and that everyone who disagreed was totally wrong came off as a little odd/rude, that's all.'

I don't think my post has that kind of tone at all - here it is:


'I think barnyard was almost certainly the fade

I can't think of one other acetate that fades out unless it was obviously at the end of a song (pls correct me if I'm wrong here)

also you can't get out of barnyard unless you do a hard cut, and to what..?  I've never been able to match it up with anything that sounds right - keywise you can go into the fast 'my children' section but the rhythm is not right

actually it just hit me BY cut into C&W them has similar tempo, I might give that a try, however I think BY feels like a fade'

completely agree with runners and Quzi that I don't see a problem with that at all and it's a common thing that happens on forums and most people should have understood exactly what was going on.

[buddhahat]

Sorry RDZ but I'm with Mike S and the mods on this one. I took the quote at face value initially and wondered what Mike S's problem was, whereas in reality he was just stating an opinion. Whether intended as a joke or otherwise, the last thing we need here is free reign to misquote each other.

[runnersdialzero]

My apologies, and I won't misquote you like that again. It was not meant to annoy you nor was there ever anything close to malicious intent. If we're good now (hope so, sincerely), let's get back to Mr.Boyd's lecture and the interesting shtuff he talked about.

Sorry again.

[mike s]

yeah no worries mate

I was wrong about BY not cutting well into the fast 'my children' section as with a bit of fiddling I subsequently managed to do it 

My apologies, and I won't misquote you like that again. It was not meant to annoy you nor was there ever anything close to malicious intent. If we're good now (hope so, sincerely), let's get back to Mr.Boyd's lecture and the interesting shtuff he talked about.

Sorry again.

[smile-holland]

@ runnersdialzero: I've seen you doing this before, and let me give you a warning right now.

You might consider this as funny, but fake quotations, or altering quotations from others is not in line with the board rules and therefore not permitted !

teh heck? Legit? I've seen this done on literally every other board I've been to without warnings, probably because it's obvious that it's a joke and meant to be a good-natured means of poking fun at something someone has said. His original post is still there, after all.

I felt it was obvious that I was just kidding and meant no malice toward this kind fellow while also basically summing up what he was saying. The post basically insisting that "Barnyard" ended "Heroes" and that everyone who disagreed was totally wrong came off as a little odd/rude, that's all.

I might have sounded a bit harsh, runnersdialzero. Not trying to play the big boss here, although I realise it came across like that.  Currently I see things happening on this board that should get more attention than this (especially the plain rude and offending replies as of lately). So let me soften my words as well and say that in the future please be reserved with altering quotations. And if you decide to alter quotations, please take into account that it can be interpreted otherwise. Just add a smiley or something, so any misunderstanding is out of the question.

I completely understood that your intention was to make a joke about it. And as long as it’s an obvious joke, that’s okay by me. But I’ve seen this happen in the past (not just from you). Problem is that it can also be interpreted as being a genuine quote from someone that isn’t even aware of it. And if I get notified that the original poster is not happy about it, then I have to draw a line there.

Okay, back to the topic.   

[Micha]

OK, back on topic.

yeah that sounds great - try BY into C&W and see what you think 

I'm convinced it will work without even trying it. My fan edit of "Wonderful" uses C&W or, as it is rather named, "Prelude to fade", as an outro, and even that works.

I think C&W/Prelude to fade was designed to replace OMP/MOS, since both originally ended with descending strings, and OMP/MOS is followed by the fade.

I really like your transition but the actual ascending harmony part I'm not so keen on:  it does sound to me like it was written to bridge an awkward chord change..?

At first I tried "pickup to 3rd verse", because I think the third verse would have been after Barnyard, but the tempo didn't match. Then I tried "Bridge To Indians" which is the same but slower, about the speed of "Barnyard". That probably was designed to resolve into the BR section cut from Worms.

ok just got a great hard cut from BY to the fast 'my children' section:  you have to use one of the fan mixes of BY which puts the 'na na na' vox by Brian at the end and also has the french horn in there - the french really horn blends into the BVs on the 'my childen' section

it sounds fantastic and is a way out of BY 

Unfortunately I don't know what fan mix you are referring to. Can I hear that somewhere?


I do have a 4:27 mix of H&V that totally satisfies me, but contains neither IIGS, BY, C&W, nor TOMP... I have two mixes I made with IIGS, BY, and TOMP, but neither of them is good. Heck, even Brian Wilson couldn't do that!

[mike s]

hi Micha drop me your email address and I'll send you something - I'd love to hear your heroes mix

mjstwo@yahoo.com

[Cam Mott]

Brian had a system of naming his sections:

Part 1: The Verse
Part 2: The Chorus
Part 3: The Bridge
Part 4: The Fade

These were the the four basic components of any song in Brian's mind (and in most people's minds as well). No matter what he recorded it would be one of those four things and he used that general taxonomy all throughout the recording of Good Vibrations and Smile. It's important to realize though that he had no qualms about having multiple bridges and just because there are 4 categories doesn't mean the final song would only have 4 sections.

A typical song would be structured as:
Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 1 / Part 2 / Part 3 / Part 4

And Part 4, the fade, would usually be a straight reprise of the music from the chorus.

The original May 11th version of Heroes was probably structured in exactly that way. The April 9th and May 4th Good Vibrations sessions were complete takes of the backing track using the conventional verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/fade structure. It wasn't until the May 24th Sunset session for Good Vibrations that Brian started auditioning different bridges and choruses separately.

My Only Sunshine was most probably used as a bridge for the May 11th version of Heroes, and this is further supported by the fact that it precedes the fade in the November 14th recording of those two parts. The whole idea of a separate Barnyard 'suite' or what have you is totally bunk in my opinion. Brian simply decided during that period that he would record every section as a separate take to capitalize on the success he had using that method for Good Vibrations.

The Cantina section, Bag Of Tricks, Swedish Frog, all of those sections were only first recorded after January 1967 and I really don't believe that a 1966 version of Heroes would have used any of them. Brian only started recording new parts at the beginning of the new year once he realized that the Autumn 1966 material he had recorded was unsatisfactory, and that 'second' version of Heroes was probably:

1st Verse / I'm In Great Shape / 2nd Verse / Barnyard / You Are My Sunshine / Fade

Brian then auditioned several new sections on January 3rd and January 27th. The January 3rd session produced Do A Lot, Bag of Tricks, and a new Tag suggesting that You Are My Sunshine, and The Fade were both on the chopping block. The recording of 'pickup to 3rd verse' is also interesting, and perhaps Brian was intending to sequence the final song as:

1st Verse / I'm In Great Shape / 2nd Verse / Barnyard / 3rd Verse / Do A Lot / Bag of Tricks / Tag to Part 1

Brian likely recorded what he needed at that particular moment, he was making his own Smile mix but actually had the ability to record entirely new sections whenever the mood struck him. He didn't plan ahead or record with the long-term completion of the project in mind, he just ran to the studio to audition some new parts that he thought would strengthen the final song. When he actually sat down to edit the additional sections into the track, and still found himself unhappy with the result, he booked more studio time to audition other sections.

The January 27th Session yielded the Cantina section and a new bridge and the 'Alternate' version that was officially released on the Good Vibrations boxset is the track that resulted from all this recording, even after completing an acceptable single version however he remained unsatisfied and did still more recording at the end of February for a bevy of new Part 2s, 3s, and 4s.

Very interesting. In my theory there is another definition of "Part 2" which is the same as "side 2" but it would exist separately from your definition of Part 2 on another side from the single's A side which would have its own master and master number. Each master/master number would have its own Part 2 within that master as per your post. I think your definition is probably very insightful, I don't remember anyone proposing this definition of terms before. I hope we get some back and forth on your idea.