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

[Andrew G. Doe]

The Redwood "TTGA" sessions were indeed at Wally Heider's, October 14th & 15th 1967.

[Moon Dawg]

 Did The Beach Boys utilize Brian's Redwood instrumental track for "Darlin"?

[ontor pertawst]

So, still generally regarded as apocryphal? Cough.

[bgas]

cough /cough /hack/ hack / hawks a loogie.... all better now, Thanx!

[Andrew G. Doe]

Did The Beach Boys utilize Brian's Redwood instrumental track for "Darlin"?

Excellent question: the entirely honest answer is, we don't know. The only documented session for "Darlin'" that we currently know of was on 10/27/67 at Heider's along with "A Thing Or Two" and "Game Of Love", but given that the track for "Darlin'" is far and away the most complex on Wild Honey and obviously not recorded by the band, that both that and the vocals were cut in one session (along with two other titles) is frankly highly unlikely.

Further...

On October 11th & 12th, at the home studio, there were sessions for an untitled song. Could they be for the Redwood "Darlin'" ? Possibly but again, to be entirely frank, currently that would be pure, if mildly informed, speculation. I'm hoping that Craig's MiC session notes will throw further light on this shady corner of BB recording history. Preferably here, and later today.  

[Andrew G. Doe]

So, still generally regarded as apocryphal? Cough.

In this here neck o' th' woods, yup. Not disputing what Brian told Ray...

[guitarfool2002]

So, still generally regarded as apocryphal? Cough.

In this here neck o' th' woods, yup. Not disputing what Brian told Ray...

Andrew, then what exactly are you still calling apocryphal?

[Joel Goldenberg]

Danny Hutton in the YouTube interview link describes Mike being "pissed off" about Brian giving them a hit song, he describes the tracking of Darlin' starting at the house, with a "Motown bass player" and a guide vocal, then the tracks being stacked. And with "Time To Get Alone", Danny said "we did it on Selma, we didn't do it at the house".  Wally Heider had his studios at the intersection of Selma and Cahuenga. And in Carlin's book, Danny mentions Wally Heider's studio by name as the location.

I'd love to hear that guide vocal version, would it have been by Brian? I love his guide vocal for Breakaway.

[guitarfool2002]

No idea who would have done the guide vocal, it could have been Redwood or Brian.

One footnote, and I'm curious if this is apocryphal too: Danny and Cory Wells had played together, then split and Cory took a gig that put him playing a stint in Phoenix, or something. Danny calls Cory and tells him he's putting a band together, and he had a third singer available to complete the lineup, a Beach Boy who would leave the group, but Cory needed to get back to LA immediately to hammer it all out. Cory declined because he had a few weeks left in his contract, which he took because prior to that his LA gigs had dried up and he was broke. So he finished out the gig, and returned to LA a few weeks later to meet with Danny and the third singer, the mystery Beach Boy.

The mystery Beach Boy turned out to be Bruce Johnston, and Cory (keep in mind the year) said he wasn't a Beach Boy, he was a session musician...but Danny said it was too late, the deal wasn't on the table since it had been weeks since he first asked Cory to come back to LA.

That's all pre-Redwood, before they got the trio of vocalists in place and when each of them was doing their own gigs after some initial success in and around LA, via clubs, bands, releases, etc.

Just found it interesting that you don't hear that part of the Three Dog Night-Beach Boys connection as often, the fact that at one point Bruce was considering joining Danny Hutton and what would have been Cory Wells in a nascent version of TDN.



And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

[Smilin Ed H]

No idea who would have done the guide vocal, it could have been Redwood or Brian.

One footnote, and I'm curious if this is apocryphal too: Danny and Cory Wells had played together, then split and Cory took a gig that put him playing a stint in Phoenix, or something. Danny calls Cory and tells him he's putting a band together, and he had a third singer available to complete the lineup, a Beach Boy who would leave the group, but Cory needed to get back to LA immediately to hammer it all out. Cory declined because he had a few weeks left in his contract, which he took because prior to that his LA gigs had dried up and he was broke. So he finished out the gig, and returned to LA a few weeks later to meet with Danny and the third singer, the mystery Beach Boy.

The mystery Beach Boy turned out to be Bruce Johnston, and Cory (keep in mind the year) said he wasn't a Beach Boy, he was a session musician...but Danny said it was too late, the deal wasn't on the table since it had been weeks since he first asked Cory to come back to LA.

That's all pre-Redwood, before they got the trio of vocalists in place and when each of them was doing their own gigs after some initial success in and around LA, via clubs, bands, releases, etc.

Just found it interesting that you don't hear that part of the Three Dog Night-Beach Boys connection as often, the fact that at one point Bruce was considering joining Danny Hutton and what would have been Cory Wells in a nascent version of TDN.



And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

I wonder if this was the period Carl was - allegedly - angling to replace Bruce with Billy.

[Andrew G. Doe]

Wasn't that more 1969-1970 ?

[Mr. Verlander]

And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

I think that maybe it's a case of 'Just because Brian said it to Ray, doesn't mean that it actually happened'. Hasn't Brian been known to sort of, uh, go back and 'change his tune' on things to fit the accepted story lines? The whole SMiLE thing comes to mind; for 30 years it was because it was 'inappropriate music', and then suddenly when BWPS comes out with DVD, Brian says that the big reason that it didn't come out was 'Mike didn't like it'.

[CenturyDeprived]

And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

I think that maybe it's a case of 'Just because Brian said it to Ray, doesn't mean that it actually happened'. Hasn't Brian been known to sort of, uh, go back and 'change his tune' on things to fit the accepted story lines? The whole SMiLE thing comes to mind; for 30 years it was because it was 'inappropriate music', and then suddenly when BWPS comes out with DVD, Brian says that the big reason that it didn't come out was 'Mike didn't like it'.

If people find it unlikely that Brian in actuality broke down in tears, maybe he was deeply hurt and crying on the inside, or very slightly visibly crying. Maybe Brian *felt* like crying, and he simply remembers those feelings. I'm sure there are many people who've done research to try and corroborate (or dispel) such a story, and maybe they have well-researched legit reasons for doubting some aspects of it, but I find it mighty doubtful that Brian would claim to his friend that it happened if it didn't in fact happen in some fashion.

[Theydon Bois]

And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

I think that maybe it's a case of 'Just because Brian said it to Ray, doesn't mean that it actually happened'. Hasn't Brian been known to sort of, uh, go back and 'change his tune' on things to fit the accepted story lines? The whole SMiLE thing comes to mind; for 30 years it was because it was 'inappropriate music', and then suddenly when BWPS comes out with DVD, Brian says that the big reason that it didn't come out was 'Mike didn't like it'.

I'm not sure that the demise of Smile is necessarily the best choice of parallel, given the number of variables in play in that situation; the Redwood story, on the other hand, seems far more cut and dried, with nobody actually contradicting the tale with the exception of, as far as I can gather, a few people on this board.  If Brian Wilson says it happened, Chuck Negron says it happened, Danny Hutton is a bit vague but basically goes along with it, Carl Wilson isn't around to comment and Mike Love hasn't sued anybody despite the fact that a story that makes him look like a bit of a bully has appeared in print in at least two books, then surely the balance of probabilities is now tilting towards "it happened"?

[Jim V.]

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.   

Quite interesting. I do have to ask Ray, is it you asking Brian about this stuff? Or him bringing it up? Cuz I have to imagine that something like this has to be really traumatic still for him. And while we're at it, if this is true as you say (and I have no reason to doubt you), does Brian still harbor resentment against Carl and Al for this, or has he let bygones be bygones, especially considering I'm sure he did quite a bit to hurt those guys to in the intervening years.

[c-man]

Did The Beach Boys utilize Brian's Redwood instrumental track for "Darlin"?

Excellent question: the entirely honest answer is, we don't know. The only documented session for "Darlin'" that we currently know of was on 10/27/67 at Heider's along with "A Thing Or Two" and "Game Of Love", but given that the track for "Darlin'" is far and away the most complex on Wild Honey and obviously not recorded by the band, that both that and the vocals were cut in one session (along with two other titles) is frankly highly unlikely.

Further...

On October 11th & 12th, at the home studio, there were sessions for an untitled song. Could they be for the Redwood "Darlin'" ? Possibly but again, to be entirely frank, currently that would be pure, if mildly informed, speculation. I'm hoping that Craig's MiC session notes will throw further light on this shady corner of BB recording history. Preferably here, and later today.  

I will say I've heard the session tape for the "Darlin'" basic track, and it pretty much matches Danny's description in Mark Dillon's book. One thiing he doesn't mention is that Carl played drums, off-mic, then Hal Blaine was brought in to overdub the real drum performance. I believe this was on Oct. 11th, in two separate sessions. I believe Oct. 12th was the date of the "Time To Get Alone" basic track, with further work on Oct. 15th. I believe The Beach Boys added additional overdubs to "Darlin'" on Oct. 27th. 

[alf wiedersehen]

I will say I've heard the session tape for the "Darlin'" basic track, and it pretty much matches Danny's description in Mark Dillon's book. One thiing he doesn't mention is that Carl played drums, off-mic, then Hal Blaine was brought in to overdub the real drum performance. I believe this was on Oct. 11th, in two separate sessions. I believe Oct. 12th was the date of the "Time To Get Alone" basic track, with further work on Oct. 15th. I believe The Beach Boys added additional overdubs to "Darlin'" on Oct. 27th. 

Do you remember who does the guide vocal?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Did The Beach Boys utilize Brian's Redwood instrumental track for "Darlin"?

Excellent question: the entirely honest answer is, we don't know. The only documented session for "Darlin'" that we currently know of was on 10/27/67 at Heider's along with "A Thing Or Two" and "Game Of Love", but given that the track for "Darlin'" is far and away the most complex on Wild Honey and obviously not recorded by the band, that both that and the vocals were cut in one session (along with two other titles) is frankly highly unlikely.

Further...

On October 11th & 12th, at the home studio, there were sessions for an untitled song. Could they be for the Redwood "Darlin'" ? Possibly but again, to be entirely frank, currently that would be pure, if mildly informed, speculation. I'm hoping that Craig's MiC session notes will throw further light on this shady corner of BB recording history. Preferably here, and later today.  

I will say I've heard the session tape for the "Darlin'" basic track, and it pretty much matches Danny's description in Mark Dillon's book. One thiing he doesn't mention is that Carl played drums, off-mic, then Hal Blaine was brought in to overdub the real drum performance. I believe this was on Oct. 11th, in two separate sessions. I believe Oct. 12th was the date of the "Time To Get Alone" basic track, with further work on Oct. 15th. I believe The Beach Boys added additional overdubs to "Darlin'" on Oct. 27th.  

I love this place... it's like a fairytale. Wish for something and Shazaam ! It happens.

Sometimes.  

Craig, does that mean the 10/14/67 date for a "TTGA" session at Heider's (Hawthorne CA liner notes) is incorrect ?

[Smilin Ed H]

Wasn't that more 1969-1970 ?

Hmmm. Maybe Bruce was still trying to distance himself from the drug use a la not going to Hawaii

[c-man]

I will say I've heard the session tape for the "Darlin'" basic track, and it pretty much matches Danny's description in Mark Dillon's book. One thiing he doesn't mention is that Carl played drums, off-mic, then Hal Blaine was brought in to overdub the real drum performance. I believe this was on Oct. 11th, in two separate sessions. I believe Oct. 12th was the date of the "Time To Get Alone" basic track, with further work on Oct. 15th. I believe The Beach Boys added additional overdubs to "Darlin'" on Oct. 27th. 

Do you remember who does the guide vocal?

No guide vocal is extant on the surviving tapes, just the final BBs vocals.

[c-man]

I love this place... it's like a fairytale. Wish for something and Shazaam ! It happens.

Sometimes.  

Craig, does that mean the 10/14/67 date for a "TTGA" session at Heider's (Hawthorne CA liner notes) is incorrect ?

No - it means it's correct but I forgot to include it!    The actual timeline for "TTGA" as I understand it is thus:
   Basic track & overdub recorded at Brian Wilson's Home Studio, Bel Air, Thursday October 12, 1967, 2:00pm-5:00pm
   Strings & horns recorded at Wally Heider Studio 3, Hollywood, Saturday October 14, 1967, 6:00pm-9:30pm
   Drums & percussion recorded at Wally Heider Studio 3, Hollywood, Sunday October 15, 1967, 8:00pm-10:00pm
And (as was the case with "Darlin'"), The Beach Boys added additional overdubs along with their vocals - in this case, a year later (October 1968).

[Mikie]

Good thread.   Note to self: We need more threads like this.

[Cyncie]

And again, I'm genuinely asking this: What part of anything I had written concerning the Redwood story with Brian is in question, or which part of the story in general is in question? If what was laid out in this thread is being challenged or labeled apocryphal, I think it's only fair to offer something additional to back up the challenge.

I think that maybe it's a case of 'Just because Brian said it to Ray, doesn't mean that it actually happened'. Hasn't Brian been known to sort of, uh, go back and 'change his tune' on things to fit the accepted story lines? The whole SMiLE thing comes to mind; for 30 years it was because it was 'inappropriate music', and then suddenly when BWPS comes out with DVD, Brian says that the big reason that it didn't come out was 'Mike didn't like it'.

I'm not sure that the demise of Smile is necessarily the best choice of parallel, given the number of variables in play in that situation; the Redwood story, on the other hand, seems far more cut and dried, with nobody actually contradicting the tale with the exception of, as far as I can gather, a few people on this board.  If Brian Wilson says it happened, Chuck Negron says it happened, Danny Hutton is a bit vague but basically goes along with it, Carl Wilson isn't around to comment and Mike Love hasn't sued anybody despite the fact that a story that makes him look like a bit of a bully has appeared in print in at least two books, then surely the balance of probabilities is now tilting towards "it happened"?

Well, yeah. If it was just Brian, you always have to view that with a grain of salt. But, since there are at least 3 people who were present who generally agree on the events, you would have to at least grant a certain amount of credibility.

I wonder if our hesitation on this is due to Carl's apparent involvement? We're accustomed to the "Mike bullied Brian/Al/ etc" stories (true and false); but, the idea of Carl being a part of it goes against our generally held opinions about him and his nature.

[Don Malcolm]

I wonder if our hesitation on this is due to Carl's apparent involvement? We're accustomed to the "Mike bullied Brian/Al/ etc" stories (true and false); but, the idea of Carl being a part of it goes against our generally held opinions about him and his nature.

True enough. But there are certainly moments in the session tapes where Carl is shown as a forceful personality, which are often manifested by his being especially attuned to production details while in the middle of a series of takes. He also clearly was prominently present at later sessions where Brian was not and often seems to be the one calling the shots (even in several snippets from sessions for Dennis' songs).

So while it would be unusual behavior at the time, it would not be 100% out of the question for Carl to be involved, particularly at a moment when the rest of the band was particularly concerned about its ongoing viability. If he came along, it was probably to impress Brian about just how strongly everyone felt about the matter, i.e. it would really get Brian's attention.

[guitarfool2002]

Let me ask again, since this is getting absurd. Of everything I wrote in this thread detailing the Redwood/Darlin-TTGA/Brian/BB's story from fall 1967, what is it that is apocryphal?

Look, it's fine to hammer out the details, the history, etc and debate what's there, but I'll try to phrase this as respectfully as I can: Exactly what the hell are some posters here looking for in terms of evidence, for lack of a better word?

As someone pointed out, we have Danny Hutton in multiple published (and unpublished) sources telling the story, we have Chuck Negron telling the story, we have Brian confirming it, as mentioned Carl isn't around to comment, so who else's word will satisfy the skeptics in light of everything already written here about that October 1967 incident? I can guess the answer, but that's another topic entirely.

Seriously, I'm beyond frustrated at this point with this discussion. If *my* research or my history report above is called into question for some personal reason, just let me know now, because that would be pretty pathetic and petty.

If anything I've written above is incorrect, about the song Darlin's inception, about the whole incident itself, give us something to back it up.

Otherwise, this going around and around is just silly. So basically what it seems like is we have session dates from AFM sheets that show when all this happened, so what does that mean in terms of Brian and Redwood to have a date of the 15th versus the 14th or whatever the case? We have *THREE MUSICIANS* who were there giving versions that line up. We have the Beach Boys going back into adding their vocals to Darlin around a week or two after the Redwood sessions ended at Heiders. We have a week after Redwood ended at Heiders *The Beach Boys* working on Wild Honey tracks, with a handful of them at Heiders. Again - It lines up with what I said here earlier. Redwood was out, the Beach Boys new album was the focus.

So is it about the Negron specifics? Are we *seriously* going to use those specifics as a springboard to call Negron's word into question, to discredit him in some way? Whether Brian cried or not at Heider's that day...is this the focus?

Someone called Brian's word into question again. That is sad but not surprising. So again, in all of this, whose word would be the final say that everyone should believe without hesitation in these issues? Tell us.

Here's the thing: The Beach Boys, specifically the ones who went to Wally Heider that day when Brian was working with Redwood, *did NOT want Brian producing Redwood or giving them hit songs*, and that was made clear to Brian and the members of Redwood.

That about closes the case, doesn't it? IT HAPPENED, whether Brian cried or whether the Beach Boys talked about ordering dinner that night, it happened, period.

Again, someone challenge the fact that the Beach Boys did not want Brian working with Redwood with something concrete, otherwise it continues to spin and spiral to the point where everyone who was there is discredited somehow expect for potentially an eyewitness or observer whose version better suits what some might want to believe happened versus what actually happened.

"The Beach Boys Did Not Want Brian To Produce Redwood", I'm going to make a sign, frame it, and hang it outside my front door.