dtram

Firends is great. If you took the Sunflower/Surf's Up two-fer and picked the 10-12 best tracks you'd have one amazing record. This Whole World, Forever, Our Sweeet Love, Feel Flows, Long Promised Road, Disney Girls, Til I Die; just great stuff.

I thought I read that the BB's really didn't take part in any of the instrumental sessions for Smile, hopefully the release has detailed session notes to clear that up. As for PS, I thought the only song any BB's played instruments on was That's Not Me and I thought it was only Carl and Dennis but haven't read the liner notes in a while. For me, when Brian went off the road and started using the wrecking crew exclusivley is when I really get interested in their music. However, the post Smile era, Wild Honey through Holland, I like a lot. Some really underated and underappreciated music in t

I absolutely agree that it could stick out like a sore thumb and that's why i said that i hoped they'd scrap the idea of adding vocals if it sounded like they weren't working. I think what the idea of adding vocals has going for it, is that this is the beach boys and they were a vocal group. Smile would not have been an instrumental record and to have an instrumental release isn't what it would have been in 1967. It would only be instrumental because they never got around to recording the vocals for some songs. Again, I am not saying i am for adding vocals yet, i need to think about it s

What do you mean by that? I got that feeling too when he said they still need to assemble it and then present it to the band, that is the scary part.

Guess I'm torn. The purist in me doesn't want it touched, the other part wants some vocals. I think they should do it both ways, what the hell? You have the choice to listen to it with and without vocals. It could sound like a train wreck though so i would hope if they went with that line of thinking, they would have the self awaerness to realize if it sounded like shit to scrap it. I only feel that way because the songs, especially Blue Hawaii and On A Holiday sound so much better with vocals. I can't wait for this.

Nice interview with Mark Linett in Billboard: http://www.billboard.com/#/features/beach-boys-engineer-talks-about-the-smile-1005071622.story

I think so too. I ve often wondered if the heroes part one and two actually exist or not. You would think if it did it would've made it onto the boxed set. My hunch is that the 6 minute heroes sections is all that there is that is extra but i really hope I'm wrong. It funny, for me, there isn't a wasted note on BWPS, i think it is perfection. I think it flows extremely well and i think the shorter lesser songs you refer to are the right length. They actually shortened Look when it was converted into song for children and i love the way Child was (re)constructed. Regardless, i think we

As far as i know, they were not allowed to use anything from the 66-67 sessions in 2004, everything was rerecorded. They did it on older equipment to get the sound as close as possible. Definitely hear you about it sounding a little broadway but IMO, if all broadway sounded like that, id be a show tunes fan. I thought the original Priore book said that that running order was Brian scribbling the songs on a piece of paper for Capitol and was never meant to be the real running order. Yeah there's no doubt to me that 2004 used more than they would have for that reason and, they had more roo

I think that was true before 2004 but once it got finished, it kind of ended the mystery thing, at least to me. We're all getting older, i just want pristine copies of it. I just hope they don't compress the shit out of it though.

By getting a bug up his ass that he isn't "represented" enough or some bullshit like that and blocks its release. I think he held up the PS box for a year. I think this will come out this time but wont really believe it until I'm holding it.

I wouldn't think it would be anything like BWPS but when the article above says that 2004 will be the blueprint, it makes you wonder. Not sure i agree with 2004 being bloated, its only 5 or 10 minutes longer than a 60's release would have been. Yeah its longer but the three movement thing works for me. Obviously not how it would've been done but i like it. As for the mono/stereo thing, i never listen to the mono pet sounds after the boxed stereo version came out, the stereo sounds so much better to me, richer. I think that has to with the care they took in assembling the stereo mix off o

Yup, spinning away was one I couldn't remember the title, love that tune. Always thought it would go great as the last song of a movie where a car is driving off into the sunset, that song plays over it and then fades into the credits. If you remeber the show Northern Exposure, they used Lay My Love once. I think it was a scene where Ed and Ruth Ann buried someone at the top of hill, then had this sort of joyful dance together as the song played. Cool stuff.

Sweet. Little disapointed it's coming out in Mono and that DB Priore is writing the liner notes but as a Smile fan, this is all you can ask for. I hope the running order is a close approximation of what BW had in mind in '66 (what, if any part he can remember) and not the BWPS order. I like the BWPS order but we have that and I would be much more interested in what would have been. Sign me up for the boxed set. Thanks for the post.

Reveal, for me its the 3 songs stretch of Reno, Shes Just Wants to Be and Disappear with She being the major offender, can't stand it. I've always liked Saturn for some reason. I have solved the problem by omitting She and putting Fascinating between Beat A Drum and Imitation. Record works much better for me that way. Accelerate - Liked from the 1st listen but the loudness killed it. Now that I have the vinyl rip I find I go back to it much more. I've always thought Up was great ATS was shit, seems to be the one thing the majority of REM fans agree on. Did you see that Matthew Perpet

I couldn't get enough of this record when it came out but it hasn't aged well for me. I still love the opening track and a few others. I should go back and give it another shot. And Paris 1919 is awesome.

I gotta say, I think I liked the world better when there were 2 or 3 major music publications, you read the reviews, agreed or disagreed and that was that, you liked it or you didnt. I know I sound like an old man, I guess I am. Reading all of these reviews, some positive, some negative and all these varied comments is starting to wear on me. And I know the answer, if it annoys you, dont read it, but it is kind of like crack, I cant stop. I remember this scathing review of Green when it came out, Pop Song sounds too much like Exhuming McCarthy, Inside out is Finest Working, Hairshirt suc

Funny, felt exactly the same way although now that i have the vinyl rip of the record, I curiously like the title cut much more. Sing for the Submarine is actually staring to get on my nerves. I never loved it but felt it worked to break the faster louder songs. Now it just seems kind or dirgy to me and not that interesting. The record is short enough that I dont skip it but had it been on one of their 60+ minute opus' I probably would never listen to it.

I think that's probably a good description for 2 of the songs, Oh My Heart and Marlon Brando. I totally love MB, really grew on me. I think I said earlier in this thread that not liking this album is valid opinion, (i'm sure those of you who dont like it will thank me for allowing you to not like it )if you dont like REM, this is not for you. If you do though, its a pretty good collection of REM songs. IMO, REM's strengh always was writing good catchy songs. They would dress them up in different costumes but at the end of the day, it was always about the songs. One of the reasons why I

This review was posted to murmurs too. Apparently he loves the Decemberists for sounding like old R.E.M. but R.E.M. themselves are not allowed to. It's pretty simple; it's a good batch of songs. If you liked R.E.M. between 1986 and 1996, you're probably going to like this. Does it break new ground? Probably not but does music always have to? Can songs just have good hooks and be fun to listen to? Seems to me that some critics feel that since the last decade or so for R.E.M. has been spotty, that ripping the record is the safe route to go, better to be wrong and be negative instead of g

That's fair. We all have our share of bands where theres a period we dig much more than others. Stipe could sing the phone book and I'd probably like it. Think I'll put on Voice of Harold now that i think about it:-)

I definitely agree with that. Most of the post berry records were ignored but 4 of the 5 of them are really good and if you're in a sunny mood you have reveal to put on, a rocking mood, accelerate, etc. As for U2, after all you cant leave behind i kinda tuned them out. It sounds to me that they aren't taking chances but without having heard them, it's not fair to say. Thats what concerns me about rem's next step. Do they get experimental again and if not, do they get lumped in with U2?

Yeah, i thought that too at the time. I will always believe that monster was just about the worst thing they could've done at the time for their US popularity. Just about any record they did after, ATS included, would have held a lot of that audience that came on board in the 90's. Yeah, monster sold a lot, but a lot of those got played once and never again. Following it up with ebow as the first single was kind of the nail in the coffin as far as US popularity. Now maybe they don't give a shit, and on some level i think they might have gotten leary of how big they were, but it's human n

There's a flac of the record on demonoid.me and bunch of mp3 rips, sounds much better.

Really? Well, mills did suffer appendicitis during it's recording and they say you can hear the song slow down at the end although i never noticed it. I remember hearing Kenneth when it came out and thinking, wow, if monster is half as good as this song we have a classic. Unfortunately is was half as good, IMO, and it's not quite a classic. Is a good record while engaging in a little of the old in out, in out if you hear what I'm saying.

That's why they called Out of Time out of time, beacuse it was so different than what was popular then. My problem with Monster is that they got so focused on making a loud record, the kind of forgot to write great songs. I actually like the record if I'm in the right mood for it as they did do a good job capturing a mood. Stipe just got so wrapped up in this glam personna that he turned in what is probably his weakest collection of melodies. And make no mistake, the key to the band has always been him. Yes the other guys help make the sound what it is but without his amazing melodic ta