Because it's such a Mojo/Q favourite, my dislike is also reacting against that awful smug rock classics thing, which means it's a prejudiced taste. Should I be challenging myself or is it really is as worthless and dull as I think?
― Guy, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― alex in nyc, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Having played it to death for the last 3 years or so, it's a little
over-familiar now, but Classic for sure. The fact that it's so
universally fawned over by the dad-rock mags doesn't make it
AUTOMATICALLY crap, although I understand the suspicion.
― Dr. C, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
then riding on a bus through Archway with a hangover one day, the
string quartet on "Don't talk put your head on my shoulder" slid in
on top of the vocal melody on my walkman and this was the strand that
unlocked the album for me, an epiphany took place, and thenceforward
I was captured by its beauty, which was a beauty of a different
musical logic than I was used to, hence my initial blindness. For me
it's a record for hangovers. It's better than the bitty, half-crap
Revolver, but this is really beginning to resemble a giants of rock
mojo argument so will desist...
enough to say that the acclaim it gets is OTT: it's not an
unassailable classic: the instrumentals seem overly loungey and dated
now, but the songs and the textures get me every time.
― Peter, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― scott bassett, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Patrick, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― james e l, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― scott, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
after repeated playings, the music -- in a way that only a few
records can -- passed through my ears and connected with my soul,
wherever it may be. it was one of those moments when you literally
stop dead in your tracks and realize that an album, a book, a film is
playing out your life, before your very eyes/ears. the music was
charged with hope, anxiety, fear; it screamed, it sighed, it shed
tears: it wasn't notes or chords or lyrics, it was the word made
when you reach that level of engagment with a work of art, as i hope
everyone has at some point, how the melody compares to so-and-so
or "are the lyrics really as sophisticated as blah blah?", questions
like that, they cease to matter. pet sounds, for me, is about
being young, stupid, and in love for the very first time and i hope
it continues to bring me back to those times. 'til i die.
― fred solinger, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
if you want a friendly alternative to pet sounds at the very
least say today!, the second side of which, if it were
an album, probably tops pet sounds, "bull session with big
but, as tom just proved to me, it needs to be reworked just a
little: it's music for people who didn't get out enough as
adolescents. because even if you're out partying every night
now, your past is always with you like a scar, like the ghost
of the person you'd like to believe you once were and are no
Okay, so perhaps part of that is because it was released just before
I was born. My understanding is that Pet Sounds played a big part in
determining the direction for Sgt. Pepper, another album I don't get.
I also think that Revolver was really the start of this direction, at
least as far as pop/rock goes (admittedly, other artists were pushing
the boundaries of recorded sound in other genres...Raymond Scott, to
name one). I think Pet Sounds is pleasant enough, but hell, I even
prefer to listen to the Heavy Blinkers' album, which uses it as an
― Sean Carruthers, Wednesday, 2 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Omar, Thursday, 3 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Except for Sloop John B, which gets a pass because of an injoke with
my cousin involving hoisting my, erm, rather large grandmother's
underwear in the air on laundry day and running around
screaming "Hoist up the john b sails!" over and over. So, yeah.
― Ally, Thursday, 3 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
Classic: the phrase "fawning pube head"
― mark s, Thursday, 3 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
But I regress, this little tangent has more to do with the validity
of deeming a record a 'classic' or not than it does 'Pet Sounds.' So
I'll go ahead and bite and tell the world 'Pet Sounds' is a favorable
record in my collection despite ANYTHING that has been said about
But what about 'Friends' or the brilliant 'Smile?' No one's talking
about those? Right, Q or Mojo has yet to run coverage on either.
Can you say "Manipulation by the Media?"
― JRL, Thursday, 3 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― DG, Thursday, 3 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― K-reg, Friday, 4 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
You only don’t like the Beach Boys because…you only don’t like the
Beach Boys. It’s that simple my friend (where you got the ‘jealous’
bit is beyond me - I'm actually quite theoryless on why people don't
like the Beach Boys).
Also, you're right I SHOULD calm down. I was having a fucking crazy
caffinated day at work (Wall St. style!) and I went off...but today
Since when does opinion = token of angst? Reread the rest of the
opinions on the thread mate! (Notice my previous message said
nothing of blood and razor blades;)
I also don't think this thread is ENTIERLY about insecurties, but it
did start with a lad wondering out loud if he should 'challenge'
himself to give 'Pet Sounds' another chance as he fears his taste is
predjudice (and even he agrees the 'rock classic thing is smug'). I
say go with your insticts man!
Hey K-Reg - you're right, I'm sure a lot of people who rate Pet
Sounds highly where in other places and times than SoCal in the mid
60's. But some Beach Boys tunes are nostalgic for me as I grew up
listening to them on the Gulf Coast (of Mexico) in the 80's and the
aesthetic seemed to transfer well, but I was just a little kid of
course. Also, I'm glad we made you laugh from our 'symphonoc angst.'
― JRL, Friday, 4 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
One of the better capsule descriptions of A Certain Album I Like is
that it's _Pet Sounds_ meets _Metal Machine Music_. And frankly of
the three I know which one I like listening to the most...
― Ned Raggett, Friday, 4 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
loveless, for me, is like pet sounds but without the
tunes. and the angst. and the deep, lasting connection. but with
guitars. so, not really like pet sounds after all. ;)
― fred solinger, Friday, 4 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Josh, Saturday, 5 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― gareth, Sunday, 6 May 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
I'll give you an abridged/simplified rant, as opposed to one of my
massive rampages that I've given in the past (so, this version will be
shorter and sweeter than in the past, which also means less involved
and less detailed).
Brian Wilson and lyricist (depending on which album) vs. John Lennon,
Paul McCartney, George Harrison and George Martin. PLUS, The Beatles
had the record label AND almost literally the rest of the entire (yes,
entire) world on their side (very much unlike Brian). Put all that
together and...you get one lopsided "battle". Nonetheless, Brian
some-freakin-how managed to STILL win the "war" (until the breakdown,
-Early Beach Boys (B.Wilson = "The Beach Boys") is better than early
Beatles. I'll take songs about surf-n-turf (regardless of how fake
they were, which they were fake, Brian was nearly afraid of the water)
over "she loves you yea yea yea" n'sync bull.
-'Pet Sounds' is better than 'Revolver' (the difference is that one
must actually listen very closely to 'Pet Sounds' than to 'Revolver'
to fully hear thus understand this - which is the case with B.Wilson
to The Beatles, in general...one must listen more closely to how
intricate Brian gets with his brilliant music, that The Beatles simply
do not touch).
-'Smile' was set to be better than 'Sgt. Peppers'. By most all
accounts of those around that scene who saw and/or heard 'Smile' being
recorded (months before 'Sgt.' I might add) has admitted to as much.
Brian was, basically, always one step ahead of The Beatles. Of course,
until his impending breakdown (which would've happened to literally
anyone else - including Lennon or McCartney, if the situations were
However, I certainly will say that:
The Beatles absolutely were better pure/standard/verse-chorus-verse
songwriters than Brian and lyricist. I will give them that. But, as
far as "the big picture" in terms of albums (of which only the early
stuff onward to 'Smile' can be taken into account - in all fairness)
or over-all finished products (including certain singular songs
written by Brian after 'Smile' the ones that were truly on account
of/written by Brian within his very much dimished role in The Beach
Boys)...which would account for the mixture of actual basis of the
song/composition/lyrics+arrangement+production...I just can't see The
Beatles as equal (much less above) that of Brian Wilson. But, that
deals (of course, as with everything in life) with ones own personal
opinions. I mean, I'm alright with people calling it a draw, but. Most
feel compelled to constantly view The Beatles as above (if not FAR
above) Brian (The Beach Boys), which simply isn't based on reality. I
find that many Beatles supporters go overboard and the rest of the
world validates them doing so (sadly enough).
― michael g. breece, Sunday, 1 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Tom, Monday, 2 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
But I still love it.
― Robin Carmody, Monday, 2 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― gareth, Tuesday, 3 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― michael g. breece, Thursday, 5 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
*there was a mistake in sending that message prematurely, by the way*
But, I would completely (though partially) agree with you about both
bands lyrics being in the "crap n'sync" vein (as I already stated in
my previous post, the Beach Boys, at least, mixed in some other
variants than JUST "crap n'sync" simple love letters).
"over-indulged" - who's to say. Personally, I don't make such caps on
art. Clearly, Parks was attempting a sort of "Picasso" of rock lyric.
And...why not? Nothing wrong with that. Rock should have such freedoms
(which both Brian Wilson and The Beatles were both quite important in
freeing up pop/rock in numerous artistic ways - lyrically,
musically, sonically, conceptually, etc). Especially seeing as Brian
was doing the same with the music - a sort of "Picasso" of a rock
album (was what the pieces of the 'Smile' puzzle had been).
The Beatles were better at FASHION, period. Which, unfortunately, is a
part of the reason why they are so vastly more accepted and then
respected in comparison to Brian Wilson (I could give a flying rats
assed fuck about The Beach Boys, in case that wasn't already clear
enough). The element of fashion ("hipness") clearly played a larger
role than most would care to realize in their transition compared to
Brian (and the Boys).
VDP's lyrics - yeah of course he was trying to do this and that.
Saying it was "over-indulged" I don't think is trying to "set caps on
art" - it's pointing out that whatever he was trying to do, I don't
think he managed it. Compare especially his excellent lyrics
on "Discover America". Points-for-effort is not a particularly
sensible mode of criticism, I think.
― Tom, Thursday, 5 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Tim, Thursday, 5 July 2001 00:00 (seventeen years ago) Permalink
― Mark, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― dleone, Monday, 28 January 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Terry Shannon, Monday, 4 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― Andrew L, Monday, 4 February 2002 01:00 (sixteen years ago) Permalink
― RS_LaRue (RSLaRue), Sunday, 8 May 2005 15:20 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Sunday, 8 May 2005 15:38 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― RS_LaRue (RSLaRue), Sunday, 8 May 2005 15:43 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― Mr. Snrub (Mr. Snrub), Sunday, 8 May 2005 15:48 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― Hurting (Hurting), Sunday, 8 May 2005 16:05 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― RS_LaRue (RSLaRue), Sunday, 8 May 2005 16:09 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― RS_LaRue (RSLaRue), Sunday, 8 May 2005 16:18 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― edd s hurt (ddduncan), Sunday, 8 May 2005 16:40 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
I don't know. I thought you were being flip in reviving a thread about a pretty serious piece of work and just going, "Dud, can't get through it." So I thought I'd be flip right back atcha and imply that Pet Sounds is Ellingtonian in scope. Not so far off base, is it?
― Tim Ellison (Tim Ellison), Sunday, 8 May 2005 17:17 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― Spencer Chow (spencermfi), Sunday, 8 May 2005 18:37 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
― Ian John50n (orion), Sunday, 8 May 2005 18:43 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
As is, very near the top.
― Zed Szetlian (Finn MacCool), Sunday, 8 May 2005 19:41 (thirteen years ago) Permalink
all this hate seems so reactionary
― PappaWheelie V, Sunday, 25 October 2009 02:52 (nine years ago) Permalink
Weird album in that I both love it and think it's overrated.
― Mark, Sunday, 25 October 2009 03:53 (nine years ago) Permalink
it's sort of "overrated", sure, but against what?
― Stormy Davis, Sunday, 25 October 2009 03:59 (nine years ago) Permalink
it's not as good as pet sounds
― iatee, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:00 (nine years ago) Permalink
not asking to be a dick, but I think it's curious ... what are those rock albs that are so clearly superior to this second-tier 'Pet Sounds' ?
― Stormy Davis, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:00 (nine years ago) Permalink
― iatee, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:02 (nine years ago) Permalink
'Revolver', sure I could get that
actually I think the essence of 'Pet Sounds' diminishness lies in something like "Highway 61 Revisited"
because "Highway 61 Revisited" is clearly better than 'Pet Sounds'
:) but this obviously comes down to preconceptions about what "rock music" should "do"
i personally think it should "do" what Dylan did on 61, but I love and live 'Pet Sounds' until my dying day.....
― Stormy Davis, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:05 (nine years ago) Permalink
god, somehow that post got all f'd up
every album in this thread rocks ... not sure about Ian's last gap BB rec though!!
― Stormy Davis, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:07 (nine years ago) Permalink
er, iatee, i mean
― Stormy Davis, Sunday, 25 October 2009 04:08 (nine years ago) Permalink
"Odessey & Oracle" I like FAR better than Pet Sounds. Same with "Piper at the Gates of Dawn". Same with "Revolver" and "White Album". I need to hear Pet Sounds in stereo though, I have only ever heard it in mono. Also it's been a long time.
I remember the first time I heard it, it was so hyped up for me that it couldn't possibly live up to it. I still really loved it but in particular the instrumental tracks seemed like 101 Strings BS. Later when I heard them they were some of the trippiest and most fun parts of the record!
Never cared much for "O Caroline". Never got the huge love for that track. It's kind of boring and sappy.
― Adam Bruneau, Sunday, 25 October 2009 07:41 (nine years ago) Permalink
I like Brian Wilson's "Smile" better than "Pet Sounds" come to think of it.
― Adam Bruneau, Sunday, 25 October 2009 07:43 (nine years ago) Permalink
― Moka, Sunday, 25 October 2009 08:12 (nine years ago) Permalink
I love "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times." it's so plaintive in a really personal way. it's like a musical self-portrait of Brian
― lukevalentine, Sunday, 25 October 2009 08:47 (nine years ago) Permalink
A lot of overrated albums are still classic. But this one is not even overrated.
― Tied Up In Geir (Geir Hongro), Sunday, 25 October 2009 13:12 (nine years ago) Permalink
Except for Sloop John B, which gets a pass because of an injoke with my cousin involving hoisting my, erm, rather large grandmother's underwear in the air on laundry day and running around screaming "Hoist up the john b sails!" over and over. So, yeah. Anyhow.
― Ally, Wednesday, May 2, 2001 8:00 PM (8 years ago) Bookmark
Figured this for an lj post.
― alexfromnycderpoolera (kingkongvsgodzilla), Sunday, 25 October 2009 15:06 (nine years ago) Permalink
TWO instrumentals? This album did not need two instrumentals.
― Mr. Snrub, Sunday, 25 October 2009 15:49 (nine years ago) Permalink
i love the beach boys. i don't really have anything else to add. sorry
― velko, Sunday, 25 October 2009 15:57 (nine years ago) Permalink
"Wouldn't It Be Nice" came on oldies station today and I just imagined being in the room they recorded it and tried to picture all these people playing multiple pianos and jingle bells and tympanist and vibraphones and etc etc. Was it recorded live? Wow what an amazing sound Brian got!
― Adam Bruneau, Monday, 26 October 2009 04:35 (nine years ago) Permalink
I've been listening to it on repeat for the last few days and one thing that's struck me is that 'I'm Waiting For The Day' is the album's unheralded masterpiece. Does anyone else agree?
― Alba (Alba), Friday, July 8, 2005 11:46 AM (4 years ago) Bookmark
― chocolatepiekid, Monday, 26 October 2009 07:29 (nine years ago) Permalink
If it had some ripping frazzled psyche guitar solos, it'd be a much better album.
― Sickamous (Scik Mouthy), Monday, 26 October 2009 11:38 (nine years ago) Permalink
Certainly worked for the Zombies.
― Adam Bruneau, Monday, 26 October 2009 14:32 (nine years ago) Permalink
i pulled this thread up cuz i'm spending tonight in self loathing mode and listening t oPet Sounds and Smiley Smile era Beach Boys (just saw Mike Love and the band he calls the Beach Boys live a few weeks ago and they were pretty awesome)....
and this thread is clearly the biggest challopser I've ever read. Pet Sounds might be 'overrated' to some degree but there's little doubt in my mind that it's filled with fantastic songs. Hell, the first four tracks are pretty much flawless!
― Phoenix in Flight (Cattle Grind), Saturday, 10 April 2010 03:59 (eight years ago) Permalink
basically old-ILM was just a bunch of trolls who hated to get trolled and eventually got older, fatter, grayer in their safe haven corner of the blogosphere.
― ✌.✰|ʘ‿ʘ|✰.✌ (Steve Shasta), Saturday, 10 April 2010 04:08 (eight years ago) Permalink
so presumably there's a thread from 2003 proclaiming Coda to be Led Zeppelin's best album.....
― Phoenix in Flight (Cattle Grind), Saturday, 10 April 2010 04:14 (eight years ago) Permalink
hmm when did Lord Soto Challops show up on ILM?
― ✌.✰|ʘ‿ʘ|✰.✌ (Steve Shasta), Saturday, 10 April 2010 04:24 (eight years ago) Permalink
We're not as intent on fighting the Heartbreak of Rockism as we once were. I never gave a fuck about rockism, or popism, or Geirism, or whatever. I just liked what I liked, including Pet Sounds.
― Christine Green Leafy Dragon Indigo, Saturday, 10 April 2010 08:02 (eight years ago) Permalink
Kind of a dud, for me, to be honest. http://devonrecordclub.wordpress.com/2011/09/16/the-beach-boys-–-pet-sounds-–-round-14-–-nick’s-selection/
― Sick Mouthy (Scik Mouthy), Friday, 16 September 2011 21:08 (seven years ago) Permalink
So while I find the rollicking drums of I’m Waiting For The Day exciting and pleasurable, I find Don’t Talk (Put Your Head On My Shoulder) and You Still Believe In Me to be just a little… dull.
Aww really? I think 'You Still Believe In Me' is incredibly beautiful, the bit at the end (from 'I wanna cry' echoing the intro melody, before it dies down and builds up into those harmonies) is incredible.
"Pet Sounds" is a classic for me, but on a personal level I get the most enjoyment from "Sunflower" of all the Beach Boys albums.
― Turrican, Friday, 16 September 2011 21:15 (seven years ago) Permalink
Someone in my neighborhood is jamming this pretty loud for 11:30pm on a Monday night.
"I'm Waiting For The Day" at the moment.
― queequeg (peter grasswich), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 07:25 (six years ago) Permalink
your neighbours OTM
― The Invisible Superstars (dog latin), Tuesday, 14 February 2012 10:48 (six years ago) Permalink
Just got the Pet Sounds Sessions box in the mail and I skipped straight ahead to the a capella version of the album at the start of disc three. Boy, what a revelation. I mean, it's obviously their thing to do those gorgeous perfect harmonies, but to hear them isolated like that just brings out something so pure in it. Really hypnotizing and wonderful. I don't know why I waited so long to get the box.
― austinato (Austin), Thursday, 29 October 2015 23:24 (three years ago) Permalink
Thanks to a Rick Astley-related link, just learned that this is currently #26 on the British album charts.
― clemenza, Saturday, 18 June 2016 16:43 (two years ago) Permalink
The sessions box is wonderful. Night and day between this and the Beatles anthologies !
― AlXTC from Paris, Saturday, 18 June 2016 19:36 (two years ago) Permalink
WANT.i love this album so so much.
― brimstead, Saturday, 18 June 2016 20:26 (two years ago) Permalink
listening to the instrumental tracks and you can sort of see why mike love was freaked out. otherworldly chord changes.
― brimstead, Saturday, 18 June 2016 20:27 (two years ago) Permalink
This is like a master class in pop. Anyone who wants to make songs should listen to this box !
― AlXTC from Paris, Saturday, 18 June 2016 20:43 (two years ago) Permalink
BBC Classic Albums show tomorrow night on bbc 4
― piscesx, Saturday, 23 July 2016 18:23 (two years ago) Permalink
Did anyone happen to catch this? And how was it? Should I try to watch it somehow from across the pond? Does David Fricke show up intermittently to tell me why Pet Sounds is so good?
― it's sort of a layered stunt (sheesh), Tuesday, 26 July 2016 21:18 (two years ago) Permalink
― Mr. Snrub, Sunday, October 25, 2009 3:49 PM (6 years ago)
it totally did btw, the instrumentals on this album are both wonderful
― (The Other) J.D. (J.D.), Tuesday, 26 July 2016 21:20 (two years ago) Permalink
Yup. And as I mentioned previously, listening to the instrumentals of the other songs is a trip.
― brimstead, Tuesday, 26 July 2016 21:21 (two years ago) Permalink
At least for me, it really brought out the "strangeness" and "complexity" of the chord changes and stuff.
― brimstead, Tuesday, 26 July 2016 21:22 (two years ago) Permalink
Does David Fricke show up intermittently to tell me why Pet Sounds is so good?
― I look forward to hearing from you shortly, (Karl Malone), Tuesday, 26 July 2016 22:23 (two years ago) Permalink
No, he doesn't. This wasn't long or in depth enough, they didn't talk about every track for a start. They interviewed all the right people though: all the remaining Beach Boys, Tony Asher, Hal Blaine, Don Randi. Don't know why Helen Shapiro was on it though and why she was given as much screen time as Mike Love or Al Jardine. Brian started off very lucid but seemed to be losing it a bit by the end.
― 24 Hour Sex Ban Man (Tom D.), Wednesday, 27 July 2016 09:36 (two years ago) Permalink
yeah, the moments with Brian and Mark Linett in the studio, vaguely listening to some isolated tracks, are awkward (and quite useless).the documentary was ok but I guess not for big fans who already know a lot about all these stories and recordings.I don't think I have learned or heard anything new but it's always nice to go back to this fantastic album.a funny moment was when Jardine was seating in front of a piano for the interview. then next comment he's still seating there but with a guitar. I was wondering where they would stop and if he would have an extra instrument each time !
― AlXTC from Paris, Wednesday, 27 July 2016 10:46 (two years ago) Permalink
Pet Sounds good because the lyrics were largely written by Laura LaPlante's son. And that's fun.
The day Brian Wilson and Tony Asher met at Western Studios, Tony introduced Brian to "Stella By Starlight", perhaps during Asher's Bill Evans phase.
Of course, Brian's obsession with Dick Reynolds, the arranger for the Four Freshmen, culminated in the "Beach Boys" warbly bootleged version of the song (along with another standard performed just as warbly, "How Deep Is The Ocean"). Both are Brian, Reynolds, and Bones Howe in Studio A (where Spector recorded Ebb Tide a month earlier)
But I suspect all of these events happened on the same day, October 15, '65, just as Brian was recording this overlooked seed for Pet Sounds (generally misidentified as a Smile fragment)
How much Brian was dropping in on Gold Star during the fall of '65 just to hear other people's sessions remains debated, but some of those Spector proteges/throw-aways are fucking marvels -- so I can see where Brian felt a surge of ideas
And once the Beach Boys returned from Japan around Feb '66, Mike Love was greeted with Brian's solo Caroline No already in the can, and facing his role on "Let Go of Your Ego" being the first session.
I often speculate on the Sloop John B sessions, just before Mike Love got on that plane to Hawaii/Japan (wait; who's gettin' paid royalties on this traditional folk song, Brian?!)
― OPRAH WHEELIE! (PappaWheelie V), Friday, 29 July 2016 23:13 (two years ago) Permalink
this was lacking something. wished the had the in depth analysis of each track like they did with previous episodes of this
― Neptune Bingo (Michael B), Friday, 29 July 2016 23:19 (two years ago) Permalink
Still the best Brian interviews I've seen on it, and well combined with Wrecking Crew interciews:
― OPRAH WHEELIE! (PappaWheelie V), Friday, 29 July 2016 23:27 (two years ago) Permalink
missed you bro
― Οὖτις, Friday, 29 July 2016 23:33 (two years ago) Permalink
thank you. seriously :-)
― OPRAH WHEELIE! (PappaWheelie V), Friday, 29 July 2016 23:33 (two years ago) Permalink
“I can’t help how I act when you’re not here with me”
― Random Shitposter (calstars), Friday, 29 December 2017 00:47 (eleven months ago) Permalink