Dear Mr. Desper
By Cam Mott (Cam)
on Thursday, February 7, 2002 - 10:06 am:
I'm
hoping the board is fixed and I just wanted to re-posted my question about the
Beach Boys and production.
If I remember right you had said that others, primarily Carl, were taking over
those duties and described the process as the musical content being ripped from
Brian's control. I hope I'm stating the gist accurately.
I remarked that some had the impression that Brian had requested that others
take over those responsibilities and queried if the take over was actually more
"hostile" then thought.
Thanks for the memories, when you have time.
Cam
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Thursday,
February 7, 2002 - 08:53 pm:
QUESTION
ASKED BY: Cam Mott (Cam) on Wednesday, January 30, 2002 - 03:19 am:
"...during 20/20 control of the musical content was "ripped"
from Brian, we [or was it just me] were under the impression that Brian asked
Carl to take over those responsibilities. Do you mean it was more of a
"hostile" takeover?"
================================================
There has never been any “hostile” relationship between Carl and Brian Wilson.
I cannot remember Brian showing anger at any time I have known him. Everyone
who was ever associated with Carl came to know his demeanor as angelic.
To put things in perspective, always remember that everything you hear or read
about any musical group, including the Beach Boys, must be taking within the
framework of THE ENTERTAINMENT BUSINESS. Every band member has a contract with
(in BB case) Capitol Records. Also, the group collectively is under contract.
Also, the group’s enterprise, Beach Boy Productions is under contract with each
band member and with Capitol Records.
Of course, Brian worked closely with all the other members of The Beach Boys,
however it was becoming very evident to him and to Capitol that he was not the
only gifted one in the group. As each member composed and produced within the
group, only two ways were available for this new material to be released and to
generate income for the group, that being ether solo or group. Capitol would
have nothing of each member going off to do their own stuff so the outlet for
the new stuff was distend to be the group.
Capitol repeatedly saw two pathways developing. (1) Brian becoming experimental
in the studio and his music taking an esoteric turn (that is out commercial
acceptance), and (2) talent (good talent) developing within the group – already
under contract to produce and perform.
Management, both Capitol and BBP, were advancing much money to the group’s
members and this “loan” had to be repaid – it was in the contract. So, to
answer your question Cam Mott, think of Carl’s takeover not as “hostile” but
rather by necessity, and out of love for his brother, who was sluffing and
staggering under the tremendous pressure of producing a new hit. Someone had to
get a contractually required album recorded – or else go broke. If Brian was
mentally spent, it seemed natural for the younger brother just step up to the
plate and start to play ball. What could Brian say but good? Brian welcomed the
help and certainly needed a pressure reduction just to get re-focused. Thank
God, both brothers’ close association with Brian had familiarized them with his
style and the task at hand.
If Carl had not assumed the role of leader at this time, you would not have
seen any Beach Boy future develop. Capitol wanted its (already paid for) album
– quick, somebody do something! – Carl did, and everyone was grateful.
I hope the above helps set the stage of understanding for you.
~Stephen W. Desper
By Marie (Ne_pa) on Friday, February 8, 2002 -
05:47 am:
Mr.
Desper,
What is the status of the BBF&F videotapes that were ordered shortly before
Christmas? I know you mentioned that maybe they would be sent late-January or
February. Thanks for any info.
Marie
By Cam Mott (Cam)
on Friday, February 8, 2002 - 09:48 am:
Dear
Stephen,
Thanks for your reply. I didn't think there was hostility between Brian and
Carl and I'm glad to have it confirmed. We often hear that others in the group
supposedly *were* working to take "control" from Brian during this
period, would you be comfortable in illuminating those rumors?
I was lucky enough to have met Jim Lockert last Fall, he remembered your
acquaintance and spoke kindly of you. I'm sorry to tell you, if you didn't
already know, that Jim passed away just before Thanksgiving last year but is
survived by his wife.
Thanks,
Cam
By STE (Ste) on Friday, February 8, 2002 - 10:13
am:
Talking
about the tapes I have to say a was expecting more that 2 songs... still cool,
though.
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Friday,
February 8, 2002 - 11:02 am:
REPLY
TO MARIE's COMMENTS: All first-run copies were mailed in December. So far I
have two envelopes from fans for additional second-run copies. At the end of
Feb. I'll close the offer and make/mail copies.
REPLY TO CAM MOTT's COMMENTS: Thanks for the update. I did not know that Jim
had passed on. He was a great fellow. Chuck Britz has departed too. One of the
best old-school engineers in Hollywood.
REPLY TO STE's COMMENTS: Too bad the old posts are gone, but in the original
discription of the offering I clearly stated that "Wouldn't It Be
Nice" and "God Only Knows" were all that had been mixed to
picture and the only two songs being sent on the cassette. Still, glad you
enjoyed them -- and the main thing is we helped the cause.
Happy Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Bungalow Bill
(Bungalow_bill) on Friday, February 8, 2002 - 01:01 pm:
Thanks
for giving us another shot , Stephen . Sorry that the board boogie man got
hungry .
By Topgazza (Topgazza) on Saturday, February 9,
2002 - 04:48 am:
Yes
indeed Bung. Stephen I enjoy your "meandering" posts, if I may call
them that. They maintain the memories they way they should be. Some facts, some
side views and a large portion of fond nostalgia laced with a few memory lapses
that just add charm. There are plenty of people who can fill in the facts for
those that crave them and good for them too. We need 'em. Me I felt like I lost
my virginity, all over again, when I learnt some of the more unsavoury facts
about Brian and the band over the past few years. There are some things I wish
I didn't know and just have the music. Thanks again Stephen.
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Saturday,
February 9, 2002 - 11:19 am:
REPLY
TO TOPGAZZA's COMMENTS: We all have skeletons in our proverbial closets.
Unfortunately the world keeps looking into Brian's, giving the poor fellow no
private life nor peace. However, I can assure you that all the bad you hear is
blown way out of proportion. The real Brian is in the music. He uses it to
communicate directly with you, the listener. Therewith he transends the
bullshit of The Music Business and the rags that want to mop up all the dirt.
Basically Brian and all the members of THE BEACH BOYS have shown me, time and
again, that they are like us all, productive, seeking fun and security,
mindfull of their rights, and proud of their accomplishments. You could not ask
for better friends. So, my friend, do not be put-off or disillusioned by all
the crap you hear. I doubt any of us would be the better if the world's spot
light illumined our secret past or that we would endure as well as they have
with their success at such a tender age. Go back and just enjoy their music
keeping in mind that we are all part of the same human family.
Happy Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Saturday,
February 9, 2002 - 11:35 am:
REPLY
CAM MOTT's COMMENTS: No hostal nor friendly take-over of the musical aspect of
BB was ever planned. In hindsight it may seem that control was
"taken" from Brian, but it was not taken, it was assumed. It was a
natural thing, given the events of the time. On the business level, Brian gave
control (as chairman of the board of American Productions and Beach Boy
Enterprises) over to professional managers. This was necessary to maintain
financial success for the group. All the in-fighting you read about happens
with most musical acts and even between business type partners too. It's just
part of life. ~Stephen W. Desper
By Joe_blow (Joe_blow) on Saturday, February 9,
2002 - 04:31 pm:
If
you're still around here Mr. Desper, I was wondering if you could give me a
little insight as to how good musically Dennis was in the studio by the late
60's. Did he really play so many instruments? Thank you kindly.
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Saturday,
February 9, 2002 - 08:44 pm:
REPLY
TO JOE BLOW's COMMENTS: Although Dennis has a reputation for banging more than
his drums while on the road, he was a musical natural in the studio. If he did
not know how to play an instrument, and he wanted to use it on a track, he
would learn enough of the playing technique to record and then continue to
learn. Too bad he was treated as the black sheep of the family -- but it forced
him into more solo situations. As I have posted before, he recorded in the
morning and the rest of the gang came in during the afternoon hours. Depending
on what was happening, he either stayed or went to surf or whatever. I'd say
about half his time was spent by himself in the studio (with this engineer). As
an independent he recorded lots of song starts, but only stayed with them a few
days -- short attention span. It was usually on encouragement from the group
that caused him to finish a piece.
He was a complex personality, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Joe_blow (Joe_blow) on Sunday, February 10,
2002 - 12:44 am:
Thanks
so much for the comments. I would alsolike to compliment you on the great work
you did during your career. I particularly enjoyed the Til I Die alternate mix.
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 11, 2002 - 09:29 am:
THANKS
TO ALL OF YOU FOR A FUN CHAT. I've got to attend to business for a while.
Later, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Susan (Susan)
on Monday, February 11, 2002 - 10:25 am:
Thanks
for your informative posts, Steve. Come back soon!
By Bungalow Bill
(Bungalow_bill) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 08:45 am:
Gee
Willikers ! Stephen Desper , Brad Elliot, Alan Boyd , Jon Stebbins , AGD , Don
Cunningham (did I miss anyone ?) all on the board at the same time ! Is
Cabinessence cool , or what ?
By Mikie (Mikie) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 -
09:09 am:
Yes
it is Bungalow. And as long as nobody says anything to piss 'em off, I'm sure
they'd be willing to hang out with us for awhile!
By Susan (Susan)
on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 09:22 am:
Sometimes
things just run their course, you know. It's not always about being *pissed
off* - sometimes, things are just *over*.
And sometimes it's just a time factor thing. Like.....we ALL have days when we
don't post here, because we don't have time to GO here. Nobody's pissed off,
they're just out of time.
Sing along with me now: It's just a matter of time..........
By Mikie (Mikie) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 -
09:47 am:
Whoa
darling
I'm waiting for you
Sad with nothing to do
It's just a matter of time.
It's just a matter of tiiiiiiiime.
Purty good, eh?
By Susan (Susan)
on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 10:00 am:
I
*knew* i could count on you, Mikie!!!!
By Textus (Textus) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002
- 10:18 am:
That's
a relief. I was deathly worried that something I said about Texans mostly in
jest had chased Gina away. She only seems to post about posting these days, and
I worry it's my fault.
By Susan (Susan)
on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 10:24 am:
Nah,
Steve, i think if you were pissing Gina off she'd tell you. I knows *I* would,
if you were pissing ME off.....
By Mikie (Mikie) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 -
10:33 am:
Nobody
can piss off the Queen of Delete like I can. NOBODY.
By Bungalow Bill
(Bungalow_bill) on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 11:21 am:
QUESTION
FOR BRIAN WILSON ......... hey, it's worth a try .
By Susan (Susan)
on Tuesday, February 12, 2002 - 11:57 am:
Yeah,
but you've gotta ask a actual question, doncha think?
Sorry Mr
Desper. Your WAY ahead of us all
Net
Sounds: Brian
Wilson: Sorry Mr Desper. Your WAY ahead of us all
By Markrudd (Markrudd) on Saturday, February 23,
2002 - 08:34 pm:
You
like Brian think in 6 part harmony.We(me at least), have enough trouble with
just ONE vocal!
Didnt want to sound rude before. I'm just confused by it all!!
You said 3dD stereo is closest to the matrix then N-2-2. But isnt 3D only
270degrees whereas N-2-2 is the full 360'?
Why cant music cd's be played on a dvd player with the n-2-2 anyway? I know
this is for movies, but how do you get the benifit of BOTH music and movies? Is
there a player with BOTH features?
You said you know of only a few matrix stereo released cd's. So why bother
using ANY of this new technology like Spatializer? Thats really my main
question I've been trying to find out. Apart from a few cd's and
maybe(hopefully oneday) the matrix releases of 20/20, Sunflower ets, does it
make ANY difference to NORMAL stereo music cd's?
One more question please! You said you were listning to Cabinessence and heard
Brians vocal in the backround. But that was recorded before you started on the
BB's records? How did THAT get mixed in matrix stereo? Does that mean ALL the
BB's catalog could also be done?
By Mikie (Mikie) on Saturday, February 23, 2002
- 08:46 pm:
So
why do you have to start a new thread every time you have something to say to
or have a question for Mr. Desper, Mark? Just ask the question on the same
thread Steve Desper and everybody else is already talking on. It's easier that
way, you know?
Just a thought. :>)
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Sunday,
February 24, 2002 - 12:55 am:
REPLY
TO MARKRUDD’s COMMENTS: Thank you Mark, for your interest in recording
technology. I have spent a lifetime developing technique and methodology
concerned with presenting spatial impression to the listener that is realist
and enveloping. I cannot spend the time to explain this complex subject without
first knowing your background. If you visit http://www.spatializer.com // support // frequently asked
questions, and read the answers, many of your questions will be made clear. I
wrote the Q&A section.
1) Perhaps I can clear up your first paragraph confusion by telling you that 3D
Stereo and N-2-2 are both reproduction devices. The matrix used for my
recordings deals with production. Production and reproduction are not the same.
2) Degrees of envelopment are pure sales department conceptions. Both can do
both. Both are also capable of elevation imaging, within reason.
3) Of course you can play CD’s on DVD players and use N-2-2 if the manufacturer
has allowed that programming. Some do, some don’t. Try with and without, you
decide which one you like best, and listen that way. It’s art – there is
neither right nor wrong. Again see spatializer.com. This very question is
answered there. The “N” in N-2-2 stands for “any number of inputs” N=Number
(It’s a math term). Therefore the N can be two channels of stereo from a CD or
five channels of movie track from a DVD. If the manufacture implemented the
algorithm correctly it should work for two or five track playback.
4) You asked, “does it make any difference to NORMAL stereo?” So-called normal
stereo reproduction is flawed. Again I refer you to spatializer.com only
because I don’t want to re-type what is already available elsewhere on the web.
READ and then ask me again. However, the best answer to your question is to
LISTEN to stereo and then 3D enhancement – which is really a correction to the
listening process, a correction that makes it possible to hear the full
potential of stereophonic reproduction.
5) I seem to remember mixing cabinessence. In fact I sang on it!
Keep on Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Susan (Susan)
on Sunday, February 24, 2002 - 06:20 am:
"5)
I seem to remember mixing cabinessence. In fact I sang on it!"
Gee, Steve, i hope they paid you union scale!
;-)
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Sunday,
February 24, 2002 - 10:11 am:
REPLY
TO SUSAN's COMMENTS: Better than . . .
Carl and I had an understanding that I wanted to sing or play on every BB song in
some way. I'm not a bad singer so at some point along the way one of them would
run the board and recorder and I would go into the studio and sing with the
guys. Just one line or phrase, buried deep in the mix -- but I could still say
I sang on the song. This was all kind of an inside joke -- we had a lot of fun
in those days!!
Alan even honoured that old tradition on "Loop de Loop" 29 years
later. You know the carnavel barker line, "Hurry, Hurry, Hurry, Step right
up ..." Well, that's me being a barker in the 21st century!
As to the union, I joined the musician's union as a moog player per Carl's
suggestion. Before I joined, running the moog was part of my engineering
duties. After I joined I could bill them as a musician on top of the
engineering fees, plus the union rules allowed me to double bill them as
musician + conductor -- seems union rules permit a single musician to conduct
himself. All union dates appoint one of the playrs on the date to be conductor.
That person gets double-rate.
Happy Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Susan (Susan)
on Sunday, February 24, 2002 - 10:37 am:
You're
just a never-ending font of information, Steve! And how did they decide who got
to be the conductor? Were there [are there] certain cats who *do* take control?
Or is it more of an honorary title that gets passed around over time?
And......i've gotta ask........which ones are "your" songs?
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Sunday,
February 24, 2002 - 02:36 pm:
REPLY
TO SUSAN's COMMENT: "My" songs? -- After 30 years have passed,
couldn't tell you. Once in a while I remember when I am listening, but
generally can't tell you which songs, leave along what parts. But, almost every
song.
As to union conductors... the "conductor" title usually goes to the
contractor, that is the cat who calls all the other cats. By way of example,
let's say we need to put some horns on a track or two. A phone call goes out to
"the horn guy" for a horn session date using, say, three 'bones, two
trumps' and a flute/sax. Then it's up to "the horn guy" to assemble
his people based on their schedules and abilities and the chemistry between the
ensemble players. Not always the same people. When the date does happen, he
represents the "union" aspects of the group. He calls the breaks and
overtime. He fills out the paperwork and submits to the union. The union sends
out a bill for services. For this, the conductor (contractor) gets paid double
for the date. Remember, this is Hollywood -- a recording haven -- where people
make a complete living being session side men, maybe doing three or four
different three-hour sessions per day, all over town, on different types of
music. Heavy union towns like NYC, Chicago, San Francisco, Nashville -- all have
professional side-man musicians who make this their daily work.
Since you asked, here's an interesting union rule. Suppose you are a string
player. You come to the date. Your part is recorded. Then the tape is backed up
and you play the same part again. As far as the union is concerned, it's the
same as hiring another string player, i.e., one player doubling on two tracks
equals two players on one track. So, if you have twenty string players playing
background on a song, then you record the same notes again on another track (to
thicken the sound) you must pay each player twice (and the conductor four
times). It's as if you hired fourty string players to play it once. This can
get to be rather pricy. The rate is around $400.00 per three-hour session. Double
is $800 per player. Not bad money for the musician, but for the studio -- let's
see -- twenty strings times two, times $400, equals $16,000 just for the
players. Add to that the engineers and studio costs you are up to twenty
grand!! just for a string overdub!! Now you know why albums cost so much!
Here's another union rule. Suppost you get a call to play the theme for a TV
series. It's a big date with horns, percussion, strings, and a couple of harps.
Big bucks. You play the entire theme. As far as the union is concerned, every
time that TV show has a new episode and requires a theme (usually the same
theme) for the beginning of the show, the studio can either hire new musicians
to play the theme again or pay the original musicians for each new airing of
the show. So if you are fortunate enough to play on the first theme, and the
show runs for a typical 20 or 30 episodes for the broadcast season, expect to
get a $400 check in the mail for each new airing as if you played all 20 or 30
themes, even if you never pick up your instrument again. Not bad huh?
Now let's bring this discussion back to Brian Wilson. When he started, all the
studios were unionized, including the engineers. (I myself am a member of
IATSE, local 695 Hollywood.) He could deal with the musian's union. He was even
part of that. But a typical Columbia or Capitol studio session would find the
union engineers mercilessly stopping a session for their break when the
red-second-hand hit the 12 o'clock mark exactly. I mean, they didn't care if
you were recording the best lead since sliced bread. Even if you only had three
notes to go -- BANG -- the recording engineer would press the stop button, the
mixer would close the master fader, and walk away to their smoke and coffee.
This would drive poor Brian up the wall. I mean, you can't turn on creativity
like a faucet. As a musician, you know what "getting into a groove"
is all about. So Brian has a studio full of musicians or even full of his BB
group of singers -- they have finally, after fifty minutes of rehearsal, found
their "groove" and -- BANG!! It's break time for the engineers. The
musician's will continue (into overtime of course) but not the union engineers.
You may have lost that "groove" forever.
This is the reason that Brian ventured over to Western (at 6000 Sunset Blvd.),
one of the first non-union or "independent" studios to spring up in
Hollywood. There he met Chuck Britz and fell in love with Studio 3. No more
stopping just because the clock said 12:00. Now when he found his "groove"
he could play it out. I would venture to say that one of the reasons the so
called "smile sessions" came to be incomplete was because of all the
false starts from union rules of those studios. And to top things off -- Brian
could not touch the console at a union studio. I have seen a Columbia Studio
engineer actually slap Brian's hand when, out of desperation, he would reach to
make a fader move for a cue that the engineer forgot, while recording a live
date. Very frustrating for talent such as Brian's. Over at Western, Chuck
welcomed Brian's involvement -- and they both went on to make many great
records.
Today, most union shops are now motion picture and television or broadcasting
facilities. The independent recording studio deals with R&R, Jazz, and that
kind of stuff.
The music industry...you got to love it,
~Stephen W. Desper
By Boxer_monkey (Boxer_monkey) on Sunday,
February 24, 2002 - 03:19 pm:
I
have a question for Mr. Desper that I hope hasn't been answered elsewhere: Why
aren't you the one coordinating the last decades' remasters instead of Linnett
and the other guys? (Also, what's the best way to mike a piano?)
By Susan (Susan)
on Sunday, February 24, 2002 - 05:16 pm:
Sounds
like a good gig for the players, boy....but a nightmare for the studios to pay.
So would non-union houses like Western have to hire non-union cats for the
jobs, or would the union guys take gigs there? For scale? Less than scale? They
couldn't do that, could they? How did that work?
By Markrudd (Markrudd) on Sunday, February 24,
2002 - 08:41 pm:
I
always thought you were more than a pretty face Stephen. Your really a Beach
Boy in disguise!
Have been looking at the Q+A at Spatializer.com and have been to a store looking
at DVD player's and saw a nice Toshiba with the Spatializer N-2-2(n to 2 not n
two two!) feature on it. Now I have to see what the wife say's now!
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 25, 2002 - 12:02 pm:
REPLY
TO BOXER_MONKEY’s COMMENT: There are engineers who specialize in making records
and others who specialize in restoration. The recordings I did thirty years ago
were optimized for LP release. The change to CD format requires expert
attention to other aspects of the recording transfer. Linnett, Boyd, and others
are experts in restoration of the music itself and skilled at creating the
overall packaging required for a successful re-issue. Also, I have a business
to run and involved in neurological research. I really could not do justice to
any re-issue project. BB reissues are in better hands with Linnett, Boyd and
others.
There is no “best way” to mic just as there is no “best way” to paint a picture
of a piano. I have several books (yes whole books) on the subject of recording the
piano. Are we miking it alone or with a room of other musicians? Do you want
room sound too? Does it have to blend with percussion or harmonies? What kind
of music is being played? Who made the instrument? How does the performer play
the instrument?
The piano is one of the hardest instruments to record. This is because it is an
omni directional propagating energy source, or in other words, the sound comes
from all parts of the piano.
My standard set-ups:
Rock & Roll sound to be mixed with many other tracks, recorded by itself –
Lid removed. Three condenser mics facing down and set for figure eight pattern
spaced evenly across a diagonal from the short strings to the long strings.
Although the figure-eight pattern has the backside of the mic looking at the
ceiling, the use of the F8 pattern is to reduce harmonic distortion, more
present if a cardioid pattern were to be used.
Rock & Roll sound to be mixed with many other tracks, recorded with other
instrument in the same room – Lid down and padded. Same mics inside but set a
cardioid pattern.
Jazz , everyone plays at the same time -- Lid in concert setting, two
condensers facing the reflection from the inside of the lid. A blanket may be
needed draped over the opening but the lid remains up.
Classical, Solo – Lid in concert setting. For this type the room has a great
deal of influence. The piano is moved around the room, studio, or stage. Once
the best coupling of the piano to the room in which it is played, is found,
three condenser microphones with large diaphragms are set several feet to the
side of the instrument facing the reflection from the lid. Omni directional
patterns are used to capture the room and the piano. The microphones must use
external elastic suspension holders to prevent low frequency coupling of
structure borne vibrations from reaching the microphones. In some cases I may
use Type C Spatializer recording matrix.
There are as many mic setups for the piano as there are engineers. Everyone has
their way of doing things. Another factor to consider is speed of setup. Many
times, there is no time to adjust microphones for the fine points, so general
setup situations have to do.
Happy Listening to all 88 keys, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 25, 2002 - 12:19 pm:
REPLY
TO SUSAN’s COMMENT: Hello Susan, The studios are paid by the record company.
The musicians are too. The billing comes from the union. There is no
requirement for union studios to only hire union musicians. But many union musicians
will not work on productions with mixed union and non-union musicians. Union
musicians working for less than scale can expect to be fined by the union or
removed from union membership.
All movies made under the union banner (IATSE) must use union musicians, union
camera men, union sound men, union costumers, union truck drivers, etc … all
union. Even the release must and only can go to union theaters using union
projectionists. I don’t know if the popcorn maker has to be in a union or not,
but the box it comes in must be made in a union factory!!
On the other hand, the music recording business is not very unionized because
there are so many popular musicians. But if you are a serious musician or one
who uses your talent to make a living, union membership is almost a given – at
least in Hollywood.
Happy Listening does not require a union card, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 25, 2002 - 12:27 pm:
REPLY
TO MARKRUDD’s COMMENT: Toshiba makes a good product. Their implementation of
our algorithm is excellent. I own one myself. The nice thing about virtual
surround (3D stereo) is that it is easy on TWF (the wife factor). No extra
speakers to dust, no wires to hide, and no additional equipment to buy.
Happy Listening and viewing, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Mikie (Mikie) on Monday, February 25, 2002 -
01:00 pm:
Really,
really interesting stuff, Mr. Desper. While on the subject of DVD players (I'm
buying one in a couple of weeks), which model Toshiba player would you
recommend? I was leaning towards the Panasonic RP56 with the special video chip
thrown in for only 200 bucks. The chip supposedly makes the quality of the
video better, and is available mostly in the more expensive models. You're
probably more into the sound aspects of the player, but is there a good DVD
with both high quality "state o' the art" sound and video without
going broke?
Sorry if I derailed this into a DVD Techie thread, but I was just trying to get
Steve's recommendation here. I've always stuck with Sony- No-Bologna products,
but also like Panasonic and Toshiba.
Thanks!
By Mikie (Mikie) on Monday, February 25, 2002 -
01:14 pm:
Mr.
Desper, I really enjoyed your post concerning microphone placement in the
studio, specifically the piano. Would you explain how you typically set the
mics up in Brian's studio up on Bellagio and what kinds you used? Did it vary
all over the map, or was it pretty consistent for instruments and vocals? I
guess The Beach Boys use to use Telefunken omni-directional mics in the early
days at Western/Gold Star. I know you stayed up on the latest technology; for
instance you used a "U-boat" microphone on the Surf's Up album. That
mic was pretty cutting edge technolgy for 1971! :>)
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 25, 2002 - 01:40 pm:
REPLY
TO MIKIE's COMMENTS: Listing of Spatializer products such as DVD players
included in the attached link. At what price range are you looking? Whatever,
don't buy one of those cheap (under $100) DVD players from China now in the
stores. Not reliable.
http://all.search.shopping.yahoo.com/search/all?p=spatializer&b=11&X=0&Y=0&mid=&did=&pf=&pt=&r=&f=14489115&rkeys=&clink=
Answers to recordings done at Bellagio will be found in my upcomng
"Recording the Beach Boys" essay soon to be on-line. Stay tuned.
Awaiting your response, ~Stephen W. Desper
By Stephenwdesper (Stephenwdesper) on Monday,
February 25, 2002 - 01:42 pm:
Try
this link too -------- more complete:
http://all.search.shopping.yahoo.com/search/all?p=spatializer&X=0&Y=0&mid=&did=&pf=&pt=&r=&f=14489115&rkeys=&clink=
~SWD
By Susan (Susan)
on Monday, February 25, 2002 - 09:22 pm:
Thanks,
Steve.
By Mikie (Mikie) on Tuesday, February 26, 2002 -
06:56 am:
Thanks
a lot Mr. Desper! Looking forward to your upcoming essay.
SMILE - recently received for publication - long.
By Susan (Susan)
on Monday, February 25, 2002 - 09:44 pm:
The
following was received a few weeks ago from Scot Livingston, but it's only just
now that i'm posting it. Sorry.
%&*&%&%*&%*%&*%&%*&%*%&%*&%*%&*%&%*&%*&%*%&
SMiLE is a much better album because it was never finished.
Pause and think about it a second. Ok, sometimes even I don't fully believe
that's true. Sometimes SMiLE becomes maddeningly frustrating and I just wish
there were something definitive out there to end all the arguing of the voices
in my head. But still ... How many discussion boards are out there about DARK
SIDE OF THE MOON or SGT. PEPPER? Not nearly as many as SMiLE has. And why?
Because there isn't as much to say about any of these other albums. Either you
like 'em or you don't. If you like it; buy a copy, put it on, and listen away.
These are not albums that require any thought, any creativity, any work on the
listener's behalf.
SMiLE on the other hand, long before the invention of CD-ROMs or any other such
nonsense, is truly the first interactive album. You have to go out and track
down all the bootlegs. You have to read through all the various histories and
theories. You must decide which theories seem the most plausible. And then you,
as much Brian Wilson, must create your own SMiLE. Indeed, each person's own
SMiLE says as much about the individual compiling it, as it does about whatever
Brian was trying to say.
Plus, anything you don't like on SMiLE, you can hypothesize that Brian would've
fixed before it was released. Do you find the album too jarring and the fragments
too abrupt? Well, maybe Brian would've smoothed that over. Do you think the
album is under-reaching, and you were hoping for something a little more
experimental and weird? Maybe by the time Brian edited it all together, it
would've done that for you too.
But unlike other unfinished albums (like say that Jimi Hendrix/Miles Davis duet
that never got started), there is really something here. On bootlegs. On the
box set. Here and there on the Internet. There are actually recording to play
around with. Songs that are strong, yet fragile. And ultimately beautiful.
Of course it wasn't always so. At times you must admire the persuasiveness and
persistence of those lucky few who actually heard these recordings back in
1966/67. People like Paul Williams and Jules Seigel. Try this as an experiment;
put together a tape of all the SMiLE songs as they were officially released
from SMILEY SMILE and 20/20 through SURF'S UP. Put them in whatever order you
think best suits them. Now, what does that sound like? How much of SMiLE can
you glean from that tape? Sure it would've been weird, but how much of SMiLE's
power and beauty shines through on those versions? And then think - until the
first bootlegs started showing up in the mid '80s, this is all anybody had to
go on. We should be grateful that the torch for SMiLE was carried on for so
long.
Now, I'm not trying to say that Brian deliberately left SMiLE unfinished
because it was better that way. But I was heartened to hear that Brian's
"master plan" for SMiLE did not necessarily say a CD. Although, Brian
also did not deny that there was going to be a CD either. So what is Brian's
master plan? Don't ask me, I don't have a clue. Quite possibly, it's to keep
dropping hints until we all stop bugging him about the subject. But what would
I like to see?
For one thing, I'd love to see a documentary on the subject. Not that Brian
should so that. He has, as far as I know, no filmmaking ambitions. But those of
you out there in SMiLE-land who do, please take note. And sure while Capitol is
unlikely to let some amateur have the rights to those songs, I don't think that
would have to be an obstacle. Honestly, I believe that the story of SMiLE is
fascinating even if one has not heard (or does not like) the music itself. It
deserves a full cinematic treatment. Something other than that vilifying it got
in the ABC tele-movie. Heck, even ENDLESS HARMONY spent more time discussing
their tour of Czechoslovakia than it did SMiLE. It's an untapped market. The
only real problem would be that at any given time, most of the surviving SMiLE
participants are sick to death of re-hashing the subject.
But more than even a film, I think to do right by SMiLE, Brian would have to
release something along the lines of the ProjectSmile CD-ROM. Or a box set of
the sessions. Which comes with a complimentary CD-R so that everyone could make
his or her own SMiLE. And extensive liner notes featuring as much as Brian can
dredge up from his memory. Plus lots of other essays and recipes for making
SMiLE from various historians, experts and fans. A really big set of liner
notes.
Notes that may, in fact, finally be a second book about SMiLE. No disrespect to
Domenic Priore's scrapbook, Look, Listen, Vibrate, Smile!. It is a
useful resource. And it earns a lot of kudos by simply being the only book
solely on the subject. Sure, every Beach Boys bio contains usually chapter on
the subject ... but I'd like to see SMiLE receive the same kind of treatment
that 1967's other infamous unreleased recording received. Namely Greig Marcus's
tome on the Basement Tapes of Bob Dylan & the Band, Invisible Republic.
I think it's odd that Dylan's slip-shod rough-hewn recordings get such a
thorough, linear, minimally illustrated, well written book, while all that
Brian's ornately over-produced non-album gets is a 200+ page 'zine.
On a side note, did anyone else notice the similarities between THE BASEMENT
TAPES and SMiLE. While the wide differential in production values clearly
reflects the fact that one was made for release while the other was not, both
display the same kind of goofball sense of humor and odd obsession with
Americana. Probably nothing more than a coincidence, but fun to note none the
less.
But then again, there's a reason why there have been no other books on the subject
of SMiLE. You've got to feel sorry for Domenic occasionally. Having written his
book out on paper there is no way for him to change his mind. Other than that
one revision. So each time some new tape emerges from the vaults, or someone
remembers something useful, Mr. Priore's got to come up with some other,
"new" way of explaining his theories, rather than simply retracting
them and coming up with something far more reasonable. Take for example the
release of the "Heroes & Villains (demo)" off of the ENDLESS
HARMONY soundtrack. Many were convinced that "I Wanna Be Around/Friday
Night" was in fact, "I'm In Great Shape" the lost song from the
back cover. But when this came out, some held tight to this theory, trying hard
to explain away the differences in melody (and lack of lyrics) between the
snippet heard here and this song full of woodshop noises. But to me, this was
new proof that the two were in fact two separate and distinct songs. And that
if any actual recordings of "I'm In Great Shape" were actually made -
we have not yet heard them.
So, in other words, the only place to really write the "next" SMiLE
book (which I'll admit in my grandiose way, that I had originally planned the
essay to be) is on the internet. Something malleable so that as each new piece
of evidence is unearthed, we can quietly go back and change our hypotheses to
fit. The next SMiLE book is already out there in the essays contained on sites
like thesmileshop.net and cabinessence.com. If one wanted to kill enough trees,
they could all be printed out and would probably form a fairly hefty pile of
paper.
And so it is to this ever-changing "book" that I wish to add my
humble ramblings. There are a lot of other writings on the subject out there in
cyber-space. Some are quite well thought out and have forever altered my way of
thinking about the subject. And others - needless to say - add very little or
are just plain wrong. I guess the pieces you include in your SMiLE book are
much like the recordings you put on your SMiLE CD. But most of the writings out
there attempt to answer one or more of the following questions: Why didn't
SMiLE happen? How would SMiLE have been received if it had come out as
scheduled? And what would SMiLE have sounded like (in other words, what does MY
SMiLE sound like)? I will attempt to give my thoughts and theories and all of
these subjects. Make of them what you will...
WHY DIDN'T SMiLE HAPPEN?
I some ways, one would think that this is the easiest question to answers.
Since, unlike the other two hypothetical questions, this one involves things
that actually happened. Or rather, didn't happen. But you know what I mean.
There are however many theories out there. And the truth is probably each of
these factors contributing to some extent. But how much, and which one was the
straw that broke the camel's back, that's hard to say. So let's just look at
each of the theories one by one:
1.) Mike Love and the other Beach Boys
The other Beach Boys are often seen as the villains to Brian's hero in the
SMiLE story. Most often the other Beach Boys are boiled down to (or personified
as) Mike Love. Truth is the rest of the Beach Boys might've been confused by
SMiLE, but only Mike Love would've said anything. Or possibly the other Beach
Boys didn't mind so much, but didn't stand up to Mike when he was putting SMiLE
down. And can you blame them? They were stuck with Mike all the time on the
road, while they only saw Brian during vacations and recording sessions. Who
would want to live with a petulant Mike?
As popular opinion has dictated, each of the Beach Boys has at one point or
another claimed to have originally liked SMiLE. I've got to imagine that of all
of them, Dennis liked it the best. Or at least admired the balls it took to do
something like that. Mike Love (on his few generous days towards the project)
claimed that he had nothing against the music itself. It was just that the
lyrics were too hard to relate to. And he was probably right. It takes a lot
more effort to imagine oneself dominoing ruined columns than it does to be
having fun fun fun till Daddy takes the T-Bird away. But look at PET SOUNDS.
Strangest lyrics on there by far were the West Indies patois of "Sloop
John B" - their biggest hit off the album. The rest of the lyrics, while
exhibiting a lot more depth and maturity, were still primarily revolving around
boy-girl relationships.
Point is, they weren't very supportive. And mostly because - it wasn't very
commercial. And again, we may have to concede that Mike was right. I once was
taking a friend of mine to a concert and during the drive I had one of my SMiLE
tapes in. When the hammering and drilling of "I Wanna Be Around" came
blaring out of my speakers, my friend - who is a fairly open minded guy in
terms of music, Frank Zappa and the like - turned to me with this look which
said, "What is this crap?" For whatever reason, the public at the
time seemed far more likely to have accepted this kind of 360 turn and radical
experimentation from the Beatles than they were from the Beach Boys.
In fact both Mike and Brian may have felt a twinge of "I told you so"
after the public reaction to PET SOUNDS. Brian may have felt vindicated by the
critic's reactions, cult following, and celebrities' word-of-mouth. While Mike
may have believed that the disappointing sales proved that he was right in
allowing Brian to do only one album of what he felt was ego-music.
And unlike PET SOUNDS, SMiLE required a lot more group participation. The vocal
arrangements were much more complex. Unlike PET SOUNDS, this wasn't (or
couldn't be) a Brian Wilson solo record. Brian is a sensitive guy. Having to
hear Mike (and the others) bad mouth all his hard work for all of those
necessary vocal sessions clearly undermined his self-confidence. And Brian's
not a guy who likes to go out on his own. That's what make PEST SOUNDS and
SMiLE some interesting, they're works of an individual who wants to blend into
the crowd. I don't know how deliberate it was, but I always liked the fact that
on the proposed cover to SMiLE, all the letter of the title are capitalized
except the I. As anyone into handwriting analysis could tell you - the I
denotes the self. And a small I, in relation to the other letters, indicates
low self-esteem or little ego (depending on how you look at it).
Of course the question then becomes: If Beach Boys thought SMiLE was too weird,
why then did they make SMILEY SMILE, a record which was equally as weird if
just not as well done. Even the songs written specifically for it (and not
SMiLE) like "Whistle In" and "Little Pad" are pretty
strange. Only "Gettin' Hungry" sounds like the kind of old school
hits they were hoping for from Brian. There are a couple of reasons for this:
1.) SGT. PEPPER was released (almost days before the first real sessions for SMILEY
SMILE began) proving that this kind of music could in fact make truckloads of
money. 2.) The Beach Boys passing on the Monterrey Pop Festival, while it may
not have precipitated the division, clearly illustrated how the Beach Boys were
un-hip, out of touch, "surfing Doris Days". This was their attempt at
regaining some hippie credibility (much like the Monkees' trippy 1968 movie
HEAD). And 3.) None of the other Beach Boys had tried, much less succeeded, at
writing their own material yet. This was all they had to work with.
Of course, when it was released SMILEY SMILE was seen much like the Rolling
Stones' THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST. Namely a pale imitator of SGT. PEPPER,
when in truth I find SMILEY SMILE has a lot more in common with the other big
selling album during the summer of 1967 - HEADQUARTERS by the Monkees. The
Monkees, who had learned how to play their own instruments in order to tour,
wanted to prove that the could with this album. Not that the Beach Boys minded
not being the musicians on TODAY or SUMMER DAYS, but they felt the same urge.
Only problem was, while the Monkees would've been an okay folk-rock garage
band, the material they were sidled with, Don Kirshner's stable of bubblegum
writers didn't mesh well. So too, the Beach Boys touring band's ability to play
car and surf songs didn't mix well with Brian's deepest psychadelia. Oddly
enough, the Beatles themselves ended up with the same problem on LET IT BE.
They wanted to show that they could play their own instruments, but the songs
Lennon and McCartney were churning out required arrangements more sophisticated
than any 4 musicians, no matter how able, could play. Who knew the Monkees
would be that influential?
2.) Brian's group of "friends"
While Brian later complained that he needed to hear a "yes" during
those days, in the months prior to Beach Boys return from touring England, all
he heard was yes. From his infamous inner circle of friends, sycophants,
hangers-on and yes men. These were the guys who boosted his self-confidence after
the lackluster sales of PET SOUNDS. The guys who told him that he was a
misunderstood genius. The names of these men (Paul Williams, David Ardele, etc.
etc.) are well known in SMiLE circles, despite the fact that they never wrote
sang or played a single note on the album. Although Van Dyke Parks is sometimes
lumped into this group, I think he belongs in a separate category (see below).
These were guys who would do any crazy thing Brian asked. Anything except for
starting a barroom brawl for Brian to record, apparently. These are guys who
saw the potential in Brian. Whether cynically seeking it in money. Or
foresightedly seeing it in artistic brilliance. They wanted to be close to
that.
The problem is Brian's a follower. There's a reason why Mike's the lead singer,
and it's not just because Brian wanted another voice and Mike couldn't play an
instrument. From his father Murray to Dr. Landy to his wife and manager today,
Brian feels more comfortable doing whatever it is that makes the people around
him the happiest. And while this group of friends may have had the best of
intentions, thinking they were encouraging Brian to reach his fullest
potential, they have been planting ideas in his head which weren't really his.
>From "Rio Grande" on his eponymous solo debut to his recent PET
SOUNDS symphony tour, Brian frequently does things that it seems others would
want him to want to do more than he really wants to do them. And this
"teenage symphony to God" may have eventually become more ambitious
than Brian felt able to do.
Besides, he knew how much he needed the rest of the band (both in terms of
vocals and emotional support). Clearly he couldn't have been surprised by their
reaction to SMiLE. What did he expect, Mike to start crowing about how great
the lyrics to "Cabinessence" were? (ha-ha, that was a little pun).
While Brian clearly wanted to continue going forward artistically, surpassing
even PET SOUNDS, and finally impressing his father. But maybe not something as
grandiose as some would lead us to believe SMiLE was meant to be. Often the
most ambitious parts of SMiLE (a 14 minute, 2-part "Heroes &
Villains" and "The Elements Suite") tend to be the pieces most
shrouded in confusion, and for which the least actual concrete work was done.
Truth is the "teenage symphony to God" may have been something Brian
thought he wanted a lot more than he really did want.
Let's take a look at that oft-quoted phrase in more detail. Was he really going
to write some sort of psalm or hymn? While music has always been a religious
experience, other than "Our Prayer" and the references to God in
"Wonderful" (whose lyrics many have interpreted as sexual), there is
not a lot of talk about any sort of religion on the album. I think what he
meant when is he was writing something TO God and not about him. Rather that
the lyrics would have a wider, deeper, loftier aim than the just getting a fast
car and a hot chick. But it was still teenage. Meaning not that Brian (who was
in his mid-twenties) was a teenager, but rather that the music would be aimed
at a teenage audience. Namely that it was still going to try and be pop music.
The question than comes in; What did Brian mean by the word
"symphony"? Did he mean for SMiLE to be one long continuous piece of
music - which lasted as long as a symphony? Or that it would follow strict
symphonic guidelines? Did Brian, who did like Gershwin but really wasn't
classically trained, even know what that meant? Brian threw out the words
"pocket symphony" to describe "Good Vibrations" and even
subtitled "Fall Breaks Into Winter" a W. Woodpecker symphony. Clearly
Brian didn't know (or at least mean) symphony in the strictest sense. But
rather - like the phrase "to God" - meant trying for something a
little harder and more complex in the music as well as in terms of subject
matter.
But Brian may have lost sight of that with the encouragement of his group. His
friends may have given him too much rope, and Brian simply hung himself on it.
Although of all the craziness that this clique indulged Brian in, what is often
cited as the most detrimental were the drugs.
3.) Drugs and Brian just losing his mind.
Actually the popularity of this theory seems to be waning. While the songs
themselves were clearly written under the influences; Carol Kaye insists, and
listening to most of the sessions bear this out, that Brian was completely in
control during the recording process. Not to say he was stone cold sober, but
Brian was lucid and functioning. Stories of weirdness abound, but really what
happened? Sessions cancelled due to bad vibes? While it's possible, no one has
yet mentioned an actual date when this happened. Asking musicians to don fire
hats and even keeping an actual fire in a wastebasket during the "Mrs.
O'Leary's Cow" sessions? Ok, that's true - but have you seen the footage
of the Beatles' sessions with the symphony for "A Day In The Life"?
Tuxes and clown noses. It's all just apart of building the atmosphere. In order
to help the musicians get the right feel for the song. All that other
"Fire" weirdness, thinking it caused spontaneous combustion and the
attempt to destroy the tapes. Well, that all happened after the recording
session. Outside of the studio. As long as he was working in the studio, Brian
was ok.
Of course all the drugs, while in and of themselves did not stop SMiLE from
happening, they did I think exasperate another problem, Brian?s' psychedelicate
state of mind. Brian is not a well man. Even if he had grown up in a perfectly
functional Donna Reed household, he would've turned out a bit insecure, and
sensitive. And then of course being brought up by Murray Wilson - the depths of
whose abuse we may never know (although I certainly hope that the allegations
Brian made in the "auto"-biography are like most everything else in
that book, a big fat lie). Still no one would argue that Murray would earn
Father of the Year. If all that were not enough to create a neurotic paranoid
(or whatever else Brian's been diagnosed with) he went and did about the most
unhealthy thing a human could do: he became a rock star in the sixties. When
drugs were not only plentiful and available but expected. Particularly mind
altering hallucinogens. All of this conspired to create a fairly fragile
individual. Not that Brian's state of mind alone would've stopped SMiLE. There
are some quotes out there (some even from Brian) that indicate if he had
completed, or even continued, SMiLE he would've ended up dead or a vegetable
(irony). "I had to kill SMiLE, because it was killing me." "By
killing SMiLE, Brian saved himself". While considering the infrequency and
inconsistency of his post SMiLE work, some can fans can be forgiven for wishing
they could make that Faustian bargain (Brian's soul for one last great album),
I don't think SMiLE would've necessarily meant the end of Brian Wilson. If
everyone around him knew and understood and helped support him, Brian could've
finished. This just meant that all of the other myriads of factors surrounding
him were that much more potent. Actually considering all Brian had to work
against, it's amazing we have as much of SMiLE as we do.
4.) Capitol Records
While it's probably true that Capitol Records would've concurred with Mike
Love, and preferred something a little more commercial, there is no indication
that any one at Capitol ever heard the album. At least not until after the
project was canned and the tapes returned to their vaults. Of course there was
always the potential reaction of Capitol to worry about. Particularly
considering their less than enthusiastic response to PET SOUNDS. But don't know
how much of a factor that was. All that Capitol really seemed to want was just
something. Anything. Now. Now! NOW!! Capitol Records was antsy. Why else would
they print up covers and booklets and even start to run ads for an album that
hadn't even gotten a final running order yet?
So the deadlines came and passed and more were set. Who knows directly Capitol
was breathing down Brian's neck, but I'm sure he must've felt it even if it was
subtle. Got to strike while the iron's hot. While the hit single (which Brian
didn't really want on there in the first place) was still fresh on people's
minds. Got to get it out in time for the Christmas rush. Or at least when
teenagers still had the money the got from their grandparents for Christmas.
Hurry. Hurry. Hurry. Look at it this way: Brian took how many months to finish
"Good Vibrations"? If he was going to record another twelve song in
that manner of that caliber, it would've taken him five to seven years to
finish! No wonder Brian felt rushed. Sure he had been working on this thing for
almost a year by the time he gave up (and at a time when the six months the
Beatles spent working on SGT. PEPPER seemed decadent) but it was hardly as much
time as he needed.
Part of the problems with Capitol may also have been cause by the fact that
record company execs were feeling a little lost. Much like Hollywood did after
the surprise success of EASY RIDER. They just sorta threw up their hands and
said, "We don't know what the kids of today want" and then just
trusted the creative talent to do whatever they felt best. Capitol had taken a
big risk with "Good Vibrations" (possibly out of guilt for not
backing PET SOUNDS more). The risk didn't involve how innovate or experimental
the recording was, but in the only terms that record companies understand.
Dollars. And it paid off too. Not because it was a great sounding record, but
because it made a lot of money for them.
Capitol should've been on the top of the world at this point. It had two of the
biggest selling acts, and the both started with the letters B E A. But Capitol
had no control or even influence over the Beatles. They were in London. And
they were technically signed to Parlophone, with Capitol just getting the
rights to release and distribute in the US. It must frustrated them that they
could go in and meddle with their golden goose (although they sure hacked the
heck out the albums that the Beatles gave them before releasing them). The
Beach Boys on the other hand were right there with them in LA. While they did
eventually let that snot-nosed punk produce their own records, they had to find
some way of justifying their existence if the artists were going to take
control of their own careers. So Capitol was used to having some sort of
control over the Beach Boys. "Good Vibrations" or not. But all they
could do was wait. And they were not happy waiting.
What Brian really needed was a stopgap solution. Something he could whip up
quickly to temporarily satiate the maws of Capitol while he figured out just
how to finish SMiLE. Something along the lines of PARTY, which bought Brian
enough time to make PET SOUNDS.
Of course Capitol Records was not happy for other reasons as well. One being
that the Beach Boys were suing them for royalties. The other was that the Beach
Boys were starting their own label. To go into competition with them. While
Capitol may have seemed ready and eager for anything Brian might've given them
- there was always the possibility that even if SMiLE was finished they
wouldn't release it. Aside from Capitol's reaction to these two occurrences,
there was also Brian's to consider. These legal wranglings required Brian's
attention (or at least attendance) away from recording. It was these kind of
distractions from the studio that lead Brian to leave touring in the first
place.
5.) Van Dyke's absence
Van Dyke, I think, underestimated his role in SMiLE. To him he was just another
hired hand on Brian's project. No different from Chuck Ritz or Hal Blaine.
That's what Van Dyke did. He was hired by other bands (the Byrds) to either
arrange or produce or play keyboards or write lyrics or whatever. He did his
job, and he did his job to the best of his abilities, but it wasn't his music.
He could write his own music, and ultimately that's what he wanted to do. this
was just his way of making the rent.
So when Jules Siegel wrote in "Goodbye Surfing, Hello God" that Van
Dyke left the project, it's easy to see why Van Dyke didn't see it that way. He
was just the lyricist. Did Tony Asher or Gary Usher hang around for the
recording sessions? Of course not. And while he didn't mind showing up
occasionally, because he liked Brian and the two might even be considered
friends, it certainly wasn't his cup of tea. First of all, there was all that
weirdness from Brian circle of friends. Not the drugs (which Van Dyke was also
known to enjoy), but the dog doo in the piano's sandbox. Business meetings in
the pool. Tents in the living room. All that weirdness. On the other side he
was getting all this out-right hostility from Mike and the others. Questioning
his lyrics. If they didn't like them, hire him. It was just a job. Besides Van
Dyke had his own album to work on.
But to Brian it wasn't just his album. It was a collaboration. Granted Van Dyke
didn't get to write any of the chords, but all that stuff about pan-patriotic
westward expansion, that was Van Dyke's idea. That was his thing. And Brian
needed Van Dyke. Someone who wasn't one of the fawning members of his
inner-circle, but wasn't completely negative like the rest of the band either.
Brian isn't good and standing up for himself. He needed someone to defend and
justify SMiLE to the rest of them. Someone who could tell the emperor that he
was naked but could also compliment him when he dressed himself. Brian may bot
have realized it, but he needed someone who was neither a yes man or a no man.
Van Dyke was the only one in his circle who could appreciate his genius without
being awestruck by it. And I don't think Van Dyke ever really realized that
that was his role in SMiLE.
6.) The FBI fearing that this would lead to an over-throw of the government
by liberals over-excited by the music, leading to certain discoveries involving
UFOs, JFK and Area 51.
Ok, I made that last one up. But somewhere in those other reasons lies the crux
of SMiLE's original disappearance. That still doesn't answer why SMiLE
continues to elude us to this day. Why the proposed 1967 10-song follow-up
failed to produce anything more than a serial number at Brother Records
(#000002)? Why the proposed 1972 SMiLE only resulted in the
"completion" of "Surf's Up" and a record deal with Warner
Brothers? Why the 1988 attempt by Dr. Landy to show-off how much he had
thoroughly "cured" Brian gave us nothing more than that memo about
the tape boxes from Capitol Records? Even Brian's so-called master plan has yet
to bear fruit. Is SMiLE curse? Are we just unlucky? Or maybe SMiLE was simply
never meant to be. So let's move on to the next big question.
HOW WOULD SMiLE HAVE BEEN RECIEVED?
There are basically two theories about this. Neither one is particularly easy
to substantiate. I've boiled them down to two simple analogies; either SMiLE
would've been SGT. PEPPER (only more so) or it would've ended up like PET
SOUNDS (only more so).
SMILE as SGT. PEPPER
This theory holds that when SMiLE was released it would have instantly won all
the praise and acolytes that SGT. PEPPER received. It would've have issued in a
Spring of Love (as opposed to a summer). SGT. PEPPER itself would've been
viewed with the same skeptical distaste that met the Rolling Stones' THEIR
SATANIC MAJESTIES PRESENT (or even SMILEY SMILE). Seen as a cheap attempt to
cash in on the current craze by a band that really should know better. Brian
Wilson is hailed as a genius. And leads a normal healthy productive life. Or at
least doesn't end up as bad as fast. Who knows? It is possible. Remember
"Good Vibrations" was one of the Beach Boys biggest selling 45s,
while the preview single from SGT. PEPPER, "Strawberry Fields"/"Penny
Lane" was the first Beatles single to break their streak of #1s in the UK.
Of course then the question becomes, what would Brian have done next? Would he
have tried to top himself once more? Could he (or anyone) ever make something
that was as big a step forward from SMiLE as SMiLE was from PET SOUNDS (which
was a big step forward from SUMMER DAYS ... etc. etc.) Most likely, Brian's
head would've exploded, although one can always dream of what that beautiful
monstrosity would've been like. How little of it would've been done by the time
it collapsed.
But while we're on the subject, I've always thought it odd that SMiLE is always
linked with SGT. PEPPER. Granted (according to Sir Paul, John might think
different) but PET SOUNDS was the inspiration for SGT. PEPPER. And RUBBER SOUL
was the inspiration for PET SOUNDS. And true, SMiLE was cancelled shortly
before SGT. PEPPER's release while SMILEY SMILE was started right after it. But
in my mind SMiLE's musical twin was never SGT. PEPPER, but rather REVOLVER. Particularly
when you compare the two to their immediate predecessors. Both PET SOUNDS and
RUBBER SOUL are stylistically and thematically consistent, while SMiLE and
REVOLVER are far more diverse in their arrangements. PET SOUNDS and REVOLVER
are mature, subdued, quiet, emotional records. SMiLE and REVOLVER are far more
intellectual, surreal, and psychedelic. Not to say that they are cold or
cerebral, but they are both LPs aimed more at the head than the heart. Besides
Brian would've actually heard REVOLVER before or during the making of SMiLE,
while all he knew at the time of SGT. PEPPER was the acetate of "A Day In
The Life" that Paul played him during the sessions of
"Vega-Tables"
SMiLE as PET SOUNDS
Only more so. By which I mean, it would've been even less enthusiastically
publicized by Capitol than PET SOUNDS was. It would've sold even fewer records
than PET SOUNDS did. It would have received even stronger support from and even
smaller cult than PET SOUNDS. It would've taken even longer to be appreciated.
And Brian would've fallen even harder and faster than he did after PET SOUNDS,
perhaps never to rise to even the piddling heights he has managed since. While
we SMiLE aficionados would like to think our beloved masterpiece would've been
embraced with open arms, this sad tale seems far more likely. So again I
assert, SMiLE is a much better album for having never been completed.
HOW MY SMiLE SOUNDS...
Now we come to the fun part. A part that mixes historical hypothesis with
personal preference. With the lack of any definitive proof of what exactly
would've been on SMiLE and in what order, this is where we get to play. Even if
Brian came down from Mount Sinai with the correct running order written on
stone tablets, one could argue that the Brian from 1966/67 wouldn't have done
it the way that the Brian of 2002 says. And that because we want to defend our
right to help make SMiLE in our own image.
But of course, you can't just make the album you want. I like the song
"Butterfly" by Weezer. It has nothing to do with SMiLE in terms of
time of texture or intent, I just like it. That doesn't mean I can put it on my
SMiLE. This isn't just some mix tape - there need to be ground rules. But where
you choose to draw that line in the sand is up to you. Some people refuse to
include "I Love To Say Da-Da" because they think it was recorded too
late to be seriously considered for SMiLE. That's up to you. Read the evidence
on either side and decide for yourself. (Me, I include it) Do you make your own
edits of what you think Brian would've done, or do you confine yourself to only
that which Brian actually has done? Do you use the various completions of
certain tracks that were done after 1967 because you think they were done the
way they were originally intended, or just because they sound closer to
completion that way? Or do you not use anything that was touched after say May
of 1967?
Whether you think that Brian was days, or even hours, away from finishing
SMiLE, or whether you think that if he had continued working on it, it would've
ended up even less done than it is today, you have to agree that SMiLE is not
yet completely finished. So what about the stuff that isn't done? Do you just
use the piece we have left, or do you just leave a big hole in the album where it
was going to be? Do you throw in something that is close to replace whatever
"Elements" weren't done, or do you just go with three (or fewer)
"Elements"? It's up to you.
Do you make your SMiLE as you think Brian would've liked it ("Do You Lie
Worms?" entitled with a dig instead) or as it would've been more likely
released by Capitol (got to have "Good Vibrations")? Do you fill up
an entire 80 minute CD-R (or two) or do you control yourself to something that
would've fit on a standard Beach Boys 33 1/3 R.P.M. (12 songs, enough room to
squeeze it onto a two-fer, only at most 20-25 minutes a side)? Do you just pick
your favorite songs, or the ones you think Brian liked best? Do you try and
replicate what Brian had originally hoped for when he started this album, and
still called it DUMB ANGEL, (like Stan Shantar tried to do here)
or do you go for what Brian would've settled for right before giving up on the
whole thing? There is a plurality of plausible possibilities presented. (See
what an over-exposure to Van Dyke Parks will do?) The reason why so many
different conflicting theories may all seem true is simply that Brian might
have toyed with all each of the ideas sometime during the making of SMiLE. He
just simply changed his mind.
So, do you try and sequence it like a fairly straight forward pop record - like
Jon Hunt does here - or do you follow Domenic Priore's recipe using link
tracks and such, so that you have two side-long concepts guiding a continuous
flow of music? Are you trying to recreate that "teenage symphony to
God" or are you going for something like a trippier version of SUMMER DAYS
(AND SUMMER NIGHTS!!)? You may think you have sifted through all the evidence
and made you decision based on what is mostly likely accurate, and not just
what you want, or maybe you decided to hell with the real SMiLE (it doesn't
exist) and you're just doing it any way you want to. Maybe you even put
"Sail On Sailor" on there because Brian and Van Dyke sorta started it
back then. (And if anyone can find that original 1960s demo, I'd love to hear
it). Either way, this is where your personality shines through.
So here's me - exposed to the world:
SIDE 1:
1.) Heroes & Villains
2.) Wonderful
3.) Cabinessence
4.) Vega-Tables
5.) Wind Chimes
6.) Good Vibrations
7.) Surf's Up
SIDE A:
1.) Our Prayer
2.) Heroes & Villains (sections)
3.) Do You Like Worms?
4.) Water Chant
5.) I Love To Say Da-Da
6.) Well, You're Welcome
7.) I'm In Great Shape (demo)
8.) He Gives Speeches
9.) Barnyard
10.) The Old Master Painter/You Are My Sunshine
11.) Look
12.) Holidays
13.) Mrs. O'Leary's Cow
14.) I Wanna Be Around/Friday Night
15.) Surf's Up (first movement)
16.) Child Is Father Of The Man
So what did I do? Well I put together an album that splits its pop leanings and
its symphonic yearnings in half. My idea is to put all the straightforward
songs on one side. These are the songs that you can sing along to. And all
these songs were realistic enough to be re-recorded for future releases by the
Beach Boys. This is Side 1. On the other side I've included all the fragmentary
or instrumental or whose vocals don't exactly include words. You can look at
these pieces as un-finished. Lyrics would've been written, lead vocals
recorded, fragments put into some sort of cohesive order (or cut). Or you can
just see them as indicative of where the whole album was going. I'm not saying
I even know for sure, but I like the duality of it. This would be Side A. All
the songs on Side 1 get the traditional 2.5 seconds of silence between each
cut, while I'm not going to attempt to cross-fade or dove-tail all the songs on
Side A together, they are edited much closer together allowing for a more
constant stream of music. In some ways, my structuring of SMiLE mimics (or
pre-dates) the Beatles' ABBEY ROAD, which featured six fairly straight -forward
rock songs on Side 1, while Side 2 had all those Mr. Mustards and Polythene
Pams coming through the bathroom window but never give you their money.
Now, there is absolutely no evidence to suggest that Brian even thought of this
idea, much less ever considered it. Brian did sort of cleave TODAY into two different
sides, with all the softer, more melancholy songs on side two, but I'm pretty
sure this is just my idea, not Brian's.
I do think that Brian would've appreciated the joke however. The cover says to
see the label for the correct running order, but when you pull the album out,
how do you know which side goes first. I like the way it gives equal weight to
both sides. Of course there's no way of doing this on a CD, so which side I
present first depends on who I'm making this SMiLE for? If it's someone who?s
into classical or jazz, or someone who fairly open-minded I go with Side A
first. Usually though, Side One goes first - and that's the way we're going to
do it in this essay.
"Heroes & Villains"
alternate take from the SMILEY SMILE/WILD HONEY twofer
Ah, the infamous "in the cantina" version. A lot of people still want
to mess around with this, but I don't trust any of the various fan
"edits" of this or any other song. And maybe that's because I don't
have any sort of music editing software myself. So I stand by this version
because it is, as far as anyone has been able to find, the only version done.
By Brian. During Smile. Besides as much as I'd love a roller-coaster musical
comedy, this version helps fit with the more pop song-oriented theme of Side 1.
Strange as this song is (especially when compared to the lame SMILEY SMILE
re-make) it's still only 3 and a half minutes or so, and you can hum along to
it.
"Wonderful"
from the 1993 box set
Sure there's the "Rock me Henry" background vocals not included. Nor
have I inserted that "insert" that so disrupted the flow of the
SMILEY SMILE version. the SOT bootleg includes this horrifically off-key lead
vocal by Brian that eventually cuts off as he goes to get a glass of water. Why
would anyone want to hear that? No, I think this is the definitive take.
Granted it has a lot fewer instruments and simpler arrangement than what we're
used to with PET SOUNDS or even the rest of SMiLE. But then I dig out my copy
of the I JUST WASN'T MADE FOR THESE TIME SOUNDTRACK. There, Don Was's session
musicians faithfully (if soullessly) re-create the backing tracks of Brian's
mid-'60s to early-'70s classics. And their version of "Wonderful"
clearly apes the one on the box set. Although oddly enough, Van Dyke's writing
credit for that song is not included. I'm hoping that that was a typo. It's too
bad that when Brian and the karaoke-perfect Wondermints did their 2001 tour
with Paul Simon, their versions of "Heroes & Villains", "Our
Prayer", and "Surf's Up" reflected the later officially released
arrangements rather than shedding some light on their SMiLE era origins.
"Cabinessence"
from 20/20
The compliance of SMiLE fans in regards to the 20/20 version of
"Cabinessence" continues to astound me. It never raises the levels of
doubt and skepticism that the equally Frankenstein-ian 1971 version of
"Surf's Up" causes. It's even thrown into the middle of the SMiLE
music on the 1993 box set. Is it because it was only done about a year and a
half later so memories are fresh as to its original intent? Or is it for same
reason that I'm including it here; namely, there isn't any better (or even any
other) version out there. Unless of course, you want to chop it back up into
its original components, "Home On The Range", "Who Ran The Iron
Horse", and "Grand Coolie Dam". But you don't want to do that.
"Cabinessence" is much more than the sums of its parts. Just a few
things bug me. The lead vocals on the first verse, particularly the opening
line, are mixed so low. And during the second "Who Ran The Iron
Horse", Dennis's interesting (and far more melodic) lines about the
trucker are so buried most people don't even know they exist. In fact all of
"Iron Horse" seems too loud and clunky. And maybe it was supposed to
be that way. But in my mind, that's one of the things Brian would've fixed to
my satisfaction if only he'd stayed with the project.
"Vega-Tables"
from the 1993 box set
A teenage symphony to God ... and carrots?!? You know for an album that was
supposed to be filled with humor, this is the one of the only really funny
moments on there (aside from the quoting of "The 12th Street Rag" in
"Look" and the blurting of "you're under arrest" in
"Heroes & Villains"). And it's not even THAT funny. "I threw
away the candy bar/And I ate the wrapper"?? Brian's no Tom Lehrer or Spike
Jones. Still this moment of levity is important to SMiLE, in that it helps
puncture the more pretentious moments on the album and keeps it more grounded
in reality.
"Wind Chimes"
from the 1993 box set
This song always seemed bizarrely slight in comparison to the rest of SMiLE.
Even after the silliness that is "Vega-Tables". And I think this has
to do with Brian's general weakness as a lyricist. Listen to THE BEACH BOYS
LOVE YOU for example. Was this something Brian wrote after Van Dyke had
"abandoned" SMiLE? Or did Brian write this before he met Van Dyke? Or
did Van Dyke simply decline, like he did for "Good Vibrations"? Not
that the song is bad, just that compared to everything else on here - it seems
to be under-reaching.
"Good Vibrations"
from the 45 RPM single
Brian may not have wanted it on here, but I sure do. And many bootlegs include
various other takes and mixes of this song, trying to show off how much rare
stuff they can get their hands on. But Brian's released version is still simply
the best. I put it on here for a couple of reasons. 1.) To show that SMiLE did
have some commercial potential, and that Brian hadn't given up on his pop
instincts. 2.) To remind people how weird "Good Vibrations" really
was. Because the single sold so many copies, it tends to end up on all the
greatest hits compilations, sandwiched in between "Barbara Ann" and
"Fun, Fun, Fun". I'm sure all the current touring factions of the
Beach Boys include it somewhere in their repertoire. And so with all those
"surf, sand, and car" aficionados dancing away with their
excitations, I'd like to remind everyone that beneath Mike Love's
boy-meets-girls was a very weird song. Sudden tempo changes. Lots of different unrelated
sections. The cello and theremin. It's a lot more of a SMiLE track than it's
often given credit for.
Another reason I'm including it is out of gratitude. With the relative failure
(at least commercially) of PET SOUNDS, Brian's future was on the line with this
single. If it had tanked, as Brian Johnston supposed it would if it weren't
their biggest single of all time, it would most definitely had ended Brian's
career, if not the Beach Boys altogether. Do you think Brian would've had the
self-confidence (or that Capitol would have given him the funds and the
freedom) to even start SMiLE if "Good Vibrations" had been a flop?
And so in thanks I put it into my SMiLE
"Surf's Up"
the solo piano version from the 1993 box set
So why did Brian record this version? Its double-tracked vocals prove that it's
not a demo. Was he thinking of releasing it like that? Why then did he record
the backing track for the first half then? Did he intend it to turn out like it
did in 1971, with an ornate first half and a stripped down second? Or did he
have something else in mind for the later half (which he never got around to
finishing)? Brian clearly was heading in a simpler more minimal direction as
evidenced by the version of "Wonderful" on here as well as SMILEY SMILE
and WILD HONEY, maybe he did toy with the idea of putting out "Surf's
Up" with just the piano. Unlike the other songs from SMiLE which were
relatively simply written (for more info, see Tobias Bernsand's excellent essay
on the subject) "Surf's Up" sounds interesting, full and complete,
even in this arrangement. Contrast that to this simple piano and vocal demos of
"Heroes & Villains" (on the ENDLESS HARMONY SOUNDTRACK) or
"Vega-Tables" (to be found on Dumb Angel's MILLENIUM SMILE and other
bootlegs). Those songs clearly need more instruments to fully bring them to
life. "Surf's Up" on the other hand, stands fine alone. Certainly
better than the confused creature that gave title to the SURF'S UP album.
"Our Prayer"
from the 1993 box set
To my ears, the version from 20/20 doesn't sound all that much different, but
the box set version was done during SMiLE, and that one wasn't, so we'll stick
with that one. Of course, one of the reasons why I went for the double A side
concept for SMiLE instead of simply calling Side A, Side 2 was so that
"our Prayer" could still sort of be considered the first song on the
album. It's about the only given that all SMiLE compilers can agree upon. But
given it's short running time and word-less vocals, "Our Prayer"
belongs more with the experiments on Side A than it does with the songs on Side
1.
"Heroes & Villains"
the sections from the 1993 box set
Is this the infamous missing "Heroes & Villains Part 2"? No. Is
"Part 2" in there somewhere? Maybe. Was there even a "Part
2" ever assembled? If there was no one can prove conclusively that they've
found it. Was there ever a "Part 2" worked on? Some believe so. Was
there even a "Part 2" planned? Maybe Brian considered it at one
point. Although Brad Elliott gives a fairly compelling case
that there wasn't. While many have tried to reconstruct a "part 2"
using what may or may not have been Brian's guidelines, either way, the actual
real "Heroes & Villains Part 2" has not been discovered.
Of course, people's frustrations surrounding any or both parts of "Heroes
& Villains" I think again illustrates how the possibility of SMiLE is
much greater than any actual SMiLE. You hear all of these wonderful segments
and recording and you can just imagine a awe-inspiring kaleidoscope being
possible from them. But really any possible combination that could be created
(even by Brian himself - and this may have also lead to his giving up on the
project) would fall short of that ideal. There is no way to sequence a single
coherent work out of this mess without leaving behind a large disappointing
pile of stuff. It's just not possible to live up to the potential that these
snippets seem to have.
So, once again I defer to the 1993 box set. Now I'm not as gung-ho about it as
say Paul Williams, who suggests just considering the last 30 minutes of disc 2,
including the SMILEY SMILE song "With Me Tonight" as SMiLE. Although
I think he made the comment in order to be done with SMiLE rather than any
feeling that it really is SMiLE. And while others may quibble with certain
things, the inclusion of "I Love To Say Da-Da", the wrong mix and
speed for "Do You Like Worms?", some inappropriate tag at the end of
"Vega-Tables", the incorrect title of "Heroes & Villains
(intro)", for me I take the box set at it's word. And not just because I'm
trying to justify the $63 I spent on it (much more than any bootleg. So who's
the scalper now, Capitol?). But particularly on such sticky matter such as the
leftovers from "Heroes & Villains", this is the only piece of
music that Brian has personally signed off on. Or at least there's a
reproduction of his signature at the end of his introduction to the liner
notes. That's good enough for me.
"Do You Like Worms?"
from the 1993 box set
Again we're introduced to the "Bicycle Rider" theme, tying it to the
"Heroes & Villains (sections)". It also appears as the chorus of
the SMILEY SMILE version of "Heroes & Villains". I don't think
"Bicycle Rider" was ever meant to stand on its own as a track. This
much piece - I hesitate to call it a song - also ties in with its predecessor
in that it's vocals veer from the highly repetitive ("Plymouth rock..")
to meaningless gibberish (the Hawaiian Chant). It's much shorter and more
cohesive structure helps leads us to the next section of Side A.
"Water Chant"
available only on bootlegs
"I Love To Say Da-Da"
from the 1993 box set
These two pieces are often lumped together, because both the recording of
"Water Chant" and the melody of "I Love To Say Da-Da" were
combined (along with other non-SMiLE writings) to create SUNFLOWER's magnum
opus, "Cool, Cool Water". Although as far as I know, there is no evidence
to suggest that these two were ever linked during the making of SMiLE. In fact
when you listen to them, these two don't have a whole lot in common. The reason
I put these two here is rather because their lyrics are either droning
("water water water water...") or dadaistic ("Da-Da"),
linking it to "Do You Like Worms?". While both clock in just around
one minute apiece helping segue us to the next section
THE BARNYARD SONG CYCLE??:
"Well, You're Welcome"
B-Side from the "Heroes & Villains" 45 RPM single
"I'm In Great Shape"
from the ENDLESS HARMONY SOUNDTRACK's "Heroes & Villains (demo)"
"He Gives Speeches"
available only on bootlegs
"Barnyard"
available only on bootlegs
"The Old Master Painter/You Are My Sunshine"
available only on bootlegs
Was the next group of songs meant to be lumped together into one suite? Or
chopped up and put into more coherent songs ala "Cabinessence"? Or
are they just more unused segments of "Heroes & Villains"? Or
were they each going to be elongated to become full songs of their own? Or
maybe each piece had a different fate planned? Quite possibly all of these
might have been considered at one point. But this is what we were left with. A
group of "songs" all ranging from just under a minute to about a minute
and a half. Yet all featuring far more full and fleshed-out lyrics than what
we've heard so far on Side A.
So we begin with "Well, You're Welcome", a song that in being short
with a repetitive vocal belongs more with "Child Is Father of The
Man", "Water Chant" and "Our Prayer" than the rest of
this song cycle. While "Heroes & Villains (sections)" is
certainly the first piece on the chopping block if I were editing this SMiLE
for historical accuracy (and Side A does run a bit long to fit onto one side of
a 33 1/3 RPM at this point), the Barnyard Song Cycle is definitely the first to
go for reasons of what I personally want to hear. Particularly "Well,
You're Welcome".
For "I'm In Great Shape" I used the segment from the "Heroes
& Villains (demo)" simply because, as far as I believe, it's the only
recording of it available. Granted there was a vocal session logged - before
the instrumental session! The session, which in reality, spawned "I Wanna
Be Around/Friday Night" only somebody mislabeled it. Who knows if
instruments were even planned for the final "I'm In Great Shape" or
if it was going to be a cappella. Either way, it doesn't matter. Until a tape
from that session surfaces it does us no good either way.
For the version of "Barnyard" I used a fan edit (something I normally
avoid). I don't even know who did it, but some very clever person lifted
Brian's vocals and lyrics from the same "Heroes & Villains
(demo)" and wedded them to the usual instrumental version with its backing
vocals. While the mix is not great, considering what he had to work with, I'm
impressed. And it's about the best were going to find without sacrificing
either the lyrics or the arrangement.
And then the song cycle ends with "The Old Master Painter/You Are My
Sunshine" whose purely instrumental first half clues us in on things to
come. (Although there are some rumblings about vocals being recorded for that
section too.) Do not however use the SOT bootleg version as it is sadly missing
Dennis's somnambulant, past tense take on "You Are My Sunshine". So
is this cover (non-original) song the "Sloop John B" of the album?
Who knows? Speaking of which I've never actually heard the original version of
"The Old Master Painter" before. Some say, and for all I know they're
right, that "I Wanna Be Around" is also an old standard. I'm kinda
curious to hear them in their non-SMiLE-ified states.
THE ELEMENTS SUITE??:
"Look"
available only on bootlegs
"Holidays"
available only on bootlegs
"Mrs. O'Leary's Cow"
available only on bootlegs
"I Wanna Be Around/Friday Night"
available only on bootlegs
Perhaps no part of SMiLE is fraught with more peril that "The Elements
Suite". Supposedly a series of songs representing Earth, Wind, Fire, and
Water. I always liked the way the Smile Shop FAQ
puts it, that all we know for sure about "The Elements" is that
"Fire" is "Fire". And Brian was even going scrap that and
try to do something that (in his mind) didn't endanger the world, but rather
invoked a candle. Many theories abound on the subject. The Frank Holmes
illustrations from the pre-printed SMiLE booklet caption
"Vega-Tables" as an element, and most think it's Earth. But that same
empty record sleeve also lists "Vega-Tables" and "The Elements
Suite" as separate entries. So who do you believe? Did Frank make a
mistake? Or was "Vega-Tables" listed separately because it was a
possible candidate for a single? Other theories suggested that "Wind
Chimes" is the Air section, because it has the word "wind" in
the title I guess. But than Brian is quoted as saying that Air was a solo piano
instrumental. One that no one has yet turned up. Can Brian's memory be trusted?
Was this piece ever recorded? If it wasn't, a fat lot of good it does us now.
And then there's Water. Both "Water Chant" and/or "I Love To Say
Da-Da" are raised as possibilities, probably because both were later
incorporated into the song "Cool, Cool Water".
Certainly there has been no overwhelming evidence in any directions clearing
this up for us. So what is there to do? Try this little experiment. Find a
friend who was never heard of any of the stories or whatnot surrounding SMiLE.
Play him "Mrs. O'Leary's Cow". You may want to skip the first section
with the Keystone Cops-ish firemen arriving at the scene. Don't tell him or her
who did it or what the title is. Just make them listen. And when they're done,
asking 'em what it made them think of. The answer is "fire"
obviously. Brian was a bit crazy, but if someone were to tell me that there
existed a single recording that could've caused a rash of fires, "Mrs.
O'Leary's Cow" is the only possibility.
Problem is: none of the other songs sound that much like any element.
"Vega-Tables" kind of reminds me of random items falling off of a
third story fire escape into an empty metal trash can (don't ask me why). At
least until the backing vocals and rhythmic crunching starts. Certainly not
Earth. "Wind Chimes" does sound a lot like wind chimes, particularly
at the triple-tracked, high-pitched piano coda. But you don't hear either a
light breeze of a gusting gale swirling anywhere in there. (Although I suppose
you can't really hear air by itself, only when it moves other objects). While
"Water Chant" certainly invokes Water by repeating the word
"water" over and over again, that seems like kind of a cheap way out.
I could write a song that reminds one of zesty eggplant parmesan by having a
group of people chanting that phrase over and over. And "I Love To Say
Da-Da" is not particularly wet or liquid either. In fact it's sudden stops
and pauses break up the even flow that water would naturally have.
Who knows what Brian might have had in mind? Carol Kaye is quoted as saying the
woodshop noises in "I Wanna Be Around/Friday Night" was supposed to
be the re-building after the fire. I put it after "Mrs. O'Leary's
Cow" on my mix, but does that make it one of the Elements? If so which
one? The Water that I assume was used to put out the fire? Or the Earth that
they're building on? Was the "Elements Suite" meant to be literally
translatable program music, like say "Peter and the Wolf" where the
oboe stands for the duck or whatever? Or was this supposed to be more like a
tone poem that just sort of gives you a vague impression of the things
described? Who knows? My guess is, most of the Elements weren't even written.
And the only one recorded was Fire. So instead I just put together an
Instrumental Suite to help contrast with the cycle of songs that preceded it.
And we start with "Look" and "Holidays". Two songs that
give a lot of SMiLE-o-philes trouble. One hopes they would've been given more
evocative titles before release. Even I have a hard time keeping the two of the
apart. On the other hand, they are definitely my favorites, and often sadly
overlooked. If I were in Domenic's shoes, and was asked by the brass at Capitol
what title or two from SMiLE to include on the box set, I certainly would have
vouched for these two.
There are many ways of looking at this pair of songs. Either they are the
"Trombone Dixie"s of SMiLE. Vague sketches that once he heard them
didn't need any further work or lyrics - because they were dropped from the
line-up. Or maybe they were the "Pet Sounds" and "Let's Get Away
For A While". Brian is one of the few pop stars who aren?t afraid of the
instrumental. And his instrumentals are showcases for improvisation and
technical prowess on your instrument. Rather they are gestures that illustrate
Brian's talent at texture, composing and arranging. Or maybe they are like so
much else on this album, unfinished. They were suppose to have lyrics and
either Van Dyke never got to them, or they were just never recorded. Actually,
there is much evidence that, in fact, "Child Is Father Of The Man"
and "Do You Dig Worms?" were the ones with missing lyrics, regulating
the current vocals to background status. While I'm of course curious what those
words were meant to be, I'm more anxious to hear the melody lives they would
have incorporated. But since no recordings of the lead vocals were made, even
if Van Dyke decided to share those lost lyrics with us, they wouldn't do us any
good.
"Surf's Up"
instrumental version from disc 5 of the 1993 box set
In attempt to tie together the divergent paths that Side 1 and Side A took, I
tried to get them to reflect each other just a little bit. Both start with
versions of "Heroes & Villains" (except for a brief intro) and
both end with "Surf's Up" (save for a short coda). Plus as much as I
think that the solo piano version of "Surf's Up is full and complete unto
itself, these "crazy horns" (as Brian called 'em) and percussive
keychains are fun to listen to too. They give a whole new look to the song.
Less stately and elegant, wilder and harder. Plus given its shorter running time
and instrumental status, it makes a welcome addition to Side A.
"Child Is Father Of The Man""
available only on bootlegs
Of course, there's been a lot of talk about whether or not "Child"
was meant as a part of "Surf's Up" like its used on the SURF'S UP
album or not. While I'm not sure I'm thoroughly convinced they're part of the
same song, it does follow here pretty nicely. Of course what version of
"Child" to use is hard to decide. There were at least three different
parts recorded. A version with just piano and group vocals, a version with just
full orchestration, and then another with the full band and the group vocals.
Whatever edit you choose, you should make sure to get a least one of each.
Although who knows how often and in what order Brian intended them. My
suggestion is to start out with the piano verse, that way it hooks onto the
tickling piano that sort of end's the previous "Surf's Up".
So anyway ... that's SMiLE - as I see it. I'm sure you'll disagree with me
somewhere. Heck, I myself will probably become embarrassed by some of the
assertions I've made as time goes by, as more evidence is discovered, and as I
become a different person. But that's the fun of SMiLE, it can be as much yours
as it is anyone else's. So don't worry, baby, about getting it just right. Have
fun with it!
By Joe_blow (Joe_blow) on Monday, February 25,
2002 - 11:15 pm:
Susan
that's the most incredible post I'v ever read. What more can I say.