Is Bruce an original member? No? Well, Mike's website claims he is.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Sorry but it goes like this...David was playing music regularly with the Wilsons for two years before Al did, but he was 12 when 19 yr old Brian and 19 yr old Al got together for Surfin, they played 4 or 5 gigs with Al, he left, Dave came in for the next year and a half and was on the first major record contract, first four albums, first national hits, first tours, first TV shows and was in the band during their initial rise to fame...etc... etc... Al was not in the band that became famous as the Beach Boys...he rejoined the band when they were already on top in 1963. But... since Al was there on that first single and first few gigs he too is an original, like the other five guys who were the original Beach Boys that became famous and successful.

The fact that David played music with the Wilsons BEFORE the group started is interesting but not really relevant imo. Obviously the fact that he later stayed for 18 months is.

Exactly. When Brian formed the group that eventually became known as The Beach Boys he chose Al as the second guitarist not Dave. Dave was only asked to join once Al left. By definition Dave is not an original member. But honestly who cares about something so trivial anyway?

In this era of big bands touring with one, or no original members, some people care and some don't. Skynard has one original member, so too the Moody Blues. Diverence is that their web sites don't claim non original members are original. I care, think it's deceptive.

By the by, I really think the genersl standard is if you R on the first album, you are original. Case in point, Ringo. Dave is immortalized in Hawthorne, as is Al. Bruce isn't.

[Disney Boy (1985)]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but the group released 26 studio/live albums during the '60's/'70's (not including Stack'o'Tracks). Bruce was with the band whilst 11 of these albums were recorded - Summer Days... through to Surf's Up, plus L.A. Light Album - which is pretty impressive. Although he barely featured on Friends and Smiley Smile, and is he even on Party! at all? So more like 8 albums really... Still, not bad. And certainly grounds to be considered officially a Beach Boy, if not quite an original member.

The fact that almost all his songs royally suck is another matter however...

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Correct me if i'm wrong, but the group released 26 studio/live albums during the '60's/'70's (not including Stack'o'Tracks). Bruce was with the band whilst 11 of these albums were recorded - Summer Days... through to Surf's Up, plus L.A. Light Album - which is pretty impressive. Although he barely featured on Friends and Smiley Smile, and is he even on Party! at all? So more like 8 albums really... Still, not bad. And certainly grounds to be considered officially a Beach Boy, if not quite an original member.

The fact that almost all his songs royally suck is another matter however...

If you tead the whole thread, the fact that Bruce is a 100% real, offical, long standing BB is not in dispute. Some want to quibble about David being original but to advertise Bruce as a original member is wrong.

Historically, Bruce was a hired hand, like Glen Cambell, for his early years.  He may have been with the band but as hard as I look, I can't find his face on the cover of Pet Sounds.

[Shady]

I thought it was really interesting that Al in his recent post about the smile sessions winning a grammy congratulated all the Beach Boys apart from Bruce 

an album recorded by the Beach Boys. Well done Brian. Well done Carl, Dennis, Mike and yours truly........"

[Jon Stebbins]

Sorry but it goes like this...David was playing music regularly with the Wilsons for two years before Al did, but he was 12 when 19 yr old Brian and 19 yr old Al got together for Surfin, they played 4 or 5 gigs with Al, he left, Dave came in for the next year and a half and was on the first major record contract, first four albums, first national hits, first tours, first TV shows and was in the band during their initial rise to fame...etc... etc... Al was not in the band that became famous as the Beach Boys...he rejoined the band when they were already on top in 1963. But... since Al was there on that first single and first few gigs he too is an original, like the other five guys who were the original Beach Boys that became famous and successful.

The fact that David played music with the Wilsons BEFORE the group started is interesting but not really relevant imo. Obviously the fact that he later stayed for 18 months is.

Exactly. When Brian formed the group that eventually became known as The Beach Boys he chose Al as the second guitarist not Dave. Dave was only asked to join once Al left. By definition Dave is not an original member. But honestly who cares about something so trivial anyway?

You must care because you corrected some other members up the thread who stated that David was an original member. If you didn't care then you would have let it pass. Is getting an accurate historical read on who is among the original lineup of a band who are important enough to generate thousands of posts from you... trivial?

I've done a lot of research on the genesis of the Beach Boys and I've never seen any trace of evidence that Brian "chose Al as the second guitarist"...did I miss something? The only time I can see any probability that the group rehearsed with two guitars prior to Feb. '62 was with David and Carl playing them. As their guitar teacher John Maus confirmed, Brian, his brothers and Dave Marks used his garage to rehearse but they were so bad his dad kicked them out. This, according to John, was before Surfin, probably in 1960. But any reference to Al playing an instrument with the "group" during the fall '61 period has him on standup bass, which he also played on 'Surfin" and at the first live performance(s). Al did switch to guitar for a couple of weeks prior to leaving the group but as the early demos of Surfin Safari show he and Carl hadn't really had time to develop any chemistry, which is something that Dave and Carl had years under their belt and immediately shows on the Western demos of Surfin Safari/409 that got them signed to Capitol. There is a ton of myth regarding the early months of the "Beach Boys" and so much of it has been debunked (Al going to dental school in the east etc...). But the story of Brian choosing a band that became the Beach Boys is way more nuanced set of events than the Murry written history (which first appeared in 1964 BTW). The first drafts of said history do not include the name Al Jardine. I have the first, badly drafted "official" Beach Boys bio from '62 and no mention of Al is in it. The genesis of the Beach Boys included six guys, that's just a fact and one that is hard for many people to get their heads around after decades of being told one neat little story that is just one of a dozen that actually formed the band. But there really wasn't a "band" with amps and drums and gigs etc...until about two or three weeks before Al left, and of course the guy they replaced him with was the guy that was already kind of in the band that wasn't really a band yet. So Brian refers to Dave as one of the original Beach Boys because he was one of the original building blocks that became the Beach Boys. He played music with Carl and Brian that ended up on the first few Beach Boys albums before Al was there, and yes that is relevant because it was part of the creation of the band. But if you want to ignore all that came before and insist that the recording of the single Surfin designates who are the orig. Beach Boys then you are right David is not, and Ringo is not an original Beatle.

[Nicko1234]

Some want to quibble about David being original but to advertise Bruce as a original member is wrong.

It is all fairly trivial though isn't it and has been happening for 15 years at least.

Didn't David say in an interview way back that one of the stipulations of the contract in 1998 was that they had to have 3 original members (obviously that later changed) which meant him, Mike and Bruce. Bruce has technically been considered to be that for a long time. Now clearly we all know that he literally wasn't around when the band started but the wording on the website is obviously just there because nothing else would really suit. They couldn't exactly write, '2 proper Beach Boys' because that would hardly be professional and if they didn't name the members then they would really be duping people.

As others have said, Jeff introduced them all as original Beach Boys every night and nobody complained. In fact, the only vague dissent that I noticed was from a couple of reviewers in the press who stated tosh like, 'David Marks has only missed about 46 years' or whatever.

Is anybody really being misled into buying tickets to see Mike or Bruce any more or less than they have been since 1998?

[Emdeeh]

Didn't David say in an interview way back that one of the stipulations of the contract in 1998 was that they had to have 3 original members....

I think those contracts specified three "principals," not three "original" members. Anyway, that's consistent with how the BBs refer to themselves. A "principal" means someone who is an official Beach Boy. Everyone else onstage is a supporting band member or a guest (in Stamos' case). Last year's reunion brought in a new term, "vice-principal," in referring to Foskett and Totten's roles -- meaning they had more responsibilites -- but that still didn't make them official BBs.

[Mike's Beard]

You must care because you corrected some other members up the thread who stated that David was an original member. If you didn't care then you would have let it pass. Is getting an accurate historical read on who is among the original lineup of a band who are important enough to generate thousands of posts from you... trivial?

I've done a lot of research on the genesis of the Beach Boys and I've never seen any trace of evidence that Brian "chose Al as the second guitarist"...did I miss something? The only time I can see any probability that the group rehearsed with two guitars prior to Feb. '62 was with David and Carl playing them. As their guitar teacher John Maus confirmed, Brian, his brothers and Dave Marks used his garage to rehearse but they were so bad his dad kicked them out. This, according to John, was before Surfin, probably in 1960. But any reference to Al playing an instrument with the "group" during the fall '61 period has him on standup bass, which he also played on 'Surfin" and at the first live performance(s). Al did switch to guitar for a couple of weeks prior to leaving the group but as the early demos of Surfin Safari show he and Carl hadn't really had time to develop any chemistry, which is something that Dave and Carl had years under their belt and immediately shows on the Western demos of Surfin Safari/409 that got them signed to Capitol. There is a ton of myth regarding the early months of the "Beach Boys" and so much of it has been debunked (Al going to dental school in the east etc...). But the story of Brian choosing a band that became the Beach Boys is way more nuanced set of events than the Murry written history (which first appeared in 1964 BTW). The first drafts of said history do not include the name Al Jardine. I have the first, badly drafted "official" Beach Boys bio from '62 and no mention of Al is in it. The genesis of the Beach Boys included six guys, that's just a fact and one that is hard for many people to get their heads around after decades of being told one neat little story that is just one of a dozen that actually formed the band. But there really wasn't a "band" with amps and drums and gigs etc...until about two or three weeks before Al left, and of course the guy they replaced him with was the guy that was already kind of in the band that wasn't really a band yet. So Brian refers to Dave as one of the original Beach Boys because he was one of the original building blocks that became the Beach Boys. He played music with Carl and Brian that ended up on the first few Beach Boys albums before Al was there, and yes that is relevant because it was part of the creation of the band. But if you want to ignore all that came before and insist that the recording of the single Surfin designates who are the orig. Beach Boys then you are right David is not, and Ringo is not an original Beatle.

I'm not ignoring anything Jon. I'm well aware of the above history having read your book. We just seem to have different ideas of what the term "original" constitutes.

[Nicko1234]

I think those contracts specified three "principals," not three "original" members. Anyway, that's consistent with how the BBs refer to themselves. A "principal" means someone who is an official Beach Boy. Everyone else onstage is a supporting band member or a guest (in Stamos' case). Last year's reunion brought in a new term, "vice-principal," in referring to Foskett and Totten's roles -- meaning they had more responsibilites -- but that still didn't make them official BBs.

Perhaps but David did use the word 'original'.

[shelter]

Jon, I have a lot of respect for the way you always defend David (and Dennis), major props for that. And I don't question a word of what you wrote in this topic.

But the thing is, if you would have to write a definition for what an "original member" is, what would the criteria be? I would say that the original line-up would either be the line-up that played the first concert, or the line-up that recorded the first released music. Seems fair, I think. And David was in neither. I know that's probably a bit too black and white in this case, but that's the hard thing about defining something...

[Nicko1234]

Jon, I have a lot of respect for the way you always defend David (and Dennis), major props for that. And I don't question a word of what you wrote in this topic.

But the thing is, if you would have to write a definition for what an "original member" is, what would the criteria be? I would say that the original line-up would either be the line-up that played the first concert, or the line-up that recorded the first released music. Seems fair, I think. And David was in neither. I know that's probably a bit too black and white in this case, but that's the hard thing about defining something...

I think that's a fair definition.

[Sheriff John Stone]

I thought it was really interesting that Al in his recent post about the smile sessions winning a grammy congratulated all the Beach Boys apart from Bruce 

an album recorded by the Beach Boys. Well done Brian. Well done Carl, Dennis, Mike and yours truly........"

I hope that was simply an oversight by Al, not mentioning Bruce. But if it wasn't, it's things like that which have a way of coming back to bite Al in the ass, and leave him searching for a band to play with.

Back on topic, kind of...I noticed in a couple of recent interviews, Al is really making it sound like HE was THE founding member of The Beach Boys. He has been telling the story (and I know some of it is factual) that he approached Brian to sing with him, Brian agreed, and the rest is history, like it was Al's idea "to start The Beach Boys".  Maybe - probably - Al did approach Brian at some time to get together to sing some songs, but in a group that consisted of three brothers and a first cousin, I'd hardly consider that early incarnation to be Al's band or idea.

[Jon Stebbins]

Jon, I have a lot of respect for the way you always defend David (and Dennis), major props for that. And I don't question a word of what you wrote in this topic.

But the thing is, if you would have to write a definition for what an "original member" is, what would the criteria be? I would say that the original line-up would either be the line-up that played the first concert, or the line-up that recorded the first released music. Seems fair, I think. And David was in neither. I know that's probably a bit too black and white in this case, but that's the hard thing about defining something...

Yeah I think there's room in the BB's genesis for a variation on first record, or first concert because they took an unlikely route to becoming a "band". They didn't play a bunch of practices, parties, dances for months or years and then release a record, they did the opposite. Brian was obviously trying to get a vocal group going, but he wasn't really thinking band with electric guitars and drums and amps...just singers. They threw together an acoustic session and released a record, someone else named them the Beach Boys after the fact, and then they began developing material, developing instrument roles, and playing some gigs. IMO and from what i've learned through a lot of research they really didn't get serious about being a band until after David was there. It seems somewhere around March or April '62 they decided to rededicate to being a real band with a set list, with a promotional bio and with publicity photos. Before that Brian and Carl were playing playing around with several combinations, some with Al, some with David, some with Val Poliuto? Or Audree? The Surfin record was a surprise, it did better than they were ready for, they really got busy promoting it after Al was gone...it peaked in the charts when Dave was in the band, the Beach Boys became a brand, they got a real record contract and you know the rest. I appreciate that this thread is allowing a nuanced view, but as you all have said it comes down to definition and criteria.

[Sound of Free]

I thought there was only one original Beach Boy, Brian. At least that's what "Smart Girls" tells us. 

[SMiLE Brian]

The Beach Boys:
Brian Wilson
Carl Wilson
Dennis Wilson
Al Jardine
Mike Love

[bgas]

The Beach Boys:
Brian Wilson
Carl Wilson
Dennis Wilson
David Marks
Mike Love

[the captain]

The Beach Boys:
An assorted collection
of people who
recorded, performed, and otherwise worked together
to create an amazing body of music that is
loved, studied, and sometimes hilariously dissected.

[the captain]

I wish to f*** I'd thought of an acronym for that.

[SMiLE Brian]

 

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Some want to quibble about David being original but to advertise Bruce as a original member is wrong.

It is all fairly trivial though isn't it and has been happening for 15 years at least.

Didn't David say in an interview way back that one of the stipulations of the contract in 1998 was that they had to have 3 original members (obviously that later changed) which meant him, Mike and Bruce. Bruce has technically been considered to be that for a long time. Now clearly we all know that he literally wasn't around when the band started but the wording on the website is obviously just there because nothing else would really suit. They couldn't exactly write, '2 proper Beach Boys' because that would hardly be professional and if they didn't name the members then they would really be duping people.

As others have said, Jeff introduced them all as original Beach Boys every night and nobody complained. In fact, the only vague dissent that I noticed was from a couple of reviewers in the press who stated tosh like, 'David Marks has only missed about 46 years' or whatever.

Is anybody really being misled into buying tickets to see Mike or Bruce any more or less than they have been since 1998?

In all of the 50th Reunion PR stuff I saw, Bruce was never referred to as an original member. BeachBoysBand.net referring to Bruce as an original member is something new. I might guess it's some BS PR response to those three actual original members who are touring this summer.

[SMiLE Brian]

I don't see what is so hard about this topic about the original members.

The first Surfin single had Brian, Carl, Al, Mike, and Dennis on it.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I don't see what is so hard about this topic about the original members.

The first Surfin single had Brian, Carl, Al, Mike, and Dennis on it.

The Beatles released My Bonnie with Tony Sheridan but Ringo was on the first album and he is considered an original. Michael Clark of the Byrds didn't drum on their first single yet he is an original Byrd.

With all the transformations bands go thru starting out, a member is generally considered original if they are on the first album.

As both Dave and Al appear on the first album, Surfin Safari, they are both original members.

[Jim V.]

I know this might be kinda dickish, but there is no way I'm gonna take Jon Stebbins word on this "who's an original?" question. He is obviously in the David Marks corner, probably more so than Dave himself. So although he is super helpful in distinguishing truth from the lies, he obviously is pushing an agenda. To totally take him as the final word on this stuff would be like taking Bruce Johnston's word on what happened between Mike and Brian, Al, and Dave since the C50 tour.

But anyways, I think Dave and Al should be considered original. Al was on the first single, and Dave was on the first album and the first show (right?).

[SMiLE Brian]

Al played the very early shows before he left for the first time.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I know this might be kinda dickish, but there is no way I'm gonna take Jon Stebbins word on this "who's an original?" question. He is obviously in the David Marks corner, probably more so than Dave himself. So although he is super helpful in distinguishing truth from the lies, he obviously is pushing an agenda. To totally take him as the final word on this stuff would be like taking Bruce Johnston's word on what happened between Mike and Brian, Al, and Dave since the C50 tour.

But anyways, I think Dave and Al should be considered original. Al was on the first single, and Dave was on the first album and the first show (right?).

Obviously you've never read any of Jon's books. We are lucky to have BB experts like Jon, AGD and others on this board.
Why in the world would you not believe someone who has done such exhaustive research on the subject.

And you didn't even read Jon's post correctly.  My summary - Al on the first single and early concerts. (single was on the first album). David on some of the first neighborhood jams, first tours and first 4 albums.