Track Talk #5: Summer Means New Love

[buddhahat]

I was listening to this today and was kind of wondering how I felt about it.

I remember reading (although I can't remember where) a critique of the song where it was compared quite unfavorably to Let's Go Away For A While. I would tend to agree that this instrumental is not in the same league. Where LGAFAW draws you in and transports you to some blissful nirvana, the track in question is nice but feels more superficial. It reminds me a lot of Bruce's Nearest Faraway Place, which I like, but kind of more in an ironic way than that I am genuinely moved by it.

I'd be interested to hear others' opinions on this instrumental piece ...

[Aegir]

It's pleasant, but that's about it. I think the Nearest Faraway Place has a pinch more depth to it than this. The production of Nearest Faraway Place is a lot more atmospheric, this really creepy mood hangs over it, as with much of 20/20.

[Freddie French-Pounce]

yeah, I tend to pass over this track when playing the album on my iPod (I never skip tracks on Vinyl) - but I love Nearest Faraway place.

[CJS]

This tune was played as "exit music" at the C50 concert I went to.. seemed very appropriate...

[shelter]

Excellent and very underrated song. It starts off sounding very sweet but very square, outdated even for it's time. Like something that could have been played at a prom in the 1950s. Then the strings and horns come in and the song flies off to a magical place and another time, with 'Pet Sounds' dawning at the horizon. And that's what makes it so special. It's almost like this is a bridge between Brian's teenage memories and the place where he was going. And at the end, the song seems to morph into another song that quickly fades away, just like on 'In the Back of My Mind'...

[Cabinessenceking]

I enjoyed it, but was waiting for the stereo mix to materialise. the stereo does wonders for this song. now I listen to it more frequently!

[EgoHanger1966]

Meh. I skip it. But....the snare drum sound is so wild anbd out of place. It sounds like it could be from three or four generations later than it actually was. Wonder how he got that drum sound - I haven't heard any other 60s record with that sound on the snare

[BJL]

Looks like I'm the exception here - it's always been one of my very favorite Brian songs.  The melody is gorgeous, the string and horn arrangement is fantastic, and the whole song just transports me to another place and time. Let's Go Away for a While is a better song, but I prefer this for the same reason that I prefer Today to Pet Sounds - it just has an unbelievable honesty to it.

[smilethebeachboysloveyou]

It seems to me that "Summer Means new Love" is the first ambitious Brian Wilson instrumental.  Prior to this, the instrumentals were mainly surf guitar songs that gave Carl an opportunity to show off his "licks"; sometimes the songwriting is also credited to Brian, but I get the impression that his main interests were usually elsewhere (even though I do like some of them).  Here, however, Brian seems to be conveying an emotion without the aid of lyrics, and with a much more complex production style than any of the previous instrumentals (it's the first instrumental with sessionists, isn't it?).  While I agree with the general consensus that "Let's Go Away for Awhile" is the better song (presumably benefiting from having a producer who was more experienced), I think it's a mistake to regard "Summer Means New Love" as simply take one of the later song since the emotions that they are trying to convey are different.  For similar reasons, I get annoyed when I hear people refer to The Beach Boys Today! as a mere stepping stone to Pet Sounds.

[I. Spaceman]

To the last poster, I'd recommend listening to Brian's composition and production for The Survivors, After The Game. That is from 1963, and it is fully a twin of Summer Means New Love.
As for Summer itself, it is absolutely incredible. I'm kinda amazed that people here talk up the supposed "complexities" of droney, compositionally minimal  Smile backing tracks, and seem to underrate this truly sophisticated and gorgeous, superior piece of work.

[I. Spaceman]

I enjoyed it, but was waiting for the stereo mix to materialise. the stereo does wonders for this song. now I listen to it more frequently!

A stereo mix was created and released years ago.

[Quzi]

'Let's Get Away for Awhile' does benefit from being sandwiched between the tag of 'I'm Waiting for the Day' and the gorgeous arrangement of 'Sloop John B'. It's context that fully thrusts you into appreciating the meticulous design of Brian's arranging talent. I'm not going to say that 'Summer Means New Love' would be appreciated at the same level as 'Let's Go Away for Awhile' had it been in a similar position, I don't think it's designed as masterfully, but I do believe that had it been placed in between a couple of tracks more appropriate than 'You're So Good to Me' and 'I'm Bugged at My Ol' Man' the listening experience would be a lot more pleasant. It's undoubtedly a very pretty, evolutionary track, it's just the instrumentals on Pet Sounds effectively serve to bridge songs together in a stronger manner, yet 'Summer Means New Love' doesn't really do that, it's just plonked in the middle of Summer Days (And Summer Nights!!!), tragically under-utilised and serving little purpose.

[smilethebeachboysloveyou]

To the last poster, I'd recommend listening to Brian's composition and production for The Survivors, After The Game. That is from 1963, and it is fully a twin of Summer Means New Love.

Oh, dear me.  I feel quite silly for forgetting about "After the Game"; that's also a good one.  The production is not nearly as dense as it is for "Summer Means New Love," but it's still quite good.  Thanks for reminding me.

[Matt Bielewicz]

Oh boy, how I *love* this track. Like shelter says above, it starts so square and old-fashioned sounding - like supermarket muzak, as my wife once said - and then the strings and horns come in and it shimmies right out of its 1950s Eisenhower-era white bread suburban existence and into a multicoloured, mid-1960s Brian-Wilson-at-the-top-of-his-game universe, full of amazing chords and voicings and arrangement goodies that are a simultaneously simple-sounding, yet beautifully complex delight to the ear. It's always knocked me out, from the very first time I heard it.

Has anyone else noticed the differences in the new stereo mix? I don't know whether the part was added at the original mono mixdown, or whatever, but the gorgeous reverbed, and, I think, Leslie-speakered guitar that plays throughout the mono mix seems to be completely absent on the new stereo mix. I feel its absence most acutely at the final break, in the last few seconds of the track, just before the final strings outro. On the mono mix, you get a couple of strums of this beautiful guitar echoing off into infinity, while on the stereo mix, that's completely missing, and instead, you get a measure of plonky, out-of-time piano instead before the strings come in to finish the track. I'm guessing the piano was mixed out for the original mono mix, or obscured by the guitar; whatever, I never noticed it before.

If the (Leslied?) guitar was added at mono mixdown, I guess there wouldn't have been a lot they could have done, short of an 'extraction mix'. I really miss that part at the end, though... 

[LeeDempsey]

Has anyone else noticed the differences in the new stereo mix? I don't know whether the part was added at the original mono mixdown, or whatever, but the gorgeous reverbed, and, I think, Leslie-speakered guitar that plays throughout the mono mix seems to be completely absent on the new stereo mix. I feel its absence most acutely at the final break, in the last few seconds of the track, just before the final strings outro. On the mono mix, you get a couple of strums of this beautiful guitar echoing off into infinity, while on the stereo mix, that's completely missing, and instead, you get a measure of plonky, out-of-time piano instead before the strings come in to finish the track. I'm guessing the piano was mixed out for the original mono mix, or obscured by the guitar; whatever, I never noticed it before.

If the (Leslied?) guitar was added at mono mixdown, I guess there wouldn't have been a lot they could have done, short of an 'extraction mix'. I really miss that part at the end, though... 

I noticed this right away.  I'd chalk this up to a mixing decision, as a few years ago someone sent me a stereo mix of "Summer Means New Love" that was created from an extract of the front channels of the 5.1 version that appeared as a bonus track on the Pet Sounds DVD-Audio, and it correctly includes the guitar on the outro.

But at least the new remix does appear to reveal something new -- that the guitar lead throughout the track is doubled by a piano line.

Lee

[guitarfool2002]

Two points:

To my ears, the lead guitar is playing through the "vibrato" channel of most likely a Fender amp of some kind. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but that sounds more like Fender amp vibrato/tremolo than it does a Leslie. The Leslie sound is on "You're So Good To Me" and "Pet Sounds", and this track sounds like straightforward tremolo from a Fender "Vibrato" channel standard on several models.

I'm curious what a previous poster heard as being unique in that drum sound...I'm hearing a pretty basic, bone-dry standard snare sound. Maybe that's the difference? So many of Brian's mid-60's snare tracks have something wet like a deep reverb or even a slight slapback delay/ tape echo added, where this track sounds dry with little or no effects.

[EgoHanger1966]

It's a really flat, dull and thuddy sound on the snare - prevalent in the 70s and 80s mostly. Give me another example of a 60s record recorded in a studio that has that snare sound, I've never heard one.

[guitarfool2002]

It's a really flat, dull and thuddy sound on the snare - prevalent in the 70s and 80s mostly. Give me another example of a 60s record recorded in a studio that has that snare sound, I've never heard one.

Put a wallet, a towel, or a piece of duct tape on the head, record it dry and mic it close without capturing the room sound...easy! I think the main difference is that so many snare sounds in the 60's especially in LA studios were sent through a reverb or echo/delay sound of some kind to make it "bigger", or they were going for a bright, crisper attack, that hearing a more dull un-effected snare sounds out of place in context.

[punkinhead]

the piano only version that was goin around about 5 years ago was an interesting way of listening to the song. I think it was a fan who played/recorded though.

[Matt Bielewicz]

Two points:

To my ears, the lead guitar is playing through the "vibrato" channel of most likely a Fender amp of some kind. If I'm wrong I'm wrong, but that sounds more like Fender amp vibrato/tremolo than it does a Leslie. The Leslie sound is on "You're So Good To Me" and "Pet Sounds", and this track sounds like straightforward tremolo from a Fender "Vibrato" channel standard on several models.

I'm curious what a previous poster heard as being unique in that drum sound...I'm hearing a pretty basic, bone-dry standard snare sound. Maybe that's the difference? So many of Brian's mid-60's snare tracks have something wet like a deep reverb or even a slight slapback delay/ tape echo added, where this track sounds dry with little or no effects.

Craig, you're absolutely right. Guitar effects are not my strong point (I'm a keyboard/synth guy), but you're spot-on - it's vibrato/tremolo on that guitar on the mono mix of SMNL, and definitely not Leslie, which, as you say, has a very distinctive timbre.

Regarding the drums - yes, I agree with EgoHanger66 that what's unusual about the snare sound is that it's so plain for its time. Dulled-souding, 'thuddy' snare drum sounds like that were ten a penny in the 70s and very early 80s, but in the 60s, not so much. BW being ahead of his time again...!

I noticed this right away.  I'd chalk this up to a mixing decision, as a few years ago someone sent me a stereo mix of "Summer Means New Love" that was created from an extract of the front channels of the 5.1 version that appeared as a bonus track on the Pet Sounds DVD-Audio, and it correctly includes the guitar on the outro.

But at least the new remix does appear to reveal something new -- that the guitar lead throughout the track is doubled by a piano line.

Lee

A good point! I have that mix from the DVD-A somewhere as well... I'll have to dig it out and give it a listen...! I had forgotten that, but I'm sure I would have noticed back then if the guitar had been missing off that version, too! And as to the piano doubling... well, yes, but I wish the piano playing on that final break wasn't so clunky! That's why I really miss the guitar there...

[Gertie J.]

that's probably the worst instrumental i've ever heard.

[I. Spaceman]

that's probably the worst instrumental i've ever heard.

Eh?

[Gertie J.]

alright, take 2. THAT'S PROBABLY THE WORST INSTRUMENTAL I'VE EVER HEARD. get it now?

[I. Spaceman]

alright, take 2. THAT'S PROBABLY THE WORST INSTRUMENTAL I'VE EVER HEARD. get it now?

Oh, I'm speaking to a moron with no taste. Noted for the future.

[hypehat]

The vibes playing the root notes throughout sound so clunky on the stereo mix!

But yeah, love this instrumental. So sweet.