Official thread for Brian & Al's Official Response to Mike/Bruce Band Tour in the LA Times

[Awesoman]

that'd be stupid. you're just ruining everyone else's good time. only a very small amount of people care who's on the stage.

And I suppose ignorance is bliss for the rest of them?

[Jonathan Blum]

For your consideration:

June 26th - in a Rolling Stone article, Mike announces he's booked post-C50 dates with the BRI-sanctioned lineup. Brian comments "I wasn't aware that Mike had some shows in South America. News to me."

September 23rd - at the opening of the BB exhibit at the Grammy Museum, Mike issues a press release underlining the composition of the band touring in October. Brian expresses surprise (at something he knew about and commented on three months previously), stating "I'm disappointed and can't understand why he doesn't want to tour with Al, David and me. We are out here having so much fun. After all, we are the real Beach Boys."

October 5th - Mike sends a letter to the LA Times explaining that, amongst other things, he issued the original press release at the request of Brian's representative.

October 7th - also in the LA Times, Brian responds to Mike's explanation, stating that "my attorney merely suggested to Mike's attorney that a possible press release in those markets might be appropriate to stop the confusion, which was in no one's best interest"... and also "I'm disappointed that Mike would now say that the release was done at the request of my representative".

Someone care to explain to me exactly how Mike's emerged from this as the bad guy when he did not only exactly what Brian's representative requested, but also something Brian had been aware of for three months ?

And as I said before: "a press release in those markets" does not equal "a nationally-released announcement that the touring Beach Boys will now only consist of Mike and Bruce, with no indication of any potential further reunion shows".

Brian being aware of the gigs doesn't mean he was expecting that announcement.  Neither is it exactly what Brian's representative requested.  I'm surprised you can't seem to see this...

Regards,
Jon Blum

[Jonathan Blum]

Tell me, if it was Mike wanting to carry on and Brian sticking to the mutually agreed and contracted gameplan, would there be such a fuss ?  That's a rhetorical question, BTW: we all know the answer to that one.

Here's a non-rhetorical answer:  Brian dropping out of the tour wouldn't force Al and Dave to drop out as well.  If Mike wanted to carry on and Al wanted to carry on and Dave wanted to carry on... well, we'd have a touring Beach Boys lineup like most of their first 35 years or so.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Jonathan Blum]

I think you guys are just plain giving Andrew too much credit. He is only arguing in defense of the Love/Johnston scheme because he's buddies with Bruce.

I call BS on that.  Yes, I'm also disagreeing with AGD on the press-release stuff and the end-it-all stuff -- but I'll happily point out that he's not playing mouthpiece for Bruce on the reunion situation... for a start, he's enthused about "Radio" (particularly the closing suite) in a way which Bruce very much doesn't.

Andrew felt that "Summer's Gone" was a perfect farewell to the Beach Boys, and I think that's driving his thinking on this.  (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, Andrew!)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Jonathan Blum]

BTW, I'm in complete agreement with the view that The Beach Boys (2012) are something better than Mike's, Brian's or Alan's bands. I just can't see a hypothetical BB (2013) sustaining, or even approaching, such heights.

Yeah, but I couldn't see *this* approaching such heights either, so I'm willing to be surprised again!

Really, what do we have to lose?  Given a choice between perfect closure and a bit more flawed-but-wonderful music, I'd lean towards having a bit more.  It's always nice to find that one more crisp at the bottom of the bag, even after you thought you'd run out...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Jonathan Blum]

Brian's been preventing Beach Boys' reunions for several years now, and all I've ever read was, "You go, guy...."

Again -- Brian hasn't been preventing "Beach Boys' reunions" by not touring with them, any more than he was doing so in 1965.

A Beach Boys reunion with Mike, Al, David, and Bruce would still interest me a heckuva lot more than just Mike and Bruce.  And we could have had that at any time between 1999 and now -- even if only for short stints because Dave and/or Al don't want to be on the road endlessly.  It's not Brian who was preventing that.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Jonathan Blum]

that'd be stupid. you're just ruining everyone else's good time. only a very small amount of people care who's on the stage.

That is the biggest myth when it comes to the beach boys.

People actually do care who's on stage.

I think the difference in the size of the venues filled this year compared to last year should make that pretty clear...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[Nicko1234]

Again -- Brian hasn't been preventing "Beach Boys' reunions" by not touring with them, any more than he was doing so in 1965.

A Beach Boys reunion with Mike, Al, David, and Bruce would still interest me a heckuva lot more than just Mike and Bruce.  And we could have had that at any time between 1999 and now -- even if only for short stints because Dave and/or Al don't want to be on the road endlessly.  It's not Brian who was preventing that.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

It might interest you a lot more but would it interest the general public? I doubt that it would. When Dave left the band in 1999 it didn`t really affect things and when he rejoined for a while in 2008 it didn`t make too many headlines. I think it would be the same with Al.

It was the 50th anniversary tag that sold the tickets on this tour along with Brian`s return. A reunion in previous years without Brian would never have been a goer.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I think you guys are just plain giving Andrew too much credit. He is only arguing in defense of the Love/Johnston scheme because he's buddies with Bruce.

I call BS on that.  Yes, I'm also disagreeing with AGD on the press-release stuff and the end-it-all stuff -- but I'll happily point out that he's not playing mouthpiece for Bruce on the reunion situation... for a start, he's enthused about "Radio" (particularly the closing suite) in a way which Bruce very much doesn't.

Andrew felt that "Summer's Gone" was a perfect farewell to the Beach Boys, and I think that's driving his thinking on this.  (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, Andrew!)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

My thinking is informed by past history and a burning desire not to see all the positive results of this summer just passed diluted if not actually tarnished by a mediocre new album and tour nest year. Fitzgerald, I think it was, said "there are no second acts in American lives". Well, The Beach Boys proved him wrong... however, I think aiming for a third act is, at best, a triumph of wishful thinking over past history. Simply put, I want the events of summer 2012 to be a gloriously unexpected coda, not a shining prelude to mild disappointment. Because I'm a fan of this here band.

[startBBtoday]

Again -- Brian hasn't been preventing "Beach Boys' reunions" by not touring with them, any more than he was doing so in 1965.

A Beach Boys reunion with Mike, Al, David, and Bruce would still interest me a heckuva lot more than just Mike and Bruce.  And we could have had that at any time between 1999 and now -- even if only for short stints because Dave and/or Al don't want to be on the road endlessly.  It's not Brian who was preventing that.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

It might interest you a lot more but would it interest the general public? I doubt that it would. When Dave left the band in 1999 it didn`t really affect things and when he rejoined for a while in 2008 it didn`t make too many headlines. I think it would be the same with Al.

It was the 50th anniversary tag that sold the tickets on this tour along with Brian`s return. A reunion in previous years without Brian would never have been a goer.

Bingo. A reunion without Brian doesn't benefit anyone but the hardcore fans who are willing to look past the fact that Brian's not there, which certainly wouldn't be all of them.

Al won't want to bare-bones tour, Mike/Bruce will have to split more shares with "Beach Boys" and there must have been some reason David didn't stick around in 1999 or 2008...

Without Brian attached, it makes more sense for everyone to be on their own.

Mike probably (rightfully) assumed Brian wouldn't want to go right back out and play shows, so he kept booking them while on the C50 tour. Mike wanted to keep going, Mike has the right to the name. Until there's a solid plan in place to keep doing reunion shows, Mike has every right to what he's doing.

"Brian"'s gripe that the press release went national rather than local is nitpicky and old fashioned thinking. Press releases to local markets would still go national as soon as one major source picks it up. It still turns into "Mike kicked Brian out" and I can easily see how that game of telephone tag goes from "send out local press releases" to "send out press releases" or even "hey we're lazy, let's just send out one since this will get to everyone eventually anyway and who the hell cares."

The greater point here should be that this is probably a positive for the group anyway. They're staying in the press and the reunion group isn't flooding the markets, therefore when and if they do reunite again, people will still care and they may be able to book even bigger shows. Most shows on the C50 tour were not selling out. If they went to those same places right away again, there would be even fewer people there.

Finally, Mike's always been willing to take the role as the villain. Who knows, maybe some forward thinking pr guy is telling the whole group "no press is good press." Another reunion with no fighting isn't a very interesting reunion. Is it?

[Cyncie]

For your consideration:

June 26th - in a Rolling Stone article, Mike announces he's booked post-C50 dates with the BRI-sanctioned lineup. Brian comments "I wasn't aware that Mike had some shows in South America. News to me."

September 23rd - at the opening of the BB exhibit at the Grammy Museum, Mike issues a press release underlining the composition of the band touring in October. Brian expresses surprise (at something he knew about and commented on three months previously), stating "I'm disappointed and can't understand why he doesn't want to tour with Al, David and me. We are out here having so much fun. After all, we are the real Beach Boys."

October 5th - Mike sends a letter to the LA Times explaining that, amongst other things, he issued the original press release at the request of Brian's representative.

October 7th - also in the LA Times, Brian responds to Mike's explanation, stating that "my attorney merely suggested to Mike's attorney that a possible press release in those markets might be appropriate to stop the confusion, which was in no one's best interest"... and also "I'm disappointed that Mike would now say that the release was done at the request of my representative".

Someone care to explain to me exactly how Mike's emerged from this as the bad guy when he did not only exactly what Brian's representative requested, but also something Brian had been aware of for three months ?

And as I said before: "a press release in those markets" does not equal "a nationally-released announcement that the touring Beach Boys will now only consist of Mike and Bruce, with no indication of any potential further reunion shows".

Brian being aware of the gigs doesn't mean he was expecting that announcement.  Neither is it exactly what Brian's representative requested.  I'm surprised you can't seem to see this...

Regards,
Jon Blum

I'm with Jon. Here's the way I read the situation:  Mike's take is that the C50 tour was always meant to be short term and he's just going back to the game plan previously established. Brian and Al's take is that the game plan changed with the success of the tour and required some additional discussion about the future of the band. Brian's surprise at the announcement, I think, was because it didn't just clarify the lineup for the shows that were booked, but seemed to also put a period on  future shows  with the reunion line up, which hadn't been discussed by the group as a whole since the tour became successful.

I'm also baffled when people insist that they couldn't sustain the big C50 show indefinitely and Mike's line up makes more financial sense. There's a middle ground between big, birthday blow out and a stripped down show with two Beach Boys and John Stamos pretending to be one.

Oh, and Jon... Hello from Gallifrey Base!

[Nicko1234]

I'm also baffled when people insist that they couldn't sustain the big C50 show indefinitely and Mike's line up makes more financial sense. There's a middle ground between big, birthday blow out and a stripped down show with two Beach Boys and John Stamos pretending to be one.

I completely agree with you there but I think it would have to be Brian`s management who instigated any changes. If I were the Beach Boys manager in charge of the budgets then my first instinct would be, `there`s too many guys on stage`. They could lose 3 or 4 guys easily while the band would still sound excellent but I guess Brian`s management wanted it like that. The same would go for the travelling situation.

[hypehat]

I'm also baffled when people insist that they couldn't sustain the big C50 show indefinitely and Mike's line up makes more financial sense. There's a middle ground between big, birthday blow out and a stripped down show with two Beach Boys and John Stamos pretending to be one.

I completely agree with you there but I think it would have to be Brian`s management who instigated any changes. If I were the Beach Boys manager in charge of the budgets then my first instinct would be, `there`s too many guys on stage`. They could lose 3 or 4 guys easily while the band would still sound excellent but I guess Brian`s management wanted it like that. The same would go for the travelling situation.

IIRC they had in London...

Cowsill (Drums)
Bragg (Percussion/Vox)
D'amico (Bass)
Totten (Guitar/Vox/MD)
Foskett (Guitar/Vox)
Sahanaja (Keys/Vibes/Vox)
Bennett (Keys/Vibes/Vox)


And ofc Brian/Bruce on inaudible keys, David on lead guitar, Al on inaudible rhythm guitar.

So.... who'd you get rid of?

[SMiLE Brian]

I still don't understand why Mike doesn't make Bruce play keys in M&B if he wants to keep costs down. The M&B group sound is pretty hollow for these songs. The full band this summer was the backbone of the shows and should stay as it is because it fills out the sound.

[Doo Dah]

I used to share Andrew's view that they're wise to 'go out on top', but after thinking about it I'm convinced that they have another solid album in them - provided that Joe Thomas is there to keep the peace as it were. The problem here is, what do you do with another album? And let's assume for the moment that it's uptempo and it hits all the classic R&R buttons that Brian's known for. What next?

You have to tour. In fact, Capitol would insist.

And I don't think that anyone either wants or clearly knows what they really want in 2013. It's a shame really, because I'm convinced that a follow up album would be fine and well received by us fans. This isn't MIU/LA era - they're grown ups here and they know how to make a well rounded, good sounding album. It would be so easy, except for settling on how to promo the damn thing.

[Nicko1234]

IIRC they had in London...

Cowsill (Drums)
Bragg (Percussion/Vox)
D'amico (Bass)
Totten (Guitar/Vox/MD)
Foskett (Guitar/Vox)
Sahanaja (Keys/Vibes/Vox)
Bennett (Keys/Vibes/Vox)


And ofc Brian/Bruce on inaudible keys, David on lead guitar, Al on inaudible rhythm guitar.

So.... who'd you get rid of?

That wasn`t the band for all dates this summer though right? They had 10 backing guys at times including Probyn, a saxophone player and one more.

They could certainly cut 3 or 4 from that as you`ve intimated now yourself.

[Autotune]

The "go out while on top" is a great idea.

Except that they did not. They went out while blowing it. The exit sucked.

Their only chance now is to get back together again and do it right all the way through.

[absinthe_boy]

I think you guys are just plain giving Andrew too much credit. He is only arguing in defense of the Love/Johnston scheme because he's buddies with Bruce.

I call BS on that.  Yes, I'm also disagreeing with AGD on the press-release stuff and the end-it-all stuff -- but I'll happily point out that he's not playing mouthpiece for Bruce on the reunion situation... for a start, he's enthused about "Radio" (particularly the closing suite) in a way which Bruce very much doesn't.

Andrew felt that "Summer's Gone" was a perfect farewell to the Beach Boys, and I think that's driving his thinking on this.  (Correct me if I'm wrong on this, Andrew!)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

My thinking is informed by past history and a burning desire not to see all the positive results of this summer just passed diluted if not actually tarnished by a mediocre new album and tour nest year. Fitzgerald, I think it was, said "there are no second acts in American lives". Well, The Beach Boys proved him wrong... however, I think aiming for a third act is, at best, a triumph of wishful thinking over past history. Simply put, I want the events of summer 2012 to be a gloriously unexpected coda, not a shining prelude to mild disappointment. Because I'm a fan of this here band.

AGD knows as well, if not better, than any of us that our beloved Beach Boys have a considerable track record for f***ing it up....for turning the silk purse into a sow's ear.

I am intrigued and enthused by what an on-form, happy and motivated Brian Wilson might be able to do in terms of a 2013 Beach Boys studio album. I am thrilled that everyone, especially Brian, seems to have had a blast on the tour. I was at Wembley and it was a magnificent concert for everyone concerned. Are we tempting fate too much if the Beach Boys try to continue?

Once again, Mike is not f***ing with a formula that works. I haven't seen the Mike & Bruce band but by most accounts they put on a good show. It works for them, fills the coffers, satisfies the audience. With their track record for really, really screwing it up when they are on top of their game...dare we tempt fate?

Once again I take some steps back. In the last year we have had a new album that didn't suck, that had a couple of genuinely great tracks on it and which as a whole is actually pretty good. We've had a world tour with the 5 most important Beach Boys which gathered momentum as it went on and was a triumph for everyone. Perhaps it should end here. How upsetting for everyone, fans, record company, and the Beach Boys themselves (especially perhaps Brian) if they release a crap record and if future dates aren't quite as harmonious.

Maybe Brian and Al should do a record together with David and Brian's band.

[pixletwin]

Meh. I think the whole thing is just a publicity gag.

[Aegir]

IIRC they had in London...

Cowsill (Drums)
Bragg (Percussion/Vox)
D'amico (Bass)
Totten (Guitar/Vox/MD)
Foskett (Guitar/Vox)
Sahanaja (Keys/Vibes/Vox)
Bennett (Keys/Vibes/Vox)


And ofc Brian/Bruce on inaudible keys, David on lead guitar, Al on inaudible rhythm guitar.

So.... who'd you get rid of?

That wasn`t the band for all dates this summer though right? They had 10 backing guys at times including Probyn, a saxophone player and one more.

They could certainly cut 3 or 4 from that as you`ve intimated now yourself.

the sax is part of the reason Brian's band sounds so good, it really fills out the sound. Probyn also plays the theremin-ribbon-controller-thing and the French horn, which are a lot better than trying to play them on a keyboard.

the Beach Boys often toured with an entire brass section during their prime. I don't see how this is worse.

[Wah Wah Wah Ooooo]

You've left Probyn Gregory, Paul Mertens and (sometimes, early on) Nicky Wonder off that list of band members.  I honestly don't know that anybody missed one less guitar when Nick left, but I really think all the other guys were pretty indispensable on this tour, except, to be honest, Foskett and Totten kind of have the same role and one or the other probably wouldn't have been missed either.

[bossaroo]

the bottom line is: if Brian Wilson wants to keep writing and performing as a Beach Boy, he has every right in the world to do that. If Al and David want to keep being Beach Boys, they have every right to be included in the touring act.

They just released a #3 album, sang their asses off in the studio and on stages across the globe, regained their credibility and massive acclaim... and seemed to have a great time in the process.

As Mike/Brian wrote and Bruce sang: "Seems like it could go on forever, long as we can all stick together!"

[AndrewHickey]

You've left Probyn Gregory, Paul Mertens and (sometimes, early on) Nicky Wonder off that list of band members.  I honestly don't know that anybody missed one less guitar when Nick left, but I really think all the other guys were pretty indispensable on this tour, except, to be honest, Foskett and Totten kind of have the same role and one or the other probably wouldn't have been missed either.

That list was a list of guitarists, keyboardists and drummers, because it was those it was suggested could be cut.
The idea of dropping guitarists or keyboardists is, of course, nonsense -- there are only a couple of each (as opposed to people holding guitars or stood behind keyboards...). The fact is, the band on stage is so big because none of the Beach Boys make any real instrumental contribution (with the exception of David on the guitar solos). So discounting the Beach Boys on stage, Mike's band has five people providing instrumental backing while the reunion band had nine.

Really we can knock that down to eight, as Foskett's guitar doesn't add much of anything and may not even be in the mix -- his role in the show is close to that of, say, Al, and he's probably better thought of as a Beach Boy than a backing band member (plus he's definitely not expendable). That leaves three more backing band members than Mike & Bruce's band have, covering between them an extra keyboard part, sax, flute, percussion, tannerin, french horn and harmonica.

In other words, the people you'd get rid of if you wanted to strip the backing band down to the size of the one Mike & Bruce use are Probyn, Paul Mertens and Nelson Bragg. The most talented instrumentalist on the stage, the musical director and an extremely accomplished percussionist who allows John Cowsill to concentrate on keeping a rock-solid rhythm while Nelson provides the embellishments. I somehow think that cutting those people just might lead to a drop in the quality of the show...

[Wah Wah Wah Ooooo]

Oh I see. Got it.

And I don't really think Foskett or Totten are indispensable, it's just that as far as a what they do, it's roughly the same. I see being Brian's security on stage as about equal with Totten's role as director, and their voices are similar and they both play guitar (though as you pointed out, Totten's guitar is more prominent than Jeff's).

[hypehat]

No, it was me forgetting Paul Mertens and Probyn. Serves me right having a conversation and posting.   

But Andrew Hickey is OTM anyway.