Smiley Smile

[Mitchell]

From the SWD Thread on the old Smiley board:

WONDERFUL

Baldwin Organ and cellest at first with Carl

Wa Wa Wonderful is wives singing segment

Children, who I think were Carl's (that would be Jonah), were present at the vocal recording and ask to be quite, but the whispers were kept in the mix because of the "party" section

Harmonica

Party like sounds of family gathering, a seperate recording. Audree (mother), Dennis and Brian are named. All the wives and other friends are in the mix. Piano* in background with organ.

Brian at piano*

Na-Na is Brian & Carl

*The piano has a special tuning practiced by some piano tuners who tune studio pianos. It widely detunes the second and third string of the note set.


In Windchimes the "honk" -- do you mean at 1:26, the organ stop in tape echo?

~swd

[the captain]

I love He Gives Speeches. I also dig the creepy-sounding wives part of the Smiley Smile Wonderful--but the unreleased (till box set), Smile-era Wonderful is easily my favorite.

[Reverend Joshua Sloane]

I love He Gives Speeches.

I like the words, like the musical theme, bassline of Wind Chimes all that....just Brian's bored as heck voice makes me cringe.

[Aegir]

I also really like the women singing "won-won wonderful"... It has a really cool vibe, even if it's kinda creepy.

That sounds like a sped-up tape, or a bunch of women with really annoying voices.

I always thought it was the boys just singing high-pitchedly.

[I. Spaceman]

"high-pitchedly"?

[Aegir]

In a high-pitched manner.

I have an adverb problem.

[Mitchell]

Nope, it's the wives.

[monkee knutz]

The recent chatter here makes me wonder how Mike let Smiley Smile 'slip on through' when he gave SMiLE the big thumbs down. Smiley is by far weirder that the finished SMiLE would have been. Maybe Mike liked the more organic feel to Smiley?
I totally dig all the weirdness on this record: uke, giggles & laughs, crunching veggies, 'bom-bom's' in Fall Breaks, sha na na's in Bald, way out man, way out. How this cannot be dug is beyond me! Way bizarre.

[Jeff Mason]

Mr. Knutz, you are moving toward something called The THREAD round these parts.  In essence, it involves why Smile died and how involved the BB and Mike in particular were in that death.  It turns into a holy war of sorts.  Smiley is the big thing there.  Any explanation of the demise of Smile must account for Smiley.  And anyone who blames it all or mostly on Mike must explain why he hated Smile and loved Smiley.

For my money, I would say this regardless:  Smile was mostly studio musicians and outside lyricists.  Smiley is mostly the BB on instruments (or at least could be played by them in concert) and mostly Mike and Brian on lyrics.  For whatever reason, this made Smiley more appealing to band members at that time vs Smile.  Beyond that I risk the thread.  In fact, I may have triggered it, as Cam would say that Mike would have preferred Smile over Smiley but that Brian chose the change over band members' objections.

I will say this -- the silence of other band members, esp Brian, about Smiley is deafening.  Had I $100 to spare, I would have asked Brian to give me his view on why he did it and what he thought of it then and today.

[Mitchell]

I do remember someone complimenting it to him somewhere and Brian thanking him and saying that he liked it, too. No idea where I heard that, though.

[I. Spaceman]

He put it on his Top 5 BB albums in 2004.

[Jeff Mason]

OK, so he likes it -- why did he do it?  What was he up to? Details, man, details....

[I. Spaceman]

Have you heard the Silver Platter Service interview from 67?

[Jeff Mason]

Yep -- not enough detail, esp in the context of the history.

[monkee knutz]

You're spot on and I'm full on aware of the history as well! It's interesting since there are some answers and double the amount of opinions as to why it went that way. If only more undercurrents could be uncovered & elaborated upon. Interesting answers lie within and yes, many arguements are there as well!

A buddy of mine cannot stand Smiley, but loves SMiLE. He just gets angry and can't listen to it. It frustrates him and I find that amusing! "I... I... I can't... can't listen to it." He associates them too closely, as where some of us can look at both seperately and comparatively. I dig 'em both equally and love the scathing histories behind both.

[I. Spaceman]

Why does it have to be that complicated?
Maybe he just dug the sounds they were coming up with, and decided to put em out!

[the captain]

Why does it have to be that complicated?
Maybe he just dug the sounds they were coming up with, and decided to put em out!

Isn't allowing someone that luxury--to just dig or not dig the sounds--something you and Chris D argued against earlier in this thread? It seems to me that you were requiring listeners to analyze music, that liking it just because you "dig it" implies you're lazy. Are you putting more responsibility on listeners than on the artist?

[I. Spaceman]

Yes.
What a work of art is, is a discernment best made by the listener, not the artist.

[the captain]

But artist as listener has insight that a listener can't have, and therefore may be in a better position to judge. (Often not, as many artists are poor judges of their own work, at least in the popular opinion, probably because they're too close to it.)

I think you're wrong if you call it a responsibility of the listener. A right, maybe. But a listener shouldn't be required to do homework on a song that turns out to be a thoughtless accident involving last night's beans and some running tape (for a fictional example).

[Jeff Mason]

Why does it have to be that complicated?
Maybe he just dug the sounds they were coming up with, and decided to put em out!

But Mike didn't raise any issues that we know of and fully cooperated with Smiley.  He did (unless you are Cam) raise concerns and interfere with Smile.  So what's up with that?  And how does that play into Brian's decision?  Let's take your view -- you say that it is an FU by Brian (I don't agree, but work with me).  Given that, why did he choose to make it an FU, and why did Mike say OK to that but reject Smile?  I don't want to start the Thread, but I *am* interested in the dynamics of Smile going to Smiley and the band members views, each one and their thoughts.  All I have seen is Al who seems to have been disheartened by Smiley over Smile.  But it got approved by the band for release.  How?

Just VERY curious, that's all.

[monkee knutz]

Complicated or not- it's just interesting. Insight makes it a bit more phun.
Not that I find one version superior to the other, but why ditch versions of Veggies & Wonderful that are amazing and recreate something different? Simply to avoid using those versions because of what they were associated with?
I recall the first time I heard Smiley's Wonderful, it was strangely uncomfortable as a tune by itself AND I had yet to hear SMiLE's Wonderful. I love them both, and to see an artist turn the production around and go the extreme opposite is amazing to me.

[the captain]

The Smiley Smile versions of all the Smile tunes were, to me, my first exposure to the songs. All of them: Wonderful, Wind Chimes, H&V, etc. And I liked them in the same oddball, creeped-out way I do now. I consider them all inferior, but still worth hearing.

[Chris D.]

Isn't allowing someone that luxury--to just dig or not dig the sounds--something you and Chris D argued against earlier in this thread? It seems to me that you were requiring listeners to analyze music, that liking it just because you "dig it" implies you're lazy. Are you putting more responsibility on listeners than on the artist?

I'd probably place more responsibility on the artist.  They must know what they are putting out there.  They may not know when they are creating.  That's fair.  I think it's best to create spontaneously and then analyze while editing prior to release.  But I really despite it when people say, "I just create this stuff and let fans decide what it means," even though artists I love do that.  It's so lazy and irresponsible, and a total betrayal of their intellectual skills.  If you're not going to think about your work, why should I?

And "luxury" is the perfect word for what you describe.

Not that I find one version superior to the other, but why ditch versions of Veggies & Wonderful that are amazing and recreate something different?

Because Smiley is a different album with a different concept.  The new approach would sound ridiculous if elements of the old approach were placed within it that explicitly.

[monkee knutz]

Not that I find one version superior to the other, but why ditch versions of Veggies & Wonderful that are amazing and recreate something different?

Because Smiley is a different album with a different concept.  The new approach would sound ridiculous if elements of the old approach were placed within it that explicitly.

Not necessarily. Can you say Good Vibrations and Heroes & Villains??

[Chris D.]

"Good Vibrations" works because conceptually it couldn't be any different.  It has to sound like science-fiction.  A "Smiley style" version just wouldn't be right.

"Heroes and Villains" already is the Smiley version, different than what we know from the Smile stuff even if it contains large elements of Smile.  My point was that it's still not too explicit, whereas dropping the first version of "Wonderful" next to "Gettin' Hungry" would be a bad idea.