[Abouna]

After reading all the rave reviews concerning the Beach Boys Pet Sounds, I'm stumped. The amount of propaganda concerning this album (deserved or not) is astounding. Many well respected people have called it the greatest album ever made.

I have a very eclectic taste, I listen to just about every genre. I am also not far removed from the Beach Boys generation. I do like some of their stuff but admittedly am not a big fan. There is no doubt they were a huge influence on early pop and obviously the surf/West coast sound.

That said, unless you listen specifically with a production/engineering ear in mind, I just don't understand the hoopla here. I picked this album up (the 40 year anniversary version) and am seriously let down. First, the mono version, while it may be the original, has horrible SQ. The stereo mix is much better but it doesn't help the music. Again, other than innovation made by Wilson in the mixing and arranging (all of which I don't dispute), the music straight off the cuff just doesn't have much appeal.

Can someone clue me in? Obviously most the time this would just be a matter of personal opinion, but the accolades this album gets say something different.

 

[GlendaleViper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fr. John /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...this would just be a matter of personal opinion...

Same is true of the accolades. As an unabashed Brian Wilson fan, I can't agree with you, but that doesn't matter. If you listen through Pet Sounds and Smile (Wilson's opuses) and don't like it... just leave it at that.

There is nothing in music, with or without praise and awards, that will cause you to like something that you don't. Nor should it. What you choose to enjoy is wholly your own decision.

Take me for example: I love horrible b-movies. Technically, I should hate them. But I don't. It makes me different, but not wrong.

 

[Jahn]

You mean you listened to "God Only Knows" and you didn't think it was the most perfect pop song on earth? May Wilson save your mojo!

 

[Abouna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn /img/forum/go_quote.gif You mean you listened to "God Only Knows" and you didn't think it was the most perfect pop song on earth? May Wilson save your mojo!

I'll give it another listen just to be sure.

 

[Lord Chaos]

I like parts of "Pet Sounds," and parts of "Smile." Other parts leave me scratching my head. What was Brian Wilson thinking of? I applaud his original approach even if I don't listen to it that often.

 

[elrod-tom]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn /img/forum/go_quote.gif You mean you listened to "God Only Knows" and you didn't think it was the most perfect pop song on earth? May Wilson save your mojo!

I can still remember the first time I'd heard the Beach Boys version of this song. I had prior to that been exposed to a weak Olivia Newton-John version...mostly on 8-Track in my mom's car!!

One of the handful of times that I was just blown away when listening to music...maybe because my expectations were low. The OP's expectations are pretty high, and maybe that's what's going on here.

 

[Relayer71]

Quote:

Originally Posted by GlendaleViper /img/forum/go_quote.gif Same is true of the accolades. As an unabashed Brian Wilson fan, I can't agree with you, but that doesn't matter. If you listen through Pet Sounds and Smile (Wilson's opuses) and don't like it... just leave it at that. There is nothing in music, with or without praise and awards, that will cause you to like something that you don't. Nor should it. What you choose to enjoy is wholly your own decision. Take me for example: I love horrible b-movies. Technically, I should hate them. But I don't. It makes me different, but not wrong.

I agree it's personal opinion above all. But I think when an album (or book, or film, or...) receives general universal praise, you can usually pin point the "brilliance" or appreciate it without really being blown away by it.

For instance, I am not a fan of Michael Jackson. I do not own any of his albums but I've heard both Off The Wall and Thriller a few times in their entirety along with hearing all the singles many times and can see why he was dubbed, "King Of Pop". Those 2 albums are Pop masterpieces. But I don't particularly like pop music (more a Progressive, Art, Post Rock kinda guy).

Same with Nirvana's Nevermind. I can see why it propelled the band to the heights it did: the songs were catchy, melodic, clever, Kurt's voice had appeal. But I lost my copy at some point and will not get another to replace it because I never really fell in love with it. But I can SEE why others did.

Pet Sounds is one of those albums I have heard where I scratch my head thinking, "I don't get it...what's so special?". The Beach Boys had a very unique, distinctive sound but today it sounds dated to me. Unlike some of the Beatle's later albums (and I'm not a huge Beatles fan either).

Recently I've felt that way about Tool's Lateralus. I happen to be a fan in this case, I think they're a great band - but the critics and fans keep raving about that album and I don't understand why - to me it's just another good album.

 

[GlendaleViper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Relayer71 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The Beach Boys had a very unique, distinctive sound but today it sounds dated to me.

Just to clarify, are you stating that the Beach Boys formula is dated, or is this also specific to Pet Sounds and Smile? I would agree that the majority of the Beach Boys' catalogue was so specifically built around the 50s/60s surf sound that it HAD to wind up dating itself, but in the case of Wilson's two main projects from that era, I couldn't disagree more.

Hearing Smile for the first time in its entirety at the end of 2005 was a revelation for me. A continuation of a beloved masterpiece that seemed as fresh to me now as Pet Sounds did, and still does (please bear in mind that I am 27, so was not around for P.S, nor Smiley Smile). It's actually the innocence, instrumentation and ever-ascending structure that appeals to me so much in Wilson's music.

Is there something specific in the sound of these two albums that makes the music seem dated? I'm only curious since Pet Sounds was effectively a Brian Wilson (oh, and featuring the Beach Boys) album, while Smile was his own entirely. I consider the B.W. "sound" as being timeless.

 

[Jahn]

absolutely. Wilson's music doesn't try to recapture the sense of innocence lost in popular music - instead, Pet Sounds to me is like one long last look at those days, with the recognition that they're past in the current world. In other words, it was dated the day it hit vinyl - i'm not talking about the production of course, but the message, or even the "feeling." it's a very mature look from a band that could have very well rested on its surf pop laurels. that's the beauty of this album, and what makes it rise above retro and into Timeless.

 

[GlendaleViper]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jahn /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...that's the beauty of this album, and what makes it rise above retro and into Timeless.

Doesn't hurt that my eyes well up on nearly every track, either. There is more raw emotion on this album than most bands can produce from an entire catalogue.

[EDIT]

Quote:

There is more raw emotion on this album than most bands can produce from an entire catalogue.

Yea yea, I'm quoting myself in the same post. Perhaps it's the emotion of the album that impedes one's enjoyment of the album. If the lyrics don't speak to you, the music (which is perfectly matched to the content) will degenerate into simple melody. Anyone can make pretty music.

 

[VicAjax]

Pet Sounds is a landmark record on many levels:

instrumental arrangement: wilson stretched farther beyond traditional pop arrangements than any other songwriter had thus far. the lush orchestrations combined with esoteric add-ins such as theremin and bike horns were pretty much unprecedented in pop music.

vocal arrangement: the Pet Sounds Sessions box set includes a vocal-only mix that reveals the complexity, beauty and sheer talent involved in the vocal arrangements of this album. it's a sound that hasn't been matched before or since.

production style: layer after layer of tracks were piled onto one another (which is why the original mono master has perceived SQ limitations), to create a symphonic, often ethereal, effect that had never been heard in pop music.

song structure: while there is still the ever-popular verse-hook-verse-hook structure, you also see songs incorporating a more narrative style, with a steady build to a climactic twist and hook at the end ("I'm Waiting for the Day").

lyrical content: while not entirely unprecedented, and while they may sound dated at this point, the lyrics were profoundly personal, reflecting Wilson's inner struggles and laying the songwriter's psyche bare in a way that hadn't really been explored before.

if you read up on the making of Pet Sounds, it will increase your appreciation of the album and its deserved status as a masterpiece. whether it helps you grow to enjoy the music itself, there's just no telling.

 

[en480c4]

While much of Pet Sounds leaves me cold, I love "Sloop John B" and think it's fantastic!

 

[markl]

Man, if Wouldn't It be Nice doesn't raise the hair on the back of your neck, there's just no hope for you.

That said, aside from the classic songs, I agree not every track is up to that absurdly high standard, but how could it be?


We should also talk about Smile, the "lost" album made after Pet Sounds, recently remade by Wilson. It's great, and has many many great moments, but sometimes, if an album has been supressed by a record company, or left incomplete and unreleased, or resulted in the mental breakdown of its creator, we tend to assign to it special magical powers it just doesn't necessarily have.

WRT Smile-- Ugh! Those lyrics!

 

[Thelonious Monk]

"God Only Knows" and "Sloop John B" are personal favorites of the 60s for me. while the rest of the album doesn't really do it for me, single-song wise, the work as a whole is amazing. overrated to hell and back, but still a classic.

 

[blessingx]

Can "propaganda" be deserved? I didn't think so which is why I doubt it's use here.

Anyway, when a piece of work like Frank Sinatra's Wee Small Hours or Orson Welles' Citizen Kane, Shakespeare's Hamlet, etc. get this level of acclaim**, it's important to have a healthy level of self-doubt if you don't "get it" (which may be what this thread is for). I certainly didn't for the first few years I had it around. You're right about the "production/engineering" often discussed, as is the Pet Sounds/Sgt. Peppers rivalry, but the emotional impact of the album with the beautiful arrangements are where it stands out for me. Another God Only Knows perfect elemental pop song vote here.

As an album, I think it's better, greater and maaayybe grander than anything single album the Beatles or Rolling Stones ever did. It's one of probably five albums I've known for over ten years I want to play for my imaginary future son or daughter. I also think it's a quite brave album which only seems more so in the cooler, more sarcastic, and guarded last couple of decades. Coupled with Sinatra, it's as close as it comes for my selection as recorded white mans soul music.



[size=xx-small]**
MOJO magazine voted it "The Greatest Album Ever Made."
VH1 placed it at #3.
Rolling Stone at #2.
In 2004, it was one of 50 recordings chosen by the Library of Congress to be added to the National Recording Registry.[/size]