50th anniversary latest

[Jon Stebbins]

Yeah Dave was signed to A&M Records, Warner Brothers Records, Imperial Records, and Dot Records AFTER the Beach Boys. He played sessions with, was in bands with and/or collaborated with Warren Zevon, Delany and Bonnie, Leon Russell, Glen Campbell, Jim Keltner, T-Bone Burnett, Delbert McClinton, Brian Wilson etc...AFTER the Beach Boys. I could dig having that kind of an unsuccessful career.

[the captain]

I feel a little bad for you, Awesoman, but you do have a losing battle here. There are two things going on. 1) Of course there is some comparison to be made between these two guys, about some things, on some level. In addition to both having once been a part of bands that had success without them (though as has been mentioned, having contributed wildly different amounts, left under wildly different circumstances, and had later careers of wildly different success), they are both men. Both white. Both musicians. So yeah, there are some comparisons to be made. But when you stick by what isn't an especially great choice, well... 2) And worse, you've selected an example who, like it or not, is loaded with certain connotations. I disagree with Howie that you're calling David a failure, et al, by comparing him to Pete Best. But you have to understand that the term carries those connotations. If I can take this to an extreme to make the point, you don't compare a friend with a mustache to Adolf Hitler without expecting the mustachioed friend to get upset. "I'm just talking facial hair!" won't cut it.

[bossaroo]

And isn't it a bit absurd to call Pete Best a "mediorce drummer" when Ringo Starr is considered to be "the luckiest guy in the world"?    

I've also heard that term applied to one Graham Nash. 

Awwww...unfair.  At least Nash could sing in tune.   

David Crosby gets my vote.  or possibly that sax player from the Beach Boys... 

[the captain]

David Crosby gets my vote.  or possibly that sax player from the Beach Boys...  

Steve Douglas? 

[Awesoman]

I feel a little bad for you, Awesoman, but you do have a losing battle here. There are two things going on. 1) Of course there is some comparison to be made between these two guys, about some things, on some level. In addition to both having once been a part of bands that had success without them (though as has been mentioned, having contributed wildly different amounts, left under wildly different circumstances, and had later careers of wildly different success), they are both men. Both white. Both musicians. So yeah, there are some comparisons to be made. But when you stick by what isn't an especially great choice, well... 2) And worse, you've selected an example who, like it or not, is loaded with certain connotations. I disagree with Howie that you're calling David a failure, et al, by comparing him to Pete Best. But you have to understand that the term carries those connotations. If I can take this to an extreme to make the point, you don't compare a friend with a mustache to Adolf Hitler without expecting the mustachioed friend to get upset. "I'm just talking facial hair!" won't cut it.

Wait...did David Marks ever have a mustache?     Of course, if I had compared Marks with Hitler, I'd understand all the emotional outburst.  (Did Pete Best strangle your cat or something, Howie?)

In all seriousness, let's get a grip here.  Perhaps Pete Best isn't the best (pun intended) comparison to David Marks, but there is no harm in making a comparison; nor am I attempting a disservice to either person in doing so.  Yes, I'm making these comparisons fully aware that Marks is certainly a more talented musician than Best, but that's neither here nor there in this context.  Both men were present during the formation of what became two wildly successful bands (which is nothing to sneeze at).  Both men were in the band for a relatively short period of time.  Both men attempted forming bands using their own name; neither band was ultimately successful commercially.  Neither individual was able to fully enjoy the success of their bands; even if one of those individuals deserved it more than the other.  I think I'm being more than fair here.

[donald]

Pete Best was noted because he was a Beatle and anything Beatle related, anything or anyone related to Beatles got noticed, written about, discussed endlessly.  Look at the library of books out there and the pantheon of related characters in the lore of Beatles.   


David Marks was actually a Beachboy.  He was on TV. albums, part of the band.  More comparable to someone who might have been the Beatles lead guitar on the first 3 or 4 albums before Harrison.   More like that than similar to Pete Best.

But he does fall into that fringe of people who were there early on and left before things really took off or became the stuff of legend.  I'm thinking of Signe Anderson, Skip Spence,  member/s of Buffalo Springfield,  and so on.   Sometimes these make for compelling bios.

[Andrew G. Doe]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

[Howie Edelson]

"Awesoman" (is that your REAL name?) -- No, Pete Best did not strangle my cat. But I'm a historian. I know my s hit. And the Pete Best comparison is lazy and incorrect. Look, there are people (and fanzines) that believe that Jan & Dean and The Beach Boys are one and the same. But they're NOT. Now, you might believe that Jan Berry was as talented and important as Brian Wilson and Phil Spector -- but he was NOT.

So, you can FEEL that the Pete Best/David Marks comparison is accurate, but I'm telling you, and Jon Stebbins, and AGD are telling you that it's NOT.

Read 'THE LOST BEACH BOY.'
Learn and move on. 

[PhilCohen]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

The 5 Decca Tapes tracks included on "The Beatles Anthology Vol.1" 2-CD set.

[lupinofan]

If I can take this to an extreme to make the point, you don't compare a friend with a mustache to Adolf Hitler without expecting the mustachioed friend to get upset. "I'm just talking facial hair!" won't cut it.

Bingo! <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law>

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

The Polydor tracks wouldn't count anyway. The Beatles were paid session fees and a buyout fee of any royalty payments.

[Carrie Marks]

If you don't like this comparison, we can agree to disagree.  It sticks for me though. 

I am going to make an equally as absurd Beatles / Beach Boys comparison:

I say that David Marks was the “John Lennon” of the Beach Boys.  They both played rhythm guitar in a band that changed the course of  popular music and culture.  They were both signed to Capitol Records.  They were both in bands that started with BEA.  They both have had their old shirts on display at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. And they both moved to New York. See…they’re almost exactly the same except for ALL the other differences that make them nothing alike.  Of course you can compare ANY 2 people and find SOME similarities...but that doesn't mean its accurate to put them in the same category.
 
Now as far as being offensive…it’s not offensive to say you aren’t a fan of his, that you don’t like his mustache...think Surfin' USA sucks, or any other opinion that is subjective.  In fact, David is a musician’s musician. If ‘everybody’ liked his music, he would consider that an artistic failure. Where the offense comes in, is in your argument that David wasn’t in the band long enough to have an impact, or that his music career was a failure.  Wasn’t it was only a few weeks ago that Billboard announced the top 30 summer songs of all time…if YOU played on three songs on that list, would you consider yourself a failure?   
 
I get that you are basing your argument on the time factor. However…from a commercial standpoint, the Beach Boys “Greatest Hits Era” was from 1962 to 1966.  Songs David played on were on the charts and his image was still being used well into 1964…so that 'short time' he was there actually accounts for nearly HALF of their ‘glory days’.  There is no way you can deny that the David Marks era Beach Boys songs are an essential part of the band's legacy.  His time was short, but the lasting result is undeniable! You can prefer whatever era of the band you want, but the reality is, the licensing and sales of Greatest Hits, as well as the consistent touring of those Greatest Hits, is what has kept the operation afloat.  The masses want to hear the Surf / Car classics, and the classics include David Marks….you can’t get around that fact.

In fact, I COULD argue using your logic that David Marks is the "Brian Wilson" of the Beach Boys because they both stayed home to further their own musical endeavors and collected checks while the rest of the band went out and toured to sell those records.  I mean, if we are going to choose random people to compare David to, why limit ourselves to comparing him to failures...we can just as easily pick out the similarities he has with successful people.

[the captain]

Bingo! <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin%27s_law>

Meh, Godwin can suck my dick. Some people--not talking Awesoman here, btw--need extreme, hyperbolic comparisons or analogies because they're fucking stupid and don't understand otherwise. When it's analogous, it's analogous (even to obviously different degrees).

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

Uh, Pete Best & David Marks are the same...they both have eyes and legs and  pulses..dur dur dur/ [/sarcasm].

[Awesoman]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

As far as I know, none.

[Andrew G. Doe]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

As far as I know, none.

'Xactly. 

[Awesoman]

Honestly, I think the point I was trying to make by making a comparison with David Marks to the apparently nefarious Pete Best has gone waaaayyy misunderstood.  And I probably didn't do a stellar job of making the point from the get-go (although I think some are taking this a little too personally).  So if it will settle the waters around here, I invite you to simply forget the original comment I made as I will retract my comparison between the two.  No harm was meant from what I was trying to convey.  So sorry for any confusion.  It's a pity though; guess this means I won't be able to make my next comparison between Al Jardine with "Weird Al" Yankovic as I had originally planned...

BTW Carrie...please let me know if your husband plays in Atlanta again.  Had no idea that he had performed here recently until after the fact.  I would have definitely have gone had I known about it!

[Sound of Free]

I say that David Marks was the “John Lennon” of the Beach Boys.

Whatever you say, Yoko. 

[SurfRiderHawaii]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

As far as I know, none.

'Xactly. 

Exactly WRONG!  Pete Best gets royalties from the Anthology 1 set.

[Awesoman]

OK, let me ask one more question. Very simple one.

How many Beatles songs does Pete Best still get royalty payments for ? (The Sheridan/Beat Brothers tracks don't count, before anyone says anything).

As far as I know, none.

'Xactly. 

Exactly WRONG!  Pete Best gets royalties from the Anthology 1 set.

Hey!  One point for me!   

[SurfRiderHawaii]

If you don't like this comparison, we can agree to disagree.  It sticks for me though. 

I am going to make an equally as absurd Beatles / Beach Boys comparison:

I say that David Marks was the “John Lennon” of the Beach Boys.  They both played rhythm guitar in a band that changed the course of  popular music and culture.  They were both signed to Capitol Records.  They were both in bands that started with BEA.  They both have had their old shirts on display at the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. And they both moved to New York. See…they’re almost exactly the same except for ALL the other differences that make them nothing alike.  Of course you can compare ANY 2 people and find SOME similarities...but that doesn't mean its accurate to put them in the same category.
 
Now as far as being offensive…it’s not offensive to say you aren’t a fan of his, that you don’t like his mustache...think Surfin' USA sucks, or any other opinion that is subjective.  In fact, David is a musician’s musician. If ‘everybody’ liked his music, he would consider that an artistic failure. Where the offense comes in, is in your argument that David wasn’t in the band long enough to have an impact, or that his music career was a failure.  Wasn’t it was only a few weeks ago that Billboard announced the top 30 summer songs of all time…if YOU played on three songs on that list, would you consider yourself a failure?   
 
I get that you are basing your argument on the time factor. However…from a commercial standpoint, the Beach Boys “Greatest Hits Era” was from 1962 to 1966.  Songs David played on were on the charts and his image was still being used well into 1964…so that 'short time' he was there actually accounts for nearly HALF of their ‘glory days’.  There is no way you can deny that the David Marks era Beach Boys songs are an essential part of the band's legacy.  His time was short, but the lasting result is undeniable! You can prefer whatever era of the band you want, but the reality is, the licensing and sales of Greatest Hits, as well as the consistent touring of those Greatest Hits, is what has kept the operation afloat.  The masses want to hear the Surf / Car classics, and the classics include David Marks….you can’t get around that fact.

In fact, I COULD argue using your logic that David Marks is the "Brian Wilson" of the Beach Boys because they both stayed home to further their own musical endeavors and collected checks while the rest of the band went out and toured to sell those records.  I mean, if we are going to choose random people to compare David to, why limit ourselves to comparing him to failures...we can just as easily pick out the similarities he has with successful people.

It's a bad comparison in that David Marks is a great musician and also a wonderful singer/songwriter.  I just love his voice.  Pete Best had a great hairdo but was a mediocre drummer.

Carrie, speaking of David's talents, what's the scoops on his new album?  I posted in your Honored Guest thread but nadda.

Can't wait to buy it!

[Howie Edelson]

Wrong. Pete Best receives no royalties or mechanicals from his appearance on The Beatles Anthology 1. He received a one-time-only cash payout in mid-1995.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

Wrong. Pete Best receives no royalties or mechanicals from his appearance on The Beatles Anthology 1. He received a one-time-only cash payout in mid-1995.

I strongly believe your wrong Howie.  Read an interview last year with McCartney.

Read this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-447201/Pete-Best-The-happiest-Beatle-all.html

Several article state "Best received a substantial windfall—between £1 million and £4 million—from the sales"
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0078983/bio

I believe it's pretty hard in this day and age to jip someone out of royalties.  It's been a while since I read Jon's book but I didn't David get his royalties back?

There is a CNN  with Pete Best, right around 1995-1996, where he holds up a check for about $13,000,000 that he got for royalties from the first Anthology boxed set (and videos).

[oldsurferdude]

Honestly, I think the point I was trying to make by making a comparison with David Marks to the apparently nefarious Pete Best has gone waaaayyy misunderstood.  And I probably didn't do a stellar job of making the point from the get-go (although I think some are taking this a little too personally).  So if it will settle the waters around here, I invite you to simply forget the original comment I made as I will retract my comparison between the two.  No harm was meant from what I was trying to convey.  So sorry for any confusion.  It's a pity though; guess this means I won't be able to make my next comparison between Al Jardine with "Weird Al" Yankovic as I had originally planned...

BTW Carrie...please let me know if your husband plays in Atlanta again.  Had no idea that he had performed here recently until after the fact.  I would have definitely have gone had I known about it!

Are you a member of congress?

[Howie Edelson]

I don't think I'm wrong.

[Jon Stebbins]

Wrong. Pete Best receives no royalties or mechanicals from his appearance on The Beatles Anthology 1. He received a one-time-only cash payout in mid-1995.

I strongly believe your wrong Howie.  Read an interview last year with McCartney.

Read this: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-447201/Pete-Best-The-happiest-Beatle-all.html

Several article state "Best received a substantial windfall—between £1 million and £4 million—from the sales"
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0078983/bio

I believe it's pretty hard in this day and age to jip someone out of royalties.  It's been a while since I read Jon's book but I didn't David get his royalties back?

There is a CNN  with Pete Best, right around 1995-1996, where he holds up a check for about $13,000,000 that he got for royalties from the first Anthology boxed set (and videos).

David always got his royalties for (mostly) everything he played on dating from Murry's backdated paperwork which wrongly states his exit as happening in 8/63. There was never an issue of getting them "back" since they were always paid in accordance with that end date. The issue is the things he played on after that... (approx. 8/63 through 10/63 maybe longer) which he does not get paid for. Unfortunately the session paperwork from that period has been missing forever...check Murry's tomb.

I would bet that the "windfall" that Best received, and the check that he holds up (13 million? really?) are for, exactly as Howie stated, the one-time cash payout for Anthology. Although how that payment was set up, paid out, whatever, might have been left to lawyers who describe it in legal terms that relate to "royalties".