Mike Love: 'There are a lot of fallacies about me'

[Rocky Raccoon]

I would like Taylor Mills to come back to Brian's band.  That woman's got a voice.  Or a different female backing singer if Mills has moved on.  I think the band benefitted greatly from a female presence.

Apart from being a total stunner she didn't really serve a purpose IMO.

I think she did.  Aside from Brian and Jeff, she had the most distinctive voice in the group and like I said, she has a fantastic voice, it adds a lot to the harmonies, particularly on Smile.

[Shady]

I would like Taylor Mills to come back to Brian's band.  That woman's got a voice.  Or a different female backing singer if Mills has moved on.  I think the band benefitted greatly from a female presence.

Apart from being a total stunner she didn't really serve a purpose IMO.

I think she did.  Aside from Brian and Jeff, she had the most distinctive voice in the group and like I said, she has a fantastic voice, it adds a lot to the harmonies, particularly on Smile.

I honestly didn't notice her after she left the group, apart from the nice intro to Marcella she did.

I agree though, she did have a fantastic voice. Just not the type of voice I care for hearing in Beach Boys songs.

[Jonathan Blum]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

[JohnMill]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

[wantsomecorn]

I would like Taylor Mills to come back to Brian's band.  That woman's got a voice.  Or a different female backing singer if Mills has moved on.  I think the band benefitted greatly from a female presence.

Apart from being a total stunner she didn't really serve a purpose IMO.

I think she did.  Aside from Brian and Jeff, she had the most distinctive voice in the group and like I said, she has a fantastic voice, it adds a lot to the harmonies, particularly on Smile.

I honestly didn't notice her after she left the group, apart from the nice intro to Marcella she did.

I agree though, she did have a fantastic voice. Just not the type of voice I care for hearing in Beach Boys songs.

How much of that was her being a woman, though? One female voice is bound to stand out next to BW & company.

That said, I did really like her vocals. A female voice sounds good in the mix, like how Marilyn, Toni Tenille, and Christie McVie were used in studio, not to mention California Saga.

[Micha]

Agreed, the main problem with Mike seems to be his unwillingness to let go of the past and accept change in the BBs. This is a man still obsessed with a long passed "surf" fad from the early 1960s.

I think you're obsessed with your image of Mike.

[Micha]

Let's hope Brian doesn't suggest writing out doors with Mike because that "room" seems to be a really crucial piece of the pie. What a fu(k!ng baby...

Yes. yes, I'm sure that's what it is. Not in a vestibule or garage or grotto or under an umbrella. Only in a room is the crucial bit.

Didn't they write "Pitter Patter" under an umbrella? That's a really good song (except the lame chord progression in the chorus).

[Micha]

The champagne was drunk

How dare you go on to comment about the state of the champagne at Dennis' memorial?

By the way, I'm pretty sure it was "drank", not drunk.

Andrew is correct. Past participle of drink is drunk
Drink - present
Drank - simple past
Drunk - past participle.

It's actually getrunken. In German.

Example: Ich hab' zuviel getrunken.

Isadora Dunken
Worked the Telefunken.........

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm living about 400 meters away from the Telefunken building in which the PAL color TV system was developed.

What are you talking about?!?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Let's hope Brian doesn't suggest writing out doors with Mike because that "room" seems to be a really crucial piece of the pie. What a fu(k!ng baby...

Yes. yes, I'm sure that's what it is. Not in a vestibule or garage or grotto or under an umbrella. Only in a room is the crucial bit.

"The Room" is metaphorical. Possibly even metaphysical.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Let's hope Brian doesn't suggest writing out doors with Mike because that "room" seems to be a really crucial piece of the pie. What a fu(k!ng baby...

Yes. yes, I'm sure that's what it is. Not in a vestibule or garage or grotto or under an umbrella. Only in a room is the crucial bit.

"The Room" is metaphorical. Possibly even metaphysical.

U PMd me.  I can't PM you back....... But thanks!

[Cam Mott]

Let's hope Brian doesn't suggest writing out doors with Mike because that "room" seems to be a really crucial piece of the pie. What a fu(k!ng baby...

Yes. yes, I'm sure that's what it is. Not in a vestibule or garage or grotto or under an umbrella. Only in a room is the crucial bit.

Didn't they write "Pitter Patter" under an umbrella? That's a really good song (except the lame chord progression in the chorus).

It was under an umbrella but they were in a room and since opening an umbrella inside is bad luck: the chorus chord progression turned out lame.

[Micha]

Let's hope Brian doesn't suggest writing out doors with Mike because that "room" seems to be a really crucial piece of the pie. What a fu(k!ng baby...

Yes. yes, I'm sure that's what it is. Not in a vestibule or garage or grotto or under an umbrella. Only in a room is the crucial bit.

Didn't they write "Pitter Patter" under an umbrella? That's a really good song (except the lame chord progression in the chorus).

It was under an umbrella but they were in a room and since opening an umbrella inside is bad luck: the chorus chord progression turned out lame.

Another mystery solved!

[RonBaker2003]

Isadora Dunken
Worked the Telefunken.........

[/quote]

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm living about 400 meters away from the Telefunken building in which the PAL color TV system was developed.

What are you talking about?!?
[/quote]

Those words were spoken by John Lennon on a Beatles bootleg of the "Let It Be" recordings.  Not sure which one...it's been a LONG time since I played them.

[Doo Dah]

I knew what was talkin' about, but then again I am infused with Beatles trivia DNA.

[Andrew G. Doe]

U PMd me.  I can't PM you back....... But thanks!

Try now. 

[Awesoman]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

All this yet few could probably really differentiate between Petty's solo albums and his band albums. 

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Isadora Dunken
Worked the Telefunken.........

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm living about 400 meters away from the Telefunken building in which the PAL color TV system was developed.

What are you talking about?!?
[/quote]

Those words were spoken by John Lennon on a Beatles bootleg of the "Let It Be" recordings.  Not sure which one...it's been a LONG time since I played them.

[/quote]

It's also in the movie.

[Heysaboda]

Isadora Dunken
Worked the Telefunken.........

I have no idea what you're talking about, but I'm living about 400 meters away from the Telefunken building in which the PAL color TV system was developed.

What are you talking about?!?
[/quote]
Those words were spoken by John Lennon on a Beatles bootleg of the "Let It Be" recordings.  Not sure which one...it's been a LONG time since I played them.

[/quote]

heh heh

I knew someone here would know this....... 

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

All this yet few could probably really differentiate between Petty's solo albums and his band albums.  

I can.... First off, since Mike Campbell is all over Petty's solo stuff, it's natural that the Heartbreakers feel will be there.... However, the absence of Stan Lynch and that Jeff Lynn slime is all over the solo albums (JL tried to ruin Learning To Fly but only partially succeeded) .... The awful JL drum sound and drum machines are very present on Full Moon Fever, for instance, whereas Learning To Fly, while still bearing that putrid sound, has a creative drummer behind the kit.... The Ron Blair Heartbreakers albums are marked by more lively and skillful bass playing, while the Howie albums sport a better lock groove and great, behind the beat feel. When Stan quit (or was fired), the band lost that specific specialness that he brought. It was always nice putting on a Heartbreakers album for the first time knowing, if nothing else, the drumming would certainly not be boring.... Seeing the Hearbreakers now, while of course awesome, is a bit sad due to Steve Ferrone not even attempting to bring any of that special magic to the old songs.. (I had this same gripe with him on the George tour: if you're going to be playing Beatle songs, at least TRY to do Ringo justice) .... I saw Ferrone once with Clapton and he was off hook, which makes me think he's taking that "slumming it" route playing in a "rock" band and just going with a strong backbeat over all else. Nothing wrong with that, but you sure ain't Stan Lynch.,,,,,, Though Ferrone was great on Echo (or whatever it was called) so, maybe he just doesn't dig having to play other guy's parts.

[JohnMill]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

All this yet few could probably really differentiate between Petty's solo albums and his band albums.  

I can.... First off, since Mike Campbell is all over Petty's solo stuff, it's natural that the Heartbreakers feel will be there.... However, the absence of Stan Lynch and that Jeff Lynn slime is all over the solo albums (JL tried to ruin Learning To Fly but only partially succeeded) .... The awful JL drum sound and drum machines are very present on Full Moon Fever, for instance, whereas Learning To Fly, while still bearing that putrid sound, has a creative drummer behind the kit.... The Ron Blair Heartbreakers albums are marked by more lively and skillful bass playing, while the Howie albums sport a better lock groove and great, behind the beat feel. When Stan quit (or was fired), the band lost that specific specialness that he brought. It was always nice putting on a Heartbreakers album for the first time knowing, if nothing else, the drumming would certainly not be boring.... Seeing the Hearbreakers now, while of course awesome, is a bit sad due to Steve Ferrone not even attempting to bring any of that special magic to the old songs.. (I had this same gripe with him on the George tour: if you're going to be playing Beatle songs, at least TRY to do Ringo justice) .... I saw Ferrone once with Clapton and he was off hook, which makes me think he's taking that "slumming it" route playing in a "rock" band and just going with a strong backbeat over all else. Nothing wrong with that, but you sure ain't Stan Lynch.,,,,,, Though Ferrone was great on Echo (or whatever it was called) so, maybe he just doesn't dig having to play other guy's parts.

Without putting Steve Ferrone down, Stan Lynch was a drummer's drummer.  I was saddened to hear that he's abandoned his kit now (I think he even broke it down and sold it) and the only drumming he does is occasional lessons for children wishing to learn how to play.  Stan ran into all kinds of problems adapting his drumming style to the recording studio.  I'm not at all saying that the finished product wasn't worth the journey but the journey itself often times was an arduous one especially during the Jimmy Iovine years.  Iovine and Lynch didn't see eye to eye on much.  From my vantage point Iovine saw TP as his horse that he was going to ride all the way to the bank and in Iovine's own words (and I'm paraphrasing here) Lynch's drum sound didn't gel with TP.  In fact judging from some of the stories and first hand accounts, the dynamic between Iovine and Lynch wasn't all that different from what The Beach Boys had to endure from Murry for years in the recording studio.

Iovine would literally spend days trying to get a certain drum sound out of Lynch frustrating the drummer to no end.  Lynch tells the story about how after the first session The Heartbreakers did with Iovine, he told him to get rid of his drums and go out and buy a new kit because his drums were "punk ass" (Lynch's own description).  So Lynch was fired several times over the course of those early records but was always brought back when The Heartbreakers couldn't find a suitable replacement.  I think Stanley finally just had enough of being dictated to in so much of how he should or had to drum to fit the overall sound of the record.  So he did everything he could to push TP's buttons until TP finally fired him.  As Stanley said "The 70s were great, The 80s were great, The 90s were rough!" and I think he's even being somewhat generous with that evaluation.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

All this yet few could probably really differentiate between Petty's solo albums and his band albums.  

I can.... First off, since Mike Campbell is all over Petty's solo stuff, it's natural that the Heartbreakers feel will be there.... However, the absence of Stan Lynch and that Jeff Lynn slime is all over the solo albums (JL tried to ruin Learning To Fly but only partially succeeded) .... The awful JL drum sound and drum machines are very present on Full Moon Fever, for instance, whereas Learning To Fly, while still bearing that putrid sound, has a creative drummer behind the kit.... The Ron Blair Heartbreakers albums are marked by more lively and skillful bass playing, while the Howie albums sport a better lock groove and great, behind the beat feel. When Stan quit (or was fired), the band lost that specific specialness that he brought. It was always nice putting on a Heartbreakers album for the first time knowing, if nothing else, the drumming would certainly not be boring.... Seeing the Hearbreakers now, while of course awesome, is a bit sad due to Steve Ferrone not even attempting to bring any of that special magic to the old songs.. (I had this same gripe with him on the George tour: if you're going to be playing Beatle songs, at least TRY to do Ringo justice) .... I saw Ferrone once with Clapton and he was off hook, which makes me think he's taking that "slumming it" route playing in a "rock" band and just going with a strong backbeat over all else. Nothing wrong with that, but you sure ain't Stan Lynch.,,,,,, Though Ferrone was great on Echo (or whatever it was called) so, maybe he just doesn't dig having to play other guy's parts.

Without putting Steve Ferrone down, Stan Lynch was a drummer's drummer.  I was saddened to hear that he's abandoned his kit now (I think he even broke it down and a sold it) and the only drumming he does is occasional lessons for children wishing to learn how to play.  Stan ran into all kinds of problems adapting his drumming style to the recording studio.  I'm not at all saying that the finished product wasn't worth the journey but the journey itself often times was an arduous one especially during the Jimmy Iovine years.  Iovine and Lynch didn't see eye to eye on much.  From my vantage point Iovine saw TP as his horse that he was going to ride all the way to the bank and in Iovine's own words (and I'm paraphrasing here) Lynch's drum sound didn't gel with TP.  In fact judging from some of the stories and first hand accounts, the dynamic between Iovine and Lynch wasn't all that different from what The Beach Boys had to endure from Murry for years in the recording studio.

Iovine would literally spend days trying to get a certain drum sound out of Lynch frustrating the drummer to no end.  Lynch tells the story about how after the first session The Heartbreakers did with Iovine, he told him to get rid of his drums and go out and buy a new kit because his drums were "punk ass" (Lynch's own description).  So Lynch was fired several times over the course of those early records but was always brought back when The Heartbreakers couldn't find a suitable replacement.  I think Stanley finally just had enough of being dictated to in so much of how he should or had to drum to fit the overall sound of the record.  So he did everything he could to push TP's buttons until TP finally fired him.  As Stanley said "The 70s were great, The 80s were great, The 90s were rough!" and I think he's even being somewhat generous with that evaluation.

F! Iovine!

My take is he wished he was a musician and in the band and took it out on who he thought would be the easiest guy to push around.... Stan get's the last laugh, of course, because he gets to be on all those albums and the band has to be less that what it was with him behind the kit.

Hey, take a look at who's at the top of this list:

http://superiorshit.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-ten-executives-most-responsible-for.html

[JohnMill]

JJon, I must admit, with this topic, I think I'm still fighting, like a fever dream,  that long ago battle where folks would say things like "Brian could have swapped out/replaced/ or had any other guys in the original Beach Boys and it would have been just as good"  and then using that same logic on his solo band in order to get even!....  Thank God that seems to be over

Ah, that at least makes sense of it!  :-)  Me, I think there are some folks you could swap without changing the overall blend of the band -- much as I liked Bob Lizik on stage, I'm not seeing much of a difference in the bass these days -- but I think it'd be damn hard to change any of the original five without knocking things around.  Guitar-wise, going from David to Al didn't change much, but vocally...

(Actually, this is reminding me of a long-running discussion with a college roommate about how many members actually mattered in various given bands.  Put a Tom Petty solo album next to a Heartbreakers one, you can't tell the difference; OTOH change one member of Fleetwood Mac, or even just the level of their drug intake, and the whole chemistry is different...)

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Ah yes you can.  Tom Petty solo albums are far more poppy than Heartbreakers albums.  This is actually discussed a bit in Tom Petty's RDAD documentary when speaking about "Full Moon Fever".  Word got back to TP from the other Heartbreakers that they didn't like what he was doing in terms of overdubs and layering the tracks with sound and thought he was making a "bad record".  Howie Epstein (late bass player for the band) walked out on the session for "Free Fallin'" because he didn't like the song.  TP would go onto say that the entire feel of "Full Moon Fever" didn't fit the band and they took an attitude of "this music isn't us".  "Wildflowers" is another case where the album didn't gel with all the band members.  Drummer Stan Lynch was deliberately kept off the record because TP didn't think his style of drumming was right for the feel of the record.  Lynch who was later fired from the band, would later say that he found the album to be melodic but in terms of the drum sound, he was glad he didn't have to be put into that "plow harness".

The general consensus seems to be on Tom Petty's solo records he has complete autonomy as to the direction of the record whereas on Heartbreakers records it's a far more democratic process.  "Wildflowers" would be a good example of this where TP wanted to cast each song individually to the point where if he wanted to use different musicians for one track versus another he could be free to do that whereas if "Wildflowers" was a Heartbreakers LP, he wouldn't have had that option available to him.  Oddly enough, it's TP solo albums that have seem to have found the most success in recent years as all three of his solo efforts have done better business than recent Heartbreakers' LPs.

All this yet few could probably really differentiate between Petty's solo albums and his band albums.  

I can.... First off, since Mike Campbell is all over Petty's solo stuff, it's natural that the Heartbreakers feel will be there.... However, the absence of Stan Lynch and that Jeff Lynn slime is all over the solo albums (JL tried to ruin Learning To Fly but only partially succeeded) .... The awful JL drum sound and drum machines are very present on Full Moon Fever, for instance, whereas Learning To Fly, while still bearing that putrid sound, has a creative drummer behind the kit.... The Ron Blair Heartbreakers albums are marked by more lively and skillful bass playing, while the Howie albums sport a better lock groove and great, behind the beat feel. When Stan quit (or was fired), the band lost that specific specialness that he brought. It was always nice putting on a Heartbreakers album for the first time knowing, if nothing else, the drumming would certainly not be boring.... Seeing the Hearbreakers now, while of course awesome, is a bit sad due to Steve Ferrone not even attempting to bring any of that special magic to the old songs.. (I had this same gripe with him on the George tour: if you're going to be playing Beatle songs, at least TRY to do Ringo justice) .... I saw Ferrone once with Clapton and he was off hook, which makes me think he's taking that "slumming it" route playing in a "rock" band and just going with a strong backbeat over all else. Nothing wrong with that, but you sure ain't Stan Lynch.,,,,,, Though Ferrone was great on Echo (or whatever it was called) so, maybe he just doesn't dig having to play other guy's parts.

Without putting Steve Ferrone down, Stan Lynch was a drummer's drummer.  I was saddened to hear that he's abandoned his kit now (I think he even broke it down and a sold it) and the only drumming he does is occasional lessons for children wishing to learn how to play.  Stan ran into all kinds of problems adapting his drumming style to the recording studio.  I'm not at all saying that the finished product wasn't worth the journey but the journey itself often times was an arduous one especially during the Jimmy Iovine years.  Iovine and Lynch didn't see eye to eye on much.  From my vantage point Iovine saw TP as his horse that he was going to ride all the way to the bank and in Iovine's own words (and I'm paraphrasing here) Lynch's drum sound didn't gel with TP.  In fact judging from some of the stories and first hand accounts, the dynamic between Iovine and Lynch wasn't all that different from what The Beach Boys had to endure from Murry for years in the recording studio.

Iovine would literally spend days trying to get a certain drum sound out of Lynch frustrating the drummer to no end.  Lynch tells the story about how after the first session The Heartbreakers did with Iovine, he told him to get rid of his drums and go out and buy a new kit because his drums were "punk ass" (Lynch's own description).  So Lynch was fired several times over the course of those early records but was always brought back when The Heartbreakers couldn't find a suitable replacement.  I think Stanley finally just had enough of being dictated to in so much of how he should or had to drum to fit the overall sound of the record.  So he did everything he could to push TP's buttons until TP finally fired him.  As Stanley said "The 70s were great, The 80s were great, The 90s were rough!" and I think he's even being somewhat generous with that evaluation.

F! Iovine!

My take is he wished he was a musician and in the band and took it out on who he thought would be the easiest guy to push around.... Stan get's the last laugh, of course, because he gets to be on all those albums and the band has to be less that what it was with him behind the kit.

Hey, take a look at who's at the top of this list:

http://superiorshit.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-ten-executives-most-responsible-for.html

I don't care for Iovine either.  Back in the day I just believed what I was told in interviews with Tom Petty and Bruce Springsteen where they both put the guy over as an amazing producer, an amazing engineer, knowledgeable and all that.  But the more I've read about him recently has changed my opinion dramatically.  That article you quoted basically sums up what I've read about Iovine over the past couple of years.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Yeah, I had similar benign feelings for the guy until I saw the Petty doc where Tom's being nothing but gracious and complimentary (at times even effusive) toward Stan yet Iovnie still can't resist the urge to be rough on him.

[SIP Mike]

If what I have been stating here in this thread is even somewhat correct, then Mike shot down a new album because he didn't want a repeat from last year.

A surprisingly strong album that was also a pretty solid commercial hit.

Yes, it was very strong. I am strictly talking of writing the bulk of an album together.

I know. But if the end result was so good, I can't fathom why Mike couldn't put aside his desire to relive his own rose-coloured view of the past in favour of a similar project. If he didn't have a track record of getting all hung up about really great works that he wasn't involved in in the past, I might be a bit more forgiving. As it is, this is just another sign of his ongoing childishness.

Agreed, the main problem with Mike seems to be his unwillingness to let go of the past and accept change in the BBs. This is a man still obsessed with a long passed "surf" fad from the early 1960s.

So SMiLE Brian...it seems we yet again disagree.

Mike is the least ego centered Beach Boy. The rest of them really care about maintaining images long before set in stone. How much have any of the other members changed, in terms of public image? Little. Mike is a real person, and accepts himself, no matter where that may lead him.

[Juice Bronston]

If what I have been stating here in this thread is even somewhat correct, then Mike shot down a new album because he didn't want a repeat from last year.

A surprisingly strong album that was also a pretty solid commercial hit.

Yes, it was very strong. I am strictly talking of writing the bulk of an album together.

I know. But if the end result was so good, I can't fathom why Mike couldn't put aside his desire to relive his own rose-coloured view of the past in favour of a similar project. If he didn't have a track record of getting all hung up about really great works that he wasn't involved in in the past, I might be a bit more forgiving. As it is, this is just another sign of his ongoing childishness.

Agreed, the main problem with Mike seems to be his unwillingness to let go of the past and accept change in the BBs. This is a man still obsessed with a long passed "surf" fad from the early 1960s.

So SMiLE Brian...it seems we yet again disagree.

Mike is the least ego centered Beach Boy. The rest of them really care about maintaining images long before set in stone. How much have any of the other members changed, in terms of public image? Little. Mike is a real person, and accepts himself, no matter where that may lead him.

That's right. Mike accepts that he is better than the rest, and humbly, doesn't need to prove it to anyone. Instead, he prefers to release small golden, nuggets of song-smithery like "Summer of Love," and "Still Cruisin,"  whcih was even deemed superb enough to use in Lethal Weapon 2. The man is a national treasure.