|
Post by zebulan on May 18, 2020 12:57:46 GMT -5
I think that in the terminology of H & V sessions tag is an "outro", something attached to the end of a section - and "pick-up" is the opposite, something attached to the beginning. Both serve as transitions from one section to another. Why would finished versions of Part 1, 2 single need a tag? If I remember right, Brian thought in terms of "fade" for the endings of songs. What about the Wind Chimes version 2 tag (which acts as a fade)? Actually, come to think of it, is it actually called "tag" anywhere official, or is that just a name created by fans and/or TSS? And I guess it's also a special case since in the early mixes of the song, the original version of the section acts as a connective piece between two choruses. Actually, Brian calls it "pickup 1" on UM 17 disc 3 track 5. Either way, I think you may be on the right track (heh) with the terminology.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 18, 2020 13:16:01 GMT -5
I just listened to the TSS track. The slate guy says "Uh, part 2, [uh/of], Heroes and Villains take 1... revised version". I can't tell if he's saying "uh" or "of". It sounds like it could be "of" with a slang so there's no "f" sound, but I'm not sure. I don't think I'd call it an "evolution". The basic track remains the same in the master take as in the early takes, doesn't it? I would assume that Brian was always planning to overdub the vocal parts he did. I am aware the pronunciation is not always the clearest on these tapes, but it seems to me it's "of". The earliest take of "Hold On" as per TSS is more "villainese" closer to the end, as befits the idea of H&V chorus sounding "villainese". And in the master as mixed on TSS, not everybody would notice the "Bicycle Rider" theme under all these vocal parts, so yes, while the backing is the same, it is not "chorusy" anymore - maybe in this way Brian planned continuation of the BR theme.
|
|
|
Post by Cam Mott on May 18, 2020 13:27:38 GMT -5
Yep, looks like I was wrong, it was not "FIRST PART" on that tape. Don't know where I got that.
So we think the verses had a fade or Brian edited off the run over and then came a "part 2", if H&V 57020 had a "Part 2" at that time, or something followed and the song would end with something else? Is a "Part 2" noted or slated on that tape or those sessions?
There was an H&V Part 2 57045 by January 5 which implies the concurrent H&V 57020 was "Part 1".
Take that puppies!
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 18, 2020 13:40:18 GMT -5
The only notation anywhere for a 'first part' is on the tape box for the missing Jan 31 mix, and looking at the edit list, I honestly think it could refer to the fragmentary rough mixes and partial edit the Sea of Tunes people got their hands on (which are not in the tape vaults). The parts aren't quite in the right order but neither is the edit list on the box for the Feb 10 mix. The "1st version of PT-1" and "2nd version of PT-1 with more echo" notes certainly suggest that. '1st part' here would refer to the edited first part of the song... because it was only a trial edit of a few sections before Cantina had been added. And even if what's floating around on bootlegs isn't that particular mix, the notes on the box don't suggest a completed track like the Feb 10 notes do. Brian used 'tag' interchangeably with 'fade' or 'ending', but this is the only session where I've ever heard him call something a tag TO a certain part. Sorry, not buying in a million years that Brian was ever referring to the A-side of his single as "Heroes and Villains Part 1". Every time the master number theory bobs up a puppy drops dead. All of them, 1/31 list and the 2/10 list AND (different) mix of the alternate version don't have one thing: chorus. So whatever differences between the versions missing from tapes and the "Cantina" version may exist, the proposed hit single at this stage missed the crucial ingredient. But who knows, given there was quite a number of finished sections, of which just a few befitted the A-side, maybe a design of the moment was for Part 1 / Part 2 not on the single, but on the album. The album was on the cards all the time, even though later on Brian was focused on singles. Part 1 as presented on 1/31 list and the 2/10 list and the mix certainly befits this idea. Part 2 could be any concoction of chants-tags-bridges, moreso most of these chants are in the theme of "Smile" in general. Such design would put the most of already-developed musical fragments to use and would prolong the playing time, and varying the musical contents of the album, also, it'd be in the spirit of the times. Of course, this is just an idea. The key observation is absence of a chorus, and I think Brian did not entertain an idea of a hit without a chorus, so this wasn't for a single. As "Tag to Part 1" is not specified anywhere in these lists and mix, it's obviously a remnant from an earlier design, and "Part 1" is everything up to the "cantina" bit ("Part 2").
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 18, 2020 14:29:17 GMT -5
What about the Wind Chimes version 2 tag (which acts as a fade)? Actually, come to think of it, is it actually called "tag" anywhere official, or is that just a name created by fans and/or TSS? And I guess it's also a special case since in the early mixes of the song, the original version of the section acts as a connective piece between two choruses. Actually, Brian calls it "pickup 1" on UM 17 disc 3 track 5. Either way, I think you may be on the right track (heh) with the terminology. It's weirder still, that WC2 tag - Brian says on tape it's "pick-up 1 for the pianos out" I haven't heard all tapes, though.
|
|
|
Post by zebulan on May 18, 2020 14:43:43 GMT -5
It's an extended cantina version of H&V, with "Tag" coming right after "Prelude to fade" (in which the flutter horn ending part is omitted): Verse Acapella verse
Cantina
Children were raised ("often wise")
Verse ("at three-score five")
Bridge to Indians (cross-cutting into--)
Prelude to fade (flutter horn ending cut out)
Tag to part 1 (with moaning vocals from "Animals")
Dumb Whistle/Tape explosion
Fade I still think this sequence flows quite good, even though I don't actually use it on my own SMiLE-mixes. Especially regarding the Tag, this particular edit was one of the few "breakthroughs" I encountered during my own attempts to edit SMiLE.
Following this template, you could also go from "Dumb whistle/tape explosion" to verse once again ("stand or fall") and then proceed with the rest of the song as it is in Smiley Smile/Single version. That way every essential lyric gets used and you have a pretty solid alternate version of H&V. But still, it's no match for more official versions of this song imho... Nice mix. The second half is not at all plausible for historical accuracy, but it does sound pretty good. The Swedish Frog sounds work surprisingly well dubbed over Part 1 Tag. In case you aren't already aware, it's worth noting that Prelude to Fade was most likely the stand or fall verse. It would probably have gone like: "I've been in this town so long, (so long) to the city, I'm fit with the stuff, to ride in the rough, and sunny down snuff I'm alright." (The second "so long" could either be omitted or sang as a call-and-response quickly after or in-sync with the first one.) At this point we reach the quieter part of the section... "Stand or fall I know there shall be peace in the valley, and it's all an affair of my life with the heroes and villains" ...with "villains" sung concurrent with the start of the flutter horn. So technically, your mix already contains the (early version of) "stand or fall", just without anyone actually singing the lyrics. I also notice that you use Mission Pak at the start of the song. That's also probably not historically accurate, but it's definitely a convenient way to (more smoothly) transition from Our Prayer and avoid using the BWPS/TSS-style Gee intro. I'm currently using it the same way in my H&V album mix. (My current H&V album mix is a compromise between historical accuracy and personal preference; its mostly based on the Feb 10 mix, similar to yours, but I'm using the Smiley versions of the pre-Cantina verses, and I've inserted the Smiley "la la la... stand or fall" verse between Three Score and Whistling Bridge.)
|
|
|
Post by zebulan on May 18, 2020 14:55:36 GMT -5
What about the Wind Chimes version 2 tag (which acts as a fade)? Actually, come to think of it, is it actually called "tag" anywhere official, or is that just a name created by fans and/or TSS? And I guess it's also a special case since in the early mixes of the song, the original version of the section acts as a connective piece between two choruses. Actually, Brian calls it "pickup 1" on UM 17 disc 3 track 5. Either way, I think you may be on the right track (heh) with the terminology. It's weirder still, that WC2 tag - Brian says on tape it's "pick-up 1 for the pianos out" I haven't heard all tapes, though. Just to clarify (in case my wording was a bit unclear), UM 17 disc 3 track 5 contains the earlier version of the section, not the later version that seems to act as a fade. So it's the WC1 "tag" (or pickup, or whatever), not WC2.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 18, 2020 15:30:07 GMT -5
There was an H&V Part 2 57045 by January 5 which implies the concurrent H&V 57020 was "Part 1". Take that puppies! About master 57045: looks like it and not 57020 has got most for Side A of a single, only the work was stopped too soon. In a marked difference to the design of "Cantina" alternate, "Part 2" here is chorus which is missing amidst the sections of 1/31-2/10 and the bunch of chants and tags/bridges/pick-ups. Remakes of verse and fade are also here. "Intro" is an unknown entity in this scheme - does the verse really need any intro? but as work on this master was stopped, it does not matter; it could be just a whim of the moment. So: Brian has got enough of stuff on 57020 for a prolonged album version, very possibly in two parts - "Cantina" alternate as Part 1 and 4 chants (plus something else?) as Part 2. But, as he had BR all this time, he had designs for it as an obvious chorus - so he started re-making previous sections in order to make his single (Side A)? In this scenario, we know nothing about Side B, though he could use again those 4 chants from 57020 for that. Could there have been factors at work for him wanting to delay the single as long as possible? the Capitol contract, Brother Records creation, whatever? if the single ASAP was the goal, he'd make something like "Cantina", only with chorus instead of three verses in a row, of roughly 3.5 minutes.
|
|
|
Post by zebulan on May 18, 2020 16:11:57 GMT -5
Where does the March "Intro" label come from again? Or is it another fan-made title? If so, the Chimes Remake might still have been intended for the middle of whatever it was supposed to be part of, whether that be the a-side or b-side.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 19, 2020 4:58:39 GMT -5
Intro was a separate section, no way somebody would describe the opening verse as some "intro". The March intro is also a remake, as there had been one from Dec. 19, 1966.
I had been thinking hard about all this - the fact that in the March session Brian had a chorus in the works, partially demonstrates he was on the path of making a hit single. But that intro is something of most glaringly anti-single kind. I can see a buyer from a street placing a needle on this intro, and taking it off after ten seconds, it's just too spooky.
The only way to align the idea of masters 57020 and 57045 with what is known about "Part 1", "Part 2", "Side 1", "Side 2" as documented on the tapeboxes or wherever - is that Brian thought up "Sgt. Pepper" before the "Sgt. Pepper". That these masters were for versions on different sides of a LP. This would explain the need for developing a chorusless "Cantina" alternate - he'd have known it's not a single from the start. So a version that would resemble a proper single - with chorus, but also with an albatross of a useless intro - would be on Side 2. He just abandoned it all instead of taking an obvious route, what they've done for "Smiley". I understand that most, if not all, of my points have been raised in Cam's thread, but what interests me is, how many people questioned the Side A / B proposition for a single because the development of 57020 does not show the way for a single. Like, was there an interviewer who'd ask Chuck Britz, etc. about their thoughts on the absence of a chorus from the "Cantina" alternate.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 19, 2020 11:06:50 GMT -5
His previous hit was of VCVCB1B2C3B3Cf structure, so that's 4 times when a chorus motif can be heard. I'd buy the idea that the Cantina alternate was his intended single of the moment only with the idea that for H&V, he intended not just to do his another Number One, but to do it in his peculiar way, that is, by not having a single chorus section. While many Smile tracks of better variety could be relied on being memorable, hummable, etc., not every one of them could have been made into a hit single, much less a chart topper to trump out any other possible chart toppers.
Both GV and H&V have been worked on in "modular" mode, but with GV, there was a method to his madness. I don't remember a single not entirely clear moment when it comes to him naming the sections, as found on the available tapes. Other kinds of sessions logging, esp. the June 16th session debacle with "parts 1-3", may be what they are, but what was said on tapes, except for him misnaming some takes, shows his grasp of the track structure was very good. As for H&V, he thought up so many worthy modules for so many potentially worthy designs, it boggles the mind. But, was he really that intent to make his single without a chorus?
There are references that "Brian worked on several versions at the same time" (Mike Love?), most probably referring to GV. Sure he'd like to have a number of choices to choose from, but the general direction of his thought can be traced from S1 to S6, weird VCVC-F structures of S7 and S8 being a major exception - it's possible to rationalize about his every decision for each of those GV sessions. With H&V, it's clear that after the initial developments from May 66 to the middle of Jan 67, he had a strong contender for the opening verse (and more), for a chorus, a fade, and a myriad of interconnecting sections of every kind - tags, bridges, pick-ups, some weird intro. But somehow the work on the chorus, or its any use, is set aside as soon as he put it to that 57045 master - yes there were mixing experiments, but as they were not to his liking, why did he stop using that chorus instead of making tweaks. So it looks like he withheld that master till closer to the end of February, and very soon after that he got fed up with his creation. And basically, it ended off the notion of a "Smile" LP, too. His only major work after that was on Vegetables, another prospective single. At least that one had a chorus. I think the notion that the design of H&V was too complicated and overwhelmed him is bunkum, for as soon as he started the remakes on 57045 he was on a path to his single, and he had too many "spares" to fill it up. There must be some other reasons (group - record company politics, personal matters, drugs, whatever). But it does not look like his "57020" works amounted to a single - rather a "hippy-drippy" album version.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 19, 2020 11:21:49 GMT -5
The early version of the organ waltz piece was slated 'Heroes and Villains Part 3', and it wasn't recorded December 19th. An unspecified date possibly in December but the 19th is a session it definitely didn't come from. Thank you, I think I got that Dec. 19th notion from the "Smiley Smile Inventory". So it was something possibly from the "second half of the song", not the intro to Verse 1 by any means. Yet, it is possible that it served as an "intro" to some Part 4 in that H&V design, or at least sounded like some kind of an "intro" and was too long to be considered a "pick-up". And when it was remade in March 67, the "intro" slang stuck.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 19, 2020 12:08:08 GMT -5
Short of reading sources like LLVS and the like, I came up with at least one factor in favor of my theory, that the works on 57020 did not amount to the single version of H&V, and Brian's awareness of that. The "River Deep, Mountain High" debacle. I don't know how true it is that Phil Spector acted snooty toward DJs, so they snubbed his record, but Brian was doubtlessly aware that even high and mighty can fail with nothing less than works of art. Would he have been THAT intent on having a chorusless single?
P.S. Am reading Priore's second book on the subject. It looks like the upcoming H&V single was withheld from Capitol until the resolution of their legal dispute re: royalties from before. But I think that the state of the matter was more prosaic: there never was a single. Brian had worked on an album version, or even two album versions all this time. Maybe he thought he'll get to the single version in due time - after the resolution with Capitol. Well, with 57045 it looked like he was on the due course, but then certain bigger problems happened which made him to start a gradual withdrawal, through Vegetables as the next focus.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 20, 2020 7:23:23 GMT -5
If I were Brian, I'd have no problems telling NME I am working on a hit single, moreso it's not like he wasn't working on one at all. There was just a lull in this direction between sometime after Jan 5th (when the "mixing experiments" were made) till sometime after Feb 10th. Granted, it may be even a short lull, but the progress during this time as documented does not show him employing that crucial chorus element. And the litigation timeline is not in disagreement. For a side wanting to start litigation, a period of discontent is needed. He did not cease working, he just concentrated on the album version after he did not like for some reason his "mixing experiments" instead of continuing to focus on the single version to rush out. Then he decided the BR chorus was OK, after all, and started in earnest with that 57045 master. The absence of a chorus anywhere in that lull period is just too glaring.
As for Marty, he relied on his usual idiom for that song. Brian's task was to provide a related experience in the Beach Boys idiom, and of course with a big statement to prove himself again. I somehow doubt this is possible without a chorus. That the contemporary witnesses to Brian's work say nothing about him aiming to do his trick in a specifically experimental way, kinda confims "Cantina" was a LP track.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 20, 2020 8:34:13 GMT -5
The songs you named are all great songs; of them, Wouldn't It Be Nice IMO is the one that has "it", the quality and the properties of a big hit, and it is even anthemic; no wonder it got a good chart position. And it's not like it's completely devoid of something like choruses - while "Cantina" is. The resources of time, labor, and finances that Brian was spending on H&V indicate that this was, in his aspirations, nothing less than GV. The very notion of H&V demanded something better than the designs known to us.
H&V had a chorus since Jan 5th. The only question is, why Brian meddled with it. It's not like the tapes provide us with numerous attempts to come up with something even better. I would agree that, given he wasn't satisfied with "the mixing experiments", he wanted to achieve a better transition from the verse to BR and probably from BR to elsewhere, and this could be the main reason why he set BR aside. It could well be that, for a moment, "Cantina" was his choice design - after all, the guy started giving GV a new strange (and stray) direction in the middle of June, so I can accept the idea that something made him thinking to let the "Cantina" design out as the single - for a brief moment. But it did not take him long to reject it, either. Obviously he knew about the science of a hit single more than anybody.
|
|
|
Post by dumdangel (Lee) on May 23, 2020 10:51:17 GMT -5
H&V had a chorus since Jan 5th. The only question is, why Brian meddled with it. It's not like the tapes provide us with numerous attempts to come up with something even better. I would agree that, given he wasn't satisfied with "the mixing experiments", he wanted to achieve a better transition from the verse to BR and probably from BR to elsewhere, and this could be the main reason why he set BR aside. It could well be that, for a moment, "Cantina" was his choice design - after all, the guy started giving GV a new strange (and stray) direction in the middle of June, so I can accept the idea that something made him thinking to let the "Cantina" design out as the single - for a brief moment. But it did not take him long to reject it, either. Obviously he knew about the science of a hit single more than anybody. I wouldn't say H&V had a chorus since Jan 5th. H&V went into another song that had a chorus, that's a fair statement. But I think it's a bit of s t r e t c h to say the Bicycle Rider chorus was a H&V chorus, it wouldn't come off that way to the listener. Remember, the mix would have gone: H&V Verse -- Bridge to Indians -- DYLW Verse -- Bicycle Rider -- Unknown. We don't know if Bicycle Rider was set aside. What we know is that it's part of another song (DYLW), and that Brian created ways to transition to that song from H&V. But that was most likely for an album cut. Unfortunately, I think Brian was actually losing his sense of what made a single a "hit" at the time. He was growing very insecure with this project come March, and he decided to shelve the best version of H&V he had ever made. The fact that his mental disorder was also beginning to develop made it a recipe for disaster. Btw guys, I've asked this before, but I'd like to ask again: I'm looking for someone who can share with me a Smile Bootleg that I need to complete my H&V thread. There was a track on one of the bootlegs that had the Sonny down snuff vocals in a manner in which I could isolate them, which I intend to use for the Prelude. However, the flash drive I used to store these bootlegs has been destroyed so I am left without them. I believe this particular bootleg was a combination of Good Vibrations and Heroes and Villains sessions. I could use your help!
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 23, 2020 12:01:28 GMT -5
Frankly, I don't remember anything about the use of DYLW verse, need to check it out; THAT would have been one of his crazier ideas. Sure he had a way for satisfying his musical curiosity. Even if he wasn't up to the use of BR as lifted from DYLW "as is", its theme was an obvious candidate for a chorus (and, as he used its variations for other parts, he considered various designs for it). The best indicator is, of course, that he returned to this theme. H&V linked with DYLW in any way? No chance, IMO. It looks like in the second half of February he decided to plunder DYLW for its chorus, thus putting DYLW to rest; that's an indication that the Smile album wasn't in the plans anymore.
Of course this idea does not fit well with my earlier proposition, that he planned two versions of H&V for the album, just like Sgt Pepper. Basically, we can recognize two things:
- that chorusless Cantina version and the chant sections on 57020 seem to amount to one such (prolonged) version (which some people, with me in the past, took for candidate for a 2-part single); - and that the BR chorus, which started 57045, initiated that other master reel. It was not to be found among 57020-related for some reason. (Or, why didn't he go the obvious route, just using BR from 57045 as chorus in any known designs found on 57020).
But, by the time BR theme was the chorus again, and other sections were remade, it is very possible Brian has rejected his earlier design, of two versions on each LP side - probably because he decided (or had a momentary decision or whatever) to cancel the LP, but to make at least a single - but the inscriptions on the tape boxes remained. He was close to finishing the 57020 version, and his work on the second one on 57045 just went in the direction of the single.
I doubt very much that Brian ever lost the plot musically. Basically, a hit single and moreso a superhit need to be hummable. Those songs where both verse and chorus can be hummed - with two hummable themes - are the best (that's Wouldn't It Be Nice). H&V did not have a single such theme in "Cantina". So my bet is on the political things. Record company pressure, peer pressure, whatever. He just wasn't able to do what he did best, concentrating on music.
|
|
|
Post by dumdangel (Lee) on May 23, 2020 13:02:01 GMT -5
Frankly, I don't remember anything about the use of DYLW verse, need to check it out; THAT would have been one of his crazier ideas. Sure he had a way for satisfying his musical curiosity. Even if he wasn't up to the use of BR as lifted from DYLW "as is", its theme was an obvious candidate for a chorus (and, as he used its variations for other parts, he considered various designs for it). The best indicator is, of course, that he returned to this theme. H&V linked with DYLW in any way? No chance, IMO. It looks like in the second half of February he decided to plunder DYLW for its chorus, thus putting DYLW to rest; that's an indication that the Smile album wasn't in the plans anymore. You're entitled to that opinion, although I don't think it's correct. There's something about the December version of H&V we must realize: it's using sections from other songs on the Smile album. The sections "Great Shape" and "Barnyard" are from the Barnyard Suite aka "I'm in Great Shape", the song that comes after Fire. So what does that tell us about the December Version of H&V? It was not meant for the album, only as a single. Brian is using the Single version of H&V as a teaser / trailer for the Smile album. He's taking sections from different songs on the album, truncating them, and then unifying them with the H&V theme on the single. All Day = Love to Say Dada, Great Shape/Barnyard = I'm In Great Shape, Piano Themes/Chorus = Do You Like Worms. Do you see the pattern? Brian himself once said about H&V, "I don't want to give too much away on the single". He's not stealing sections from songs, he's actually teasing them through the Single.
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 23, 2020 13:21:36 GMT -5
No. A single is a single. What you're talking about is a sampler. I'd agree that could have been one of his early (crazy) ideas.
Early version of H&V we know in the form of the radio "demo" and the developments for Barnyard, Great Shape as stand-alones. It's not a single by any stretch of imagination. In that "demo" form, it must have been the same earliest design he had since May - just a verse or two, a vamp, and strange sections of completely unrelated stuff.
I don't think he'd have made "suites" out of the tracks bar The Elements at most. The main problem with Smile - he did not have enough time for all his ideas. He bit too much off that apple.
|
|
|
Post by dumdangel (Lee) on May 23, 2020 16:40:51 GMT -5
Sloopjohnb72, I missed what part of my post you're responding to. Let me know and I'll respond! Also, I'm not pushing my interpretations as facts. I'm challenging his interpretations with my own. I know I have some controversial and out-there interpretations, but that doesn't make it fair to pick on me because of it. If you've read the past several pages of this thread, everyone's been challenging each other with their own interpretations. It seems to be what we do here in the sandbox. Btw guys, I've asked this before, but I'd like to ask again: I'm looking for someone who can share with me a Smile Bootleg that I need to complete my H&V thread. There was a track on one of the bootlegs that had the Sonny down snuff vocals in a manner in which I could isolate them, which I intend to use for the Prelude. However, the flash drive I used to store these bootlegs has been destroyed so I am left without them. I believe this particular bootleg was a combination of Good Vibrations and Heroes and Villains sessions. I could use your help!No. A single is a single. What you're talking about is a sampler. I'd agree that could have been one of his early (crazy) ideas. Early version of H&V we know in the form of the radio "demo" and the developments for Barnyard, Great Shape as stand-alones. It's not a single by any stretch of imagination. In that "demo" form, it must have been the same earliest design he had since May - just a verse or two, a vamp, and strange sections of completely unrelated stuff. I don't think he'd have made "suites" out of the tracks bar The Elements at most. The main problem with Smile - he did not have enough time for all his ideas. He bit too much off that apple. I don't think Brian has crazy ideas. I think he's a genius, and like Carol said, "he's crazy like a fox". It may have been one of his earliest ideas, but that quote came from early February '67, which is late in the Smile project. The December version of H&V was most likely for a single. Brian was showing a radio DJ their (the Beach Boys) "next record".
|
|
zaval80
Dude/Dudette
Posts: 83
Likes: 27
|
Post by zaval80 on May 23, 2020 17:29:12 GMT -5
He's a genius exactly because he isn't afraid to think out of the box. Still, that old H&V "version" is a hoot. He intended to make a hit record, but the design he had at the moment was just a very very incomplete sketch.
|
|
|
Post by zebulan on May 24, 2020 13:36:49 GMT -5
I agree with saltymarshmallow on this one. The way Bicycle Rider was cut out really doesn't fit with the Bridge to Indians -> DYLW verse hypothesis. In fact, since the overdubbed BR starts in the middle of the first half of the section, it implies that H&V would have cut straight from the Bridge to the vocal half of Bicycle Rider (which I guess could have been looped once, but maybe not), completely skipping the instrumental first half.
|
|
|
Post by jasonaustin on May 29, 2020 21:11:53 GMT -5
I've spent the better part of this day reading through this thread and trying my best to absorb all the info within. Clearly there is some really high level research going on here, so maybe one of you experts can help me.
The acapella vocal segment Brian is coaching the guys through on "Heroes & Villains - Part 2" on the Box Set exists somewhere as a polished take as opposed to the rough vocal run-through heard on the aforementioned track (I know, because some of you included it in your mixes) but I'm having a hell of a time finding it. Is it on the Box Set or do I have to look elsewhere? Thanks so much.
|
|
|
Post by zebulan on May 29, 2020 23:13:35 GMT -5
I've spent the better part of this day reading through this thread and trying my best to absorb all the info within. Clearly there is some really high level research going on here, so maybe one of you experts can help me. The acapella vocal segment Brian is coaching the guys through on "Heroes & Villains - Part 2" on the Box Set exists somewhere as a polished take as opposed to the rough vocal run-through heard on the aforementioned track (I know, because some of you included it in your mixes) but I'm having a hell of a time finding it. Is it on the Box Set or do I have to look elsewhere? Thanks so much. I assume you're referring to what is sometimes referred to as the Wish Upon a Star bridge. I'm pretty sure it was never properly recorded. (Or if it was, the footage is lost.) I think dumdangel's mixes are using either non-BB vocals or digitally manipulated BB vocals for that section. I'm leaning towards the former; that brief section doesn't sound like real BB vocals to me.
|
|
|
Post by jasonaustin on May 30, 2020 2:10:31 GMT -5
I've spent the better part of this day reading through this thread and trying my best to absorb all the info within. Clearly there is some really high level research going on here, so maybe one of you experts can help me. The acapella vocal segment Brian is coaching the guys through on "Heroes & Villains - Part 2" on the Box Set exists somewhere as a polished take as opposed to the rough vocal run-through heard on the aforementioned track (I know, because some of you included it in your mixes) but I'm having a hell of a time finding it. Is it on the Box Set or do I have to look elsewhere? Thanks so much. I assume you're referring to what is sometimes referred to as the Wish Upon a Star bridge. I'm pretty sure it was never properly recorded. (Or if it was, the footage is lost.) I think dumdangel's mixes are using either non-BB vocals or digitally manipulated BB vocals for that section. I'm leaning towards the former; that brief section doesn't sound like real BB vocals to me. Blimey, you're right. No wonder I couldn't find that bit anywhere. I have to say, whomever recorded that, it's a pretty fair attempt at nailing those harmonies.
|
|