Anyone else disappointed with Do It Again (stereo mix) from MiC?

[Cabinessenceking]

First of all, the mix is pretty good, but it isn't the most exciting mix of this song I ever heard.

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

The MiC stereo version does not give much seperation to the backing track.
Most importantly they more or less muted the organ, which is an utter disaster given that it makes the song go from great to tremendous. You can feel the warmth of the sun when that organ as it rises in the 2nd half of the first verse especially and during the outro. The use of organs by the Beach Boys is far underrated and DIA is a prime example of that. Who in their right mind would want to bury that? (perhaps the organ overdub tape is missing?)

Otherwise the stereo seperation of the harmonies are excellent! Also great one can hear that bass sax out in the right channel.

Any thoughts?

[Mikie]

I wonder what Steve Desper thinks of it.

Personally, I like the version on the "Endless Harmony" disc.  And I really like the stereo version on MIC, but now that you mention it not so much if a major instrument like the organ was 'muted' or mixed down.....

[Sam_BFC]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I posted this before. Mike's lead sounds muddy and too isolated. Like way by itself in the middle. Maybe lacks echo and reverb.  The rest of tthe mix sounds pretty good but it's not the holy grail of missing stereo mixes by any means.

[beacharg]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

What about this extended-outro version? Is it available in an official release?

[Mikie]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

They finally found the multri-track of "Do It Again" in a ditch along Coldwater Canyon Rd. in L.A.

Naw, seriously, they just recently found a tape (or tapes) to enable them to make a stereo mix.

[mikeddonn]

I wasn't as impressed as I thought I'd be.  I loved the earlier stereo remixes and Pet Sounds Sessions but now I'm not as blown away by the officially released mixes.  Still love fan mixes though like Little Girl I Once Knew and 409 etc.  maybe the mix of You've Lost That Loving Feeling has put me off!

[southbay]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

They finally found the multri-track of "Do It Again" in a ditch along Coldwater Canyon Rd. in L.A.

Naw, seriously, they just recently found a tape (or tapes) to enable them to make a stereo mix.

I think he meant how did they make the stereo mix that is up on youtube...

[Custom Machine]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

They finally found the multri-track of "Do It Again" in a ditch along Coldwater Canyon Rd. in L.A.

Naw, seriously, they just recently found a tape (or tapes) to enable them to make a stereo mix.

Yes, the question was, as southbay says, what was used for the YouTube mix, uploaded almost 6 years ago in Jan. 2008.

And I would love to hear more about the missing multi-track tapes that were recently acquired.  Who had 'em, how many were there, and what's contained therein?  Could be they were simply found somewhere, or maybe they were re-acquired via threat of legal action if not returned.

[Eric Aniversario]

Upon first hearing it, my impression was that it was mixed to sound like the live arrangement from last year's tour.

[Mikie]

Sorry, didn't read the OP's post well enough regarding "Do It Again" on YouTube.

Yeah, evidently the Do It Again tape was found within the past couple of years. And I think it's a safety copy or somethng - could be wrong but I don't think it was the original that Steve Desper supposedly lost off the trunk of his Corvette in '68. Surprised the details on the finding weren't really made public - I just found out about a month ago on this board. Certainly there was no hoopla over it like there was over the finding of the multi's for Don't Worry Baby and Why Do Fools Fall in Love.

[runnersdialzero]

Sorry, didn't read the OP's post well enough regarding "Do It Again" on YouTube.

Yeah, evidently the Do It Again tape was found within the past couple of years. And I think it's a safety copy or somethng - could be wrong but I don't think it was the original that Steve Desper supposedly lost off the trunk of his Corvette in '68. Surprised the details on the finding weren't really made public - I just found out about a month ago on this board. Certainly there was no hoopla over it like there was over the finding of the multi's for Don't Worry Baby and Why Do Fools Fall in Love.

The original stereo mixdown reel is what went flying out of the car, not the actual multitrack.

Mix sounds fine to me. Nothing really leaps out at me, but that's kind of the sign of a tasteful stereo remix. I might have to do an A/B to hear this missing organ, though.

[drbeachboy]

Sorry, didn't read the OP's post well enough regarding "Do It Again" on YouTube.

Yeah, evidently the Do It Again tape was found within the past couple of years. And I think it's a safety copy or somethng - could be wrong but I don't think it was the original that Steve Desper supposedly lost off the trunk of his Corvette in '68. Surprised the details on the finding weren't really made public - I just found out about a month ago on this board. Certainly there was no hoopla over it like there was over the finding of the multi's for Don't Worry Baby and Why Do Fools Fall in Love.

The original stereo mixdown reel is what went flying out of the car, not the actual multitrack.

Mix sounds fine to me. Nothing really leaps out at me, but that's kind of the sign of a tasteful stereo remix. I might have to do an A/B to hear this missing organ, though.

I'm with you, it sounds fine to me, as well.

[Bicyclerider]

I dig it!

[Alan Smith]

The new mix sounds great, and an unexpected highlight for me.  I'm not overly supportive of the stereo remix thing for various reasons, but do like this one.

Whatevs, because in any presentation, this is a great song on it's own merits.

[Phoenix]

I was disappointed and am glad to know I'm not the only one.  I'm been compiling my own "definitive career spanning boxed set" of the Boys ("Then I Kissed Her", "4th Of July", live "Wild Honey", "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again", etc).  I planned to use MiC as a starting place, and fill in the holes with the '93 box and the individual albums, adjusting the volumes where necessary.*  The idea was that the new box had the most recent mixes, using the newest technology, etc. but when it came to "Do It Again" I didn't like what I heard.  I don't know where the "best" mix is but since I don't like it with "Workshop" tacked onto it, I just went with the one from Made In U.S.A. 



* I used specific preferred mixes in certain places ("Wouldn't It Be Nice" with Brian on the bridge, some of Seltaeb's mixes, etc.)

[sockittome]

I think it sounds great.  One of my favorites on MiC and quite possibly my all time favorite stereo remix.  I always liked this song but felt like the original mono mix sounded a bit lifeless.  The stereo mix really opens it up, and it sounds balanced on all of my stereo systems.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I just listened to the song thru my Adam A7 studio monitors.. Musically, it sounds sounds great!  Alot of instrument dynamics really pop out. But the lead vocal is muddy sounding, a bit low in the mix. Could use some additional reverb/echo.

[silodweller]

Personally I really dislike the mix of "Do It Again" found on MIC.  My hi-fi doesn't think it's all too great either...   

[runnersdialzero]

I just listened to the song thru my Adam A7 studio monitors.. Musically, it sounds sounds great!  Alot of instrument dynamics really pop out. But the lead vocal is muddy sounding, a bit low in the mix. Could use some additional reverb/echo.

Interesting - I always thought the "Do It Again" vocal had almost too much reverb and effect on it. Has that ever been explained? It feels like an intentional aesthetic choice, but it's still unique and there's not much else (if anything) from that period that uses the same effect.

[Sam_BFC]

Mike's lead sounds muddy and too isolated. Like way by itself in the middle. Maybe lacks echo and reverb. 

But the lead vocal is muddy sounding, a bit low in the mix. Could use some additional reverb/echo.

I'm thinking that the vocal treatment for the MIC stereo mix was perhaps an aesthetic choice aimed at retaining the vibe of the original mix.  I think there is definitely some added reverb/ambience there, but it is rather short and small-roomy (as on the original).  Or perhaps the original reverb was in some way already printed on to the multitrack, so there was little room to manoeuvre in terms of vocal reverb/echo for the new mix.

Either way, as Runners suggests, it does kind of make for a more tasteful(/faithful) stereo mix because it helps it to retain the character of the original.

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

They finally found the multri-track of "Do It Again" in a ditch along Coldwater Canyon Rd. in L.A.

Naw, seriously, they just recently found a tape (or tapes) to enable them to make a stereo mix.

Yes, the question was, as southbay says, what was used for the YouTube mix, uploaded almost 6 years ago in Jan. 2008.

Heh, indeed!    Noticed the upload date and was intrigued.  Or the makers of that mix got their hands on the multis before ML et al

[Bubba Ho-Tep]

I like it.

[Curtis Leon]

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

Is that an extraction mix?  How did they make a stereo mix without the multis?

It sounds like it was made using the early version on Endless Harmony.

[runnersdialzero]

First of all, the mix is pretty good, but it isn't the most exciting mix of this song I ever heard.

Take this as a contrast: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CQxdx-ScCvg

This sounds like it was done by panning the 20/20 mix to one channel and the early mix to the other. Not true stereo in the least, sounds fairly sloppy in spots (and no, not in any good ways) for various reasons, nor would I say it compares well to the properly done stereo mix on MIC at all.

[Pacific Coast]

I think its a great song. But the original production is flat, and the stereo remix is weak. It's much better in a live setting. I loved it at the Roxy.