GOOD VIBRATIONS promo video ex-ci-ta-tions

[SurfRiderHawaii]

such as?

such as telling him to take his head out of his ass, implying he can't think logically, telling him to just enjoy the pretty pictures instead ...

Dude, that was wayyyyyyy into it.  You need to go back to the start.

 But I hadn't finished my response to you when I hit post.  See above.

[SMiLE Brian]

AGD, just to help you; there are numbered buttons in the upper left hand corner of the screen where you can go back and 'read' prior posts.  As Sam pointed out, you maybe are not reading them clearly.

To quote my earlier post (I've said this like three times), "This official 'GV' Promo video was patched together because Capitol  Records needed a promo video fast and this was the footage they had available. That's my hypothesis and I'm sticking to it."

Yeah, I know. This may amaze you, but I can read, and used a message board. But these were the questions you sidestepped:

Consider this - if Capitol were hurting for a "GV" promo, wouldn't they have used some stock footage (as was done for "H&V" ?) as opposed to assembling some seriously odd stuff ? (In other words, if it was odd for Brian to use that as a "GV" promo, it's odd cubed that Capitol would do so: your logic has to apply to both cases - can't pick and choose)  Further, if Brian had it shot expressly for the Fire Music, why compromise that by letting it be used for a totally different song ?

PS: a little civility would help your cause considerably. Plus, sarcasm doesn't work with me. You'll need to to much better than that.

Didn't Brian have his acid trip where he thought he was on fire way before he wrote "Fire"? Maybe he had his trip, had a fire hat fixation for while and "fire" is the end product of months of fire hat mania due to his trip. So the video just documented them at a fire station as part of the fire interest.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

AGD, just to help you; there are numbered buttons in the upper left hand corner of the screen where you can go back and 'read' prior posts.  As Sam pointed out, you maybe are not reading them clearly.

To quote my earlier post (I've said this like three times), "This official 'GV' Promo video was patched together because Capitol  Records needed a promo video fast and this was the footage they had available. That's my hypothesis and I'm sticking to it."

Yeah, I know. This may amaze you, but I can read, and used a message board. But these were the questions you sidestepped:

Consider this - if Capitol were hurting for a "GV" promo, wouldn't they have used some stock footage (as was done for "H&V" ?) as opposed to assembling some seriously odd stuff ? (In other words, if it was odd for Brian to use that as a "GV" promo, it's odd cubed that Capitol would do so: your logic has to apply to both cases - can't pick and choose)  Further, if Brian had it shot expressly for the Fire Music, why compromise that by letting it be used for a totally different song ?

PS: a little civility would help your cause considerably. Plus, sarcasm doesn't work with me. You'll need to to much better than that.

Holy smokes AGD, that's the pot calling the kettle black.   I'm proud to say I've never been banned, suspended for my board behavior or left a board in a huff of anger.
I've never used the F word on here at someone. Shinning up that gold star I see!  Many consider you a bully on these boards dude!  You love to dish it out.......

As to the matter in question, again, as Sam pointed out, I DON"T KNOW.  I gave my opinion and theory.  And you just want to argue about it because you are the BB God of knowledge - AGD!

You questions are interesting but:

1) consider Brian's mental state at the time
2) Brian was making Smile.  He probably had little interest, at that moment, of what Capitol was doing for a GV promo.
3) Overall, I have no idea.  But I can tell you that musicians (being a crappy one myself) have little interest in promotion and advertising when in the middle of major music making.

Your theory is as valid as mine.  But again, you have no facts or concrete sources on how this video happened.  I just am putting out my theory.

Again, "I don't know and neither do you". But I'm happy to have a civil debate. Hugs!!!!!!

[SurfRiderHawaii]

AGD, just to help you; there are numbered buttons in the upper left hand corner of the screen where you can go back and 'read' prior posts.  As Sam pointed out, you maybe are not reading them clearly.

To quote my earlier post (I've said this like three times), "This official 'GV' Promo video was patched together because Capitol  Records needed a promo video fast and this was the footage they had available. That's my hypothesis and I'm sticking to it."

Yeah, I know. This may amaze you, but I can read, and used a message board. But these were the questions you sidestepped:

Consider this - if Capitol were hurting for a "GV" promo, wouldn't they have used some stock footage (as was done for "H&V" ?) as opposed to assembling some seriously odd stuff ? (In other words, if it was odd for Brian to use that as a "GV" promo, it's odd cubed that Capitol would do so: your logic has to apply to both cases - can't pick and choose)  Further, if Brian had it shot expressly for the Fire Music, why compromise that by letting it be used for a totally different song ?

PS: a little civility would help your cause considerably. Plus, sarcasm doesn't work with me. You'll need to to much better than that.

Didn't Brian have his acid trip where he thought he was on fire way before he wrote "Fire"? Maybe he had his trip, had a fire hat fixation for while and "fire" is the end product of months of fire hat mania due to his trip. So the video just documented them at a fire station as part of the fire interest.

Yeah, that sounds quite plausible to me.  Much more so than Brain did this for the GV promo video.

[Andrew G. Doe]

AGD, just to help you; there are numbered buttons in the upper left hand corner of the screen where you can go back and 'read' prior posts.  As Sam pointed out, you maybe are not reading them clearly.

To quote my earlier post (I've said this like three times), "This official 'GV' Promo video was patched together because Capitol  Records needed a promo video fast and this was the footage they had available. That's my hypothesis and I'm sticking to it."

Yeah, I know. This may amaze you, but I can read, and used a message board. But these were the questions you sidestepped:

Consider this - if Capitol were hurting for a "GV" promo, wouldn't they have used some stock footage (as was done for "H&V" ?) as opposed to assembling some seriously odd stuff ? (In other words, if it was odd for Brian to use that as a "GV" promo, it's odd cubed that Capitol would do so: your logic has to apply to both cases - can't pick and choose)  Further, if Brian had it shot expressly for the Fire Music, why compromise that by letting it be used for a totally different song ?

PS: a little civility would help your cause considerably. Plus, sarcasm doesn't work with me. You'll need to to much better than that.

Didn't Brian have his acid trip where he thought he was on fire way before he wrote "Fire"? Maybe he had his trip, had a fire hat fixation for while and "fire" is the end product of months of fire hat mania due to his trip. So the video just documented them at a fire station as part of the fire interest.

The only source for that trip is the discredited 'autobiography'. No-one I know places and credence at all in said report.

[SMiLE Brian]

AGD, just to help you; there are numbered buttons in the upper left hand corner of the screen where you can go back and 'read' prior posts.  As Sam pointed out, you maybe are not reading them clearly.

To quote my earlier post (I've said this like three times), "This official 'GV' Promo video was patched together because Capitol  Records needed a promo video fast and this was the footage they had available. That's my hypothesis and I'm sticking to it."

Yeah, I know. This may amaze you, but I can read, and used a message board. But these were the questions you sidestepped:

Consider this - if Capitol were hurting for a "GV" promo, wouldn't they have used some stock footage (as was done for "H&V" ?) as opposed to assembling some seriously odd stuff ? (In other words, if it was odd for Brian to use that as a "GV" promo, it's odd cubed that Capitol would do so: your logic has to apply to both cases - can't pick and choose)  Further, if Brian had it shot expressly for the Fire Music, why compromise that by letting it be used for a totally different song ?

PS: a little civility would help your cause considerably. Plus, sarcasm doesn't work with me. You'll need to to much better than that.

Didn't Brian have his acid trip where he thought he was on fire way before he wrote "Fire"? Maybe he had his trip, had a fire hat fixation for while and "fire" is the end product of months of fire hat mania due to his trip. So the video just documented them at a fire station as part of the fire interest.

The only source for that trip is the discredited 'autobiography'. No-one I know places and credence at all in said report.

Dang it, referenced that fine piece of literature without realising it.

[ghost]

It's not unlikely for Brian to get into a Fire kind of trip. Just cause it's in the bio the normative view likes to discredit doesn't mean it never happened. Dum ba dim ba dum ba.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Holy smokes AGD, that's the pot calling the kettle black.   I'm proud to say I've never been banned, suspended for my board behavior or left a board in a huff of anger.

Try harder.  

I've never used the F word on here at someone. Shinning up that gold star I see!  Many consider you a bully on these boards dude!  You love to dish it out.......

Nope, but sometimes you have to, when someone's being either incredibly/gratuitously dumb, antagonistic or dismissing established fact. Anyone who feels intimidated on a message board... well, I worry for them in real life.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

So the indication from SWWK #2 is this was not shot for GV.  Obviously, not definitive!

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Holy smokes AGD, that's the pot calling the kettle black.   I'm proud to say I've never been banned, suspended for my board behavior or left a board in a huff of anger.

Try harder.  

I've never used the F word on here at someone. Shinning up that gold star I see!  Many consider you a bully on these boards dude!  You love to dish it out.......

Nope, but sometimes you have to, when someone's being either incredibly/gratuitously dumb, antagonistic or dismissing established fact. Anyone who feels intimidated on a message board... well, I worry for them in real life.

That's your problem AGD.  U justify your extreme bad bully behavior cause U think people are dumb and you're some brilliant historian.  That's your justification? How pathetic!

Dumb is arguing fact when you have none.  As in this case!  "dismissing established fact"?
Your talking through your hat here. The fact is you have NO idea how this GV promo came about.  

Which is the same for me.  I have no idea.  I merely put forth a theory.

There are some rally nice, sweet people on this board who sometimes say something completely wrong.  What do you do?  Put on your bully gloves and intimidate the hell out of um.
And of course, your group of minions who idolize you jump in.  Always the same.  Seen it on Brian's Board, here, BBB, The Shut Down Board.  Your angry bullying knows no bounds!

 Sorry life has turned out so bitterly for you.  

****************
Maybe you're just bitter and angry right now because you are completely out/uninvolved with the 'Smile Box' project. Or that Jon is coming out with this great new book and not you.
Sorry dude!

[monicker]

There's a party in here. When did it start?

[Cam Mott]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

Excellent work ol' pal.

[Alex]

I can`t believe people get are getting worked up over BBs footage. We`re not talking about wars or taxes or national debt here. It`s the fuckin` Beach Boys! I love the nitty gritty obscure geeky stuff, but something as insignificant to the larger world as "why were the Boys filmed wearing fire hats?" is no reason for people to tell each other to go get fudged.

[grillo]

 

Holy smokes AGD, that's the pot calling the kettle black.   I'm proud to say I've never been banned, suspended for my board behavior or left a board in a huff of anger.

Try harder.  

I've never used the F word on here at someone. Shinning up that gold star I see!  Many consider you a bully on these boards dude!  You love to dish it out.......

Nope, but sometimes you have to, when someone's being either incredibly/gratuitously dumb, antagonistic or dismissing established fact. Anyone who feels intimidated on a message board... well, I worry for them in real life.

That's your problem AGD.  U justify your extreme bad bully behavior cause U think people are dumb and you're some brilliant historian.  That's your justification? How pathetic!

Dumb is arguing fact when you have none.  As in this case!  "dismissing established fact"?
Your talking through your hat here. The fact is you have NO idea how this GV promo came about.  

Which is the same for me.  I have no idea.  I merely put forth a theory.

There are some rally nice, sweet people on this board who sometimes say something completely wrong.  What do you do?  Put on your bully gloves and intimidate the hell out of um.
And of course, your group of minions who idolize you jump in.  Always the same.  Seen it on Brian's Board, here, BBB, The Shut Down Board.  Your angry bullying knows no bounds!

 Sorry life has turned out so bitterly for you.  

****************
Maybe you're just bitter and angry right now because you are completely out/uninvolved with the 'Smile Box' project. Or that Jon is coming out with this great new book and not you.
Sorry dude!

Dude, you are being lame. Ad hominem attacks are really lame. Why start with the personalizing of this disagreement? We get it: two different ideas, neither of which even friggin' matters at all anywhere in real life, from two folks who would likely never grab a drink together. Pull it together, man!

[Andrew G. Doe]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

So the indication from SWWK #2 is this was not shot for GV.  Obviously, not definitive!

Where does it say, or even indicate, that ? All he says is he doesn't remember anything other than it was shot for a TV station. Going by your logic, it wasn't shot for "Fire" either because he doesn't say so. Like I said, you can't cherry-pick the response that suits your notion best: you're very fond of using the word "obviously" when it's anything but. I gave him the options of "GV" or "Fire" and he opted for neither.

[Andrew G. Doe]

That's your problem AGD.  U justify your extreme bad bully behavior cause U think people are dumb and you're some brilliant historian.  That's your justification? How pathetic!

Dumb is arguing fact when you have none.  As in this case!  "dismissing established fact"?
Your talking through your hat here. The fact is you have NO idea how this GV promo came about.  

Which is the same for me.  I have no idea.  I merely put forth a theory.

There are some rally nice, sweet people on this board who sometimes say something completely wrong.  What do you do?  Put on your bully gloves and intimidate the hell out of um.
And of course, your group of minions who idolize you jump in.  Always the same.  Seen it on Brian's Board, here, BBB, The Shut Down Board.  Your angry bullying knows no bounds!

 Sorry life has turned out so bitterly for you.  

****************
Maybe you're just bitter and angry right now because you are completely out/uninvolved with the 'Smile Box' project. Or that Jon is coming out with this great new book and not you.
Sorry dude!

I love your assumption that I'm "bitter and angry right now" because of my assumed non-involvement in TSS, and that I'm burned up because my friend Jon has a new book out. In the former case, as it happens you're mildly wrong - your use of the word "completely" is both unfortunate and a handy escape hatch - and in the latter I'm eager to see what Jon's done. Fine author and researcher, good friend.

Strikes me you've got the same problem as such Bloo luminaries as "Alex McDonald", "Summer Days" & "Surfin' USA": you just don't like me and use the boards to take shots, which is fine by me, quite amusing actually (people who use text speak on boards like this always amuse me, why I don't know). As others have stated, it's just a few feel of film stock from 46 years ago: No-one's going to die, no Nobel Prizes will ensue. Why you're getting so het up about it is a mystery. Can't speak for you, but to me this is but a passing distraction and I've much more pressing matters to truly worry about.

And now, if you don't mind, I have 5 CDs to ponder over.  

[Andrew G. Doe]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

Excellent work ol' pal.

I sent an email, is all. 

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

So the indication from SWWK #2 is this was not shot for GV.  Obviously, not definitive!

Where does it say, or even indicate, that ? All he says is he doesn't remember anything other than it was shot for a TV station. Going by your logic, it wasn't shot for "Fire" either because he doesn't say so. Like I said, you can't cherry-pick the response that suits your notion best: you're very fond of using the word "obviously" when it's anything but. I gave him the options of "GV" or "Fire" and he opted for neither.

Quite right!  Pretty clear it wasn't shot for GV though.

Too bad you don't have any better sources.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

So the indication from SWWK #2 is this was not shot for GV.  Obviously, not definitive!

Where does it say, or even indicate, that ? All he says is he doesn't remember anything other than it was shot for a TV station. Going by your logic, it wasn't shot for "Fire" either because he doesn't say so. Like I said, you can't cherry-pick the response that suits your notion best: you're very fond of using the word "obviously" when it's anything but. I gave him the options of "GV" or "Fire" and he opted for neither.

Quite right!  Pretty clear it wasn't shot for GV though.

Too bad you don't have any better sources.

You have better ?    

The man was there and he wrote the definitive early Smile article, in which, btw, he makes no mention whatsoever of this shoot: now, having described the "Fire" session minutely (and entirely accurately), that he made no mention that he was part of a shoot for a promo for same obviously indicates to me that said shoot wasn't for "Fire". According to your rules of logic and deduction.

Bottom line - anyone who contests that a first-hand source isn't good enough... well... I guess we have to dismiss his entire article as unreliable now, don't we ? Bummer.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Got a reply from SWWK #2 - name of Jules. here y'go:

"1 - is that you with the camera ?

Yes.

2 - do you recall when it was shot ? I'm thinking October 1966.

It sounds about right.
 
3 - do you recall if Brian said it was specifically for "GV"... or "Fire"... or what ?

It was a video for a TV station, I think in Philadelphia. I don't recall anything else about it.

4 - who is the girl with the ball ?

I don't recognize her."

So the indication from SWWK #2 is this was not shot for GV.  Obviously, not definitive!

Where does it say, or even indicate, that ? All he says is he doesn't remember anything other than it was shot for a TV station. Going by your logic, it wasn't shot for "Fire" either because he doesn't say so. Like I said, you can't cherry-pick the response that suits your notion best: you're very fond of using the word "obviously" when it's anything but. I gave him the options of "GV" or "Fire" and he opted for neither.

Quite right!  Pretty clear it wasn't shot for GV though.

Too bad you don't have any better sources.

You have better ?    

The man was there and he wrote the definitive early Smile article, in which, btw, he makes no mention whatsoever of this shoot: now, having described the "Fire" session minutely (and entirely accurately), that he made no mention that he was part of a shoot for a promo for same obviously indicates to me that said shoot wasn't for "Fire". According to your rules of logic and deduction.

Gosh, I've said multiple times I have no info, I don't know.

A good source might be your buddy Bruce, Brian, VDP - someone who might know what Brian had in mind.
If you look at this footage, wasn't for Barnyard.

Who knows; I don't.

Thanks for trying!

[Andrew G. Doe]

OK - I'll ask Brian.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I love your assumption that I'm "bitter and angry right now" because of my assumed non-involvement in TSS, and that I'm burned up because my friend Jon has a new book out. In the former case, as it happens you're mildly wrong - your use of the word "completely" is both unfortunate and a handy escape hatch - and in the latter I'm eager to see what Jon's done. Fine author and researcher, good friend.

Strikes me you've got the same problem as such Bloo luminaries as "Alex McDonald", "Summer Days" & "Surfin' USA": you just don't like me and use the boards to take shots, which is fine by me, quite amusing actually (people who use text speak on boards like this always amuse me, why I don't know). As others have stated, it's just a few feel of film stock from 46 years ago: No-one's going to die, no Nobel Prizes will ensue. Why you're getting so het up about it is a mystery. Can't speak for you, but to me this is but a passing distraction and I've much more pressing matters to truly worry about.

And now, if you don't mind, I have 5 CDs to ponder over. 

I read those boards but don't post on them.  A member of the BBB but haven't posted in years.  Not a member of Brian's or Shut Down.  Never ever posted you anywhere but here.
If you really want to know, you caught my attention couple years ago when you 'bullied' me for screwing up David Marks name.
Couldn't help yourself posting a snide, smart-ass jab in a thread you had nothing to do with.

Sorry, I was only have fun with you here on Smiley.  That "bitter and angry right now" was just messing with you AGD. Ha, Ha!

Do I not like you?  Don't know you. DO you have an anger issue? Um........
Otherwise, what I hear 'around' is you're a swell guy! 

You're quick to tell people things like, don't like it, don't buy it.  Don't like my posts, move on then.

Till next time Sir!  Enjoy Smile!

[SurfRiderHawaii]

OK - I'll ask Brian.

In all seriousness and sincerity Andrew, we wouldn't be getting 'Smile' without you and others like you. 
Thanks for all your work!

[hypehat]

Now now, sarcasm is the lowest form of humour.....