Backing Vox 'Let's go away...'

[mike moseley]

Did Craig get the multis out..?  Did I miss something..?

You know very well that session sheets aren't always 100% accurate.

I think its worth pursuing if there's any doubt what the sound is.

Anyone who's not interested:  STOP READING THE THREAD.

f*** it, I've had enough. Yes Mike, you're right and everyone else is wrong, including Craig. Never mind there's no vibes on the part you're listenting, you're right. They're vibes. Satisfied ?

[The Cincinnati Kid]

I finally had a chance to listen to this closely.  Definitely sounds like a flute to me.  At the very least, I don't hear a voice.  That's my two cents anyway...

[mike moseley]

Its very puzzling. Maybe its more than 1 thing playing unison..?  That would account for the different things people are picking out..?

I finally had a chance to listen to this closely.  Definitely sounds like a flute to me.  At the very least, I don't hear a voice.  That's my two cents anyway...

[guitarfool2002]

Playing devil's advocate:

Reminds me of those who insisted there was autotune audible on a 10-second cel phone video clip of Brian and Zooey D tracking vocals in the studio, then further all of those who insisted, then defended those who swore they heard all of the "excessive" autotune up and down No Pier Pressure's vocals, suggesting we all hear and perceive things a different way and should be allowed to express and defend those perceptions as either pure observation or as basis for criticism (i.e. 'I didn't like the album because there was too much autotune on the vocals') whether true or not.

The proverbial shoe on the other foot?

[HeyJude]

I don't see the potential for a vocal on LGAFA as analogous to the NPP autotune discussions.

If someone had access to all of the ProTools (or whatever software they're using) multitrack files used to mix each NPP track and could testify that no pitch correction plug-in was used, then these two situations would be comparable.

[mike moseley]

Can't tell which side you're playing devil's advocate for

Different people are hearing this differently that's for sure - that in itself is interesting to me.

I think the discussion has thrown up some very interesting posts from Josh and the others and most recently my mate - did anyone else here know you can pitch bend vibes..?  I sure didn't.

Playing devil's advocate:

Reminds me of those who insisted there was autotune audible on a 10-second cel phone video clip of Brian and Zooey D tracking vocals in the studio, then further all of those who insisted, then defended those who swore they heard all of the "excessive" autotune up and down No Pier Pressure's vocals, suggesting we all hear and perceive things a different way and should be allowed to express and defend those perceptions as either pure observation or as basis for criticism (i.e. 'I didn't like the album because there was too much autotune on the vocals') whether true or not.

The proverbial shoe on the other foot?

[HeyJude]

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

[guitarfool2002]

No one has ever given proof that there was autotune applied on NPP to the extent some were saying "ruined" the album for them, and no one has posted anything more than a less-than one-half second snippet of a digital residue noise on one of the vocals to back up the claim. Yet, those that swore up and down they heard it and used that perception to insist it was there were defended, because that was what they heard. And despite what was factual, those opinions based on perceptions from those listeners were sufficient enough to say there was autotune on NPP.

Whether there was or not. Whatever the actual truth of the matter may be...opinions from listeners who claim they heard it are on the same level of fact as the actual fact, and the storyline is there was excessive use of autotune on NPP to the point of ruining the album.

So the shoe being on the other foot, Mr. Moseley hears something in the track being discussed here, and his perception of what he hears, that perception which is being suggested runs counter to the actual fact of what was recorded and mixed on the track, is being dismissed outright and very strongly.

Why not afford Mr. Moseley's perceptions and observations the same leeway if not defense as those who swore there was excessive autotune on NPP? I mean, no one has yet proven there is autotune on NPP and it's all based on perception despite the facts and what can be actually heard.

The devil's advocate position. Why one and not the other...

[HeyJude]

I think most any theory should be given a hearing, and this LGAFA issue has. Nobody just immediately dismissed it. It looks like we all went back and listened again, Craig and others dug up documentation and other evidence and expertise, and mostly eliminated this interesting and intriguing but likely incorrect theory.

Overall, I think that, while that issue and the NPP autotune issue are not comparable, both were given fair hearings from most of the folks here.

To me, the "there are vocals on LGAFA" position is closer, though still not fully analogous, to the "there's no autotune on NPP" argument.

As for the NPP stuff, there was no single position held by any large contingent of fans. Some people thought autotune ruined NPP, some people didn't like it but didn't feel it ruined it, some people heard it and it didn't bug them at all, some didn't care, and some said it wasn't there at all. All sides were voiced in that debate.

[guitarfool2002]

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

I could say having also studied and researched the methods of 60's recording and mixing techniques to the point of duplicating those techniques on various studio projects, having heard various multitracks and session tapes from that era including Pet Sounds, having owned and operated a recording and production studio that used autotune on various vocal tracks, and other peripherals to add to my resume of previous work from the past 30 years or so...

...There is just no hard evidence for the excessive autotune on NPP theory, and tons of evidence against it.

Shoe on other foot.  

[mike moseley]

Oh I see - well I'm not insisting its vox (although it still sounds like them to me).

I don't think its flute either - or at least not flute alone.

What it IS I don't know but bent vibe notes sure seems a good stab by my producer bud.

In a live set up couldn't an instrument nearby be ringing in some way and be picked up even if not being played..?  If a mic near it was live..?  I'm not saying I think that must be what happened its just a thought.

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

[HeyJude]

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

I could say having also studied and researched the methods of 60's recording and mixing techniques to the point of duplicating those techniques on various studio projects, having heard various multitracks and session tapes from that era including Pet Sounds, having owned and operated a recording and production studio that used autotune on various vocal tracks, and other peripherals to add to my resume of previous work from the past 30 years or so...

...There is just no hard evidence for the excessive autotune on NPP theory, and tons of evidence against it.

Shoe on other foot.  

But nobody (as far as I can recall) claimed there was "hard evidence" of autotune on NPP. Most simply said they believed it was there, and from time to time called on some level of familiarity with it to reach that opinion, always acknowledging there's no proof one way or the other.

There's a slew of hard documentary evidence on the LGAFA issue that doesn't exist for the NPP issue.

[mike moseley]

I'm not insisting there are vocals though.  I think its possible they are there but no probs if not.

I'm not convinced its just flute or even flute at all.  If I'm audibly proved wrong no problem.

I think the vibes pitch-bending video is very very interesting.  Suggested by a very sharp and un-biased pair of ears (who also doesn't hear any vox).
 

I think most any theory should be given a hearing, and this LGAFA issue has. Nobody just immediately dismissed it. It looks like we all went back and listened again, Craig and others dug up documentation and other evidence and expertise, and mostly eliminated this interesting and intriguing but likely incorrect theory.

Overall, I think that, while that issue and the NPP autotune issue are not comparable, both were given fair hearings from most of the folks here.

To me, the "there are vocals on LGAFA" position is closer, though still not fully analogous, to the "there's no autotune on NPP" argument.

As for the NPP stuff, there was no single position held by any large contingent of fans. Some people thought autotune ruined NPP, some people didn't like it but didn't feel it ruined it, some people heard it and it didn't bug them at all, some didn't care, and some said it wasn't there at all. All sides were voiced in that debate.

[The Cincinnati Kid]

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

I could say having also studied and researched the methods of 60's recording and mixing techniques to the point of duplicating those techniques on various studio projects, having heard various multitracks and session tapes from that era including Pet Sounds, having owned and operated a recording and production studio that used autotune on various vocal tracks, and other peripherals to add to my resume of previous work from the past 30 years or so...

...There is just no hard evidence for the excessive autotune on NPP theory, and tons of evidence against it.

Shoe on other foot.  

But nobody (as far as I can recall) claimed there was "hard evidence" of autotune on NPP. Most simply said they believed it was there, and from time to time called on some level of familiarity with it to reach that opinion, always acknowledging there's no proof one way or the other.

There's a slew of hard documentary evidence on the LGAFA issue that doesn't exist for the NPP issue.

I believe during that discussion I made a point to note that autotune at this point has become a general term for voice correcting software.  Like how a lot of people say Kleenex when really it is one of many brands of tissue.  Of course now we're getting a bit off topic here.

[alf wiedersehen]

This thread is not about NPP, has never been about NPP, and it's super weird to see a mod attempt to derail this thread with a year-old argument he apparently hasn't been able to let go of.

[guitarfool2002]

If Craig were simply someone who had no other knowledge of recording or BB music and simply transcribed the contents of a multitrack tape, then I'd perhaps leave some leeway for alternate theories.

But we not only have a guy who has examined the multitracks, we have a guy who had a strong working understanding of that era of recording, the methods Brian used, the methods and procedures used by musicians at sessions, and an understanding and familiarity with the band and its voices.

We do occasionally run into huge epiphanies that we didn't hear before (e.g. Dennis' lead surviving on IJWMFTT), but I don't think this LGAFA situation is one of them. There's just no hard documentary evidence for the vocal theory, and tons of evidence against the theory.

I could say having also studied and researched the methods of 60's recording and mixing techniques to the point of duplicating those techniques on various studio projects, having heard various multitracks and session tapes from that era including Pet Sounds, having owned and operated a recording and production studio that used autotune on various vocal tracks, and other peripherals to add to my resume of previous work from the past 30 years or so...

...There is just no hard evidence for the excessive autotune on NPP theory, and tons of evidence against it.

Shoe on other foot.  

But nobody (as far as I can recall) claimed there was "hard evidence" of autotune on NPP. Most simply said they believed it was there, and from time to time called on some level of familiarity with it to reach that opinion, always acknowledging there's no proof one way or the other.

There's a slew of hard documentary evidence on the LGAFA issue that doesn't exist for the NPP issue.

You're understating the level of those discussions related to NPP and autotune, it was not only insisting it was used, but insisting it was used based on the proof "I can hear it", which is the same criteria Mike Moseley is using to suggest he hears something playing a line besides the flute on the passage in question.

Yet not a single one of those people claiming this overuse of autotune on NPP could produce (or have produced) even a single passage for us to listen to and judge as an example of autotune on NPP. What was produced was basically a millisecond of digital residue that anyone who has recorded and mixed in digital for the past 25 years or so would say could be the result of things that happen when working with digital.

There is also evidence to suggest those trying to say there was "excessive", "intrusive", or other adjectives to describe the use of autotune on NPP were full of hot air. Since there is no proof offered as of yet to say emphatically and factually "there is autotune all over NPP". Not a single bit of proof to back it up.

So it's all perception. Just like Mike M's perception of hearing something on that line of LGAFA.

[guitarfool2002]

This thread is not about NPP, has never been about NPP, and it's super weird to see a mod attempt to derail this thread with a year-old argument he apparently hasn't been able to let go of.

Give it up, sport. It didn't work when you tried it before.

[alf wiedersehen]

Right you are.

Continue your consequence-free frolic through the Smiley Smile board, Craigy.

[The Cincinnati Kid]

Come on guys, let's not go down this road again.

[HeyJude]

You're understating the level of those discussions related to NPP and autotune, it was not only insisting it was used, but insisting it was used based on the proof "I can hear it", which is the same criteria Mike Moseley is using to suggest he hears something playing a line besides the flute on the passage in question.

Yet not a single one of those people claiming this overuse of autotune on NPP could produce (or have produced) even a single passage for us to listen to and judge as an example of autotune on NPP.

I have no interest in going back through the drudgery of that NPP autotune discussion, but I recall that there were people who said they detected autotune who mentioned specific songs and specific sections of songs that they heard it on. It basically boiled down to most everyone on either side agreeing that it couldn't be proven one way or the other, and only a very small group of people (or person) who didn't feel that level of acquiescence on the point was good enough.

As for the "I can hear it" comparison, while I don't think there's anywhere near the same grounds to make these two very disparate claims (vocals on LGAFA and autotune on NPP), beyond saying *anything* is technically an opinion (I say I hear Foghat, Kermit the Frog, a cement mixer, and crackling Rice Krispies on every "Pet Sounds" track, doesn't mean my "opinion" is as credible as any other on any topic), even if I grant that the "I can hear it" observation/opinion should carry the same weight in both cases, there are two very different sets of available evidence to refute these two claims.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of autotune on NPP? Nothing. That doesn't mean it's there. But it doesn't *disprove* the theory.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of a vocal overdub on LGAFA? Quite a bit. Basically, the contents of c-man's posts. Essentially, the ability of some level of forensic-style examination of the recording elements.

[mike moseley]

I'm not insisting there's vox on the track.

I expect its probably combined instruments I'm hearing.

You're understating the level of those discussions related to NPP and autotune, it was not only insisting it was used, but insisting it was used based on the proof "I can hear it", which is the same criteria Mike Moseley is using to suggest he hears something playing a line besides the flute on the passage in question.

Yet not a single one of those people claiming this overuse of autotune on NPP could produce (or have produced) even a single passage for us to listen to and judge as an example of autotune on NPP.

I have no interest in going back through the drudgery of that NPP autotune discussion, but I recall that there were people who said they detected autotune who mentioned specific songs and specific sections of songs that they heard it on. It basically boiled down to most everyone on either side agreeing that it couldn't be proven one way or the other, and only a very small group of people (or person) who didn't feel that level of acquiescence on the point was good enough.

As for the "I can hear it" comparison, while I don't think there's anywhere near the same grounds to make these two very disparate claims (vocals on LGAFA and autotune on NPP), beyond saying *anything* is technically an opinion (I say I hear Foghat, Kermit the Frog, a cement mixer, and crackling Rice Krispies on every "Pet Sounds" track, doesn't mean my "opinion" is as credible as any other on any topic), even if I grant that the "I can hear it" observation/opinion should carry the same weight in both cases, there are two very different sets of available evidence to refute these two claims.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of autotune on NPP? Nothing. That doesn't mean it's there. But it doesn't *disprove* the theory.

What evidence is there to refute the suggestion of a vocal overdub on LGAFA? Quite a bit. Basically, the contents of c-man's posts. Essentially, the ability of some level of forensic-style examination of the recording elements.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I don't hear any auto tune on "LGAFAW". None whatsoever. But that's just my opinion, of course.

[HeyJude]

Don't worry. You'll get the autotune on the bonus 6th disc for the new PS set; Best Buy's exclusive featuring a Joe Thomas stereo remix. Oboes, nylon string guitars, and claves overdubbed on every song.....

And Toby Keith sings the bridge lead on WIBN.

[Gertie J.]

lol

[mike moseley]

Absolutely, truly hilarious - Tom Lehrer standard wit.

As for me:  well lookee - pedantic borderline OCD behaviour on a message board which is powered by the stuff - how odd

Don't worry. You'll get the autotune on the bonus 6th disc for the new PS set; Best Buy's exclusive featuring a Joe Thomas stereo remix. Oboes, nylon string guitars, and claves overdubbed on every song.....

And Toby Keith sings the bridge lead on WIBN.