Between 1967 and 1976 what albums/songs did Brian produce for the Beach Boys?

[Dancing Bear]

What I learned from this thread: Carl was such an asshole...

[MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm]

I wonder what Mike's contributions to Darlin were exactly, as the credit reads (and has always read) Brian Wilson/Mike Love.

I know it was a re-jig of an earlier song by Brian/Mike called Thinking About My Baby (or something) ..... but was it re-written by Brian and Mike, or just Brian? .... Either way, with Mike having been a partial creator of the song in question, we can perhaps understand his apparent irritation a bit more.

This seems a reasonable point to me too. 

[SMiLE Brian]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

[Dancing Bear]

What I learned from this thread: Carl was such an asshole...

I figure that I maybe need to explain why I came to that conclusion.

Easy.

Carl Wilson went uninvited to a Redwood session and forbid his brother Brian to do further work with that group, reducing him to tears. Carl had no reason to do that, since Brother was created so that the Beach Boys could produce outside artists for the Label. To make things worse, Brian had already given the band a smah hit in 'Wild Honey' to promote their next album release (same title), while Darlin' was as good or worse than the other album tracks produced by Brian in late 67.

[guitarfool2002]

I wonder what Mike's contributions to Darlin were exactly, as the credit reads (and has always read) Brian Wilson/Mike Love.

I know it was a re-jig of an earlier song by Brian/Mike called Thinking About My Baby (or something) ..... but was it re-written by Brian and Mike, or just Brian? .... Either way, with Mike having been a partial creator of the song in question, we can perhaps understand his apparent irritation a bit more.

Also, we don't know if The Beach Boys had brought the subject up "nicely" before the witnessed incident, so we don't know where at wit's end they might have been when this all went down.... Or maybe there were just being bullies .... Brian, being overly sensitive or not, was still bringing other people into the Beach Boy's only studio and working on a song composed by him and another Beach Boy, presumably intended for The Beach Boys, at a time when The Beach Boys had flames to their feet.... Maybe the others were being harsh assholes, but Brian's actions still count as being less than cool. Actions speak words too, ya know?

The statement that Brian was bringing other people into the Beach Boys' "only studio" is inaccurate. Check the various sessionographies, the majority of Wild Honey tracks and in general most sessions from October and November 1967 were done at Wally Heider's. This would include, too, "Time To Get Alone" by Redwood, and the Beach Boys own Darlin vocals, cut at Heider's October 27.

The Beach Boys had no ownership or financial interest in Wally Heider's then-new studio in LA, as far as anyone knows. And the home studio was still being built up into something permanent up to the Friends sessions in '68. So in no way did the band have only one studio, or rely on one studio to record.

The issue of paying studio fees to me is a red herring in this whole thing, as is the suggestion of Brian working with outside artists somehow being considered a negative.

*All* of the Beach Boys who had interest in Brother Records were in agreement with and supported the business model and plan started by David Anderle and picked up by Nick Grillo, throughout 1967. This includes Mike, who supported what David Anderle was doing from a financial standpoint and in how the business plans could benefit the band financially. One of the major elements of that business model and plan was to open up a business structure which would allow band members to scout, record, produce, develop, and release material from outside artists.

In the summer of 1967 Mike Love himself signed the comedy act "The Pickle Brothers" who had opened concerts for the BB's to the Brother label, and produced a session with them in the fall of 1967 for Brother.

Brian's choice of an outside artist to produce and record was Redwood.

Dennis later brought in Manson to record.

Carl later brought The Flame to the Brother label.

Right there, you have the four band members who had controlling interest in Brother Records each bringing in outside artists to demo, record/produce, and hopefully release in the form of a record in order to generate income for the Brother label and business structure...very much according to one of the key elements in the business plan which established Brother as a business venture for the band.

In that way, someone I think needs to explain to me how Brian bringing in the group Redwood to produce was any different in terms of following the Brother business plan than Mike bringing in the Pickle Brothers in the weeks prior to the Redwood sessions.

And as far as paying studio fees, that too was an investment as part of the Brother business plan, similar to how Brother would have paid the studio costs for The Flame, Manson, The Pickle Brothers, and any number of outside acts which band members other than Brian brought onto the Brother label.

How many, if any, BBs were giving away group songs to their solo outside productions?

Mike and Brian as early as 1963/64, as this '63 photo shows them "giving" a Wilson/Love song to Sharon Marie, one of several they wrote for her to sing and release including "Thinkin Bout You Baby":



So Brother Records was set up several years after this photo to allow the band members like Brian and Mike to write and produce for other artists, but give them more control in a business sense over the process then they had in 1963.

Even *then*, there were separate branches in the structure for Brian's outside work and also Mike's collabs with Brian, in terms of issues like publishing and the like.

And again consider the Sharon Marie song "Thinkin Bout You Baby" was also a Wilson and Love composition which had been "given away" in 1964.

[ontor pertawst]

Obviously, the story is remembered wrong: Mike Love walked out of the studio crying because he was so sensitive to Brian's pain at being being harangued by his brother. Mike Love was always something of a buffer between Brian and Carl's unpredictable rages... he relied on his TM calm to sort of modulate Carl's naked greed and limited vision. Actually, Mike was known in many circles as "The Prince of Peace," a title he earned honorably throughout decades of work with the UN. Not to mention the ability to walk on water, which does not require a year of celibacy and tends to really impress folks into putting down their weapons and opening a dialogue.

[guitarfool2002]

Mike Love interview with Derek Taylor, mid-1967, direct quote:

"'Heroes And Villains' is going to be released as the first single on our new label, Brother Records. Capitol is pressing them and does the distribution. Now they realize that after all it is not a bad deal for them at all, because Bruce, Dennis, and Brian are going to produce records separately for Brother Records and the records will be released by the Capitol industries. Carl does the organizational part and I'm the business guy. Everything is settled perfectly."

[alf wiedersehen]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

[guitarfool2002]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

[alf wiedersehen]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.
I am entirely unconcerned with whatever your problem seems to be. If you want to have your battles about the whole Redwood-thing, more power to you. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that they stopped Brian from working with Redwood. My issue is with Chuck's assertion that they reduced Brian to tears.

[guitarfool2002]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.

I started the fucking conversation! Read the thread. I was not thinking of Chuck Negron when I posted it.

Satisfied, or do you think I'm lying?

[SMiLE Brian]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.

stop staring at your M&B signed records.

[alf wiedersehen]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.

stop staring at your M&B signed records.

Very nice rebuttal. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.
Brianista, kokomoaist - they're all the same.

[guitarfool2002]

There is that oft-told legend of several beach Boys going to the studio while Brian was cutting a track with Redwood, they pulled him aside, and when he came back he told Redwood he couldn't work on their album anymore because he had to do production work for The Beach Boys.

Oft-told... and generally regarded as apocryphal.

Andrew, I wanted to ask about this and maybe clarify it too: Are you suggesting this did not happen, or are you suggesting the details of what may or may not have been said or perceived have been apocryphal? I'm going on the words of at least two of the three Redwood members who have told basically the same story about what happened in the studio that day. Summing it up, they were there as Brian was producing their music, and after several Beach Boys showed up and talked to Brian, Brian was no longer working on their record. And the reasoning as told by those members was that Brian was going to be producing the Beach Boys current album project instead of Redwood. And that was it, apart from Redwood being offered a Brother single rather than the full album production.

I know that there were questions about what those Redwood members may have thought was said by the Beach Boys as they watched from the studio, but the fact that the scene happened in general is pretty much a known thing and has been reported by several involved parties who were in the studio that day.

I've never seen the fact that the scene happened in the studio challenged or considered apocryphal in some way, so I'm curious where that was coming from.

And it does go back to my bigger point that if Brian would no longer be producing a Redwood album so he could work on producing the Beach Boys' next album (which was Wild Honey), then not having him listed in a production role for that album doesn't add up with what played out. If he went to work producing Wild Honey after Redwood was told he wouldn't be producing them, that would mean he produced Wild Honey.

It's late and I'm working from memory, but as far as I recall the only source for this event is Chuck Negron's autobiog. I also seem to recall TDN fans blowing holes in the chronology, and I definitely don't recall Danny Hutton ever saying word one about it in all the time since... and I think he would ! According to Negron, Mike & Carl turned up in the studio and as TDN watched (but could not hear), basically wore Brian down, reducing him to tears. That sound like anything Carl would do in 1967 ?

If there's another source I've missed I'd be delighted to see it.

Danny Hutton spoke directly about this situation with Redwood in this interview:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zYjs96sZA&feature=youtu.be&list=PL35350BBCE486D776

Skip ahead to around 3 minutes into it, and Danny describes what happened with the Redwood tracks.

Another account from Danny appeared in Peter Carlin's "Catch A Wave", page 130, saying it specifically happened at Wally Heiders studio.

There are two out of three members of the group describing the same event, one more detailed than the other but both describing how Brian was producing them, then he was not after the Beach Boys stepped in.

And that's what I describing in the original post, I think we may have gotten more into the minute details of what Chuck had thought he heard or saw that day, when the bigger picture and more important point was the fact that Brian was producing Redwood, the BB's showed up and wanted him to work on their new album instead of Redwood, and Brian stopped working with Redwood. And the Beach Boys took with them two tracks he had been cutting for Redwood.

Back to page 2, please take note of this before more debate breaks out on an issue that was never an issue from the beginning.

[drbeachboy]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.

stop staring at your M&B signed records.

Very nice rebuttal. Go ahead and pat yourself on the back for a job well done.
Brianista, kokomoaist - they're all the same.

You should have learned by now, you can't post sh*t in here without someone having to make it about taking sides. Like taking a side is really going to make a difference and change history or something.

[CenturyDeprived]

The anti-BW crowd is out today.

Yes, the anti-BW crowd: a group of people who doubt a detail in a story that's never been corroborated. It's clearly because we dislike Brian Wilson.

This is not nor was it ever a case of accepting or denying the specific Chuck Negron quotes going back to the first time I raised the issue of Redwood in this thread.

Let's get that straight, shall we?

Of everything else I've said so far in this thread, it's beyond absurd to have posts like this continue trying to focus in on debating an issue about Chuck Negron that was never the issue being raised in the first place. I've made that very clear since the first post where I brought up Redwood, in fact I asked several times for clarification which went unanswered as the discussion shifted and spun into all directions.

Just to be clear, right?

Well, maybe not the issue for you.
I am entirely unconcerned with whatever your problem seems to be. If you want to have your battles about the whole Redwood-thing, more power to you. I'm not disagreeing with the fact that they stopped Brian from working with Redwood. My issue is with Chuck's assertion that they reduced Brian to tears.

I'll reiterate my question to the doubters, since nobody has weighed in with their opinion to what I asked previously. What would the definition of emotional browbeating, or "going too far" be with regards to this? Is there a line you could draw, or actions/words/body language you could say that if it came from Mike, you yourself would say this could constitute something along the lines of emotional abuse? If you saw video/audio of said incident, is there something that could have been said that you would admit was not right?

And please note: I'm absolutely *not* saying conclusively that emotional abuse for sure happened, but I do wonder where people would draw that line. If Brian felt like crying, and looked like he wanted to cry (but actually didn't), does that count? Or do some people feel that every single of Brian's feelings in 1967 (as they relate to how others treated him) should be considered irrelevant (when discussing what his bandmates did/didn't say/do) since he was taking drugs and was simply too emotional? I think that some people on this board feel that way. Or can it be said that someone, even if that person has emotional problems, can still be a victim of unfair bullying by others nonetheless?

Does someone want to weigh in with where they'd draw the line? I'm curious.

[guitarfool2002]

So let's discuss the facts, the timeline, the details, and the history without taking sides, does that sound reasonable? It's what I and others have been trying to do since the topic got underway. The proof of that is in the posts. And I think considering the amount of legitimate factual info that has been posted so far, including some that was rarely if ever posted if posted at all surrounding this, the actual information has far outweighed the squabbling and finger-pointing, despite attempts to spin or redirect this into areas that it was never intended to go. And if the attempts to spin or redirect are made, at least try to base the attempts on something factual, and if you're not sure of the facts, just ask and someone will attempt to clarify ahead of time - plenty of people here have the info, or can find it. Not an outlandish request.

If there are attempts to make this something that it is not, you can clearly see where and when that happened here. For those who are interested in getting the story straight, and listing accurate info for those reading and future visitors to the board who may want to know some of this info but can't find it elsewhere, the information is here on full display. If there is a case of "taking sides" as in various band members and their legacies or actions, that's entirely on those trying to bring that into the conversation, and was not the intent of the discussion. At the same time, sometimes what happened actually did happen, and can be stated without attaching any external or implied meaning to the statement.

[SMiLE Brian]

GF, could you put your posts of great info below to get everything back on track?

[guitarfool2002]

GF, could you put your posts of great info below to get everything back on track?

I'd love to get it back on track! 
 
That reposting could be done, but honestly anyone logging on can go back and read them and all the other posts as they are in the thread, and weigh the information as they choose. The one thing I'll say is that when doing that, consider everything I posted here and elsewhere is as factual as I can possibly prove it's factual or that it can be referenced or checked by other sources, otherwise I would not present it as such. And if anything is a mistake or doesn't jive in some way, I'm more than happy to dig deeper and clarify further, to the point of admitting something I posted was a mistake and thanking those who corrected it, should that be the case.

I will say speaking on my own dime here that having some of that info re-used in a mocking way was uncalled for, and if that's the spirit of how some choose to post here, that's a pretty depressing thing to see but something which the board in general is not about and will never be about.

[drbeachboy]

Am I missing something here? This argument whether what story is more correct between Chuck and Danny's memories of what went down in the booth is right here in Reply 46:
"GuitarFool;  I can tell you that I heard this straight from the horses mouth ; what went down at Wally Heiders is what Negron has related in his book." 
Ray says Negron's account of what went down is what went down. Why are we still debating this? If Negron is correct, then Mike & Carl did reduce Brian to tears. Wouldn't be the first time family members tore into each other to have that end result.

[Dancing Bear]

Am I missing something here? This argument whether what story is more correct between Chuck and Danny's memories of what went down in the booth is right here in Reply 46:
"GuitarFool;  I can tell you that I heard this straight from the horses mouth ; what went down at Wally Heiders is what Negron has related in his book." 
Ray says Negron's account of what went down is what went down. Why are we still debating this? If Negron is correct, then Mike & Carl did reduce Brian to tears. Wouldn't be the first time family members tore into each other to have that end result.

Exactly. I'm very disappointed with Carl's behaviour. No wonder Brian wanted nothing to do with his brother in the 80s and 90s.

[drbeachboy]

Am I missing something here? This argument whether what story is more correct between Chuck and Danny's memories of what went down in the booth is right here in Reply 46:
"GuitarFool;  I can tell you that I heard this straight from the horses mouth ; what went down at Wally Heiders is what Negron has related in his book." 
Ray says Negron's account of what went down is what went down. Why are we still debating this? If Negron is correct, then Mike & Carl did reduce Brian to tears. Wouldn't be the first time family members tore into each other to have that end result.

Exactly. I'm very disappointed with Carl's behaviour. No wonder Brian wanted nothing to do with his brother in the 80s and 90s.

It was Mike who did all the talking. Because in here, Mike is the only one who has ever had a bad word or thought about his family and bandmates.

[guitarfool2002]

I'll reiterate my question to the doubters, since nobody has weighed in with their opinion to what I asked previously. What would the definition of emotional browbeating, or "going too far" be with regards to this? Is there a line you could draw, or actions/words/body language you could say that if it came from Mike, you yourself would say this could constitute something along the lines of emotional abuse? If you saw video/audio of said incident, is there something that could have been said that you would admit was not right?

And please note: I'm absolutely *not* saying conclusively that emotional abuse for sure happened, but I do wonder where people would draw that line. If Brian felt like crying, and looked like he wanted to cry (but actually didn't), does that count? Or do some people feel that every single of Brian's feelings in 1967 (as they relate to how others treated him) should be considered irrelevant (when discussing what his bandmates did/didn't say/do) since he was taking drugs and was simply too emotional? I think that some people on this board feel that way. Or can it be said that someone, even if that person has emotional problems, can still be a victim of unfair bullying by others nonetheless?

Does someone want to weigh in with where they'd draw the line? I'm curious.

CenturyDeprived, I want to answer this with as straightforward a reply and suggestion as I'm probably qualified to offer, going on the available information related to this.

I'd suggest looking at the question by focusing on the family dynamic that was in place, specifically relevant to that specific time in and around 1967. I've seen, heard, and read accounts from various "outsiders" who were brought into the outer fringes of this family dynamic as employees or as close associates, and who were able to view it and report on it as both observers who were not blood relatives yet who were in the inner circle just the same.

Please watch this interview clip of Danny Hutton that I posted earlier. He talks directly about the family dynamic he witnessed first as a friend of Brian's then as someone who was involved in the business of Brother Records as an artist who was considered being signed to the label, and who Brian was producing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t5zYjs96sZA&feature=youtu.be&list=PL35350BBCE486D776

After hearing Danny's take on that family dynamic which he witnessed, consider that others who were similarly involved like Tony Asher, Van Dyke Parks, David Anderle, Michael Vosse, and perhaps a few others from that time have been quoted on the record as having witnessed a similar family dynamic running as an undercurrent through some of what they witnessed or were involved in. I cannot possibly corral all of the exact quotes or sources, but taken as a whole, I get the feeling through their observations that a lot of what they witnessed as possible tensions or even disagreements within the principle members of the group (and the family) were more deeply rooted in issues beyond the issue or the disagreement of the moment. You see how Danny comments on each of the band members' "role" as he observed them, and consider that the other outsiders who witnessed these things have expressed a feeling that they were in the middle of a family issue that had more to do with the family than it did with them or the issues at hand. I got the feeling these things would come up, and the outsider had a feeling of getting sucked into the twister that was already swirling around the family, and I think that undercurrent was something that was in place long before anything one of these outside collaborators or associates was directly involved with. And the tension may have been palpable enough for them to at least feel "what the hell have I walked into?" regarding what they were doing in a professional sense.

That's just my take. I'd suggest looking at it from the standpoint of an existing family dynamic rather than narrowing it down to bullying or other specific issues.

[Dancing Bear]

Am I missing something here? This argument whether what story is more correct between Chuck and Danny's memories of what went down in the booth is right here in Reply 46:
"GuitarFool;  I can tell you that I heard this straight from the horses mouth ; what went down at Wally Heiders is what Negron has related in his book." 
Ray says Negron's account of what went down is what went down. Why are we still debating this? If Negron is correct, then Mike & Carl did reduce Brian to tears. Wouldn't be the first time family members tore into each other to have that end result.

Exactly. I'm very disappointed with Carl's behaviour. No wonder Brian wanted nothing to do with his brother in the 80s and 90s.

It was Mike who did all the talking. Because in here, Mike is the only one who has ever had a bad word or thought about his family and bandmates.

Well, Michael is a given! I think that with all those evidences and facts that we have it's time to revaluate Car'l actions as a band member and as a brother.

[Cam Mott]

I wonder what Mike's contributions to Darlin were exactly, as the credit reads (and has always read) Brian Wilson/Mike Love.

I know it was a re-jig of an earlier song by Brian/Mike called Thinking About My Baby (or something) ..... but was it re-written by Brian and Mike, or just Brian? .... Either way, with Mike having been a partial creator of the song in question, we can perhaps understand his apparent irritation a bit more.

Also, we don't know if The Beach Boys had brought the subject up "nicely" before the witnessed incident, so we don't know where at wit's end they might have been when this all went down.... Or maybe there were just being bullies .... Brian, being overly sensitive or not, was still bringing other people into the Beach Boy's only studio and working on a song composed by him and another Beach Boy, presumably intended for The Beach Boys, at a time when The Beach Boys had flames to their feet.... Maybe the others were being harsh assholes, but Brian's actions still count as being less than cool. Actions speak words too, ya know?

The statement that Brian was bringing other people into the Beach Boys' "only studio" is inaccurate. Check the various sessionographies, the majority of Wild Honey tracks and in general most sessions from October and November 1967 were done at Wally Heider's. This would include, too, "Time To Get Alone" by Redwood, and the Beach Boys own Darlin vocals, cut at Heider's October 27.

The Beach Boys had no ownership or financial interest in Wally Heider's then-new studio in LA, as far as anyone knows. And the home studio was still being built up into something permanent up to the Friends sessions in '68. So in no way did the band have only one studio, or rely on one studio to record.

The issue of paying studio fees to me is a red herring in this whole thing, as is the suggestion of Brian working with outside artists somehow being considered a negative.

*All* of the Beach Boys who had interest in Brother Records were in agreement with and supported the business model and plan started by David Anderle and picked up by Nick Grillo, throughout 1967. This includes Mike, who supported what David Anderle was doing from a financial standpoint and in how the business plans could benefit the band financially. One of the major elements of that business model and plan was to open up a business structure which would allow band members to scout, record, produce, develop, and release material from outside artists.

In the summer of 1967 Mike Love himself signed the comedy act "The Pickle Brothers" who had opened concerts for the BB's to the Brother label, and produced a session with them in the fall of 1967 for Brother.

Brian's choice of an outside artist to produce and record was Redwood.

Dennis later brought in Manson to record.

Carl later brought The Flame to the Brother label.

Right there, you have the four band members who had controlling interest in Brother Records each bringing in outside artists to demo, record/produce, and hopefully release in the form of a record in order to generate income for the Brother label and business structure...very much according to one of the key elements in the business plan which established Brother as a business venture for the band.

In that way, someone I think needs to explain to me how Brian bringing in the group Redwood to produce was any different in terms of following the Brother business plan than Mike bringing in the Pickle Brothers in the weeks prior to the Redwood sessions.

And as far as paying studio fees, that too was an investment as part of the Brother business plan, similar to how Brother would have paid the studio costs for The Flame, Manson, The Pickle Brothers, and any number of outside acts which band members other than Brian brought onto the Brother label.

How many, if any, BBs were giving away group songs to their solo outside productions?

Mike and Brian as early as 1963/64, as this '63 photo shows them "giving" a Wilson/Love song to Sharon Marie, one of several they wrote for her to sing and release including "Thinkin Bout You Baby":



So Brother Records was set up several years after this photo to allow the band members like Brian and Mike to write and produce for other artists, but give them more control in a business sense over the process then they had in 1963.

Even *then*, there were separate branches in the structure for Brian's outside work and also Mike's collabs with Brian, in terms of issues like publishing and the like.

And again consider the Sharon Marie song "Thinkin Bout You Baby" was also a Wilson and Love composition which had been "given away" in 1964.

So maybe the Redwood incident was as simple as a disagreement. Brian was using their song for Redwood but in this case Mike, a co-author, and the other(s) possibly wanted to use it for the Boys.