Editing Pet Sounds (section)

===Before the 1990s===
{{quote box|
 |quote=[Brian Wilson] was a genius who never received his just acclaim, and it's possible that he never will. The main reason for this is absurdly simple:{{nbsp}}... Just as it was settling nicely into its position as the world's number one popular music record, the far more fashionable Beatles released ''Sgt Pepper'', and ''Pet Sounds'' was forgotten, just like that.
 |source=—''Melody Maker'' journalist [[Richard Williams (journalist)|Richard Williams]], 1971<ref name="Williams71"/>
 |width = 25%
 |align = left
}}

The initial acclaim for ''Pet Sounds'' was immediately diverted by the Beatles' successive releases.<ref name="Gilliand"/><ref name="Williams71"/> [[John Gilliland]], in his 1969 ''[[Pop Chronicles]]'' series, stated that the album was almost overshadowed by ''Revolver'', released August 1966, and that "a lot people failed to realize that Brian Wilson's production was as unique in its own way as the Beatles'".<ref name="Gilliand">{{cite journal |author-link=John Gilliland |last=Gilliland |first=John |title=Show 20 – Forty Miles of Bad Road: Some of the best from rock 'n' roll's dark ages. [Part 1] |journal=UNT Digital Library |url=https://digital.library.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metadc19770/m1/#track/5 |date=July 28, 2017 |publisher=[[University of North Texas]]}}</ref> ''Melody Maker'' journalist [[Richard Williams (journalist)|Richard Williams]], in a 1971 reappraisal, wrote that although the album had "defied criticism" and briefly "dwarfed all the rest of pop music", its critical attention was redirected when the Beatles released ''Sgt. Pepper'' twelve months later.<ref name="Williams71">{{cite magazine |last1=Williams |first1=Richard |author-link1=Richard Williams (journalist) |title=Beach Boys: A Reappraisal |url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/beach-boys-a-reappraisal |magazine=[[Melody Maker]] |date=May 22, 1971 |url-access=subscription}}</ref>

''Pet Sounds'' received no [[1967 Grammy Awards|1967 Grammy Award]] nomination.{{sfn|Granata|2003|p=184}}{{refn|group=nb|At the same ceremony, [[the Anita Kerr Singers]] won Best Performance by a Vocal Group for an album that included a rendition of "Good Vibrations".{{sfn|Granata|2003|p=184}}}} [[Geoffrey Cannon]] wrote in his late 1967 column for ''[[The Listener (magazine)|Listener]]'' that the Beach Boys were "lesser than the Beatles" due to the album's "juvenile or specious" ballads and lack of cohesive artistic vision, though his critique was withheld from publication by ''The Listener''{{'}}s editor.<ref name="Listener">{{cite magazine |last1=Cannon |first1=Geoffrey |author-link1=Geoffrey Cannon |title=California! |magazine=[[The Listener (magazine)|The Listener]] |date=November 22, 1967 |url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/california- |url-access=subscription}}</ref> Williams later echoed this sentiment, attributing the album's muted reception, relative to the Beatles, to a perceived narrower range of influences.<ref name="Williams71"/> [[Gene Sculatti]], writing in ''[[Jazz & Pop]]'' magazine in 1968, recognized the album's debt to ''Rubber Soul'' and called it "revolutionary only within the confines of the Beach Boys' music" despite also serving as a "final statement of an era and a prophecy that sweeping changes lay ahead."<ref name="Sculatti">{{cite web |last=Sculatti |first=Gene |author-link=Gene Sculatti |url=http://www.teachrock.org/resources/article/villains-and-heroes-in-defense-of-the-beach-boys/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140714191639/http://teachrock.org/resources/article/villains-and-heroes-in-defense-of-the-beach-boys/ |title=Villains and Heroes: In Defense of the Beach Boys |magazine=[[Jazz & Pop]] |date=September 1968 |via=Rock and Roll: An American History |publisher=teachrock.org |archive-date=July 14, 2014 |access-date=June 20, 2017}}</ref>

From the late 1960s onward, ''Pet Sounds'' underwent critical reevaluation, with a 1976 ''NME'' feature, cited by author Johnny Morgan, as particularly impactful.{{sfn|Morgan|2015|p=109}} Ben Edmonds of ''[[Circus (magazine)|Circus]]'' observed in 1971 that the album's "beauty" had endured amid "the turbulence of the past few years", adding that "many consider it not only the Beach Boys' finest achievement, but a milestone in the progression of contemporary rock as well."<ref name="Edmonds">{{cite magazine |last1=Edmonds |first1=Ben |title=The Beach Boys: A Group For All Seasons |url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/the-beach-boys-a-group-for-all-seasons |magazine=Circus |date=June 1971 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> [[Stephen Davis (music journalist)|Stephen Davis]] wrote in a 1972 ''Rolling Stone'' review that the album represented Wilson's pinnacle as an artist, likening the emotional resonance of its "trenchant cycle of love songs" to "a shatteringly evocative novel". He argued that the album had changed "the course of popular music" and "a few lives in the bargain".<ref name="Davis1972">{{cite magazine |last=Davis |first=Stephen |date=June 22, 1972 |title=Pet Sounds |url=https://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/pet-sounds-19720622 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220319170026/https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-album-reviews/pet-sounds-249007/ |archive-date=March 19, 2022 |magazine=[[Rolling Stone]]}}</ref> ''Melody Maker'' critic Josh Ingham wrote in 1973 that while initially "ignored by the public", ''Pet Sounds'' had inspired many critics to label Wilson a genius, "not least for being a year ahead of ''Sgt Pepper'' in thinking." Ingham concluded that, "With hindsight, of course, ''Pet Sounds'' has become ''the'' classic album."<ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Ingham |first1=Josh |title=The Beach Boys #2: The Exiles Return |url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/the-beach-boys-2-the-exiles-return |magazine=[[NME]] |date=March 31, 1973 |url-access=subscription}}</ref> 

After going out of print in 1974, ''Pet Sounds'' entered a period of obscurity with prolonged placement in [[bargain bin|discount bins]].{{sfn|Granata|2003|pp=216, 235}} Sociomusicologist [[Simon Frith]] wrote in 1981 that the album remained widely perceived as "a 'weird' record" within music circles.<ref name="Frith/HistoryOfRock">{{cite magazine|first=Simon|last=Frith|title=1967: The Year It All Came Together |magazine=[[The History of Rock (magazine)|The History of Rock]]|year=1981|url=https://www.rocksbackpages.com/Library/Article/1967-the-year-it-all-came-together|url-access=subscription|author-link=Simon Frith}}</ref> [[Dave Marsh]]'s 1979 review in ''[[The Rolling Stone Record Guide]]'' (1979) awarded four stars (out of a possible five), characterizing it as a "powerful, but spotty" collection where the least experimental songs proved to be the best.{{sfn|Marsh|Swenson|1983|p=30}} By 1985, he wrote that the album was now considered a "classic" while contrasting its perceived disconnect from listeners with the Beatles' contemporaneous work.{{sfn|Marsh|1985|p=114}} Granata wrote that upon its 1990 CD reissue, the album remained a "quasi-cult classic" primarily embraced by devoted fans.{{sfn|Granata|2003|p=216}}