Brian and Murry not crediting each other properly

[Bicyclerider]

Producer is a loose term that can cover a range of activities with the recording process.  George Martin's main role as he defined it was to work with Lennon and McCartney on the songs, making arrangement suggestions and adding keyboard parts and orchestral parts.  In addition he had input into what singles were released and determined the song sequence on albums and what songs were included.

On the other end of the range is Tom Wilson, Dylan's producer.  He suggested and hired musicians to play with Dylan and rolled tape, stopped takes if there was a mistake or technical problem, and that was it.  Slating takes was his main contribution.

Murry definitely had ideas as to the sound he wanted on the early records - listen to him on the Surger Girl album sessions telling Carl and David to go up on the treble control on their guitars, he wanted lots of top end - unfortunate now that we have the SACD mono mixes on CD because they are painfully bright.  Input into the songwriting - probably nil.  Input into the singing delivery and what constituted a good take - probably a fair amount, but it's unclear if that input was ever taken seriously by Brian or just tolerated and ignored.  I suspect early on Brian may have paid more attention to his dad's feedback than later but who knows, that's not something we can determine.

My point?  I think there have been credited producers that have had less impact on the music than Murry did at the beginning, so it is not unreasonable to ask why Murry never wanted a credit.  With his role in Sea of Tunes it was unnecessary?  He wanted to give his feedback but didn't want the responsibility of producer where he no doubt knew he was out of his depth?  The whole fight to give Brian the credit for producing and removing Nik Venet would seem a little hypocritical if he was to try and then attach his name as co- producer?

[guitarfool2002]

With Capitol studios, there was the idea that artists signed to Capitol would record in "the tower", for reasons financial and otherwise. The Capitol studio was fairly new in 1962, it had just opened in the mid 50's. To make a long story shorter, Capitol's bread and butter was Frank Sinatra in the 50's, along with Nat King Cole. Sinatra was actually the first artist to officially "open" the studio in a well publicized event, but he didn't sing. In a bit of PR hoopla, Sinatra actually conducted an instrumental session as the first session held in the new studio, I believe it was called Tone Poems Of Color, I'll need to look that up.

By the late 50's, Sinatra cut ties with Capitol. Not just that, but Sinatra started his own label "Reprise", began to cut records exclusively for Reprise, and got his fellow Rat Pack buddies like Dean and Sammy to start cutting records for his new Reprise label. Beyond THAT - and this is where it kind of ties into the Beach Boys later - Sinatra along with Bing Crosby funded an engineer from the Chicago area named Bill Putnam when he acquired United studios and then Western soon after. So as the young Beach Boys went into Western to cut those first records with Chuck Britz, and some soon after, they were basically going into the studio that was their own label's rival, not to mention what I'm sure were hard feelings both political and financial with their former artist Frank Sinatra who had basically left them holding the bag after taking what could have been at least half of their income from the previous decade with him when he started his own competitor label Reprise and bankrolled a competitor studio in Putnam's United/Western acquisition.

So there could have been some reasons beyond the surface if you consider that side of it.

The fact that Brian preferred to cut records at Western, made better sounding records at Western, had more freedom at Western because it was an indie and not beholden to strict union rules as far as the staff engineers worked, and was delivering hits pretty consistently after a certain point was almost a no-brainer. And as long as it was bringing in money to Capitol, and giving them a "teen" act to promote on their roster and make money on that scene, the leverage was in favor of the Beach Boys.

It was an important component to both the sound of the records and the way they were made, because in the "old guard" union system that staff engineers worked, a "kid" like Brian wouldn't be able to work as hands-on with an engineer as he did with Chuck Britz. That was a *key* element in how Brian developed his skills in the studio. If it were done solely at Capitol with Venet overseeing everything, there would have been hits but not the longevity and creative growth that happened with Brian's producing and music in general in the years 63-66, as mentioned.

If anything Murry was the manager and the "adult" in the room which gave Capitol some reassurance that they weren't going to be financing a bunch of kids partying in their studios and wasting time. As soon as they heard what Brian could do,m and how he was putting these songs together to record them, it became clear this guy was special, and he had the talent to see these records through. It wasn't Murry - of anything, in the earliest days Capitol saw him as the guy giving them the hard sell in favor of his kids' band, as things played out over the first year into the second, it became clear as well that Murry was more of a distraction and a hindrance to the process, as Hal Blaine said "a pain in the ass".

Murry did not have the talent or the skills to produce a record like Brian did. He could bark orders, he could schmooze executives with his salesmanship, but when it came time to getting a song idea through the whole process into having a final fully mixed production for the label to press and sell, he didn't have the ability. Which is why trying to suggest he should have gotten a production credit, to me, makes no sense.

He was the business side of it, no one denies that. But his ability to produce records as his son seemed to have a natural gift for doing (with one ear, no less...) was lacking.

[Emily]

Murry definitely had ideas as to the sound he wanted on the early records - listen to him on the Surger Girl album sessions telling Carl and David to go up on the treble control on their guitars, he wanted lots of top end - unfortunate now that we have the SACD mono mixes on CD because they are painfully bright.  

Wait. I'm sorry but was "Surger Girl" an intentionally hilarious pun (in which case - hilarious!) or was it a typo?

[Emily]

Thanks for the great elucidation, GuitarFool.

[guitarfool2002]

Replying to Bicyclerider's post about the role of "producer", it's important to note that a band or an artist in general producing their own records was pretty rare in the early 60's, if not unheard of. The corporate structure of the music business, especially labels, was that when an artist was signed to the label, that artist would be assigned to a producer. The title itself in those days was more often "A&R", as in artist and repertoire. It was the position in the label that was the liaison between those artists and the label execs who would make sure the artist delivered something to that label in return for their investment.

But Brian Wilson, I'd argue, was one of the first in a major label situation to come into that structure as both producer and member of the group, in other words the Beach Boys were a self-contained act. The A&R man didn't need to scout out demos of songs he'd think were right for the band to record, he didn't need to hire arrangers and other musical roles to bring the songs to life...with Brian you had a guy who produced, arranged, and wrote the songs too.

In our more modern terms, he was one of the earliest "producers" using the job description we know it to be. In terms of 1962-63, there were very, very few artists who were as self-contained and handled all those roles which were usually doled out to different people, under the control of what in 1962-63 would be the "producer" or A&R exec. In Beach Boys terms, that was Venet on those earliest examples, doing what was then the expected job duties. But in terms of making the records, it didn't take long for Brian to do what we think of a producer doing in the studio in modern terminology...and Venet was out of the picture, and "produced by Brian Wilson" became one of the band's calling cards.

[Emily]

I never cease to be amazed at the speed and proficiency of BW's self-education in composition, arranging and production. Just prodigious and astounding.

[hideyotsuburaya]

in the Made In California booklet Murry is in fact given producer credit there on the early recordings, like '409' (his name was not on the original Capitol 409 45)

Murry's studio abilities were lacking, but Brian's abilities initially were only in vocal arrangements (where he blew everyone else out of the water) and songwriting (to a degree).  They worked as a team (Murry & Brian) in the studio initially until Brian got the chops to do all things a producer should do himself (at which point Murry was fired, an inelegant exit but perhaps gradual was not Brian's way).  Brian was less than articulate for a time so Murry 'helped' fill the silence with his paternal comments welcome or not

[Emily]

in the Made In California booklet Murry is in fact given producer credit there on the early recordings, like '409' (his name was not on the original Capitol 409 45)

Murry's studio abilities were lacking, but Brian's abilities initially were only in vocal arrangements (where he blew everyone else out of the water) and songwriting (to a degree).  They worked as a team (Murry & Brian) in the studio initially until Brian got the chops to do all things a producer should do himself (at which point Murry was fired, an inelegant exit but perhaps gradual was not Brian's way).  Brian was less than articulate for a time so Murry 'helped' fill the silence with his paternal comments welcome or not

You sound like you have intimate information that could only be gleaned by someone "on the spot."  Was that the case?

[hideyotsuburaya]

I suppose I s/b flattered my informed outlook is considered by someone intimate, but I assure you it can be gleaned otherwise

[Emily]

I suppose I s/b flattered my informed outlook is considered by someone intimate, but I assure you it can be gleaned otherwise

Ok. Just checking. You never know!

[guitarfool2002]

in the Made In California booklet Murry is in fact given producer credit there on the early recordings, like '409' (his name was not on the original Capitol 409 45)

Murry's studio abilities were lacking, but Brian's abilities initially were only in vocal arrangements (where he blew everyone else out of the water) and songwriting (to a degree).  They worked as a team (Murry & Brian) in the studio initially until Brian got the chops to do all things a producer should do himself (at which point Murry was fired, an inelegant exit but perhaps gradual was not Brian's way).  Brian was less than articulate for a time so Murry 'helped' fill the silence with his paternal comments welcome or not

So what exactly didn't Murry get credit for that you think he should have gotten, if there are any?

Brian had the chops and was developing them constantly well before Murry got fired. It's interesting to trace some of that development by listening to the artists and song Brian was writing and producing outside the Beach Boys. He had more freedom to experiment on those.

[kermit27]

[/quote]

So what exactly didn't Murry get credit for that you think he should have gotten, if there are any?


[/quote]


I think the original question was: did Murry think he should have gotten credit, or did Murry attempt to get credit?

[hideyotsuburaya]

those exact answers are unavailable, though the point already has been well-made that nominal producers have been so credited on records although their input apparently was less valuable than Murry's

Brian liked to have Murry around in the studio (apparently even after his firing, or should I say dismissal) but as he grew he liked it less and less.  Nothing terribly outrageous there.

Other artists that Brian produced then did not have hits as good as those recordings were, unfortunate but unfortunately also a telling point.  Because Murry was omitted from the recording process of those I wouldn't go so far as to say

modifying my post (due to an intervening one), call it a firm belief if you want but I'd say Murry never sought any formal production credit even if his input approached the 50/50 threshold (on this song or that)

[Cam Mott]

Was Murry producing the Sunrays beginning Summer/Fall 1964?

[Emily]

Brian liked to have Murry around in the studio (apparently even after his firing, or should I say dismissal) but as he grew he liked it less and less.  Nothing terribly outrageous there.

I interpret the evidence as indicating Brian trying really hard to get his dad's approval and to maintain a relationship with him, rather than Brian appreciating his production efforts.

[hideyotsuburaya]

yes, but I also think Murry wanted to maintain a relationship at least as much.  if not production efforts, Brian liked it when Murry particularly dug one of his new compositions

[ChicagoAnn]

M

y point?  I think there have been credited producers that have had less impact on the music than Murry did at the beginning, so it is not unreasonable to ask why Murry never wanted a credit.  With his role in Sea of Tunes it was unnecessary?  He wanted to give his feedback but didn't want the responsibility of producer where he no doubt knew he was out of his depth?  The whole fight to give Brian the credit for producing and removing Nik Venet would seem a little hypocritical if he was to try and then attach his name as co- producer?

My guess is that Murry thought of Brian as an extension of himself and didn't need to seek credit. Brian was Murry to Murry. Once Brian pulled away as an individual, he retaliated when he could with the sale of Sea of Tunes.

As Peter Reum has written in his blog, The Beach Boys was a family business. Anyone who has been involved in that particular dynamic knows there are hidden landmines.

[CenturyDeprived]

M

y point?  I think there have been credited producers that have had less impact on the music than Murry did at the beginning, so it is not unreasonable to ask why Murry never wanted a credit.  With his role in Sea of Tunes it was unnecessary?  He wanted to give his feedback but didn't want the responsibility of producer where he no doubt knew he was out of his depth?  The whole fight to give Brian the credit for producing and removing Nik Venet would seem a little hypocritical if he was to try and then attach his name as co- producer?

My guess is that Murry thought of Brian as an extension of himself and didn't need to seek credit. Brian was Murry to Murry. Once Brian pulled away as an individual, he retaliated when he could with the sale of Sea of Tunes.

As Peter Reum has written in his blog, The Beach Boys was a family business. Anyone who has been involved in that particular dynamic knows there are hidden landmines.

Perhaps the two incidents are completely isolated, unrelated, and mutually exclusive, but I still do ponder if Murry's mindset of Murry himself apparently not seeking credit (which seems somewhat out of character from what I would imagine of him, considering how much he wanted to interject himself into the process, and show how much he was needed for success to happen) could have played into how Murry apparently desired to not properly credit Mike for Mike's contributions. Was he seeking to vicariously live through Brian and keep every possible non-Brian credit out of the mix, even himself and family like Mike?

It's easy to think that Murry sought to simply make things better for Brian's pocketbooks by excluding Mike, but it is really an odd coincidence, at least in my estimation. Could there be more to it? It is hard to understand many of Murry's actions, of course. I just think that if one believes that Murry excluded Mike out of greed to benefit the Wilsons, why didn't Murry try to get Murry's own name credited (and not as a pseudonym) when possible? If Breakaway had been a hit, wouldn't Murry have wanted his own name on it, if only for bragging rights?

One would think that at *some* point along the way, Murry's actual name would have popped up on a BB credit. I wonder if Brian or the other Boys deeply did not want Murry's name on the credits for Breakaway, as well as some of the early material, which I feel Murry could possibly have finagled a way to get a co-producing credit (properly earned or not) if he had really set his mind to it, Nik Venet-style. Not that Murry had the record company clout and political power of Venet necessarily, but I still think it could possibly have been done on a song or two.

[barsone]

M

y point?  I think there have been credited producers that have had less impact on the music than Murry did at the beginning, so it is not unreasonable to ask why Murry never wanted a credit.  With his role in Sea of Tunes it was unnecessary?  He wanted to give his feedback but didn't want the responsibility of producer where he no doubt knew he was out of his depth?  The whole fight to give Brian the credit for producing and removing Nik Venet would seem a little hypocritical if he was to try and then attach his name as co- producer?

My guess is that Murry thought of Brian as an extension of himself and didn't need to seek credit. Brian was Murry to Murry. Once Brian pulled away as an individual, he retaliated when he could with the sale of Sea of Tunes.

As Peter Reum has written in his blog, The Beach Boys was a family business. Anyone who has been involved in that particular dynamic knows there are hidden landmines.

Perhaps the two incidents are completely isolated, unrelated, and mutually exclusive, but I still do ponder if Murry's mindset of Murry himself apparently not seeking credit (which seems somewhat out of character from what I would imagine of him, considering how much he wanted to interject himself into the process, and show how much he was needed for success to happen) could have played into how Murry apparently desired to not properly credit Mike for Mike's contributions. Was he seeking to vicariously live through Brian and keep every possible non-Brian credit out of the mix, even himself and family like Mike?

It's easy to think that Murry sought to simply make things better for Brian's pocketbooks by excluding Mike, but it is really an odd coincidence, at least in my estimation. Could there be more to it? It is hard to understand many of Murry's actions, of course. I just think that if one believes that Murry excluded Mike out of greed to benefit the Wilsons, why didn't Murry try to get Murry's own name credited (and not as a pseudonym) when possible? If Breakaway had been a hit, wouldn't Murry have wanted his own name on it, if only for bragging rights?

One would think that at *some* point along the way, Murry's actual name would have popped up on a BB credit. I wonder if Brian or the other Boys deeply did not want Murry's name on the credits for Breakaway, as well as some of the early material, which I feel Murry could possibly have finagled a way to get a co-producing credit (properly earned or not) if he had really set his mind to it, Nik Venet-style. Not that Murry had the record company clout and political power of Venet necessarily, but I still think it could possibly have been done on a song or two.

[barsone]

sorry double post everyone

CD......very thoughtful and insightful post.  Personally I truly think you have hit the nail on the head as to why friction started in this band so long long ago.  I always wondered why it took Mike until 1990-ish to file a lawsuit claiming music credits he felt he deserved in the early 1960's and was never paid for.  We're talking over 25 years !!!  The current Mike is obviously smart enough to realize what he obviously missed in the 60's era.  In the 60's, I truly believe Mike was more enamored with the  "extras" from touring....ie...women...parties (tho he didn't drink back then :-) and maybe even fathering children out of wedlock, than he was to truly understand how the music business worked .  Yes Murry was a pain to all of them, but to think he truly looked at himself as Brian..so far as to protect Brian's future earnings stream going forward and shutting Mike out, seems very rational and believable to me.....For what its worth.

[c-man]

Here's my point - Murry assumed control of many Beach Boys sessions (most, in fact) from '62-early '64 (excluding the Venet Capitol Studios sessions), and bossed the band around. He called the shots as far as whether a take was good enough to proceed, or whether they had to start over again. This is true for both instrumental tracks and vocal overdubs, as can be heard on both the SOT series AND the officially-released session excerpts. As others have stated, Brian was probably OK with this at first (and the Wilson Bros. definitely took Murry's side in the battle against Venet), but by early '64, the BBs had had enough of Murry in every professional sense (except, apparently, his running of Sea Of Tunes Publishing - either that, or they couldn't legally remove him from that role).

Did Murry deserve a co-producer credit? Well, probably as much as Landy deserved an Executive Producer credit on Brian's first solo album: whether what Landy did was ethical, practical, or even welcomed is beside the point here - the things he said and did during the production of that album, IMO, do indeed warrant that title (in fact, there's plenty of people who think it could have been a better album without his behind-the-scenes meddling - which speaks to the impact his involvement had on the final product). But I don't think Landy was in the control booth, dictating the proceedings during takes the way Murry often was (at least, there's no evidence of that). And by "proceedings", I'm not talking about the technicalities of reverb, EQ, compression, limiting, etc. - I'm talking about "OK, guys, you can do better - treble up those amps - pick up the pace, you're retarding - enunciate more" - that kind of thing - over and over, for every take. On a recording session, if someone is calling the shots to that extent, they are in fact acting as "producer' (or co-producer), whether they are credited or not. And, Brian and Carl have both been quoted as saying Murry helped produce their early records.

The role of record producer can involve many things, but for the most part it can be seen as the equivalent of a movie director, which in itself can involve different roles, but basically the director is the guy or gal who has the overall artistic vision of the movie (like Brian), as well as the person who stops and starts takes, and coaches the actors on their performances (like Brian, and also like Murry when he was there). Most big movies also have a "director of cinematography", which is a more technical role, as well as, of course, cameramen, who can be compared to recording studio engineers. And then there's the administrative side of record production - I laughed and shook my head in disbelief when I read Gary Usher's assertion in "The Wilson Project" that Brian wasn't actually serving as co-producer on their mid-'80s collaborations because he didn't know or care anything about scheduling, budgets, etc. By this time, most big-name record producers had "production assistants" who looked after all those mundane tasks, leaving them to focus on the music: Usher should have known that, and accepted that as his role in the partnership, while understanding that Brian was co-producing with him in a musical sense. If they had scored a major-label deal, they could have hired themselves a production assistant, and Gary wouldn't have had to do all those administrative duties, either.

One last thought - after the BBs fired Murry as their manager, he stayed away from their sessions, but only for awhile. He was back in the booth for some of the Today! vocal sessions ("Do You Wanna Dance", "Please Let Me Wonder", "In The Back Of My Mind"), again calling the shots, and three years later, he did so again on some sessions for the Friends album. Since he was no longer their manager at that time, how can one characterize his involvement in those sessions, other than as co-producer? And what did he do on the "Break Away" session to actually score a co-producer credit that was more substantial than what he did on those earlier sessions?

[Cam Mott]

I agree with c-man, the only thing like evidence so far shows Murry's role was more than manager and that he was at least a co-producer for some period. It seems to me he could act as a producer and did which is also corroborated by the Sunrays.

[guitarfool2002]

Cam - The Sunrays thought Murry walked on water. Which is somewhat expected since he basically took them out of high school and got them in a professional recording studio and elevated them into a different level of the music business with the sole (devious) purpose of sticking it to his sons who had fired him. Murry wanted to make a surf band that would be "better" and more successful than the band who had fired him and didn't appreciate the "good advice" he had given them. So the Sunrays got some records released, but as Brian was alleged to have said, by the time Murry got the Sunrays out there surf music of the type Murry wanted them to do was already passe and pop music was moving forward.

As Hal Blaine said, Murry was often lecturing Brian on the way records should be made, and wanted it to go more like the way he thought Lawrence Welk made records. Then when Murry actually did fully produce a band, he made a Sunrays record that sounded more like what his son Brian had already done and basically trademarked as a "sound" several years earlier. So Murry was again behind the times and didn't even seem to get the point that by the time the Sunrays records came out, it had, as Brian said, already been done and was passe, especially as fast as trends in pop music were moving at that time. Brian looked ahead, Murry looked back. Who ended up being right?

The Sunrays' most famous single made it to around #50 on the charts, and that was it. Meanwhile Brian was one of the most talked about *PRODUCERS* in the years 1964-65-66 with a handful of top-5 records and now legendary albums to his credit, done on his terms while Murry still wanted to ride the wild surf with a group of high-school age musicians from the neighborhood. So much for Murry's plan to go one better on his son. Brian was right.

Harsh but true.

[guitarfool2002]

If barking orders and giving commands and saying whether something was good or not as takes were being done warrants a production credit, then by listening to that Help Me Rhonda tape (to use an example that has been more widely heard and discussed) it could be shown that Murry should get a credit as producer on that record. Right?

But consider Brian invited him down to the session (all of that talk and details are in conversations on that tape) not to produce but to watch the proceedings. And what does Murry do? He lapses into the same behavior that caused him to get fired at the earlier sessions. Sure, he's the loudest, he's the most frequently heard voice on the tape, and he's throwing in all kinds of opinions about the performances.

And as I said before, no one is paying attention or taking in anything the guy was barking at them. They were mocking him.

Yet, what he's doing on that tape falls into the definition C-Man offered above as far as what would warrant a producer credit. Even though he's not actually "producing" anything except hot air, and bad vibes that day...and most anyone who hears it cringes at what an asshole he sounds like and how he's getting to his sons, especially Brian.

Do you think this warrants a producer credit on Help Me Rhonda based on Murry *trying* to call the shots that day? And in terms of the behavior he exhibited on that tape, consider that the type of empty bellowing we hear from Murry as he thinks he's producing or calling the shots at the session was more the rule rather than the exception.

I see nothing that would warrant giving a guy who showed up at sessions and made a nuisance of himself who more often had little or no effect on what actually got recorded and release a producer credit.

Brian Wilson earned the credit, he gets the credit. Murry gets the reputation he deserves.

[filledeplage]

Cam - The Sunrays thought Murry walked on water. Which is somewhat expected since he basically took them out of high school and got them in a professional recording studio and elevated them into a different level of the music business with the sole (devious) purpose of sticking it to his sons who had fired him. Murry wanted to make a surf band that would be "better" and more successful than the band who had fired him and didn't appreciate the "good advice" he had given them. So the Sunrays got some records released, but as Brian was alleged to have said, by the time Murry got the Sunrays out there surf music of the type Murry wanted them to do was already passe and pop music was moving forward.

As Hal Blaine said, Murry was often lecturing Brian on the way records should be made, and wanted it to go more like the way he thought Lawrence Welk made records. Then when Murry actually did fully produce a band, he made a Sunrays record that sounded more like what his son Brian had already done and basically trademarked as a "sound" several years earlier. So Murry was again behind the times and didn't even seem to get the point that by the time the Sunrays records came out, it had, as Brian said, already been done and was passe, especially as fast as trends in pop music were moving at that time. Brian looked ahead, Murry looked back. Who ended up being right?

The Sunrays' most famous single made it to around #50 on the charts, and that was it. Meanwhile Brian was one of the most talked about *PRODUCERS* in the years 1964-65-66 with a handful of top-5 records and now legendary albums to his credit, done on his terms while Murry still wanted to ride the wild surf with a group of high-school age musicians from the neighborhood. So much for Murry's plan to go one better on his son. Brian was right.

Harsh but true.

GF - I can clearly remember first hearing a few measures of The Sunrays on the radio, and thinking "for a second" - that they were the "Boys," but within a half minute knew they were a wannabe "copycat" outfit.  They lacked the "vocal subtlety" of the BB's, the vocal quality of the blend, and were sort of "processed"  (we won't use "that" word.)  And, you (and Brian) are correct; it was already passe.