Win Limited Edition Pet Sounds Vinyl
Your favorite band probably isn't going to be relevant in 40 years. And that's not accosting your good taste (you're here, aren't you?); that's just the nature of art and music. World views shift, styles morph unrecognizably, society has new demands and ever-changing priorities. And yet, with their magnum opus, The Beach Boys crafted a time-honored testament to life and love, a sophisticated album of genre-synthesizing beauty. Few compare, and few are so well remembered.
To celebrate the album's 40th Anniversary, Capitol is reissuing the record in a CD/DVD digipak and a limited edition, deluxe, double colored vinyl package. This edition is limited to 10,000 numbered copies worldwide, and Stereogum's got 3 shrinkwrapped copies of the double vinyl to give away. Our copies are all numbered under 100 (if that means they're more special or something ... we're not sure).
To enter, post in the comments refuting this claim from Stereogum reader John on our last Pet Sounds post:
There is nothing particularly advanced about its use of song form (variations of eight-bar phrases, choruses, bridges, etc.) or tonal pallette (as if using a harp and an accordion is some kind of stroke of genius). Its use of meter and rhythmic emphasis is purely conventional and, though there are numerous pretty melodies, pretty melodies have been around since the middle ages. I suppose an argument could be made that it represents some sort of advance in recording-studio technique... But for the most part I don't think there is an objective, musical reason why we like this record.Winners will be chosen randomly. We just want to hear you say nice things about one of our favorite albums. Contest ends Wednesday 9/20 at 6 PM EST. Good luck!
And remember to check in on the free Pet Sounds Podcast series, featuring all-new interviews with the Beach Boys about every track on the album! We just watched the video on the overview of the record, with the Boys' commentary set to awesome still shots of them and pre-trauma, moptop Brian. An afficiondo's must. One of our favorite nuggets comes from Mike Love's retelling of the album's naming:
Brian didn't know what to call the album. We played the album back in its entirety in the studio ... I was ... listening back, like everyone else ... and here comes a dog barking and a train passing, as a sound on the album. I said, "Huh. Well, it's a dog. Why don't we call it Pet Sounds?!" Which is a double entendre. It means "our favorite sounds," as well as it means a dog barking! (laughs) Brian said, "Yeah, that's cool!"Grab the rest of the overview here:
Pet Sounds Overview (Audio) (MP3)
Pet Sounds Overview (Video) (Video)
Full of fun facts so you can kick ass at your next Rock 'N' Roll Trivia night.
Posted at 1:48 PM
Tags: Brian Wilson
While you may pull apart each distinct characteristic as "done before," I think the greater achievement is that of the thousands of details that went into the production of Pet Sounds, they were never combined before in this way, especially not on a full-length pop record. Brian Wilson didn't invent the harp, or the theramin, or harmonies in general. He produced the the quintessential ALBUM.
Score = 0
My comments haven't been posting properly (at all actually), so Imma keep it short. Obviously the harmonies on that record are amazing, innovative, inspiring, etc... Also, and equally obvious, the subtle changes on that record are effing unreal. To say it's just standard 8-bar phrasing is to miss the point. Sure, it's not math-rock, but there are TONS of gorgeous parts linked together by TONS of artful, brilliant changes. Plus the instrumentation and vocals are amazing. Not to mention the lyrics....
Score = 0
Okay, here's my shot: John argues that the album is wholly conventional in that the instruments and song forms weren't groundbreaking ("as if using a harp and an accordion is some kind of stroke of genius"). However, such an assemblage of this type of music within the confines of the "rock and roll" world are certainly groundbreaking and just flatly hadn't been done before.
Rock and roll isn't as purely blues and country based as we'd like to think; Elvis adored the "Italiano"-style of singing and featured in often (think the end of "Now or Never"). A whole type of rock and roll--the Fats Domino New Orleans style--was rooted in wonderful triplets and jazz beats that didn't gain the same popular foothold as the rockabilly and 4/4 blues stomp that became the norm (the same thing goes for Bill Haley's swing-style).
When Brian Wilson (and to a great extent, Tony Asher and Van Dyke Parks) sat down and began banging together what was to become Pet Sounds, they looked beyond what had become not just their “normal” instruments, but those of popular/rock music in general. Using a harp and an accordion? That went against just about every notion of “rock” in play at the time, and certainly was a punch in the face to Capitol Records and their notion of what the Beach Boys “sound” was.
The Beach Boys helped reclaim large chunks of musical thought that had previously been abandoned in some sections of the pop world. It’s odd to think of this as a “revolt,” but it’s just as odd as the Beatles playing “You Know My Name (Look Up the Number)”—an importation of a style of music long thought destroyed or discarded by rock and roll.
In other words: before Pet Sounds, we only knew about thirty words, and Brian Wilson gave us a dictionary. Not all of it was new, but the combinations and the inclusion were. For that, Pet Sounds deserves our love.
(Anyway, those are just my thoughts: Guess I’m Dumb).
Score = 0
John from the last Pet Sounds post can lick my balls. Pet Sounds rulez!!!
Seriously, though, I don't care if the phrasing and harmonies are conventional. Pet Sounds is a beautiful record that makes you feel something. If anything, the conventional aspects of it are what makes it genius. Good music doesn't have to be hard to listen to.
Score = 0
John is a tasteless douchebag.
Score = 0
It's good because it rocks....Moron.
Score = 0
I have been listening to this album for the past few weeks because I never really got into it before and I wanted to try and understand why it is widely recognized as the best album of the past 40 years. To me it certainly did not seem as 'cool' or deep as dark side, sgt. pepper, ok computer, or even my fave Ten. So what is it? After about 40 listens I have to say, I still don't really get it. It's definately not its momentous sound. If anything the fidelity suffers from 40 years of drastic improvements in recording technique. Even after numerous re mastering editions, it still sounds noisy and far away. But maybe this is part of the charm? I have been meaning to pick up the newly released vinyl so that I could listen to it properly the way it was enjoyed back when it was released.
I have to admit I plan on listening a bunch more because it is growing on me and the lyrics are increasingly insightful and meaningful as I get more familiar comfortable with them.
My current conclusion is that there is nothing obviously particularly advanced about this album when listening to it today. However it was groundbreaking in ways that we just can't understand 40 years later. So much has flowed from it that its almost impossible to recognize the genius that it represented at the time. Heinsite is supposed to be 20 / 20 but (to continue the cliche), we tend to forget our history and we are destined to repeat it. There was an enourmous occurence in society and recording modernization after Pet SOunds rocked the music world and we should remeber this album as a force during a moment in time when great change was occuring.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds makes me strawberry happy on a cold, rainy day.
Isn't that good enough?
Score = 0
A point-by-point rebuttal: You're wrong.
Score = 0
A lot of these posts seem to concede the notion that "Pet Sounds" used typical 8-bar phrasings and song structure, ect...I don't buy into that. The beauty of this record is that it is unlike anything that had been recorded before, yet still familiar. It would be easy to dismiss "Pet Sounds" as just another pop record, but this couldn't be further from the truth.
Score = 0
It's a beautiful record if you've been young, in love, or maybe even just human, and if you want to spend your day thinking about advances in recording technology, you might have missed the point.
Score = 0
I have a hard time disagreeing with Jon Brion's assertion that "God Only Knows" is the greatest song ever written. Name a song that's better. Go ahead, just try.
Score = 0
A lot of these posts seem to concede the notion that "Pet Sounds" used typical 8-bar phrasings and song structure, ect...I don't buy into that. The beauty of this record is that it is unlike anything that had been recorded before, yet still familiar. It would be easy to dismiss "Pet Sounds" as just another pop record, but this couldn't be further from the truth.
Score = 0
A lot of these posts seem to concede the notion that "Pet Sounds" used typical 8-bar phrasings and song structure, ect...I don't buy into that. The beauty of this record is that it is unlike anything that had been recorded before, yet still familiar. It would be easy to dismiss "Pet Sounds" as just another pop record, but this couldn't be further from the truth.
Score = 0
Pretty melodies may have been around since the middle but acid inspired breakdowns haven't.
Score = 0
Pretty melodies may have been around since the middle but acid inspired breakdowns haven't.
Score = 0
I've got an eight-bar phrase for you, John: Go fuck yourself, asshole.
Score = 0
I think if you heard Pet Sounds in 1966, it would have sounded completely unconventional and remarkably advanced.
And the pretty melodies have not been topped in the past forty years.
and "God Only Knows" is on it.
Score = 0
i really like pet sounds, can i get the vinyl please?
pretty please?
Score = 0
It's a beautiful record if you've been young, in love, or maybe even just human, and if you want to spend your day thinking about advances in recording technology, you might have missed the point.
Score = 0
I think if you heard Pet Sounds in 1966, it would have sounded completely unconventional and remarkably advanced.
And the pretty melodies have not been topped in the past forty years.
and "God Only Knows" is on it.
Score = 0
WIthout Pet Sounds there would have been no Sgt. Pepper Paul McCartney said so himself. He said that the influence Pet Sounds had on them directly led to Sgt. Pepper. Also he said without the original SMiLE sessions the White Album wouldn't have been the same. The album is beautiful and brilliant.
Score = 0
I may not always love it, but as long as there are stars above it, it'll never have to worry.
Score = 0
I agree that "God Only Knows" may be one of the crowning achievements in rock 'n' roll.
It takes a true talent to write a pop tune that doesn't grow stale after 40 years. To this day, listeners who stumble on that tune find the emotion, melody and lyrics as relevant as they ever were, something that can't be said for a great deal of pop and folk music from the '60s.
And that's just one song on the album. The same could be said for "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," "Caroline No," and "I'm Waiting For The Day." Truly a great record.
Score = 0
I think if you heard Pet Sounds in 1966, it would have sounded completely unconventional and remarkably advanced.
And the pretty melodies have not been topped in the past forty years.
and "God Only Knows" is on it.
Score = 0
I think the fiery indignation aimed at John is based on misinterpretation. I take "But for the most part I don't think there is an objective, musical reason why we like this record," to mean he does indeed enjoy the record, but that it's hard to put it in a test tube and find out why--as if there is an objective, musical reason to like any music. And that's the only problem I see in his argument. Music is magic and all enjoyment of it is subjective. There's no real, true, rational reason we like music (see http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/09/03/survival_of_the_harmonious/?page=full). It's the chills given and awe inspired by those beautiful harmonies. Pet Sounds is a big warm bath in gorgeous music, and though it's fun to try, you can never objectively justify your enjoyment based on Truth (capital T)-- whatever that means anyway. Now GIMME THAT VINYL (please)!
Score = 0
I think the fiery indignation aimed at John is based on misinterpretation. I take "But for the most part I don't think there is an objective, musical reason why we like this record," to mean he does indeed enjoy the record, but that it's hard to put it in a test tube and find out why--as if there is an objective, musical reason to like any music. And that's the only problem I see in his argument. Music is magic and all enjoyment of it is subjective. There's no real, true, rational reason we like music (see http://www.boston.com/news/globe/ideas/articles/2006/09/03/survival_of_the_harmonious/?page=full). It's the chills given and awe inspired by those beautiful harmonies. Pet Sounds is a big warm bath in gorgeous music, and though it's fun to try, you can never objectively justify your enjoyment based on Truth (capital T)-- whatever that means anyway. Now GIMME THAT VINYL (please)!
Score = 0
I agree that "God Only Knows" may be one of the crowning achievements in rock 'n' roll.
It takes a true talent to write a pop tune that doesn't grow stale after 40 years. To this day, listeners who stumble on that tune find the emotion, melody and lyrics as relevant as they ever were, something that can't be said for a great deal of pop and folk music from the '60s.
And that's just one song on the album. The same could be said for "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," "Caroline No," and "I'm Waiting For The Day." Truly a great record.
Score = 0
I know this is going to be controversial, but I know one song that is, in my opinion, just the slightest bit better than "God Only Knows": "Wouldn't It Be Nice". Seriously. Forget Sgt. Pepper's for a moment. "Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Heart Club Band" is a great beginning, sure, but the song's all a joke, really. On the other hand, Pet Sounds opens with one of the sweetest, most sincere songs ever. This sentiment continues on throughout the record. Has there ever been a band more sincere than the Beach Boys? Has there ever been a band more universal? My Grandmother loves the Beach Boys. I don’t mean that as an insult to them: a kid could love this record, a hundred-year-old man could love this record, a jaded hipster could love this record, a middle-aged woman probably does love this record. That’s because, of all things, it’s an album largely about love. Not just in the lyrics; the very instrumentation and harmonization suggests it. It’s an astonishing feat. I will never get tired of these songs; they were built to last.
Score = 0
Not advanced? Try sitting down to the piano and picking out the chords to "God Only Knows." It ain't that easy.
Score = 0
Not advanced? Try sitting down to the piano and picking out the chords to "God Only Knows." It ain't that easy.
Score = 0
Once upon a time, over a year ago, a friend asked me "Scott, what's your favorite song ever?" Really, the most unanswerable of questions, if you're me, but for her I tried to answer. I was in an emotional slump at that point, trying to live beyond what I could do for a person, and needing anything hopeful in my life. This is when I met Brian Wilson for the second time.
Everyone hears "Surfin' Safari" at age five and dances around to it, putting the Beach Boys in that category of music with Kool and the Gang that you think of when you think of washed up bands who play the County Fair, or a place like Konocti Harbor, where your parents get away for the weekend in middle-aged boredom. To me, there is "The Beach Boys" and there is "Pet Sounds" and they are almost separate entities with the same members. Everyone knows that Pet Sounds is Brian Wilson's baby, recorded with the wrecking crew, LA's finest studio musicians like Carol Kaye, Barney Kessel and Hal Blaine while the rest of the band was on tour in Japan.
Back to the question at hand: my favorite song ever? Well, the answer I came up with was one that fell under much scrutiny. I told her that my favorite song ever was "Wouldn't It Be Nice." She looked at me, almost in disbelief, and said "The BEACH BOYS? But that's such a childish pick! It's so...silly and...stupid." I didn't even bother trying to refute her statements; "if you don't get Brian Wilson, you don't get me" would have been a good response at that time, though.
Her response got me going internally. Are the Beach Boys a childish band? I certainly think not. First off, "Wouldn't it be Nice" is a beautifully written song, containing an extreme string crescendo paired with the thickest vocal harmony that comes to mind, but it's Brian's lyrics that set the song apart. Childish, no. Youthful? Definitely. It's the song that most embodied what I felt at the time, the desire to run away with someone and make it "that much better." It also highlights the faults in the question "What's your favorite song ever?" It has a dynamic answer, and it will never be static. It shouldn't be, if you're constantly listening.
Cut to today. One day fresh off of my dad putting a whole lot of guilt on me, going on about how he's alone in the world, he hates my mother, never wants to see her or speak to her again, and how he has no friends. This morning I came across a rehearsal version of "God Only Knows", a standout track off of Pet Sounds (but they all are, really). "God Only Knows" was my parents' 'song'. Seemingly every couple from the late 1970's has a 'song', but I'm surprised my dad picked such a good one, with the rest of his musical stylings being, well, pretty terrible.
This part is the hardest part to write. "God Only Knows" is pretty emblematic of my parents' failed relationship. God Only Knows what my dad was like when he may have had the balls to tell my mom that as long as there were stars above her that she'd never need to doubt his love; he'd make her so sure about it. In my lifetime, my dad wasn't sure of anything. If my mom should ever leave my dad, which she did, his life would still go on (believe him), and it did, but the world has shown nothing to him, and I don't know what good it's doing him right now to be alive in this world. He said he's alone, and God Only Knows what I can do to make him feel better or keep myself alright.
Brian Wilson found his way into my life again. Is this all childish? No, I think this is all quite adult. The rehearsal version of "God Only Knows" is something worth listening to over and over. The hushed organs and muted bass lead the song in in a much more delicate fashion than the sweeping sounds of the original. The song is even counted in by one of the musicians, my favorite touch to make a song feel intimately personal. The verses come across clearly, broken up by only the bass line. Hal Blaine's minimalist drumming carries the song along into the vocal harmony part, which seems as fragile as anything I've ever heard; it's like they recorded this take while their parents were asleep in the back of the house, trying not to make even a mouse scurry across the kitchen floor. The song comes to some sort of a quiet crescendo during the climax of the song, to be ushered out kindly by a "Thank You", hopefully out of the mouth of Brian Wilson.
The fact that an alternate take of a track not even on the album could make me feel to that extent must say something about the album as a whole, the way it works its way into your life and takes hold of you word by word and note by note makes it so we don't even need an objective musical reason to like this album. You could go on and on about the lush orchestration, harmonies, amazing single drum hits like the opening of "Wouldn't it be Nice" or any other little aspect about the musicality of Pet Sounds, but all of those pale in comparison to how it makes you feel. That is why I listen to music.
Score = 0
Great songs, great vocals and a consistent theme & feel.
The fact that it is even being discussed/re-issued 40 years later says it all really.
Nothing starts off the summer like this record.
Score = 0
I agree that "God Only Knows" may be one of the crowning achievements in rock 'n' roll.
It takes a true talent to write a pop tune that doesn't grow stale after 40 years. To this day, listeners who stumble on that tune find the emotion, melody and lyrics as relevant as they ever were, something that can't be said for a great deal of pop and folk music from the '60s.
And that's just one song on the album. The same could be said for "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," "Caroline No," and "I'm Waiting For The Day." Truly a great record.
Score = 0
Great songs, great vocals and a consistent theme & feel.
The fact that it is even being discussed/re-issued 40 years later says it all really.
Nothing starts off the summer like this record.
Score = 0
John,
Have you listened to it on colored vinyl??? It makes a difference.
Score = 0
Once upon a time, over a year ago, a friend asked me "Scott, what's your favorite song ever?" Really, the most unanswerable of questions, if you're me, but for her I tried to answer. I was in an emotional slump at that point, trying to live beyond what I could do for a person, and needing anything hopeful in my life. This is when I met Brian Wilson for the second time.
Everyone hears "Surfin' Safari" at age five and dances around to it, putting the Beach Boys in that category of music with Kool and the Gang that you think of when you think of washed up bands who play the County Fair, or a place like Konocti Harbor, where your parents get away for the weekend in middle-aged boredom. To me, there is "The Beach Boys" and there is "Pet Sounds" and they are almost separate entities with the same members. Everyone knows that Pet Sounds is Brian Wilson's baby, recorded with the wrecking crew, LA's finest studio musicians like Carol Kaye, Barney Kessel and Hal Blaine while the rest of the band was on tour in Japan.
Back to the question at hand: my favorite song ever? Well, the answer I came up with was one that fell under much scrutiny. I told her that my favorite song ever was "Wouldn't It Be Nice." She looked at me, almost in disbelief, and said "The BEACH BOYS? But that's such a childish pick! It's so...silly and...stupid." I didn't even bother trying to refute her statements; "if you don't get Brian Wilson, you don't get me" would have been a good response at that time, though.
Her response got me going internally. Are the Beach Boys a childish band? I certainly think not. First off, "Wouldn't it be Nice" is a beautifully written song, containing an extreme string crescendo paired with the thickest vocal harmony that comes to mind, but it's Brian's lyrics that set the song apart. Childish, no. Youthful? Definitely. It's the song that most embodied what I felt at the time, the desire to run away with someone and make it "that much better." It also highlights the faults in the question "What's your favorite song ever?" It has a dynamic answer, and it will never be static. It shouldn't be, if you're constantly listening.
Cut to today. One day fresh off of my dad putting a whole lot of guilt on me, going on about how he's alone in the world, he hates my mother, never wants to see her or speak to her again, and how he has no friends. This morning I came across a rehearsal version of "God Only Knows", a standout track off of Pet Sounds (but they all are, really). "God Only Knows" was my parents' 'song'. Seemingly every couple from the late 1970's has a 'song', but I'm surprised my dad picked such a good one, with the rest of his musical stylings being, well, pretty terrible.
This part is the hardest part to write. "God Only Knows" is pretty emblematic of my parents' failed relationship. God Only Knows what my dad was like when he may have had the balls to tell my mom that as long as there were stars above her that she'd never need to doubt his love; he'd make her so sure about it. In my lifetime, my dad wasn't sure of anything. If my mom should ever leave my dad, which she did, his life would still go on (believe him), and it did, but the world has shown nothing to him, and I don't know what good it's doing him right now to be alive in this world. He said he's alone, and God Only Knows what I can do to make him feel better or keep myself alright.
Brian Wilson found his way into my life again. Is this all childish? No, I think this is all quite adult. The rehearsal version of "God Only Knows" is something worth listening to over and over. The hushed organs and muted bass lead the song in in a much more delicate fashion than the sweeping sounds of the original. The song is even counted in by one of the musicians, my favorite touch to make a song feel intimately personal. The verses come across clearly, broken up by only the bass line. Hal Blaine's minimalist drumming carries the song along into the vocal harmony part, which seems as fragile as anything I've ever heard; it's like they recorded this take while their parents were asleep in the back of the house, trying not to make even a mouse scurry across the kitchen floor. The song comes to some sort of a quiet crescendo during the climax of the song, to be ushered out kindly by a "Thank You", hopefully out of the mouth of Brian Wilson.
The fact that an alternate take of a track not even on the album could make me feel to that extent must say something about the album as a whole, the way it works its way into your life and takes hold of you word by word and note by note makes it so we don't even need an objective musical reason to like this album. You could go on and on about the lush orchestration, harmonies, amazing single drum hits like the opening of "Wouldn't it be Nice" or any other little aspect about the musicality of Pet Sounds, but all of those pale in comparison to how it makes you feel. That is why I listen to music.
Score = 0
I'm not sure where I fall in the continuum between "it was groundbreaking" and "it was simply well-done." In a sense, Wilsons and Co. used Western instruments in the same way they had been used for centuries, and sang melodies and lyrics that were in the pop style that had dominated the 20th century. It wasn't into Smile when Wilson really began to explore the possibilities of structure and sound. Still, Pet Sounds does seem different than just "really good." It may have been the first pop album that was successfully self-conscious. Though not a "concept album," Brian Wilson had a vision and executed that vision as a whole, rather than just a collection of songs. This doesn't seem true of The Beatles before this point, and the only other serious contender I can think of is Sinatra.
Score = 0
i really like pet sounds, can i get the vinyl please?
pretty please?
Score = 0
I'm not going to get into a technical counterargument to John right now. But as to using the word "conventional" when discussing Pet Sounds, well that's just crazy talk!
Even today, after all these years and all the musicians who have been influenced by this record, it's still so distinctive and UNconventional that if I put a track from Pet Sounds on a mixtape, I have a tricky time picking the song to follow it. Because most of the time, even now, other music just pales in comparison.
Score = 0
Sorry that posted twice.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is a landmark album wherein the complex becomes simple and beautiful as composed and arranged by the pop/rock equivalent of Gershwin.
Mike Love is still a douchebag though.
Score = 0
I'm not going to get into a technical counterargument to John right now. But as to using the word "conventional" when discussing Pet Sounds, well that's just crazy talk!
Even today, after all these years and all the musicians who have been influenced by this record, it's still so distinctive and UNconventional that if I put a track from Pet Sounds on a mixtape, I have a tricky time picking the song to follow it. Because most of the time, even now, other music just pales in comparison.
Score = 0
Duh, dude, it's because we all hate this record. I don't care about all that techno-mumbo-jumbo-riff-raff-paddy-whack about meter and bars, no, we all like this record, because we all hate this record. Plain and simple.
Score = 0
John,
Have you listened to it on colored vinyl??? It makes a difference.
Score = 0
I'm not going to get into a technical counterargument to John right now. But as to using the word "conventional" when discussing Pet Sounds, well that's just crazy talk!
Even today, after all these years and all the musicians who have been influenced by this record, it's still so distinctive and UNconventional that if I put a track from Pet Sounds on a mixtape, I have a tricky time picking the song to follow it. Because most of the time, even now, other music just pales in comparison.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is a landmark album wherein the complex becomes simple and beautiful as composed and arranged by the pop/rock equivalent of Gershwin.
Mike Love is still a douchebag though.
Score = 0
The reason "Pet Sounds" is one of the most important albums of all-time is that it represents the singular moment when American mainstream music entered the realm of pure art, where the musicians crafting said music (mainly Brian Wilson) were not only pushing their limits as songwriters, but also as producers and sound engineers. "Good Vibrations" may have been the Beach Boys most artistic single, but if the "Pet Sounds" album hadn't come before it, American listening audiences wouldn't know what to think of it. Like Vyral said earlier, "Pet Sounds" heavily influenced The Beatles when they penned "Sgt. Pepper's," showing that people already recognized the album's significance upon its release.
Regardless of whether or not you think the album is significant in American pop culture, it's still a damn good album and always fun to listen to. It's a beautiful thing.
Score = 0
I think Bob Dylan--the man with the number one album in the country--had it right when he said, "... Jesus, that ear. He should donate it to The Smithsonian."
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is a landmark album wherein the complex becomes simple and beautiful as composed and arranged by the pop/rock equivalent of Gershwin.
Mike Love is still a douchebag though.
Score = 0
Even if the structure is 'conventional' ... or became the pop convention, theres still something special about perfection.
Score = 0
While I unfortunately share the first name as John, I don't share the same opinion. John's write-up strikes me as coming from the same kind of person who rails against modern and contemporary art. He's probably the guy who sees Duchamp's fountain and says, "Well, I could have done that."
Well, John, you didn't. Given all of the music we've heard since "Pet Sounds," it's easy to overlook the album's importance. But at the time, everything from the wonderful melodies to the studio recording advancements paved the way for the music we hear now -- the music that makes what Wilson and the Beach Boys did seem so easy.
We love the album because it's great, because it's important, and because it pushed other great rock groups, just like those same great rock groups pushed the Beach Boys, and specifically Brian Wilson.
To not treasure the album is a mistake. It's this kind of forward thinking and competition that is hurting music today, and undervaluing what made, and makes, Pet Sounds so great.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds=Aural Pleasure
Score = 0
of course there's an objective, musical reason why "we" like this record--its layered, orchestral arrangments coupled with soaring vocals are instantly appealing to the human ear and mind.
end douchebaggery.
Score = 0
it's the saddest album ever made. which makes it great.
Score = 0
While I unfortunately share the first name as John, I don't share the same opinion. John's write-up strikes me as coming from the same kind of person who rails against modern and contemporary art. He's probably the guy who sees Duchamp's fountain and says, "Well, I could have done that."
Well, John, you didn't. Given all of the music we've heard since "Pet Sounds," it's easy to overlook the album's importance. But at the time, everything from the wonderful melodies to the studio recording advancements paved the way for the music we hear now -- the music that makes what Wilson and the Beach Boys did seem so easy.
We love the album because it's great, because it's important, and because it pushed other great rock groups, just like those same great rock groups pushed the Beach Boys, and specifically Brian Wilson.
To not treasure the album is a mistake. It's this kind of forward thinking and competition that is hurting music today, and undervaluing what made, and makes, Pet Sounds so great.
Score = 0
I agree that "God Only Knows" may be one of the crowning achievements in rock 'n' roll.
It takes a true talent to write a pop tune that doesn't grow stale after 40 years. To this day, listeners who stumble on that tune find the emotion, melody and lyrics as relevant as they ever were, something that can't be said for a great deal of pop and folk music from the '60s.
And that's just one song on the album. The same could be said for "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," "Caroline No," and "I'm Waiting For The Day." Truly a great record.
Score = 0
1. Wouldn't it be nice
2. God only knows
Score = 0
I like it. Maybe you should listen to it again. On weed.
Score = 0
I agree that "God Only Knows" may be one of the crowning achievements in rock 'n' roll.
It takes a true talent to write a pop tune that doesn't grow stale after 40 years. To this day, listeners who stumble on that tune find the emotion, melody and lyrics as relevant as they ever were, something that can't be said for a great deal of pop and folk music from the '60s.
And that's just one song on the album. The same could be said for "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," "Caroline No," and "I'm Waiting For The Day." Truly a great record.
Score = 0
Using John's logic, virtually none of the best music written, performed or recorded over the past century is in any way novel or original -- not Elvis, not the Beatles, not Dylan or Springsteen or REM or Radiohead. But then, John's logic is silly. (Since when is enjoyment of music an "objective" exercise, my man?) It's like saying that William Faulkner's novels aren't at all special because using words and sentences and paragraphs and printing them on paper had already been done by Dickens and Twain. As an old composer friend of mine always says, all the notes and chords and words have already been used -- all you can do is try to string them together in new and special ways. And no one ever did that any better than Brian and Tony Asher did on "God Only Knows," unless it was Brian and Van Dyke Parks on "Surf's Up" about a year later.
Score = 0
I'm 18 and had my Pet Sounds religious experience within the last year. I can't really elaborate any better than everyone else already has, besides agreeing that its the most beautiful and sad record I have ever experienced.
And, while John may consider Pet Sounds to be "conventional" and "not-advanced", It is also perfect.
Score = 0
it's amazing that the greatest love song ever written starts with the line, "i may not always love you." it takes guts to shatter the convention that love songs had to be sappy and get right to the point, but that is just one song. what's always stood out to me about 'pet sounds' is that it marks the apex of brian wilson's genius. this is a guy that started out writing and producing chuck berry rip-offs, and he gradually grew and grew. to go from 'surfin' safari' to 'don't worry baby' is quite startling, but to go from that starting point to 'don't talk (put your head on my shoulder' is almost incomprehensible. this is not just from wilson's perspective, but from the listener's as well. imagine being twenty years old in 1966 and hearing 'pet sounds' for the first time? you probably wouldn't get it, and you might even say "fuck this shit." it was like a challenge from wilson, daring you to expand your mind to a place it had never been. i'm only twenty-two, so i will never know what it was like 40 years ago when it was released, but the music on this album has been an integral part of my young life, and it's going to remain with me forever. this music is timeless; it has no age, and with each listen i hear something new that blows my mind.
Score = 0
it's amazing that the greatest love song ever written starts with the line, "i may not always love you." it takes guts to shatter the convention that love songs had to be sappy and get right to the point, but that is just one song. what's always stood out to me about 'pet sounds' is that it marks the apex of brian wilson's genius. this is a guy that started out writing and producing chuck berry rip-offs, and he gradually grew and grew. to go from 'surfin' safari' to 'don't worry baby' is quite startling, but to go from that starting point to 'don't talk (put your head on my shoulder' is almost incomprehensible. this is not just from wilson's perspective, but from the listener's as well. imagine being twenty years old in 1966 and hearing 'pet sounds' for the first time? you probably wouldn't get it, and you might even say "fuck this shit." it was like a challenge from wilson, daring you to expand your mind to a place it had never been. i'm only twenty-two, so i will never know what it was like 40 years ago when it was released, but the music on this album has been an integral part of my young life, and it's going to remain with me forever. this music is timeless; it has no age, and with each listen i hear something new that blows my mind.
Score = 0
Wouldn't It Be Nice if we knew exactly why it's so amazing? but I Still Believe it's perfect. and some may disagree, but That's Not Me. So Don't Talk and Wait For The Day when those crazy people will Go Away for Awhile. so John, God Only Knows, really - but I Know There's An Answer, Here Today. and maybe it Just Wasn't Made For These Times. but with Pet Sounds, i know, and Caroline knows, it's perfect. and that's all that matters.
Score = 0
My parents actually introduced me to this album when I was young and I still listen to it today. It is clear to me that John is in fact an idiot and has probably never heard the album. Just because you use a lot of fancy music words doesn't mean you have any point whatsoever. I could probably say the same thing John said about any album, and people would think I was smart and had a good argument. So in conclusion, I hate you John.
Score = 0
I'll just focus on God Only Knows. Perhaps the greatest pop song ever recorded. From the opening, heart-breaking French Horn to the closing vocal tags this song will break your heart. Perhaps Brian’s shining moment as a song writer and, perhaps, one of the most beautiful songs written in the 20th Century. Both based on its musical attributes as well as its simple lyrics. It brings tears to your eyes. And that lovely instrumental break. So unexpected, so different. So perfect. Listen to the flutes in the second chorus. That Brian was in his early twenties when he wrote and recorded this makes it all the more amazing. What did you do at 22?
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is pretty much one of the most amazing albums ever. I never really paid much attention to the Beach Boys, having heard more than enough of them on classic rock FM radio (good times, eight oldies). Noticing PS on just about every top album list ever, I thought I'd give it a go and see what the fuss was all about. It blew my mind! "Hang on to Your Ego" became the Official Theme Song For Everything amongst my friends and I. That CD went everywhere I went for the next couple years, and still is on my playlist. I can't put my finger on what this album's got that others don't, but it's definitely got it.
And I paid way too much for a mono 1978 reissue, and feel I deserve a nice, new colored vinyl one!
Score = 0
I think it's been pretty widely accepted that some of these things were "common" but never common together. Even more than that no one as big and as maistream as the Beach Boys had stepped out and made such a record. It opened up a whole new world.
The Beatles don't make a record in response to a record that has no objective reason to love.
Score = 0
Even if the structure is 'conventional' ... or became the pop convention, theres still something special about perfection.
Score = 0
john's obviously just trying to put his b.a. in music to some use. if jesus self-released his own reading of the bible on pearl vinyl, 85-gatefold lp he'd call it "pretentious" and "coming off as a little too preachy in its quaint structure and holier-than-thou verses and choruses." it's criticism, which is fine, but it's also bullshit, nitpicky criticism by someone who doesn't seem capable of enjoying a good song for being just that: a good song.
i'm not going to say much more that hasn't already been said here already. the album is amazing, "god only knows" will still be a great song in the year 5000 and not even the vision of uncle jesse from 'full house' playing drums for the beach boys can take away what they did on 'pet sounds'. and that's saying a shitload.
Score = 0
"I Guess I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" is the perpetually relevant theme-song of the alienated modern soul. If you've ever had the time, luxury, and force of emotion to wallow in feeling sorry for yourself, it is your song and there is nothing else like it.
Likewise, "Wouldn't It Be Nice" captures perfectly the thrill and joy of young love and the seemingly endless possibilities therein.
I could go on but I won't.
Score = 0
"I Guess I Just Wasn't Made For These Times" is the perpetually relevant theme-song of the alienated modern soul. If you've ever had the time, luxury, and force of emotion to wallow in feeling sorry for yourself, it is your song and there is nothing else like it.
Likewise, "Wouldn't It Be Nice" captures perfectly the thrill and joy of young love and the seemingly endless possibilities therein.
I could go on but I won't.
Score = 0
sometimes people overthink classic albums. for me, it stands the test of time because it just hits me in the right spot. how the lyrics to god only knows can slay me at any given time. or years later still discover new things layered in there. so gimme the vinyl! please!
Score = 0
They were the very first concert / band I got to see live!!!
Saw them in San Diego around 86-87 at Jack Murphy Stadium after a San Diego Padres game good times with the whole family...
Score = 0
What if every single pop album was recorded using the same technique? Pet Sounds could still hold its own. There are all kinds of unique tonal palletes on this(that warbly keyboard thing that starts off the album, for example). It's the use of simple song structure that makes pop music so beautiful in the first place.
Score = 0
I don't believe John was ever a boy on a beach. Pet Sounds rules.
Score = 0
My parents had "Pet Sounds" playing in the delivery room when I was born. No joke. It has been my favorite album ever since.
Gimme the goods.
Score = 0
john, when did music become objectively good or bad?
Score = 0
I would really like to win this.
Thank you.
Score = 0
An objective musical reason to like this record is the bicycle horn. I don't stand by much; I stand by that.
Score = 0
I feel bad now for putting John in front of the firing squad. He should really win one of the copies, shouldn't he?
Score = 0
There's no objective reason to love any record. It's music. You know, art. This record is held in such high regard because so many people love it for a bunch of different subjective reasons.
The only other album I can think of that this is true for is "Please Hammer Don't Hurt 'Em".
Score = 0
i wish i had that vinyl...right now.
Score = 0
While PS might seem "ordinary" to our 21st century ears, we have to look at in in the context of its own era (granted, I'm only 23). The arrangements are unlike anything prior in pop music - was "Love Me Do" full as sophisticated textures and harmonies? Sure, the sounds were around for ages before the album but never together like this.
It's like the guy who says "oh, that's so simple - I could have made that?" Sure, you could make that now, but Wilson et all did it first (and probably better).
Score = 0
That guy probably puts Weather Report on mixtapes.
Score = 0
Shpadoinkle! This album makes my balls tingle.
Score = 0
This album sounds like an alien crying through an AM radio. The opening riff to Wouldn't It Be Nice, the theremin in I Guess I Just Wasn't Made for These Times, the howling ache of Caroline, No--I know in and of itself they're no great innovation but the album contains more sounds that are subtly unworldy and SAD than any album ever. It's so best! Don't be a fool.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds rules because, according to the lead singer of The All American Rejects in an interview with Rolling Stone, it is his favorite record... OF ALL TIME! Then, when asked his favorite song on the record, his answer? "Good Vibrations"... which was on Pet Sounds, right? I think it was. The Beach Boys certainly had some good tunes. But none as good as "Swing Swing."
Score = 0
despite the fact that "god only knows" may be disqualified due to its involvement with "big love," this album is still a classic.
wouldn't it be nice if i got some vinyl.
Score = 0
I suppose an intelligent, well thought out thery is in order, but really its a blog, so....No doubt the word "genius" is overused and too freely given in music, but I think Pet Sounds qualifies. Imagine hearing it the year it came out, much like those who refute the Goodness that is of "Citizen Kane", imagine seeing that in 1941! Plus the fact that Pet Sounds is still a better record than 75-90% of the "music" littering the airwaves now? If you don't dig it fine, but I still think its,wait for it............a Masterwork.
Score = 0
The songs are timeless. They're as beautiful now as they were 40 years ago. Complex music does not necessarily make for better music--but there's still enough going on in these songs that you can never tire of them no matter how often you listen. Such a fantastic album.
Score = 0
While I feel that John's assessment of 'Pet Sounds' is off the mark, it is difficult to resort to name calling and the such. In fact, the select number of albums out there that are considered sacred cows by the musical establishment ('Loveless', 'OK Computer', practically every Beatles album..) have all been met with a small group of detractors. In some cases, persons just simply won't like something because everyone else seems to. It's sort of the same concept as your standard indie kid sticking his nose up at Kevin Federline (go K-Fed!! - just kidding).
Though, it seems as if John is/was expecting 'Pet Sounds' to deliver some musical ideas/concepts that he could directly connect to his own particular tastes in music. Therefore, his problem pertains to the structure and instrumentation of the music therein. What John is missing, however, is history. Today, we take for granted the concept of the "album" as a complete work of art. Hence, popular musical criticism today. Any review that you read (ranging from Rolling Stone to Pitchfork) bases it's criticism on the entire album's work. The songs, the narrative through-line (if present), the musical presentation, and so on. I would suggest to say that we wouldn't "think" about popular music as an art form if it weren't for 'Pet Sounds'.
'Pet Sounds' introduced the LP as a continuous, complete piece of art that wasn't present in the music industry up till the mid-sixties. Popular music was based upon the 45 (aka. the single) and most "albums" were built around these particular songs. You would get a load of "filler" that wasn't connected (musically or thematically) to the single (that was usually recorded at a separate session). Most artists survived alone on the singles they delivered and even the best artists of the period are not remembered today for their full-length releases (see Presley, Elvis). Upon hearing "Rubber Soul", Brian Wilson not only set out to change the whole concept of what not only music could be - but also how it could be presented. 'Pet Sounds' was released without a proper single; it was set forth into the marketplace as a complete work of art. Every artist today owes a debt of gratitude to Mr. Wilson and 'Pet Sounds' for this striking evolution in popular music.
All this being said, 'Pet Sounds' still sounds incredible today. It might not be a "difficult" listen for most but it was never meant to be an unobtainable piece of music. Brian Wilson wanted to connect to his audience in a very deep and meaningful way. Pouring his own feelings and incredible talent into a project that was meant to universally connect with the audience that happened to hear 'Pet Sounds'. Granted, Brian Wilson is an idealist in this sense (and maybe a little too saccharine) but how many other artists (before or since) are willing to attempt such lofty goals? Not only did Brian Wilson attempt it - he succeeded with 'Pet Sounds'. If you listen carefully, you will feel this music and it will stay with you long after "Caroline, No" has ended its final notes.
'Pet Sounds' is one of the few albums, musically and historically, that earns its rightful place as a masterpiece.
Score = 0
Ugh, where to begin. John's post misteps from the beginning.
Using a harp,theremin, or accordian in a pop album wasn't a stroke of genius? What other pop albums in 1966 were using these instruments? None that come to my mind. It's genius, because it opened up the spectrum of what "pop music" could be - ie. more than just guitars, drums, and a bass. The concept was obviously lost on Capitol, which is why they didn't promote the album properly when it as originally released.
But let's forget the instrumentation and focus just on the vocals. Have you ever heard the purely vocal takes of the songs as presented on the PS box set. These songs are amazing just accapella. Few groups before, nor since could match the Beach Boys harmonies. Does one need more than a pretty melody to make a song of value?
Let's touch on Brian's arrangement skills. As Al Jardine notes in the DVD that comes with the 40th anniversary cd set, Brian was a gifted arranger - he cites Sloop John B. as an example. You won't hear a better arrangement of that song from anyone. His arrangements were/are more complex than most pop music before or since. Arrangements probably don't count in the realm of Objective Musical Reasoning though, right?
While somewhat dimissive, he concedes the amazing studio work that took place to create the album. All I have to say is, I challenge anyone to create an album with as much complexity as Pet Sounds on a 4 and an 8 track recorder.
There's also the sheer influence that album has/and continues to have on music. We don't need to delve into that any further.
Finally, "Objective Musical Reason"? I'm not even sure what this means. What is your objective musical reason for liking any album? Is an objective musical reason for liking an album, that it steps outside noted song form? Does it have to hit on all the criteria or just one or two? Not sure.....
The above being said, even if you assume that the song form, tonal pallette, meter and rhythm are pedestrian....Listen to the album. It would certainly be a case of the total being more than the sum of it's parts!
I won't shill for the album anymore. I obviously love it and own numerous versions. That being said, I love vinyl, and would love to get my hands on a copy of it in said format.
Score = 0
dem beeaaach boiiis iz da soul myoozik numba ONE, eh! lyka my main mahn charrilz bukkabukkakowski dun settit "azza da speerit waynez, da forrim appearz", innit?
ehh johnboy, fixa jah skirt, mon. ya forrim iz showin!
rhumbaCLOT!!
Score = 0
Two words. Vocal harmonies. Those alone are enough.
Score = 0
"But for the most part I don't think there is an objective, musical reason why we like this record."
So?
Score = 0
The album just makes me happy. I couldn't get my wife to play "God Only Knows" at our wedding, though, because of that first line of the song (way before Big Love). Which, of course, is my favorite part of the song.
Score = 0
This album refined what the album format could be. It's the progenitor to Revolver, Village Green Preservation Society, or any other great records you can name. I want a copy of this beautiful vinyl, not solely for posterity's stake, but to vicariously feel what it was like to hold it in your hands the day it came out.
Score = 0
In it's time, there was nothing else even close to it. Genius, genius, genius!
Score = 0
Objective standards mean nothing in music. It is and should remain a purely subjective art form. If I like it, that's all that matters to me.
Score = 0
As John says he likes Pet Sounds in the original thread, I'll try to be somewhat polite in addressing his claims (such as they are) about the album's musical quality.
One of his main claims in the prior thread is that rock and roll relies almost entirely on subjectivity. That's a nice position to have, as it allows him to equate musical quality with what he likes.
However, in the portion quoted in this thread John undoes his own position, for in that excerpt -- and elsewhere in his prior comments -- he suggests that there are in fact objective criteria by which one might objectively judge the music. He specifically mentions song form, tonal palette, use of meter and rhythmic emphasis, and melody.
John is a bit slippery with his language, though. The portion quoted here uses the term "advanced," whereas in the prior thread he retreats to "innovative," comparing the music of Pet Sounds to the entirety of musical history and ignoring that one can innovate in a genre of music by importing elements of other genres -- truly ironic given that rock is itself an amalgam of styles. John might respond that this only proves his argument that rock is built on subjectivity and self-identification, but this is incorrect. No one would seriously argue, for example, that there is no "objective" reason to like Beethoven because he used particular chords or drew upon the history of music that came before him. No one would seriously argue that Mozart is no big deal because he used musical idioms of the day and did not invent musique concrete. It's simply a non-sequitur to suggest that we should only "objectively" like music that is "innovative." To the contrary, the history of music is evolutionary, not revolutionary. The vast majority of people do not like innovators such as John Cage or Glenn Branca, objectively or otherwise.
So let's turn to the specifics of John's claims.
In the prior thread, John stated the following:
"But to say that no other band's vocal harmonies were as "thick" as the Beach Boys' is meaningless (what does "thick" mean?). More to the point, it's arbitrary. If you were to argue that the chord voicings were more sophisticated, that would potentially be a measureable standard. We could determine what chords were used by each band, in what order and arrangement, and then form an argument that the Beach Boys used better chords, in distinctive progressions, with more challenging intervals than those used by the Beatles or the Zombies.
But as far as I know, no one has sufficiently developed such an argument (or if it's even possible to make it -- given that we may not have reliable sheet music of Wilson's or Lennon/McCartney's vocal arrangements). Nor do I believe many listeners would want to *hear* such an argument..."
John would certainly not want to hear it, but if he stops by, he's about to read it. Did the Beach Boys use more sophisticated vocal arangements than The Beatles? Absolutely. But John doesn't have to take my word for it. Sir George Martin -- who arranged the Beatles' orchestrations and thus knows exactly how complex they were -- is on record repeatedly on this point, but one here's just one frequently-quoted remark: "Brian Wilson is... a living genius of pop music. His invention and creativity reached a level that I always found staggering... His art is that magical combination of really original compositions, a wonderful sense of instrumental color, and a profound understanding of record production." Martin would also tell you that, for example, "Here, There, and Everywhere" (a truly wonderful song Paul McCartney wrote at the time of Pet Sounds) uses simple triads of block harmony, whereas even the little scat break in "God Only Knows" is filled with incidental sevenths and ninths that the Fabs never attempted. This is what makes the vocal harmonies "thick." John should check out the segment where Martin interviews Brian Wilson about Pet Sounds on the 40th anniversary DVD; he might learn something.
Similarly, Paul McCartney, while not a technically trained musician, has often said that the bass playing on Pet Sounds profoundly affected his own bass playing. The album introduced counterpoint in the bass which was innovative for pop music, though I concede not for the entirety of human musical history.
John seems to think Pet Sounds, like most pop music of the time, used variations of 8-bar phrases. Most pop verses tend to be 8, 12 or 16 bars long.
On "I Know There's An Answer," Brian splits the verse into two parts; one in 8 bars, the other 6, creating a 14 bar verse. Good luck finding many songs with 14-bar verses.
On "Here Today," the verses are 20 bars long. Each verse is split into three sections of 8, 7 and 5 bars. If John can name any other well-known song with that structure, I'll write him a check for 50 dollars. The break in "Here Today" is also 20 bars, split into 8, 6 and 6. The kicker? The choruses are 7 bars, not the expected 8, which reinforces the lyric "It's gone so fast."
And on "God Only Knows," Brian lops the last measure off the second chorus going into the staccato instrumental bit. He does the same to the third chorus, modulated up 5 semitones.
Both play directly against the listener's expectation created by a continuous harmonic rhythm of four beats per chord.
Nor are these the only remarkable musical features of "God Only Knows." The introduction is a twist on a traditional hymnal progression -- I - ii - I -- symbolic of the lyrical theme, but one reason why people have a hard time figuring out the song is written in E. The verse then starts with D, a very "rock" choice, but is followed by B minor -- a modal change that is really not stable in the key of E, but well-suited to the lyric, "I may not always love you..."
And that stacatto break leaps out at the listener in part because that's where the modulation in the song is camoflaged. I know John doesn't see key changes as "landmark," but that one is done in a most unusual way.
Brian also used modal changes on "Caroline, No." And when he sings the title, that's a G-flat6th with an added ninth which creates a wonderful harmonic ambiguity that again complements the lyric. But, you know, jazz men have done this sort of thing, so who cares?
"Caroline, No," like "God Only Knows" also plays with the harmonic rhythm, but in a different way -- it speeds up when the lyric is about the girl he knew changing. And, in contrast to the lopping of a measure on "God," he adds one at the end of "Caroline." Brian doesn't toy with meter too much in Pet Sounds, but he does mess with the harmonic rhythm often enough -- Just ask Tony Asher, who complained about having to get his lyrics to fit the rhythmic changes on several songs.
In addition, there are some odd key choices on the album. "You Still Believe In Me" is written in B, which is relatively unusual; "That's Not Me" is written in F#, which is even more so. And here I'm not just talking about pop music -- keyboard composers avoid B because C is so much easier.
Then there is the tonal palette of the album, which John snarkily dismisses: "(as if using a harp and an accordion is some kind of stroke of genius)." Note how high John is setting the bar here; apparently, he can only "objectively" like music that demonstrates genius in its tonal pallette. Yet I doubt he could find many examples of a composer using not one, but two accordions in the manner Brian did on "Wouldn't it Be Nice" to simulate violins playing a sustained tremolo.
If John's looking for unique instrumentation, he have mentioned Brian's use of the Theremin (actually the Electro-Theremin or "Tannerin"), which I suppose John would disqualify because it was used as a sound effect in a couple of movie soundtracks. Or the bicycle horn and bell at the end of "You Still Believe In Me," which John probably dismisses as having been used by Spike Jones. On the intro to the same track, instead of a harpsichord, Brian holds down the keys to his piano, while someone else (Tony Asher, iirc) plucks the strings, but maybe John Cage did that first. Or the seldom-used bass harmonica that Paul McCartney cheerfully admits to borrowing as an idea for future Beatle records. Or the water-cooler jug that is played with a mallet on "Caroline, No."
Completely missing from John's analysis of tonal palette, of course, is any consideration of the arrangements, which is sort of like criticizing a painter for not inventing new colors, as opposed examining to the painter's inventive use of color. Not that Brian didn't invent new musical colors on Pet Sounds; he did, through the doubling of parts by instruments not traditionally used in tandem at the same volume. But even if he had not done this, Brian composed Pet Sounds the way he heard it in his head, to be recorded in a studio. Thus, he paid little heed to conventional groupings of instruments. He did not conduct an orchestra, a big band, or a jazz combo. He might use a string quartet, or sextet, and do moving arrangements, like the passing tones within the diminished chords on "Don't Talk." Not that John cares -- after all, guys like Brahms and Revel did it long ago. But neither of them would throw in other instruments at will. For example, "Let's Go Away For Awhile" used a dozen violins, piano, four saxophones, vibes, and a guitar played slide-style with a Coke bottle.
This last point transitions nicely to a consideration of Brian's use of the recording studio as an instrument itself. John actually gives this point some credit, though at other points in the prior thread he tries to dismiss it as merely the product of advancing technology. Of course, if this were true, you would have many more contemporaneous examples of this, but they don't exist. Phil Spector may have foreshadowed it, but his "Wall of Sound" was the single approach he used (albeit to stunning effect). In contrast, the arrangements on Pet Sounds vary from the exceedingly lush to the spare, as befits the theme Brian is expressing in each case.
I do agree with John's belief that many listeners would not want to *hear* such arguments. The fact is that they don't. I would submit very few people analyze the music of Pet Sounds in the manner I just did, and very little of it consciously leaps out at them when they listen to it. That is also one of the remarkable achievements of the album. It is not only that Brian did all of the above in the context of a pop album, but also that it is nevertheless perceived on its own terms *as* a "pop" or "rock" album, despite Brian's inclusion of religious, baroque and jazz elements, his imaginitive instrumentation and unique arrangements. That's due in no small part to those pretty melodies and the synergy they have with the arrangements and the lyrics.
Score = 0
THEY SOUND LIKE A NICER VERSION OF THE EARLY BEE GEES... WHICH IN ITSELF IS NICE.
Score = 0
Actually, its tonal palate and harmonies are quite advanced. You're fundamentally wrong. No, don't worry John... it's okay... just go back to sleep... it'll all be better in the morning. Don't talk, put your head on my shoulder. Come close...close your eyes and be still. There there. Night night.
*unzips pants*
Score = 0
John has no idea what he is talking about.
Score = 0
He's not entirely wrong. Although I do think this album was groundbreaking the US and in a commercial music industry, using these types of instruments "within the confines of Rock 'n Roll" as some posters have put it, had already been done in much of Europe - with influences from Celtic music (Flutes, Bagpipes), Breton Music (Harp), Basque music (Hand and vocal percussion), the use of North African instruments (Zarb) etc...the same can be said about the use of vocal melodies and harmonies, counterpoint, etc etc. But that said, you can't deny a record that took a risk in a
Music industry that was so incredibly structured and seemed afraid of the idea that a POP record could go out on an artistic limb. Such risks had more recently been braved by the overtly psychedelic, whose tie-died journeys into LSD'ed musical euphoria was worn so much on their sleeves that anyone would expect to hear 3 minutes of goats and mothers giving birth and not think anything of it. But this was the "Beach Boys" for Christ's sake! They wore turlenecks and turned the whole music world upside down with an amazing album full of intelligent, interesting, and pop conscious music.
Score = 0
Brian Wilson created Pet Sounds at a time when that music simply was not being made.
Take "Still Believe in Me" for instance. He finds a new way to use the scale. He arranges the vocals so they are always going up, even when it seems that the bass is going down the scale. While going up and down the scale, Brian Wilson found a way to make it sound like the vocals are always reaching to the heavens. On that track he also found a way to get a new sound by plucking the piano strings with his fingers
Throughout the record, he used multiple instruments together to create a new sound. With everything wrapped in the natural reverb, the sounds melt together.
Pop music in that era was not using chords in the same way Brian Wilson was. On "Wouldn't it be nice," after the part where the tempo slows he makes the chord change from an F#min7 to a C7 before the outro. That is a very unconventional chord change and in most cases, would sound wrong. However, Brian arranged the vocals so it was just beautifully haunting on the word "happy." It's the small things.
On "I just wasn't made for these times" There is an absolutely beautiful chord change. I think it's the third cycle through the vocal tag and it only happens once. It just twists your insides and makes you feel that pain he was feeling.
This record has touched more people, spiritually and emotionally, than any other pop record in history. And there's no way I can do it justice in this little comment box.
Score = 0
Paul McCartney obviously thought it was revolutionary enough... it basically shocked the Beatles right back into the studio so they could complete the Sgt. Peppers sessions.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is Important vs. Pet Sounds is Brilliant.
Pet Sounds is Important because of it's historical context (i.e., it was made in response to Rubber Soul, and then it, in turn, inspired Sgt. Pepper.) Popular music benefitted greatly from that trans-atlantic ping pong match.
Pet Sounds is Brilliant because.......it makes my ears smile.
Score = 0
John = stupid. Pet Sounds = masterpiece. Period.
Score = 0
there are countless reasons to go into why pet sounds is an important record. sure, the music is great. sure, the recording techniques were ahead of their time. sure, the beatles were jealous of brian wilson's talents. but above all... look at that green and gold vinyl! that shit is hot!
Score = 0
random selection for winners, right? well here's my rambling nonsensical post.
I'm not a musical composition major or anything, but I did take a course entitled "History of Rock and Roll" in college (i'm not kidding), and in one unit was entitled ROCK GODS or something like that, and we learned about the Beatles and Beach Boys. About their constant friendly competition that ultimately led to Brian Wilson's breadown (and of course ultimately awesome recovery with Smile!).
Well from what I remember from the course, Pet Sounds was relevant because it was innovative. It was the first album to use those "pretty melodies" and force listeners to use a whole new part of their ear, in a metaphoric way. The Beatles had been one-upped! And had to retaliate (by taking a lot more drugs). If the Beatles think its an album for the ages, it is an album for the ages.
Score = 0
Here's my take on this whole shebang:
There is nothing particularly advanced about John's use of his human form (walking on two legs, talking with his mouth, hearing with his ears, etc.) or his vocabulary (as if using musical terminology is some kind of stroke of genius). His opinions and thoughts are purely pedantic and, though he makes a few interesting points, interesting points have been around since the middle ages. I suppose an argument could be made that he represents some sort of advanced indie snob revisionist musical opinion... But for the most part I don't think there is an objective, logical reason for why we should listen to him.
Score = 0
sometimes there's nothing groundbreaking about beuty, it's just perfect culmination of everything that came before
Score = 0
what pop music sounded like pet sounds before its release? nothing. What has sounded like it afterwards? a lot.
Score = 0
John is a cunt. He can blow 8 bars on my flesh harmonica.
Score = 0
John is a butthole. I like Pet Sounds. Not buttholes. Stop being a butthole and start liking Pet Sounds. Butthole.
Score = 0
Ha! This is what I get for not checking Stereogum everyday ... I'll only try to clarify my position slightly with regard to Karl's comments (which, by the way, provide exactly the sort of objective musical analysis that I felt was so conspicuously absent from the discussions of Pet Sounds, as well as most other significant rock records).
Karl notes, correctly, that in my earlier comments I argued that rock and roll relies almost entirely on subjectivity. But I didn't mean to suggest that rock and roll *should* rely on subjectivity, only that it does -- at least in so far as it is understood by most listeners. Most of the comments here bear this out. As Karl implies, an over reliance on subjectivity "allows him [the listener] to equate musical quality with what he likes" -- a pervasive and problematic attitude that curtails discussion before it begins. It worries me that so many people say they simply don't know why they like their favorite records, and I applaud those here who have tried to articulate the reasons they do -- it can be a frustrating endeavor, I know.
Given the nature of the occasion, it seems only fair that I too should say some nice things about Pet Sounds, which isn't my favorite record by any means but one that at various moments I've held near and dear. It is often said to be a concept album, but I've never appreciated it on this basis. My experience of the record is made up of numerous individual, pleasurable moments: the tympani in "Waiting for the Day," the repetition of a four-bar phrase at the end of "You Still Believe in Me" that begins with the line "I want to cry," sung alone, and culminates in a gorgeous group vocal harmony (and -- yes -- I even like the bike horn that honks during the fade-out: a moment of pedestrian tackiness to undercut the song's genteel ending), "Wouldn't it be Nice." Don't even get me started on "Wouldn't it be Nice."
I like "God Only Knows," but not as much as "Sloop John B.," which is brilliant, one of those strange pop songs that doesn't seem to go anywhere but still winds up somewhere other than where it started.
I never said I didn't like the record, I only thought it was time to take the discussion on a different tack. So ... what do you say? I've got an empty turntable just *starving* for some green-and-yellow vinyl.
Score = 0
re: john
yeah, but Sloop John B kicks fucking ass.
Score = 0
re: john
yeah, but Sloop John B kicks fucking ass.
Score = 0
Any album that is able to connect with millions (yes, millions) of listeners on an emotional level like Pet Sounds has done, doesn't need to defend itself. Art/music's sucess is subjective. And our millions of positive opinions outweigh your negative one. We win. I for one would like to celebrate by kicking back and listening to Pet Sounds on my turntable. Hmmmmm, vinyl.
Score = 0
there's no objective, musical reason why we like anything. period.
i really want to win.
Score = 0
Pet Sounds is one of the greatest examples of an artist exposing his soul, bare, for the world to see/hear/experience. For the same reasons I respect John Lennon's early solo work (some of it quite painful), I really admire hearing Brian Wilson's complex brain being put to music. Love, fear, fun, encapsulating the mid-1960's, but not in a dated way. I can understand why the Beatles found "an objective, musical reason" to count this album as an influence. Just listen to the Beach Boys' "That's Not Me" and the Beatles' "She's Leaving Home" (both on the same theme), and understand why simplicity is genius.
Score = 0
If you need to know why it is a great album, I suggest you find the acapella tracks to Wouldn't It Be Nice and Sloop John B and give them a listen. I'm not saying that they are the best singers, but nothing gives me chills more consistently in music then when the harmony begins on Wouldn't It Be Nice.
Score = 0
"Pet Sounds" is the one album that each of my girlfriends actually like, which is really convenient.
Score = 0
If you read the original thread of comments, John comes across as a very reasonable, intelligent, musically thoughtful guy. I think people attacking him personally is retarded. So he has a different opinion than you - that makes him a "douche bag?" Ugh, grow up. Kudos to John for starting a real conversation and debate.
SCOTT, I AGREE WITH YOU THAT JOHN *DEFINATELY* DESERVES ONE OF THE LOVELY VINYL SETS.
Score = 0
This just in:
Pet Sounds? Still awesome.
Score = 0
The harmonization alone, which done by anyone else might make me punch my stereo, is beyond laudable and possibly the best pop concoction ever concocted.
Score = 0
i can't wait to hear this new album...should be great!
Score = 0
To be honest, I like Odessey an Oracle perhaps a bit more than Pet Sounds, but still I'd like the vinyl. The CD I have is an early mono version from the 90's that sounds really crappy. Thanks-
Score = 0
I gave away my pet sounds cassette in 1999. It had been dubbed for me by an older sister sometime around 1992 in an attempt to get me to stop listening to Weird Al's Alapalooza. I didn't dislike it at the time, but I was ambivalent. It certainly didn't sound 'new' to me, to 6th grade me it sounded like everything you hear in the car when your parents stick the radio on the Classic Rock station and you can change it when you're old enough to drive. In 1999, a freshman in college, I gave Andrew Neuahuser my pet sounds tape one day when I was telling old technology to screw itself by getting rid of all my cassette tapes. While we sorted the boxs of tapes, separating the Jackson from the Amy Grant, he played that Beach Boys tape. And by end of side A there was this euphoria just hovering in the room. Euphoria that only nostalgia can provide, and not real nostalgia, the good fake stuff, the Happy Days version of your past. There are a few albums that are untouchable in precisely this way, the way Nick Hornby describes in "About a Boy" that the Beatles, to him, were about singing yellow submarine on the bus. It doesn't matter that the beach boys aren't special, but they are able to make you believe you remember when you were and your sister made you tapes.
Score = 0
Green-yellow is at the direct middle of the light spectrum visible to the human eye, and as such it is the colour that is most eye catching to humans.
Score = 0
the point of Pet Sounds is its aesthetic; not anything entirely new or innovative in it per se, but as an artistic piece, at the moments when the orchestral flourishes and harmonies combine in Brian's much loved wall of sound--done here far more heartbreakingly than Specter ever did--the album feels whole, entirely complete in a way even Sgt. Pepper never realizes
Score = 0
i liked the goats. but really only the one who wants to eat the funny beardy man at the back. but they didnt sing songs about the goats. wish the goat had eaten man at back, but mum says goats dont eat people. shame cos it ruined the album for me. it would have really been the best album in the world if the goat had done that but i dont think it is because of the goat. and the funny stary man at the back who is scared of the goat because he thinks it might want to eat him. dad says because there are no goats on the velvet underground album it's much better but i dont think so. the goat record the best one ive heard. objectively.
Score = 0
I buy multiple copies of my favourite CDs and keep them in a bookshelf by my front door so I can give people I like copies of the music I love... and I adore Beach Boys!!!
Score = 0
Pet SOunds is genius and not because it was completely original, but because Brian Wilson was a pained, brilliant, artist who made beutiful inspiring music in a unique way. For start, the studio band assembled to record that record were some of the finest musicians in L.A. each of which were hand-picked by Brian himself. Brian couldn't write music formally so he scraled these little notes of "chord diagrams" and used humming and singing melodies to get across the sounds he wanted to these musicians who were used to reading notes on a page. His chordal and bass relationship is downright bizarre. pick up a guitar and try to make God only knows sound right. you can't because the melody is made up of chords on various instruments while the bass augments these chords with different notes, turning it into a completely new chord. seriously try to play it. I threw my guitar across the room. His chordal structures were unique and more rooted in jazz than in anything else, though I don't think it was intentional. It creates a unique sound, jazz structure on straight songs. as for "studio advancements", Wilson hated Stereo and instead mixed everything in mono (due to his defness in one ear). The mix of that record is so amazing and you can tell in every note anf beat that that record was a labor of love. Utilizing four and eight track machines, WIlson had to constantly bounce back everything to one track to open up space for the ammount of intrumentation on that record. anyone who doesn't appreciate this record should be shot in the head, and I honestly believe that. I'm 21 years old, and this record is one of my most prized vinyls. but god I would love to have it on yellow vinyl. how cool (I have magical mystery tour on yellow vinyl, its sweet). so yeah, it is unique in chord usage and particularly bass lines and how they acompanied the final mix. he wasn't using any new studio equpment. the person that wrote that little quip should be tortured, and not foreign torured, american tortured.
your friend Neil Bartlett
Score = 0
John's got no soul. Also, Pet Sounds is the only thing that cures my migraines.
Score = 0