- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
Music question about Pet Sounds
Posted on 7/24/25 at 9:36 am
Posted on 7/24/25 at 9:36 am
I like the album, and love the beach boys. So please don't think I'm hating on it or anything, I'm just musically ignorant in all the nuances that go into things.
I know PS is generally considered a top ~10ish album of all time. I know the beatles were so enamored with it it caused them to up their game to try to put out something better. It's universally lauded as a masterpiece. My question is...what exactly is it about it that makes all of that so? I enjoy the songs, it's a good album, but to the layman like myself what makes these particular songs so groundbreaking or unique that makes them be held in such incredible regard? Was their recording technique unique for the time?
I know PS is generally considered a top ~10ish album of all time. I know the beatles were so enamored with it it caused them to up their game to try to put out something better. It's universally lauded as a masterpiece. My question is...what exactly is it about it that makes all of that so? I enjoy the songs, it's a good album, but to the layman like myself what makes these particular songs so groundbreaking or unique that makes them be held in such incredible regard? Was their recording technique unique for the time?
8
Posted on 7/24/25 at 10:00 am to WG_Dawg
Overrated
Well produced album with very good session players. 2 or 3 good songs. It really doesn't hold up well.
That's about it.
Well produced album with very good session players. 2 or 3 good songs. It really doesn't hold up well.
That's about it.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 10:02 am to WG_Dawg
I think the incorporation of instruments not normally used in rock music was one.
Brian Wilson's use of minor chords and chord arrangements was another. Vocal harmonies was another. And it was one of the first attempts at a rock concept album where it was intended to be heard as a whole instead of singles.
Watch this and it helps explain why musicians loved it.
Brian Wilson's use of minor chords and chord arrangements was another. Vocal harmonies was another. And it was one of the first attempts at a rock concept album where it was intended to be heard as a whole instead of singles.
Watch this and it helps explain why musicians loved it.
This post was edited on 7/24/25 at 10:08 am
Posted on 7/24/25 at 10:13 am to Mizz-SEC
quote:
I think the incorporation of instruments not normally used in rock music was one.
Brian Wilson's use of minor chords and chord arrangements was another. Vocal harmonies was another
hadn't the beach boys done all this in a handful of prior albums though?
quote:
it was one of the first attempts at a rock concept album where it was intended to be heard as a whole instead of singles.
didn't know that...that does make sense.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 11:47 am to WG_Dawg
quote:
hadn't the beach boys done all this in a handful of prior albums though?
Some of the vocal harmonies, yes. Some of the instrument and chordal changes on the Pet Sounds songs, I don't think so. If you add "Good Vibrations" with the use of a thermin, their incorporation of new instruments led directly to the Beatles experimentation on Sgt. Pepper. I'm not a musical historian, but I would think the Bealtes use of tape loops on "Tommorow Never Knows" was groundbreaking (at least in the mainstream) as was the Beach Boys use of accoridans and theramin.
I'm not really a fan of the album either, but musicians seem to really value it's contributions.
Posted on 7/24/25 at 12:44 pm to WG_Dawg
Conceptually, it was arguably the first album to promote the idea of a cohesive, unified album as a cohesive piece of art. Most pop/ rock albums consisted of a few singles surrounded by a 7-8 covers and filler. Albums were disposable vehicles for hit singles.
Musically, the production of it set a new bar of what the studio could bring out in pppular music. Mizz said it better above me.
Musically, the production of it set a new bar of what the studio could bring out in pppular music. Mizz said it better above me.
This post was edited on 7/24/25 at 1:21 pm
Posted on 7/24/25 at 9:48 pm to REG861
According to the book The Wrecking Crew, Brian Wilson’s downward spiral basically began with this album. It hit him hard when it was not as well received as he’d hoped it would be.
Posted on 7/25/25 at 9:35 am to REG861
quote:
Conceptually, it was arguably the first album to promote the idea of a cohesive, unified album as a cohesive piece of art. Most pop/ rock albums consisted of a few singles surrounded by a 7-8 covers and filler. Albums were disposable vehicles for hit singles.
Same as it ever was...
Posted on 7/25/25 at 12:34 pm to hogcard1964
quote:
Overrated
Posted on 7/26/25 at 7:28 am to WG_Dawg
After you get so many years away from something, the uniqueness of it in it's time is lost.
Just like guitar players today who say Hendrix wasn't that great.
By today's standards, maybe not.
But during the late 60s, he was an anomaly.
That being said, Pet Sounds was miles ahead of anything that had been recorded, in production value and concept.
That's why it stood out....
Just like guitar players today who say Hendrix wasn't that great.
By today's standards, maybe not.
But during the late 60s, he was an anomaly.
That being said, Pet Sounds was miles ahead of anything that had been recorded, in production value and concept.
That's why it stood out....
Posted on 7/26/25 at 8:07 am to hogcard1964
quote:
Overrated
Well produced album with very good session players. 2 or 3 good songs. It really doesn't hold up well.
That's about it.
It's amusing that you post on the music board so frequently when you don't actually seem to like any music.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 8:19 am to Portballs
I think you hit it on the head. In the case of Pet Sounds, I think you have to couple with it, expectations. Pet Sounds was a departure from what made the Beach Boys the Beach Boys in terms of content. No more surf and cars with a song about girls thrown in. Plus the sound had changed. The harmonies were still there, but the musical sound was different. Wilson had picked up on the changing vibe, but he was just a little ahead of his time for the American critics.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 8:22 am to WG_Dawg
As others have said, it was very unique for its time.
Another emphasis was the way it layered sound. A friend who worked on some music production recommended listening to it loud and in mono (as it was recorded). The layering created whole new sounds.
The Pet Sounds Sessions where it breaks a lot of it down and you get to hear some of the components isolated is pretty impressive even today IMO.
Another emphasis was the way it layered sound. A friend who worked on some music production recommended listening to it loud and in mono (as it was recorded). The layering created whole new sounds.
The Pet Sounds Sessions where it breaks a lot of it down and you get to hear some of the components isolated is pretty impressive even today IMO.
Posted on 7/26/25 at 2:52 pm to WG_Dawg
Listen to 1965 Beach Boys album "Today!" and 1965 Beatles album "Help!".
Listen real good. This was top of the pops, baby. The best of what rock-pop had to offer, and people ate it up. It was slightly more progressive 50's music.
Then listen to 1966 "Pet Sounds".
Then you will have the "Oh, I see now, OK...." moment.
ETA-
Then imagine you are a young Charlie Manson trying to make it in the music business in LA and you were already obsessed with the Beach Boys and the Beatles for what they already were, and what Pet Sounds might have done to your mind when it came out. Without that album, I doubt the Tate-LaBianca murders ever happen.
Listen real good. This was top of the pops, baby. The best of what rock-pop had to offer, and people ate it up. It was slightly more progressive 50's music.
Then listen to 1966 "Pet Sounds".
Then you will have the "Oh, I see now, OK...." moment.
ETA-
Then imagine you are a young Charlie Manson trying to make it in the music business in LA and you were already obsessed with the Beach Boys and the Beatles for what they already were, and what Pet Sounds might have done to your mind when it came out. Without that album, I doubt the Tate-LaBianca murders ever happen.
This post was edited on 7/26/25 at 2:57 pm
Posted on 7/27/25 at 6:19 am to KiwiHead
quote:
Wilson had picked up on the changing vibe, but he was just a little ahead of his time for the American critics.
He just wasn't made for those times.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:11 am to PowerTool
I think if he could have remained with what he had done with Pet Sounds he would have been more commercially successful. Really, after Pet Sounds, the music starts going in weird ( really cool) directions with Smile Sessions. It's kind of experimental and I'm not sure the rest of the band had totally bought in. Plus Brian Wilson and Dennis Wilson were so f'd up all the time, and to a lesser extent so was Mike Love.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:29 am to Saint Alfonzo
I like a lot of music, as well as the Beach Boys. I just never cared for Pet Sounds. But in my opinion they really didn't make a lot of "good albums". They'd put out an album that had two or three decent songs and the rest was really filler to pretty bad. I think their last decent album was probably The Beach Boys Today from early '65.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:36 am to hogcard1964
Prior to Pet Sounds and really Sgt Pepper's ny the Beatles, albums were merely a collection of songs that the record companies would clump together in hopes that 2 or 3 would break out.
Posted on 7/27/25 at 8:39 am to hogcard1964
Their '77 release Love You is one of my favorites.. their "synth-pop" record...
Still, Pet Soundsis undoubtedly their masterpiece... I was totally obsessed with bootlegs until it was finally released on CD in 1997...
I know it was meant to be heard in mono and that's great with headphones, but I typically listen to the stereo version when I'm just playing it on the turntable... never gets old..
Still, Pet Soundsis undoubtedly their masterpiece... I was totally obsessed with bootlegs until it was finally released on CD in 1997...
I know it was meant to be heard in mono and that's great with headphones, but I typically listen to the stereo version when I'm just playing it on the turntable... never gets old..
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News