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

[guitarfool2002]

I'll put this on the table as well: It isn't as much a case of these kinds of things being challenged in this way because that is almost par for the course by now depending on who was originally involved in these various issues, but what I'd like to know is *why* are they being challenged as they are, through attempts between the lines to try to discredit the word of some of those involved who have commented on this story?

What is the end game? What is the desired result after it all gets tallied up?

[bgas]

"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.

I really wish you would! It will make it SOOO much easier to find your house at night

[Cam Mott]

For what it is worth Jim Lockert told me that Brian was very much the group's  producer during his tenure. I know Mr. Desper covered for Jim during that period so he may have something to add.

[Mikie]

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As someone pointed out, we have Danny Hutton in multiple published (and unpublished) sources telling the story, we have Chuck Negron telling the story, we have Brian confirming it, as mentioned Carl isn't around to comment, so who else's word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.

Join the club!! The other day, two posters questioned the accuracy of the date I posted of a picture of Brian and Michael Jackson. A simple thing like that (information that can be accessed on the internet) gets second-guessed even though it's correct and already established. I sometimes question dates too, but not when the evidence is right in front of you slapping you in the face!

[Nicko1234]

Some people are going to question and nitpick things on any message board.

That doesn`t mean there is some great conspiracy going on though.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I am with Guitarfool though in expressing some confusion.

The other day we were talking about the incident where Mike brought champagne to the "sort of" wake that followed Dennis's funeral. We were told in no uncertain terms that the incident "never happened" and the proof was that thirty years later, Mike said it didn't happen. Thus, the incident was apocryphal.

In this case, we have an incident which has been historically put forth and, now, corroborated by three different people who were there. Yet despite this, that incident remains apocryphal.

So I am somewhat confused here.

[Ray Lawlor]

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.

Actually ; I never have asked Brian about this, nor would I ever ask him about something that , as you say , had to have been really traumatic for him , and essentially something that still bothers him. As I said , I heard it from the horses mouth; but I guess that needs more clarification on this forum. So ; it was early August, 2006,  and I was driving Brian and Danny Hutton , in Brian's car, a navy blue 2006 Mercedes Benz CLS55 AMG ( best car I have ever driven), to Scott Bennett's place where they were going to cut "Rave On" , the Buddy Holly tune.Danny brought a Buddy Holly CD to play in the car on the ride over so he could show Brian how he could sing the tune; Brian said no , forget that,  we are going to do it totally different than the original. Anyway;  Scott called as we crossed over the Coldwater Canyon intersection up on Mulholland Drive, and asked if we could get there about two hours later than scheduled, since he was running late in a session.  So Danny knew a bar in the area by Scott's , and the three of us camped out there for about an hour and a half; maybe a bit more.  Brian was sitting on the barstool to my left ; Danny was sitting on the barstool to my right ; I was standing in the center, facing them both. Brian and I had Stella Artois on draft ; I recall Danny had either a glass of wine or a Corona ; that part I can't really be sure. Their conversation was intensely personal ; ALL of it was centered around 1966-68; both personal stuff and BB's related. Regarding the Redwood incident, Brian initiated that part of the conversation. Essentially Brian apologized to Danny for "what happened with Mike and Carl at Wally Heiders"  , but that he couldn't do anything about it ( he did not mention Al). Danny was saying to him it was ok , it didn't matter and he was never angry with Brian about it, that he knew it wasn't Brian's call.  Brian had thought that Danny held a  major grudge against him for bailing out on Redwood, but Danny reassured him that this was never the case and to please let it go. I think he did.  

[Mikie]

That's something. Water under the bridge but I wonder if this was the first time it was discussed between the two since the incident. A little surprising - maybe Brian finally felt at ease to finally bring it up after all those years or he was more concerned about clearing the air with Danny than anything else. I mean, I'd be surprised after all that partying they did in the late 60's/70's that it wasn't brought up before. Interesting, Ray.

[bgas]

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.

Actually ; I never have asked Brian about this, nor would I ever ask him about something that , as you say , had to have been really traumatic for him , and essentially something that still bothers him. As I said , I heard it from the horses mouth; but I guess that needs more clarification on this forum. So ; it was early August, 2006,  and I was driving Brian and Danny Hutton , in Brian's car, a navy blue 2006 Mercedes Benz CLS55 AMG ( best car I have ever driven), to Scott Bennett's place where they were going to cut "Rave On" , the Buddy Holly tune.Danny brought a Buddy Holly CD to play in the car on the ride over so he could show Brian how he could sing the tune; Brian said no , forget that,  we are going to do it totally different than the original. Anyway;  Scott called as we crossed over the Coldwater Canyon intersection up on Mulholland Drive, and asked if we could get there about two hours later than scheduled, since he was running late in a session.  So Danny knew a bar in the area by Scott's , and the three of us camped out there for about an hour and a half; maybe a bit more.  Brian was sitting on the barstool to my left ; Danny was sitting on the barstool to my right ; I was standing in the center, facing them both. Brian and I had Stella Artois on draft ; I recall Danny had either a glass of wine or a Corona ; that part I can't really be sure. Their conversation was intensely personal ; ALL of it was centered around 1966-68; both personal stuff and BB's related. Regarding the Redwood incident, Brian initiated that part of the conversation. Essentially Brian apologized to Danny for "what happened with Mike and Carl at Wally Heiders"  , but that he couldn't do anything about it ( he did not mention Al). Danny was saying to him it was ok , it didn't matter and he was never angry with Brian about it, that he knew it wasn't Brian's call.  Brian had thought that Danny held a  major grudge against him for bailing out on Redwood, but Danny reassured him that this was never the case and to please let it go. I think he did.  

  Obviously, Brian with his prescient knowledge of the future, arranged to have this conversation with Danny, in your company, so that you'd be able to relate the story to us and quash any rumors that wouldn't jibe with the real story!

[Ray Lawlor]

That's something. Water under the bridge but I wonder if this was the first time it was discussed between the two since the incident. A little surprising - maybe Brian finally felt at ease to finally bring it up after all those years or he was more concerned about clearing the air with Danny than anything else. I mean, I'd be surprised after all that partying they did in the late 60's/70's that it wasn't brought up before. Interesting, Ray.

Mikie;

I wasn't a bit surprised as things sit and fester with Brian forever  , and it was obvious that there were other things between them that had not been addressed in eons ; stuff I had certainly never heard about , and definitely could never repeat. 

[Ray Lawlor]

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.

Actually ; I never have asked Brian about this, nor would I ever ask him about something that , as you say , had to have been really traumatic for him , and essentially something that still bothers him. As I said , I heard it from the horses mouth; but I guess that needs more clarification on this forum. So ; it was early August, 2006,  and I was driving Brian and Danny Hutton , in Brian's car, a navy blue 2006 Mercedes Benz CLS55 AMG ( best car I have ever driven), to Scott Bennett's place where they were going to cut "Rave On" , the Buddy Holly tune.Danny brought a Buddy Holly CD to play in the car on the ride over so he could show Brian how he could sing the tune; Brian said no , forget that,  we are going to do it totally different than the original. Anyway;  Scott called as we crossed over the Coldwater Canyon intersection up on Mulholland Drive, and asked if we could get there about two hours later than scheduled, since he was running late in a session.  So Danny knew a bar in the area by Scott's , and the three of us camped out there for about an hour and a half; maybe a bit more.  Brian was sitting on the barstool to my left ; Danny was sitting on the barstool to my right ; I was standing in the center, facing them both. Brian and I had Stella Artois on draft ; I recall Danny had either a glass of wine or a Corona ; that part I can't really be sure. Their conversation was intensely personal ; ALL of it was centered around 1966-68; both personal stuff and BB's related. Regarding the Redwood incident, Brian initiated that part of the conversation. Essentially Brian apologized to Danny for "what happened with Mike and Carl at Wally Heiders"  , but that he couldn't do anything about it ( he did not mention Al). Danny was saying to him it was ok , it didn't matter and he was never angry with Brian about it, that he knew it wasn't Brian's call.  Brian had thought that Danny held a  major grudge against him for bailing out on Redwood, but Danny reassured him that this was never the case and to please let it go. I think he did.  

  Obviously, Brian with his prescient knowledge of the future, arranged to have this conversation with Danny, in your company, so that you'd be able to relate the story to us and quash any rumors that wouldn't jibe with the real story!

Yes sir. An HG Wells moment.

[Jim V.]

Actually ; I never have asked Brian about this, nor would I ever ask him about something that , as you say , had to have been really traumatic for him , and essentially something that still bothers him. As I said , I heard it from the horses mouth; but I guess that needs more clarification on this forum. So ; it was early August, 2006,  and I was driving Brian and Danny Hutton , in Brian's car, a navy blue 2006 Mercedes Benz CLS55 AMG ( best car I have ever driven), to Scott Bennett's place where they were going to cut "Rave On" , the Buddy Holly tune.Danny brought a Buddy Holly CD to play in the car on the ride over so he could show Brian how he could sing the tune; Brian said no , forget that,  we are going to do it totally different than the original. Anyway;  Scott called as we crossed over the Coldwater Canyon intersection up on Mulholland Drive, and asked if we could get there about two hours later than scheduled, since he was running late in a session.  So Danny knew a bar in the area by Scott's , and the three of us camped out there for about an hour and a half; maybe a bit more.  Brian was sitting on the barstool to my left ; Danny was sitting on the barstool to my right ; I was standing in the center, facing them both. Brian and I had Stella Artois on draft ; I recall Danny had either a glass of wine or a Corona ; that part I can't really be sure. Their conversation was intensely personal ; ALL of it was centered around 1966-68; both personal stuff and BB's related. Regarding the Redwood incident, Brian initiated that part of the conversation. Essentially Brian apologized to Danny for "what happened with Mike and Carl at Wally Heiders"  , but that he couldn't do anything about it ( he did not mention Al). Danny was saying to him it was ok , it didn't matter and he was never angry with Brian about it, that he knew it wasn't Brian's call.  Brian had thought that Danny held a  major grudge against him for bailing out on Redwood, but Danny reassured him that this was never the case and to please let it go. I think he did. 

Wow. Ray, I have to say that as far as the info and stories about "the real Brian these days" is incredible, and brings us (or at least me) back to the idea that Brian indeed still is that guy who made Pet Sounds and "Surf's Up" and whatever else. He was there, he did it, and he's still here. Been through all the dark years, the better years, whatever. Still here, and still able to share it. Thank you so, so much Ray for sharing these stories with us, just as a peak into the life of Brian Wilson these days and what an interesting person he still is.

I know a bunch of people on here are already discarding it before it comes out, but I'm hoping his upcoming autobiography might be quite interesting if he's truly into it.

[Ray Lawlor]

Actually ; I never have asked Brian about this, nor would I ever ask him about something that , as you say , had to have been really traumatic for him , and essentially something that still bothers him. As I said , I heard it from the horses mouth; but I guess that needs more clarification on this forum. So ; it was early August, 2006,  and I was driving Brian and Danny Hutton , in Brian's car, a navy blue 2006 Mercedes Benz CLS55 AMG ( best car I have ever driven), to Scott Bennett's place where they were going to cut "Rave On" , the Buddy Holly tune.Danny brought a Buddy Holly CD to play in the car on the ride over so he could show Brian how he could sing the tune; Brian said no , forget that,  we are going to do it totally different than the original. Anyway;  Scott called as we crossed over the Coldwater Canyon intersection up on Mulholland Drive, and asked if we could get there about two hours later than scheduled, since he was running late in a session.  So Danny knew a bar in the area by Scott's , and the three of us camped out there for about an hour and a half; maybe a bit more.  Brian was sitting on the barstool to my left ; Danny was sitting on the barstool to my right ; I was standing in the center, facing them both. Brian and I had Stella Artois on draft ; I recall Danny had either a glass of wine or a Corona ; that part I can't really be sure. Their conversation was intensely personal ; ALL of it was centered around 1966-68; both personal stuff and BB's related. Regarding the Redwood incident, Brian initiated that part of the conversation. Essentially Brian apologized to Danny for "what happened with Mike and Carl at Wally Heiders"  , but that he couldn't do anything about it ( he did not mention Al). Danny was saying to him it was ok , it didn't matter and he was never angry with Brian about it, that he knew it wasn't Brian's call.  Brian had thought that Danny held a  major grudge against him for bailing out on Redwood, but Danny reassured him that this was never the case and to please let it go. I think he did.  

Wow. Ray, I have to say that as far as The info and stories about "the real Brian these days" is incredible, and brings us (or at least me) back to the idea that Brian indeed still is that guy who made Pet Sounds and "Surf's Up" and whatever else. He was there, he did it, and he's still here. Been through all the dark years, the better years, whatever. Still here, and still able to share it. Thank you so, so much Ray for sharing these stories with us, just as a peak into the life of Brian Wilson these days and what an interesting person he still is.

I know a bunch of people on here are already discarding it before it comes out, but I'm hoping his upcoming autobiography might be quite interesting if he's truly into it.

"That guy" is still there on many levels; the 2006-2007 time frame was really great for him.  I figure its 2014 and there is a new record coming ; this is like playing with house money. If he really is into telling his story it will really be a great read ; so much about the guy that none of us know. I hope he applies himself to it.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I've never questioned that the band stopped Brian working with Redwood, and appropriated the actual tapes, and recently the evidence that Mike, and possibly Carl, actually turned up at a session to stop the project has become compelling. My problem remains with Negron's claim that he actually saw them browbeat Brian in the studio to the point of him breaking down in tears. No-one else has said that, even Danny, who surely would... and now Ray's personal recollection - which I wouldn't dream of questioning - supports that, unless I'm misreading. That's the apocryphal part to my thinking. Ray's one of the very few folk in the BB cosmos I'd trust implicitly not to embroider or comment on something he wasn't present for, and he didn't relate any such event from two of the principals either. I'm pretty sure Negron was "improving" on what actually happened, several decades later. Something undoubtedly happened, but not how he claimed.

This small point aside, this thread has done sterling work in establishing the chronology and finer detail of the very brief period when Brian was working with Redwood. Now, about "Sunflower Maiden"...

[Alan Smith]

Thanks, AGD - Hopefully that will give guitarfool2002 the closure that we deserve.

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I've never questioned that the band stopped Brian working with Redwood, and appropriated the actual tapes, and recently the evidence that Mike, and possibly Carl, actually turned up at a session to stop the project has become compelling. My problem remains with Negron's claim that he actually saw them browbeat Brian in the studio to the point of him breaking down in tears.

A quick look back on the thread will demonstrate that this is false:

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.

Nowhere in the quote that you suggest is "regarded as apocryphal" is there any mention of Brian being brow-beaten and reduced to tears. In fact, what you suggested was regarded as apocryphal is precisely what you now note that you "never questioned" - that the band stopped Brian from working with Redwood.

[Andrew G. Doe]

I was assuming - incorrectly, evidently - that posters in this thread were au fait with the finer detail of this episode (i.e. Negron's claim). You really think I was disputing the long-established fact that "Darlin'" was appropriated from the Redwood project ?

[bgas]

You really think I was disputing the long-established fact that "Darlin'" was appropriated from the Redwood project ?

Not a one of us would be that daft

[Mikie]

"Negron's claim that he actually saw them browbeat Brian in the studio to the point of him breaking down in tears".

Seems to me I read that somewhere before Negron's book came out (1999). Pretty sure I did.

[Andrew G. Doe]

You really think I was disputing the long-established fact that "Darlin'" was appropriated from the Redwood project ?

Not a one of us would be that daft

rockandroll excepted, as their post confirms.

[CenturyDeprived]

"Negron's claim that he actually saw them browbeat Brian in the studio to the point of him breaking down in tears".

Seems to me I read that somewhere before Negron's book came out (1999). Pretty sure I did.

Well, to the doubters, I ask the question: what would the definition of "browbeating" be with regards to this?

What actions/words/body language could have been used that might (or might not) have constituted emotional browbeating in this instance?

It's a fine line to be sure, but I do sincerely wonder where those people (who are doubters) would honestly draw that line.

[SMiLE Brian]

I think some of us are daft enough to follow Mike Love's version of BBs events...

[Chocolate Shake Man]

I was assuming - incorrectly, evidently - that posters in this thread were au fait with the finer detail of this episode (i.e. Negron's claim). You really think I was disputing the long-established fact that "Darlin'" was appropriated from the Redwood project ?

What you disputed from the get go was the "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." When evidence was given by two different people from two more participants who were there, and you were asked to clarify again if the incident was still apocryphal, you again repeated that it was. And this was after guitarfool made it clear that he was not talking about the crying and the brow beating, just that the basic event happened. Even after that point was made you were still saying the event was apocryphal. So I suppose that I am to infer now that what you really meant was that the stuff that was apocryphal was precisely the stuff that nobody was talking about and the stuff that really happened was the only thing that anybody brought up. Hence, your use of the term "apocryphal." In that case, I apologize for taking you at your word and I apologize for failing to make an assumption about what you weren't saying. After all, I know how forgiving you are with others when they are not entirely clear in their points.

I particularly like how you cast me as ignorant - that I am not "au fait with the finer detail of this episode (i.e. Negron's claim)" when in fact it was you who was unclear about the fact that Guitarfool was not necessarily talking specifically about Negron's claim but rather, in addition, the (multiple) claims made by Danny Hutton. It was you who said that Hutton has never spoken on the matter and had to be reminded that he has, in fact, been on record twice about the matter. Keep in mind, that Guitarfool was not speaking about Negron's claim and, in fact, you were the first one to bring it up. He could have easily been talking about the Hutton claims. Perhaps if you had been "au fait" with the entire documented record of this event, you wouldn't have leapt to the conclusion that guitarfool must have been speaking specifically about the incident as related by Negron.

Recall that you were specifically asked by Guitarfool to clarify: "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?" You never answered this question. And now you are saying this: "You really think I was disputing the long-established fact that "Darlin'" was appropriated from the Redwood project ?" The fact is that when you were given an opportunity to make this clear - exactly what you thought did and did not happen - you didn't (well, you said, that the only source on this matter was Negron and that Negron was questionable), hence why Guitarfool kept asking. Now it's our fault for not knowing where you stood on an issue that you were asked about and didn't answer.

And if you weren't questioning the fact that there was at least some kind of incident in the studio, then what was your point about the Three Dog Night chronology about?

What galls me about this is if  we switched places, I would be facing a barrage of insults for not knowing my history and for making assumptions. But since we haven't switched places, I am unsurprised that the end result is that I am still facing a barrage of insults.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Didn't either Negron or Hutton also say (in regards to Redwood/Darlin-gate) that if Mike was the big bad guy here, that they didn't blame him and would have done the same thing if they were in his shoes?

Good enough for me to move on.

[alf wiedersehen]

What galls me about this is if  we switched places, I would be facing a barrage of insults for not knowing my history and for making assumptions. But since we haven't switched places, I am unsurprised that the end result is that I am still facing a barrage of insults.

I don't know if "barrage of insults" equals "one insult from person I am having an argument with".
Don't make something bigger out of it than it really is.