gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 08:48:17 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Sea Of Tunes Smile vs Smile Sessions Smile  (Read 10013 times)
Disney Boy (1985)
Guest
« on: February 04, 2014, 10:14:21 AM »

So I finally decided that I'm never going to be able to make my peace with the Smile Sessions CD 1 Smile reconstruction, as such I've been listening to the Sea of Tunes Vol 16 Smile CD and I've got to say, while the sound quality is obviously poorer, I much prefer listening to it.

It's all the tampering with the new Smile I can't abide - some parts, such as Barnyard and the fade to Holidays, just sound awful - and I just find so much of the tinkering annoying. I far prefer to listen to the tracks unfinished, incomplete and authentic.

Anyone else agree? If not, what are your thoughts (i.e. perhaps the Sea of Tunes CD now seems redundant with the release of the Smile Sessions)?
Logged
Jukka
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 739



View Profile
« Reply #1 on: February 04, 2014, 03:47:41 PM »

Haven't listened to the SoT version, but I just know I'd like it more. After the initial "wow I can't believe its finally out" hype died out the bits that are fiddled with (most of all the ones you mentioned) have started to really bug me.
Logged

"Surfing and cars were okay but there was a war going on."
mikeddonn
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 976


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: February 04, 2014, 03:56:10 PM »

I would love an official Sea of Tunes Unsurpassed Masters Box Set! Grin
Logged
Sheriff John Stone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5309



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: February 04, 2014, 04:03:19 PM »

So I finally decided that I'm never going to be able to make my peace with the Smile Sessions CD 1 Smile reconstruction, as such I've been listening to the Sea of Tunes Vol 16 Smile CD and I've got to say, while the sound quality is obviously poorer, I much prefer listening to it.

It's all the tampering with the new Smile I can't abide - some parts, such as Barnyard and the fade to Holidays, just sound awful - and I just find so much of the tinkering annoying. I far prefer to listen to the tracks unfinished, incomplete and authentic.

Anyone else agree? If not, what are your thoughts (i.e. perhaps the Sea of Tunes CD now seems redundant with the release of the Smile Sessions)?

I agree.

I don't want to appear hypocritical, because I love making SMiLE fan mixes. And, I know I take liberties that Brian never would have as far as sequencing and connecting songs/parts. But...

I hate BWPS. Actually I despise it. With the three movements and the linking of tracks and no fades and ending with "Good Vibrations" and everything, well, I never listen to it. So, naturally with the Smile Sessions CD 1 mirroring BWPS, I really don't care for it. Actually, I listen to my own SMiLE mix INSTEAD of it.

Some of the fly-ins I don't mind; some are quite good. It (CD 1) just has a "busy" feel about it. Maybe it's because I/we know what was done to the tracks, but it just sounds too manipulated or overly-tinkered with, like they put the kitchen sink in every song. And, again, I don't like the way some of the songs are attached. Brian was the master of the fade.

The rest of the boxed set is great, though...
Logged
Disney Boy (1985)
Guest
« Reply #4 on: February 04, 2014, 11:20:47 PM »

Yes the rest of the boxed set is superb, but 'busy' is the right word for CD 1. To me, it's a mess. In hindsight, they really should have just got the surviving BB's to record new vocals for the missing sections, which to me would've been far more authentic than just stitching it all together and (poorly) plastering sped-up/slowed-down vocals over the top. I think BWPS is a masterpiece, but I don't think trying to replicate it on the Smile Sessions was a good idea, at least not in the way they did it anyway...
Logged
?
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: February 05, 2014, 12:07:48 AM »

Yeah, I agree completely Disney Boy.  The flown in parts are terrible and really ruin the presentation.  Honestly I'd prefer to listen to just about any of the bootlegs to the Smile Sessions.
Logged
Andrew G. Doe
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 17767


The triumph of The Hickey Script !


View Profile WWW
« Reply #6 on: February 05, 2014, 12:11:57 AM »

Just a gentle reminder, but there were only ever going to be two ways The Smile Sessions was going to be released:

1 - with CD 1 using BWPS as a template for a "completed" Smile or...

2 - never.

I know which one I'd vote for if asked.
Logged

The four sweetest words in my vocabulary: "This poster is ignored".
Camus
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 154


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: February 05, 2014, 12:33:19 AM »

I personally don't like CD1, but that wasn't why I bought the box. I always listen to my own edit that now sounds great thanks to discs 2 to 4.
Logged
?
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 534


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: February 05, 2014, 12:54:23 AM »

Just a gentle reminder, but there were only ever going to be two ways The Smile Sessions was going to be released:

1 - with CD 1 using BWPS as a template for a "completed" Smile or...

2 - never.

I know which one I'd vote for if asked.

I have no complaints about using the BWPS tracklist as a template, but adding robotic Beach Boy voices and phantom demo piano doesn't make it sound complete.  At best, it's unnecessary and distracting.
Logged
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #9 on: February 05, 2014, 03:16:47 AM »

I always found GV a much better ending for SMiLE than the song favored by many posters here. Either that, or Vega-Tables! Smiley
Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
Jukka
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 739



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: February 05, 2014, 03:30:52 AM »

So we should blame Brian, VDP and Darian who came up with that three-part, overlong live version back ten years ago? They should have stuck to two sides and approx. 36 minutes... Some guys just never get it right!
Logged

"Surfing and cars were okay but there was a war going on."
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2643


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: February 05, 2014, 06:56:38 AM »

Personally I love the disc 1 smile. It's an official band-sanctioned smile that I can listen to on vinyl. I've listened so much now that it's starting to get the odd pop and crackle that make it sound 'authentic'. Plus I'm so used to the few flaws that they're part of the album now. So I share Andrew's perspective. It was either this version or none at all and overall I think the sequence and editing is done pretty well.

Edit: All that said I definitely needed closure on my smile obsession. I endlessly tinkered with smile mixes to get one that I was satisfied with and could never enjoy these sequences without thinking of what changes needed to be made. So an official release put an end to all that in my mind. I probably would have overlooked even more dramatic editing than occurred on the final version, because I was relieved simply to have a finished Smile which I could put on the turntable and enjoy at face value.

As for the sequence: The BWPS blueprint was really the only way they could go though, wasn't it? The other option would be arbitrarily coming up with their own sequence which would surely be an insane solution? What's cool I think is that it's largely BWPS, but there's the occasional knowing wink to vintage 66/67 mixes here and there i.e. Old Master Painter/Sunshine vocals fade and Vegatables Fade.
« Last Edit: February 05, 2014, 08:04:44 AM by buddhahat » Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #12 on: February 05, 2014, 08:02:55 AM »

Overall, I think SMiLE as presented on The SMiLE Sessions is pretty great. You get all the key songs presented in versions that are pretty good. However, I still can't understand why they couldn't get rid of the piano for "Barnyard". Amateurs did a much better job of keeping the vocal yet losing the piano. Honestly, most of the attempts I've heard almost make it sound like the vocal was actually recording for the track. Which is pretty awesome. Shame that Alan and Mark couldn't get that right. I did think that "I'm In Great Shape" was done pretty nicely though. I also think that the "child, child" vocals on "Look" are kinda needless. Shoulda just kept it an instrumental.

My other beef is with with the sequencing and the songs used. First off, I think that the album was just too long. I really feel that Brian coulda gotten rid of "Look", "Holidays", "I Wanna Be Around / Workshop" and maybe even "Love To Say Dada".
Logged
Catbirdman
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 589



View Profile
« Reply #13 on: February 05, 2014, 08:45:54 AM »

I always found GV a much better ending for SMiLE than the song favored by many posters here. Either that, or Vega-Tables! Smiley

Vega-Tables ends my Smile, and after I made that decision, I can never listen to it any other way. It feels so right.
Logged

My real name is Peter Aaron Beyer. I live in Baltimore, Maryland, USA.
Micha
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 3133



View Profile WWW
« Reply #14 on: February 05, 2014, 09:42:00 AM »

I always found GV a much better ending for SMiLE than the song favored by many posters here. Either that, or Vega-Tables! Smiley

Vega-Tables ends my Smile, and after I made that decision, I can never listen to it any other way. It feels so right.

Which version do you use?


Personally, I think they should even have finished the vocals for DYLW, Holidays, CIFOTM, and Look for disc 1 or at least the vinyl. It's getting really annoying to have to sing them myself every time. Smiley
Logged

Ceterum censeo SMiLEBrianum OSDumque esse excludendos banno.
Disney Boy (1985)
Guest
« Reply #15 on: February 05, 2014, 09:51:26 AM »

Overall, I think SMiLE as presented on The SMiLE Sessions is pretty great. You get all the key songs presented in versions that are pretty good. However, I still can't understand why they couldn't get rid of the piano for "Barnyard". Amateurs did a much better job of keeping the vocal yet losing the piano. Honestly, most of the attempts I've heard almost make it sound like the vocal was actually recording for the track. Which is pretty awesome. Shame that Alan and Mark couldn't get that right. I did think that "I'm In Great Shape" was done pretty nicely though. I also think that the "child, child" vocals on "Look" are kinda needless. Shoulda just kept it an instrumental.

My other beef is with with the sequencing and the songs used. First off, I think that the album was just too long. I really feel that Brian coulda gotten rid of "Look", "Holidays", "I Wanna Be Around / Workshop" and maybe even "Love To Say Dada".

On Smile Sessions, yes the likes of Look and Holidays do seem a bit... nice but pointless. However, the completed versions on BWPS, with vocals, are terrific and fit perfectly with the surrounding songs. I still stick by my belief that BWPS was a masterpiece and for the Smile Sessions version they should have got the surviving BB's to record the missing vocals.
Logged
buddhahat
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2643


Hi, my name's Doug. Would you like to dance?


View Profile
« Reply #16 on: February 05, 2014, 10:01:07 AM »

Overall, I think SMiLE as presented on The SMiLE Sessions is pretty great. You get all the key songs presented in versions that are pretty good. However, I still can't understand why they couldn't get rid of the piano for "Barnyard". Amateurs did a much better job of keeping the vocal yet losing the piano. Honestly, most of the attempts I've heard almost make it sound like the vocal was actually recording for the track. Which is pretty awesome. Shame that Alan and Mark couldn't get that right. I did think that "I'm In Great Shape" was done pretty nicely though. I also think that the "child, child" vocals on "Look" are kinda needless. Shoulda just kept it an instrumental.

My other beef is with with the sequencing and the songs used. First off, I think that the album was just too long. I really feel that Brian coulda gotten rid of "Look", "Holidays", "I Wanna Be Around / Workshop" and maybe even "Love To Say Dada".

On Smile Sessions, yes the likes of Look and Holidays do seem a bit... nice but pointless. However, the completed versions on BWPS, with vocals, are terrific and fit perfectly with the surrounding songs. I still stick by my belief that BWPS was a masterpiece and for the Smile Sessions version they should have got the surviving BB's to record the missing vocals.

It could have been cool if just the original members had added their voices but I fear they'd be supplemented by Jeff etc. and it would just undermine the whole thing. Or auto tune. Can you imagine?!
Logged

Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes, Bedroom Tapes ......
Disney Boy (1985)
Guest
« Reply #17 on: February 05, 2014, 10:18:41 AM »

Overall, I think SMiLE as presented on The SMiLE Sessions is pretty great. You get all the key songs presented in versions that are pretty good. However, I still can't understand why they couldn't get rid of the piano for "Barnyard". Amateurs did a much better job of keeping the vocal yet losing the piano. Honestly, most of the attempts I've heard almost make it sound like the vocal was actually recording for the track. Which is pretty awesome. Shame that Alan and Mark couldn't get that right. I did think that "I'm In Great Shape" was done pretty nicely though. I also think that the "child, child" vocals on "Look" are kinda needless. Shoulda just kept it an instrumental.

My other beef is with with the sequencing and the songs used. First off, I think that the album was just too long. I really feel that Brian coulda gotten rid of "Look", "Holidays", "I Wanna Be Around / Workshop" and maybe even "Love To Say Dada".

On Smile Sessions, yes the likes of Look and Holidays do seem a bit... nice but pointless. However, the completed versions on BWPS, with vocals, are terrific and fit perfectly with the surrounding songs. I still stick by my belief that BWPS was a masterpiece and for the Smile Sessions version they should have got the surviving BB's to record the missing vocals.

It could have been cool if just the original members had added their voices but I fear they'd be supplemented by Jeff etc. and it would just undermine the whole thing. Or auto tune. Can you imagine?!

Hmmm yes, when you put it like that...
Logged
OneEar/OneEye
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321


View Profile
« Reply #18 on: February 05, 2014, 10:36:01 AM »

BWPS was its own thing though, why mirror it so for the '66/'67 version?  Personally I feel they ought to have just used the tracks listed on the original back cover (despite that list not being written in stone, it's still the best we had) and placed the additional tracks as bonus/extras.   I wouldn't have felt like it undermined the BW version at all.   The fly ins for Child, Holidays and Great Shape should not have been done if they were not able to pull them off better than they did.  As has been stated, amateurs have shown it can be done better - so why didn't they?  I too would have much preferred the surviving original members to add their vocals to these tracks, and in fact I think that would have been kind of cool.   
That being said, however, I still would rather have what we have as opposed to having no official release at all.   
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #19 on: February 05, 2014, 11:49:38 AM »

I never listened to the boots as I became a fan in early 2011 and was able to wait until the official release with the 1993 box set's smile songs.
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Jukka
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 739



View Profile
« Reply #20 on: February 05, 2014, 12:24:41 PM »

Personally I feel they ought to have just used the tracks listed on the original back cover (despite that list not being written in stone, it's still the best we had) and placed the additional tracks as bonus/extras.

This.
Logged

"Surfing and cars were okay but there was a war going on."
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #21 on: February 05, 2014, 02:58:42 PM »

Personally I feel they ought to have just used the tracks listed on the original back cover (despite that list not being written in stone, it's still the best we had) and placed the additional tracks as bonus/extras.

I think that would have been a smart idea. However, there are a still a few issues, namely...
  • What do you do for the title "I'm In Great Shape"? Do you just use the small snippet? Do you connect "Barnyard" to it? Or possibly "I Wanna Be Around"?
  • And what about "The Elements"? Do you just use "Fire" or do you add in "Love To Say Dada"? Puts you in a tough spot there.
Logged
OneEar/OneEye
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 321


View Profile
« Reply #22 on: February 05, 2014, 03:50:32 PM »


I think that would have been a smart idea. However, there are a still a few issues, namely...
  • What do you do for the title "I'm In Great Shape"? Do you just use the small snippet? Do you connect "Barnyard" to it? Or possibly "I Wanna Be Around"?
  • And what about "The Elements"? Do you just use "Fire" or do you add in "Love To Say Dada"? Puts you in a tough spot there.

That is a good point.  I think I would begin by asking Brian.  If he said "make it like BWPS" I would say "No, Brian, we're not doing that!"   LOL  (Kidding of course), but assuming he was down with making this different from BWPS and his response was "I don't know"  or "I don't care"  then maybe I would ask VDP.  If that bore no fruit, then I might just use MOLC for the elements (as that is the only real definite we have on what was to be included in that suite) and include a word of explanation to that effect in the liner notes.   All other "possibles" when it comes to The Elements, I would place among the bonus material.   With IIGS I would use the material that was in some way originally listed under that title, and place the other potential pieces in with the bonus stuff.    
Ideally of course, in such a scenario, Brian himself would be taking a more active role in the construction of it and would be making such determinations.  Or, they could have held a contest, where they presented the project to all the obsessives who'd been making fan constructions for all these years and chosen one of those for the basis of what they put together.  
Or, give it to ML and see what he comes up with.  Smiley

[edit] MOLC on its own could work as a representation for all the elements.  You have the fire, the air that fans the flames, the earth which is scorched by the fire and the water that puts it out. 
« Last Edit: February 05, 2014, 04:31:30 PM by OneEar/OneEye » Logged
Bicyclerider
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2132


View Profile
« Reply #23 on: February 05, 2014, 05:52:18 PM »

I agree completely - I'd much rather listen to the sea of tunes one cd reconstruction of Smile than the smile sessions version.  First of all I like it's mostly stereo, I like some of the unusual choices/ edits (like child), the wY unfinished stuff like worms was left unfinished! and the flow of it.
Logged
Gabo
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 1162



View Profile
« Reply #24 on: February 05, 2014, 06:03:33 PM »

The Smile Sessions is a difficult listen because so many tracks lack vocals. I think they should have omitted songs like Look from the official reconstruction.

Logged
gfx
Pages: [1] 2 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.583 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!