The Smiley Smile Message Board

Finally, one of the reasons for the C50 break down.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/beach-boys-mike-love-opens-up-drama-with-cousin-brian-wilson/

...But the tour later unraveled, in part because Love resented interference from Melinda Wilson, Brian’s wife.

“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.

“And your response to that was?” Mason asked.

“Well, I think my response was to turn and leave. That was not a pleasant thing to hear. Because I wrote all these songs with my cousin and as I said before and I still say, if it was just he and I, it would be fine.”...

Partner in what way? I would assume she's talking business, not creative. I doubt her point was that *she* should write songs with him.

Also, assuming she actually said that, what was the context? I'm guessing she didn't just blurt that out. Was it part of a heated business discussion or something?

I'm curious how much context he gives this in the book. He seems to often prefer one-line pieces of evidence that ignore underlying reasons. Like citing the "no more shows" email even though he had always said he (Mike) had already planned on leaving the reunion and going back to his own thing.

Was Melinda allegedly making this one comment actually at all a significant factor in his decision? Doesn't seem so. It's just a negative bit about someone he doesn't like.

Again, assuming she actually ever said this.

I was about to post about this per Mike's new book, to which he must be alluding here. I just got the book and read the first 50 pages, a clear and sensitive recounting of the early days. Mike's style is relaxed and thoughtful. Then I skipped ahead to the 50th part and just saw this new, related thread. If true, then Melinda was fiercely defending Brian from. . . .well, from what? From a rival?  I take Mike's story seriously.  He also recounts how they tossed him a couple of lyrics but that he had little say in the album and had no idea it would be grounded in Joe Thomas/BW leftovers.

I had heard previously from a reliable source that the 50th broke up because, among others, 2 reasons: M's and B's wives hated each other and Mike was not given the chance to even hear the Radio album before it was released. Both stories confirmed here.

Mike says in the book, which is full of endless praise and love for Brian, that in the 50th, whenever the 5 BB were alone together, it was magic. Trouble came from the people/business structures outside of the actual principles.

My ultimate feeling is sadness for Mike and for all the BB.  I will not demonize Melinda, but I do not doubt her capable of such hurtful derision against Mike. It does not diminish her purportedly salvific love for Brian, but it shows a side of her that can be cruel and heartless.

Agree with 'in what context', however perhaps a little respect of 'history' on both parties could have been required here.

There's a pretty sizeable section in the book about the C50 tour and breakup from Mike's perspective. I have to admit it's the first section I turned to at the bookstore. Even if one is inclined to totally dismiss whatever Mike's saying (I wouldn't do that, mind you, but just saying...) it's certainly interesting stuff, although the chapter called "The Fracturing" is more revealing in terms of the band really ceasing to be an actual band IMO.

The context:

1. At soundcheck, Mike asks Brian if daughter Ambha can sing lead on Sail On Sailor
2. Brian says OK
3. Melinda "storms" to Jacquelyne, says Ambha can't sing a Brian lead
4. “Mike already discussed the matter with his partner, Brian.”
5. “Mike’s not his fucking partner. I’m his fucking partner.”

If that "reliable source" was Andrew Doe, then you were hoodwinked. Keep in mind this is the same guy who told me/others (among other things) that Smile Brian was actually Melinda ( ::)  ) per an "inside source",  Brian had next to no involvement with the creation of TLOS, that Drip Drop was recorded in 1974. Not exactly the best source.

Context is indeed key.

Is this fact or hypothetical?

Melinda supposedly had a message from Mike to the effect 'Your husband had better write a big hit because he is going to have to write me a big cheque' or words to that effect. And read the comments made in the 2005 lawsuit.  I don't blame Melinda for being defensive of Brian. In fact, I applaud her for it. As for the magic of Brian and Mike together, well he would say that but listen to Daybreak over the Ocean. Give me Brian's mini-suite from 'Radio' any day.


And if this bit is true I still don't blame Melinda. Brian is related to Ambha - Melinda only an in law. That means she can be more objective about it. Ambha was not an original Beach Boy and not a professional musician. Would Mike's wife have been happy at the idea of Carnie or Wendy joining in? And they have had a career in music.

Mike had to emphasise Melinda's use of the 'f' word. Of course, I'm sure he NEVER uses it nor ever actually said 'don't f*** with the formula'. Seriously, she may have used this word - many of us do when we are angry - but deliberately trying to win sympathy by making sure everyone knows she used it is all a bit pathetic.

Actually after re-reading point 5, that is not what Mike said in the quote. Melinda apparently says she is Mikes partner, not Brian.

To be fair, Foskett sang Brian leads (DWB off the top of my head). Perhaps Mike should have asked if Ambha could cover that.

Yeah, I have now heard two different accounts on this in different places: one account is where Melinda says she's Mike's partner. Another account is where Melinda says that Mike is not Brian's partner but she is. For those who have seen the book, what does Mike say and is it different from what he says in this interview?

From the link that opened this thread: '“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.'

I assume Mike didn't actually mean this - it doesn't make any sense.

So you're married and in business partnership with your husband.  Your husband's cousin, who has previously sued your husband for considerable amounts of money and never fails to inform the public how he took drugs, is in a temporary collaborator-ship with him for financial reasons. You are told that he wants to further is daughter's career through a public appearance in front of your husband's and the group's supporters. This exceeds the terms of the collaborator-ship which is to re-unite original members of the group, is clearly nepotism and is a request for a favour.  In your business capacity you say no as this is not beneficial to your husband and you do not feel like doing a favour for someone who has been so hostile in the past.  

Then your husband's cousin tries to pull rank on you by saying 'MY PARTNER has already agreed to this' (not 'Brian has agreed to it' but possessively 'MY partner').  Divorcing yourselves from your own personal likes and dislikes can you not imagine the first words coming into your head being 'not your partner - my partner'? The 'f**king' is an expression of annoyance - in this day and age are we not passed being shocked at it?  

Any way what is Mike saying he is annoyed about

1 - Melinda having a closer relationship with Brian than him?
2 - His daughter being stopped from singing?
3 - Use of the F word?

My guess is no 1, though he presents it to breakfast TV at being shocked by the 'F' word because he knows that's what they will find offensive and only a little of (queue violins) 'he's my cousin, we wrote all this music together'.

In any case this is not what Mike said - he said Melinda told him she was his [Mike's] partner.  So either he expressed this wrongly or else she expressed wrongly or the contract was between BriMel and the Beach Boys - which puts a slightly different spin on it - Melinda is defining her role of Brian Wilson's business manager and the decision maker.  I'm sure any business woman (and some business men) will understand the importance of not letting your position be undermined and irritation that causes.

Thanks Melinda!

I bet the quote Mike said about Melinda is out of context to suit his narrative.

With that said it does seem there isnt a problem between Mike and Brian personally. Professionally a different story.

Too bad, because I'd like to hear Mike's voice again on some of the Pet Sounds songs. In a perfect word, Mike would be a member of Brian's band singing his trademark songs and contributing to the writing process.  Ive seen both Brian and Mike and Bruce's version of the Beach Boys. Mikes version is heavy nostalgia and a bit soft and Brian makes things sound more contemporary and vital.

Mike trashing Melinda again ... ::)

Melinda rescued Brian from a snake-pit.  There was more than 1 snake in Brian's past...  Snakes which negatively contributed HUGELY to Brian's illness and free-fall.  Having rescued Brian [with the IMPORTANT help of Carl and Audree. et al] she was not about to allow history to repeat itself in even small ways.  This '1/2 talent' who really hadn't contributed anything meaningfully creative to ANYONE'S music projects in decades was going to be telling folk what to do and how it was going to happen?

Not!!!

Good for YOU Melinda.  Well and properly done.

I'll side with Melinda on this one.

1.  You don't switch vocals during sound check.  You do it before you go on stage...and you clear it with the producer first.
2.  It sounds like Jackie was trying to incite Melinda.

Mike has been filing legal actions against Brian for 25 years, he's been making comments about the Wilson family and drug abuse and all of that in interview after interview, repeating the comments about Brian being "controlled" and kept drugged as recent as in the past month, and now he's going after Brian's wife.

And he wonders why Brian doesn't write songs with him much less talk to him?

Who doesn't give kudos to a spouse protecting their loved one?  Especially when it is Brian, who is so naively innocent about people and their motives.  I am just guessing that the only reason Mike and Brian still have a good relationship after the lawsuit is because it was Brian Wilson who was sued.  If the roles were reversed, how 'loving' do you think Mike would be towards Brian?

CSM - glad you asked if someone has "seen the book." It is beyond me that anyone would jump into this discussion without it in hand.  

Got it on a Kindle download on an iPad and here is my impression...I read it on an iPad (the big one) over the course of 2 days.  I could not put it down.

First, there are first-hand accounts, and I will spotlight the one on Carl's last season touring while he was terminal.  I had seen Carl about 8 weeks before his final show, where most of the audience was in tears because it would be the last time we would ever see him. This is not to be missed.

Second, it was made clear how much of Murry's crap was foisted on Brian where he left him, since he died in his 50's, with Brian holding-the-bag with the copyright issue.  It appeared that there were times where Brian conceded that the credits were not given and was blocked by a lawyer or a guardian.  That is clearly spelled out.  

Third, it seems that Murry's inter-family jealousy blinded him and he put that on his kids, too.  Probably ate him alive - dying in his mid-50's.  

Fourth, you will see exactly how devious Landy was, in terms of the crap he pulled with the band, in terms of keeping Brian from his brothers, his kids, etc.  If you think you don't like Landy now...another log fell on the campfire.  Fraud and unethical is an understatement. I am sorry he did not die in prison, as Manson's therapist.  That era was enlarged.  To those who followed that and still do, it is not unimportant.

The on-the-road part was important to me...decade-by-decade, to see them be able to stay-in-the-game, against all odds, and how Carl's and Dennis' roles became more important, with Dennis' writing (POB) and Carl doing musical direction and his own work.  It is a lot of the road perspective as well, with Chicago on the road, a very cool era.      

And the "dust up" during C50 is in the book.  The "exchange" from this article cited, was pulled from the book.  And, after the "event" there was a happy ending,  "Ambha sang 'Sail on Sailor' and got a standing ovation.  Brian speaking into the mic, congratulated her, and Ambha walked over and gave him a big hug." p. 401.

It is very reasonably priced at under $15 on amazon as a download.   ;)  

Okay, so I don't have the book in front of me right now to compare his interview quote directly with the text of the book, but is Mike actually misquoting his own book (and memory) in that interview? The description above indicates the book describes an episode where Melinda told Mike's *wife* that Mike isn't Brian's partner, she (Melinda) is. No indication based on that description as to whether Mike was present when Melinda said this to Jackie, but either way, it sounds like it was addressed to Jackie and not Mike.

Then Mike says an in interview that Melinda told *him* (Mike) that Brian's not Mike's partner, Melinda is. I'm less concerned actually about whether Mike garbled the meaning (which it sounds like he did; Melinda saying she's Mike partner only makes sense in some sort of procedural, business sense), and more concerned if Mike is changing something Melinda said to Jackie into something Melinda said to him (Mike).

As for the incident itself, if it was in fact Melinda saying this to Jackie, and saying that she (Melinda) is Brian's partner, then it makes a lot more sense.

Let's break it down and apply probably too much analysis to this:

Mike asks Brian if Ambha can take over one of Brian's leads. First of all, did he really *ask* in the traditional sense? Or was it more like "Ambha's gonna sing this song, sound okay?" There’s a difference there. But in any event, even if it genuinely was a question and not more like a statement of what would be occurring unless someone raised an objection, I have to say this: Brian seems to be an easy going guy on that sort of stuff sometimes. I don’t think he wants to get in Mike’s grill about stuff. It’s just not his personality. I have to wonder, if Mike had said “So, Wilfred Brimley is going to come in and sing an Abba medley. Sound okay Cousin Brian?”, Brian might well say “Sure, yeah, whatever.”

Now, is having a gripe with Ambha singing a song, especially taking away a Brian lead, a legit gripe? I think so. An awkward one to be sure. But I’m not so sure Mike would have said “sure!” if Brian suggested his teenage daughter come on stage and take Mike’s lead on “Kokomo” or something. But that’s all hypothetical of course, to be fair. But, while Brian’s lead on “SOS” probably isn’t his best moment in a show, I think as a fan, who is probably getting ONE chance to see the reunion lineup, I’d rather hear Brian sing a song of his than Mike’s daughter. It’s really kind of an extension of the Stamos thing.

I think Melinda’s biggest legit concern would be these two points: One, the semantic but true point that Brian’s wife is his “partner”, not a guy who hasn’t written much with Brian in DECADES, hasn’t even recorded or toured with Brian extensively in about THIRTY years, etc. Secondly, related to this, is that it’s OBVIOUSLY a pointed thing to tell Brian’s wife that *Mike* is Brian’s partner. That sounds like a classic snippy, provocative thing to say. It’s part of the ridiculous narrative Mike has been spinning for years that he and Brian are still active partners (remember, part of Mike’s 2005 lawsuit being *shot down* in court was that Mike tried and FAILED to prove that an actual legal *partnership* had formed and existed between he and Brian), instead of the reality which is that they teamed up for some great co-writes between 1961 and about 1965 or 66, had sporadic collaborations after that, and little contact for decades after that.

More to the point, my biggest problem with these stories is not the sharing of the story. Rather, it’s the implication that such a story had ANYTHING to do with Mike dumping the reunion lineup. It’s like a guy dumping his wife because he wants to be with his mistress, and then when asked about it, ignores the mistress part and instead just rattles off a story about a contentious argument he had with his now ex-wife, or shares some other random factoid about his ex-wife that could reflect negatively on her. It would have little or nothing to do with the fact that he dumped his wife because he wanted to be with the other woman. Mike wants to do everything he can to avoid highlighting the fact that *he chose* to quit the reunion.

Does anyone really think Mike was all ready to keep the reunion permanent, but Melinda said the F word and Mike couldn’t handle it? Remember, this is Mike Love, the guy who when asked about playing gigs at Sun City said the UN could go f**k themselves. Mike has said *repeatedly* that he felt the reunion was always only going to be a short-term thing. “Set end date” and all of that. He was also surely booking shows before the reunion tour was over.

Does Mike reveal in his book precisely *when* he started booking shows for his own band?

I do think that Mike was probably in shock in the sense that, when is the last time someone on a BB tour said “No” to Mike about anything?

Ultimately, I certainly wish the communication and relations between these parties wouldn’t have been so snippy and dysfunctional (and that goes for all sides; Jackie calling Mike Brian’s partner is clearly meant to be provocative too, and at the very least delusional). But if someone behind the scenes was telling Mike to let Brian have his leads so the *fans* can hear Brian sing the song instead of Mike running a talent show for his daughter, I don’t mind.

I’m actually more curious how the Stamos incident during the tour in NY unfolded in light of this Ambha story.

But yeah, I think what this all indicates is that Mike dislikes Melinda more than he wants to be with Brian. Yeah, it appears you have to (sporadically, since Melinda doesn’t stay on tour) deal with Melinda in order to work with Brian. So what? Get over it. Take one for the team, the team being both the BAND and the FANS. *Everybody else* was and is able to work with Melinda. Just like I’m sure maybe some people don’t like to deal with the Mike-Jackie partnership, some probably find it annoying to deal with Melinda. But yeah, get over it. Is Melinda really the most tough-as-nails person Mike has come across in all his years in the industry? Remember all the characters the BBs dealt with over the years. They used to do show deals with people like Bill Graham. Is Melinda reminding Jackie that Brian’s current wife is Brian’s partner, not his cowriter from 50 years ago, really that difficult to deal with?

Does anybody not think that someone over all these years found it difficult to deal with Mike and Jackie, and Mike’s point of view and business actions? Talk to Al about that; I’m sure he might have some interesting things that speak to the difficulties in dealing with *Mike* and Mike’s “team.”

I’m not going to blindly defend Melinda. I think we have sketchy details on this story, but I have no problem saying I probably wouldn’t want to be involved business-wise with ANY of these people. A certain level of acrimony and dysfunctionality seem to permeate all corners of this thing. But trust me, these “shocker” stories about something Melinda might have said behind the scenes? Trust me, there are stories about ALL of these people like that, *especially* Mike.

If looking for context is important, then I'd ask why Mike doesn't mention his failed 2005 lawsuit in the book. After reading that transcript, it's amazing Brian and Al even shared a stage with Mike considering the language used against both of them, especially Al who didn't even have skin in the game. But they did, and C50 happened for the fans' benefit. Now Mike goes on national television and goes after Brian's wife? Again, if Mike's phone isn't ringing with an invitation from Brian to write songs, is it hard to see why that might be?

GF - IIRC - the whole drugs thing was the lawsuit that Landy propelled into court to attempt to "set aside" the transfer of Sea of Tunes to A + M and examine the charges of fraud.

"The walls were closing in, (because he was investigated for  professional misconduct at the time - including having had sex with a female patient) as Landy's principal --maybe only--source of income was now Brian, not as a patient, but as a business partner.  It was all the more reason for Landy to lead the charge against  Irving Music...That suit, filed in 1989, sought  $50 million in lost publishing royalties and $50 million in punitive damages, while the whole catalog itself, was thought to be worth much more. Landy was to receive 15 percent of all the proceeds." p. 342.  

GF - -  the context is what is in the book. 

There is a story about "Sloop" and Al, where he probably should have been given credit. (Likely Murry again) I did not understand that Al had done some arranging (charts) and it was not just a matter of "Let's do Sloop John B" but Murry seemed to want it all. 

Nope, Mike has in recent months and years referred pejoratively to Brian being medicated *present-day*, NOTHING to do with Landy. Mike's words in interviews of recent years have been interpreted by many to be an attempt to compare Brian's current medicated state and general state to what occurred to him in the Landy years. Yes, some if not many believe Mike has tried to imply Melinda (and others around Brian?) is/are analogous to Landy. And that is not only despicable, but demonstrably false.

Hey Jude - I am dealing strictly with the contents of the book. 

I once saw Al eat an ice cream cone. In saying that, I've provided some level of context.

There is some level of context in Mike's words, but the point is that there maybe isn't *enough* context. "The context is what is in the book" is like saying "One equals one."

I would say a 2005 lawsuit that got extensive coverage in the press especially after Brian was getting tons of positive press and accolades from Smile would have been the definition of "context" as in a topic that could have been covered in the book. Maybe because Mike lost the suit, that wasn't the kind of context the book was looking to provide? Was it coincidence that many of the points of argument and disagreement being repeated to this day were listed in that lawsuit filing, a suit which got tossed out of multiple courts complete with damages being awarded those who were sued?

Clearly. But in doing so, you're *ignoring* what GF said and what you were appearing to try to respond to. GF said this:

he's been making comments about the Wilson family and drug abuse and all of that in interview after interview, repeating the comments about Brian being "controlled" and kept drugged as recent as in the past month

So once again you either didn't fully read what GF said, or chose to ignore it and make your own point. You quoted those comments of GF in your response, where GF talked about recent Mike interviews, and you instead talked ONLY about what is in the book.

I think one of the points that may come up in a discussion of Mike's book is what he DIDN'T mention or include. I would humbly suggest that if your response to every instance where someone raises what ISN'T in the book is going to be to cite some reflexive property of "what's in the book is in the book", then maybe you should skip the discussion.

Yeah, this is what I'm asking. Because as it stands now it seems as if Mike is a bit unsure of the contents of his own book. Can anyone who has the book confirm whether or not the news story corresponds to the book's story?

Hey Jude - that is not in the book.  I read over 400 pages of the book.   What is in that book (which I think BB fans should read) has a huge amount of info about the history of the band. I am not taking this bait.  The book deals with a lot and I won't be dragged into other interviews that have been done.  This book is a lot to digest, and when Brian's book comes out, I'll read that too.  

The 2005 lawsuit was certainly a low point, and it's rife with rejections and condemnations of Mike and his legal team. The story of fabricating evidence via eBay purchases, shenanigans about establishing places of residences to file the suit, etc. There's nothing in that chapter of the saga that reflects well on Mike. I'm not surprised if he didn't mention it in his book. Disappointed of course; that would be a great moment for Mike to have just one quick little moment of humility.

If you want to ignore other interviews, ignore what other posters are saying, that's your prerogative. I think it's silly and just an arbitrary rule you think you can set for this discussion (but of course you can't actually set such a rule). But then please don't quote and respond to someone's comments about OTHER interviews by citing the book as the only valid source for discussion in this thread.

Again, it sounds like this isn't the thread for you. People *ARE* going to bring up other interviews, other conflicting stories, other books, ALL of that sort of stuff, including what ISN'T in the book. It's absolutely silly to confine the discussion at hand to ONLY what is in the book.

PLEASE don't bog this thread down with circular comments pointing back to "THE BOOK" and nothing but "THE BOOK." People are allowed, and should, cite other things outside of the book in discussing the book. If you disagree with that, if you disagree with the very simple, fundamental idea that people will bring in things other than just the book in discussing the book, then I would ask (and all I can do is ask) that you move to another thread.

Maybe you can start a separate "Let's Discuss the Book, and Nothing But the Book" thread where the idea is to never mention anything outside of the book.

Hey Jude - you have a beachboysopinions website.  Why would you not read a book by a Beach Boy?  Why would anyone opine about a book they had not read? Or take a slice from a news report (2nd generation) and comment without having it (the book) right in front of you?  

Without reading it, it is an "uninformed opinion."  

It is cheap.  Or, free in a library.  


  

sorry double post  - mea culpa  ;)

Filledeplage: Master of the Chewbacca Theory.

When Mike went on CBS and made the comments directed at Melinda, it went out to however many million viewers were watching, listening, or reading that linked transcript from the CBS program. He cannot assume everyone watching had his book in hand, or even knew he had a book on the market until that segment was aired. Therefore, that's the context - what he said on CBS.

And I'll say again, if Mike is going after Brian's wife on a television appearance adding to all of the comments since 2012 placed in his various interviews promoting his concerts within dozens of newspapers and various outlets, not to mention whatever went on via legal actions, is it surprising that Mike isn't getting invitations from Brian to write songs? If Mike goes after Brian's wife, family, etc in public, and it's been ongoing for years, why or how would Mike be disappointed if they don't have a personal relationship? We're still talking about real people with real emotions and feelings.

What are you talking about? When did I say I would not read any book? How do you even know how far I've read into Mike's book? I mentioned above that I don't have it in front of me. I meant that in the literal sense. I'm at a computer and can't put the book in front of me at this precise moment. I didn't say I haven't or won't read it. Nice try, the "they haven't even read the book" argument is I'm sure going to be the first line of defense for Mike defenders.

I'm not questioning talking about the book. We obviously can and should; it's the main crux of these discussions.

What I'm talking about is your ridiculous assertion that OTHER sources, and how the book and those other sources reflect on each other, should NOT be brought up in this discussion.

Further, the problem in this thread is that you specifically respond to someone citing OTHER sources by saying "it's not in the book." And?

My grandfather's colonoscopy isn't in the book either, but I'm pretty sure it happened. Just because Mike chose to not discuss something in his book doesn't mean we can't bring it up. Again, what *isn't* in the book will be one of the points of discussions about the book. That he left out the high-profile 2005 lawsuit is a *huge* deal.

Oh my God, you're absolutely right. I admit, I had to look this up, but this pretty much is indeed exactly what is happening:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

GF - there is so much in that book, I found to be very informative.  Maybe a thread should be set up to address that.  And keep comments confined to "If you read this..." please comment.  

It is intense to read, I found, after going throat 400+ pages.  The interviews are beyond the book.  Those relationships are like them walking off-stage after a show.  They go back to their own lives.  That is for the parties to figure out.  It can't be "vicariously" worked out on a message board. I think it is inappropriate. That is my opinion.  Blood is still thicker than water.  

If you read the book, I think your heart will be touched as Carl explains to Brian how they were kept away from him and were not rejecting him. I think you will gain another insight into the history of the band.    

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

Hey Jude - If you have read the book, why don't you comment on it?   Those are MY impressions from what I read.  Some are refusing to read it because they have a bias against anything "Mike" related.  And refuse to see that much of this band's history is irrefutably a result of people who interfered with the band and the band members.  The old "divide and conquer" method.  

You "could" give a copy of both books to your parents and grand parents and then ask their opinions on it. They read about The Beach Boys in "real time."  Did you?  ;)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

What are you talking about? I'm in a thread talking about the book. I'm talking about the book.

I'll make any comments or reviews on any or all parts of the books when I damn well feel like it.

Are you trying to make rules for how we're supposed to talk about the book? Are we supposed to talk about it chapter by chapter?

Again, it seems like you're the only one who continually has a problem with the premise of these threads, the execution of these threads, and what people are saying or not saying in these threads. So I again suggest that you start another thread where you can try to set some arbitrary rules about what can't or can be discussed, and about how the book should be discussed.

And, not that it matters, but for the record if I wanted to introduce someone to the BBs, I wouldn't give them either autobiography. I'd probably give them Jon Stebbins's "FAQ" book, maybe Jim Murphy's book for the formative years, and even though I haven't read Brian's book yet, I'd probably end up leaning towards giving someone something like Carlin's book until such time that someone can do a Mark Lewisohn-style biography on the Beach Boys.

Perhaps it might help to note that this thread is about a quote from a Mike Love interview not the book.

Thank you for pointing this out. It's more about the interview, and how the book lines up or doesn't line up with what he said in the interview.

Poor Mike he is always getting the short end of the stick.

I think that was the working title for the book before they settled on "Good Vibrations."

Okay, filledeplage.  Since you have read the entire book, I have a question for you.

In the CBS news interview, Mike says this:

“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/beach-boys-mike-love-opens-up-drama-with-cousin-brian-wilson/

Another poster who I assume has also read the book (I could be wrong, that's why I'm asking you) says that Melinda didn't speak these words to Mike.  Rather, Melinda was speaking to Mike's wife and the exchange was more along these lines:

Melinda "storms" to Jacquelyne, says Ambha can't sing a Brian lead
Mike's wife replies, "Mike already discussed the matter with his partner, Brian.”
And Melinda answers, “Mike’s not his fucking partner. I’m his fucking partner.”

Two very different accounts of what I assume to be the same event. 
One version says Melinda told Mike that Brian wasn't Mike's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Mike's partner.
The other version says that Melinda told Mike's wife that Mike's not Brian's partner, and that she (Melinda) was Brian's partner.
Which of these two versions is in Mike's book?

Cheers :beer

I started a thread on the book, and made specific and sometimes extensive comments based on the actual pages of the book, giving my opinions and impressions of those specific sections in the book, with more to follow. As a result, I've apparently been publicly accused of charging the author with plagiarism, which I never did, and in other cases been accused by you personally among others of claiming posters here like you and Cam had a hand in writing it - a charge which is as laughable as it is false since everything I wrote is still on this board...and available to review in the thread about the book.

My most recent comments on the book are specific to what Mike said to CBS, and the notion of why Brian would be expected to invite Mike to write songs or do much of anything else after seeing his wife be the subject of Mike's comments, on top of Mike saying he was being "controlled" and drugged as recent as the past month in a public interview, and a laundry list of comments made toward his family and assorted issues peppered throughout interviews supposed to be promoting Mike's concerts.

My comments on the book have also been along the lines of what I wish Mike had included in the book, among them the lightning-rod issues like Mike giving seed money to fund the PMRC in the 80's, the 2005 lawsuit which Mike lost and lost big, and the lack of more inter-personal inner workings that were at play within the band during the Smile era.

I've also commented on the lack of context given that June 2012 email that we're told scuppered the extension and further booking of C50 shows, specifically what other emails if any correspondence came prior to the oft-cited email quoted in the book, and what was the context in which that email appeared. My comments on that are based on wondering how a lone email within what was a multi-million dollar corporate structure running C50 and affecting dozens of participants on the tour could be cited as if it came out of the blue with no precedent. I'm one who is curious to learn more about what led to it, and what else may have come prior to it within the chain of operations on that tour as of June 2012.

That's context.

CBS is not in the book. 

The scenario ended well that evening.  Ambha did the lead; Brian congratulated her. 

There is a section you are omitting, which deals with Mike threatening to quit C50 on the spot.  Things were smoothed over (Mike did not pack up and quit the tour) and not perpetuated, as in this particular thread.  Some are dealing with the small, heated exchange (without Brian or Mike being there) and not with the result.  Or the outcome.

Things cooled down.  The show went on and the tour went on. 

And, cheers to you, Happy Friday! :beer

Can anybody who has read the book please answer LostArt's question? Is Mike telling two wildly different accounts of the same story?

Did you really hope that FdP would answer your question?

GF - The book is over 400 pages.  It is Mike's account and not a reflection of what others think should be in the book.  The section on the lawsuit which was initiated by Landy with his devious plot to have Brian's kids disinherited, was originated by Landy.  

There are two email exchanges and one is from early June and one from late June.  I thought there was only one.  

IIRC  - three and a half weeks seemed too long to "call back" the first email of "no more shows for us" - which looked pretty final to me.  So, what I learned in the  book, is that there were TWO emails.  

On June 1st (it related to shows in Israel) which was turned down (the "no more shows for Wilson") and a June 25th email to "disregard the previous message." That is found on pp. 401-402.  

The info I am relying on is what is in front of me and not legal advice or counsel.***

We don't know because CBS is not in the book.  I guess.   :thud

You are looking for a particular response.  Sorry. You can get the book.   ;)

Exactly.

This thread is about the interview, not the book. The whole incident is example of Melinda's watching out for BW's interest from the Byzantine games of Mike Love.

no, not he. . . . .

I was hoping.  Not sure why.  She does say that neither Brian nor Mike was there for this little dust up, so I assume that it was Melinda and Mike's wife having the conversation.

No, I am not looking for any response. And am not going to read the book.

After reading this whole thread, I only came to ONE very obvious conclusion : I really, really want to see Wilford Brimley sing an Abba medley, live on stage. With Brian's or Mike's band, doesn't matter. Please, make it happen!

So, by inference, it seems you got your answer after all. Well, congrats! :)

FDP-bacca is currently making the kessel run in less than 12 parsecs.

I missed that! Thanks for bringing that to my attention.

So, in that case, in this interview Mike is mis-remembering the events he describes in the book?

The 2005 lawsuit had nothing to do with Landy. Why did you just dodge that entirely and bring Landy into it?

2005.

What if anything came before the email you reference from the book?

As a reader of the book...can I not say "I wish he had talked about that?" as a reaction? Or do we just take everything at face value?

Someone asked you a direct question about something that *is* in the book, and you dodged their question, and further gave the answer "buy the book". How about answering their question, since you said you wanted to discuss what was in the book, and someone asked a specific question about what was actually in the book?

Did Mike on CBS contradict what is in the book about this 'partner' confrontation at C50? Simple question...why duck it?

I think Mike Love had every reason to be annoyed, put off, etc. by Melinda injecting herself into the day to workings of the band.  It was not her place to do it.  And yes, that statement, that she's Mike's partner, whether she said it to him or Mike's wife, indicates that Brian is controlled.

Partly quoting just to repeat it because it's an excellent post but also to make the point that if Mike doesn't get on with Melinda that would surely be the same reason he seems not to get on with some others who supercede him as a BW collaborator or partner. Mike is jealous and also competitive and wants to be the main man, the one with whom Brian works and makes hits.

Except in one quote she's saying she's Mike's partner and in another quote, apparently, she's saying she's Brian's partner. Both wildly different versions seem to have come from Mike Love in a discussion about the same event. Furthermore, in both cases, the person who Melinda is saying these two different things to is a different person. This doesn't indicate that Brian is controlled so much as it indicates that Mike doesn't know the substance of his own book.

In either version, Melinda is placing herself as one of the principals running the band.  When spouses get involved in a husband's business, it's often bad news, and the other business partners deeply resent it.

Oh my. Melinda is Brian's wife AND business partner (what does BriMel mean?), so I guess more than entitled to "inject" (?) herself. And by your logic, I am controlling LostArt because I intervened on his behalf some posts ago.

Going by the 2005 lawsuit Mike resents Al and Brian, let alone Melinda.

No, in one case she's taking offence to someone who has barely engaged with Brian years referring to him as his "partner" to a person who is actually a partner to Brian in multiple ways.

I also find it somewhat problematic that the going assumption here is that its the husband who will be the one who has the business.

If Mike really felt that non-band members including wives shouldn't be there weighing in, then why was Jackie Love even there to interject anything into the conversation? Was she not butting in as well?

Further, there still seems to be some disagreement about whether Melinda is alleged to have said that she was Mike's partner rather than Brian, or that she is alleged to have said that she is Brian's partner, not Mike. Two very different things.

And aren't both wives intertwined with the business side of things? Isn't Mike's wife part of some of Mike's business ventures?

According to this, both Mike and Jackie Love are both part of "Meleco": https://bizstanding.com/directory/NV/ME/256/

But again, I'm thinking it's far more likely Melinda meant that she was Brian's partner, not Mike. As in, Brian's wife is his partner, not his long-estranged former cowriter and bandmate.

I don't remember the specifics but I'm sure someone here does, but wasn't the reunion tour and album a separate deal (not BRI) in that C50 was a production company (or some other term) and that Brian and Mike were indeed partners in this, and maybe even Joe Thomas?  And the other three BB's were salaried?

Jackie Love is apparently intertwined into the band's business to some arguable degree if she's a co-owner (or co-director, or whatever you want to call it) of the corporation (Meleco) that licenses the BB name from BRI:

https://bizstanding.com/directory/NV/ME/256/

If she is part of the corporation in a licensing agreement with BRI, then that means people at BRI including the shareholders presumably have to interact with or deal with her on some level at some point.

Yes, 50 Big Ones was apparently Joe Thomas, Brian, and Mike. But let's be realistic, the actual BBs have agents and lawyers actually handling the mechanics of all of this. And *all* of the wives get involved to varying degrees.

I'd still like to see someone speak to Ray Lawlor's point that Melinda was *absent* for most of the C50 tour. It's not like she was hovering over the whole thing. I'm sure Brian gets advice from his wife just as Mike does from his, and Al does from his, and so on.

Keep in mind as well that they went into C50 with Mike having already implied some not-too-kind things about Melinda (having already been doing the "people around Brian" thing for many years), whereas I don't think I've *ever* heard Brian say a bad word about Jackie Love. You can scrimp around and find a few riled-up Brian interviews where he talks s**t on the other Beach Boys. They're few and far between but they exist. But I don't recall seeing a single comment from Brian or Al talking about Jackie Love and her role in Mike's business affairs, or otherwise saying *anything* negative about her at all.

To be fair, I would like to read Melinda Wilson's version of what occurred.  Why did she send the fax or e-mail that said no more tour dates, if she was the one that sent it?

Why did Howie Edelson write that when Jeff Foskett left Brian Wilson to go work for Mike Love that was a big FU to Melinda Wilson?  She is obviously an issue for some people.  

Am I the only one who thinks it's a really big issue that Mike is telling a very different story about an event that is in the book that has just been published and that he's currently promoting?

Some people don't like Melinda, and I doubt that every single possible, conceivable reason to not like something about her is invalid. Like anyone, I'm sure she has flaws.

As I've often said, I wouldn't do business with ANY of these people.

But it seems like Melinda is a convenient reason and scapegoat people use when Brian doesn't want to work with them anymore. It always turns into implying that it's not Brian, but Melinda that causes the problems. Well no, maybe Brian doesn't want to work with Mike but doesn't have the personality type to say "F**k off, Mike, I don't want to write songs with you. Let's just do a tour and record some other songs." Yes, it's true that not being able to speak directly to each other instead of using surrogates is not the most functional way to do things. But all of these guys have wives, agents, lawyers, and managers throwing their two cents in and working as intermediaries.

GF - The overall dispute was over C50 - if someone writes an email that says on June 1st they are done, and the other party "relies on it" - and 25 days elapse, that puts the whole situation in a very different light.  I think the retraction was too late. (not legal advice)***

The suit in 2005 did not prevail. It is not in the book.  The book is enough to deal with.  I am not dodging anything,  I am not interested in discussing it or going on some other tangent.  I'd  like to hear what people think about things such as Carl's last days on the concert tour, it's impact on the band, how they carried on post.  Most do not want to discuss that but get into the soap opera/drama mode over "hot words" that got resolved.  It turned out just fine - but that is not drama.

My head is still exploding over how premeditated Landy was.  More than I ever imagined.  

 

In some cases, altering a story a little bit for effect or simply because he's conflated events in his mind wouldn't be a big deal. But yes, when it comes to a pretty strong and inflammatory allegation regarding something Melinda said, the possibility of two different stories being told *is* a big deal.

Then please start a new thread or go to the main book thread. This thread speaks specifically to Mike's recent INTERVIEW on CBS.

I think you're 100% dodging and Chewbacca-ing, but even if you're not, then the thread about Mike's CBS interview is *not* the place to suggest we shouldn't talk about the CBS interview!  :lol

It's just funny because Mike, like many celebrities, is of the school of telling the same story in much the same way in many interviews. It is something that we comment on here a lot. Whether we like it or not, it's kind of an art. McCartney, for example, has perfected it. For those of us who have heard several interviews, we could probably say, beat by beat, the "Yesterday" story. Or we can say, beat by beat, the "Hey Jude" story right down to "movement you need is on your shoulder" sounding like a parrot, etc. Mike does this too. But quite interestingly he does not do that here - and, in many ways, these interviews allow him the chance to really do it. After all, the book has just come out, and Mike should be very familiar with the material. Certainly you would imagine that his publishers would want him to be. Why not take out a few new tidbits in the book and re-tell them like a kind of trailer? It just seems very odd that he should tell such strangely different accounts - it's not in character, it's not as if this is a story from a long time ago or that he told a long time ago, and it does not seem like the right decision if your goal is to sell the material that's in this book.

it's a huge difference... if she A) told Jackie, "I'm his (Brian's) f*cking partner" or if she B) told Mike, "I'm your (Mike's) f*cking partner."

we still don't know which, even though certain forum members (one in particular) had the opportunity to set the discussion straight but chose to derail the thread instead while accusing OTHERS of going off on a tangent. and which is one of several reasons I stopped engaging with certain forum members (one in particular) some time ago.

it certainly seems like Mike tells story A in his book, but tells story B in the CBS interview. if that is the case, Mike is not only misquoting his own book but also misrepresenting what actually happened and slandering Melinda in the process. and if THAT is the case, then perhaps we've not heard the last of this and hopefully Melinda will offer her version of events. maybe she can even sue Mike for good measure  ;)

Just curious...does anyone know the date of this Melinda/Jackie incident.  FdP suggests that Mike was ready to quit the tour over it.  Could it also have been the catalyst for the "no more shows for Wilson" e-mail?

The C50 tour was miracle and triumph of the music for how long it went on with such infighting. :bw 

just to be clear to certain forum members (ahem): THIS thread is about ONE SPECIFIC STATEMENT that Mike just made during a CBS interview which seems to conflict with what he wrote in his book and with what may have actually occurred.

THIS thread is not about Mike's book specifically, or Carl's last days on the tour, or Landy's actions, or even the length of Mike's turds ;)

Nothing and I mean nothing would be more tantalizing to see than Melinda hauling myKe luHv's ass into court and winning big. What goes around comes around.  :bw

That's because - they are ALL professionals and did not want to let the fans down.   ;)

Disagree. The industry was unfortunately laughing at these guys (or rolling their eyes) at the end of the tour because they all came across as total amateurs business-wise and PR-wise, and the fact that their tour signified half a century in the business only highlighted the irony of still not having their s**t together.

The more info comes out about C50, the more it seems like it was a lucky accident the thing held together. I think Joe Thomas ponying up a big fat check at the outset is probably the main thing that held it together.

Does anybody really think Mike would have quit the tour? If he had, he would likely have been sued like nobody in the band has ever been sued before.

In addition, what was the date that the Touring Corporation (whatever it was called) signed the agreement to add 25 or so more shows to the tour?

But to build on CSM's point, sounds like Mike either changed his story on the dustup with melinda or didn't read his own book.

Also again, why was *none* of this (either the "emails" or Melinda's actions/comments) alluded to *at all* in Mike's letter to the LA Times in 2012? These things were not even *hinted* at in his letter.

Further, even after citing the "email", Mike continued to assert in interviews that he had planned all along to go back to his own thing. Nobody, either Mike or anyone else, has proffered anything that indicates Mike quitting the reunion was about anything other than his own preference and decision, and one that by his own admission was the "plan" all along.

Isn't there something that interrogators say about how true stories tend to be told one way but made up stories tend to have a variety of different versions? I'm really not saying that's true in this case but it is something to keep in mind.

In the concert review section of this message board, we can find reports of all of the Beach Boys shows from 2012. I guess this is the one, that was referenced to in the interview:


http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,13127.0.html


Our user "Cool Water" wrote about the soundcheck and Mike asking Brian if Ambha could sing SOS:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,13127.msg280436.html#msg280436

heavens, the "story" is the one in the book; likely the version cobbled together in the interview news item (unless there is video) ran into pronoun trouble.

The point is that a band had tention over wives. . . . .radical

I don't know what interrogators say but my Grandma used to say 'Liars have to have good memories.'

Hey Jude - Industry?  The same industry that threw them to the wolves and under the bus?  The industry that stole their catalog?  I saw 7 of those C50 shows, each one better than the one before.  If I had to guess there were a lot of industry people who made a ton of dough off that tour and are pissed that the spigot was shut off.  The fans gave them the feedback about how their music was valued.

Ah, thanks.  So the Melinda/Jackie thing happened exactly one week (three shows during that week) before the "no more shows for Wilson" e-mail.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense

not pronoun trouble, Mike tells a different story in the interview. here is the quote:


she actually never said that if we are to believe the passage in the book, which states:

a) Melinda was speaking to Jackie, not to Mike
b) Melinda said that SHE was Brian's partner, not Mike
c) Melinda said that she was BRIAN'S partner, not Mike's partner

in the interview, Mike accuses Melinda of something that apparently never happened if he is referencing his book.

Thanks for doing the leg work to look that up. Very interesting. So, based on that account, Mike did what I was thinking he might have done, which was to basically go half-way between asking and telling/announcing that she would be singing the song.

It’s also interesting if Mike did spring it on the band during soundcheck (in front of fans to boot); it certainly would put them all in an awkward position if they felt maybe they shouldn’t have her sing the song.

Exactly. Fan feedback. Thanks for pointing that out, FDP.

Brian at C50 got a ton of applause and adulation from fans, the kind of thing that Mike was used to getting at his own shows. I cannot imagine that went over well with Mike. He felt undervalued, his low self esteem instinct kicked in, and he blew up the reunion. Not *just* because of that, but I'm sure it didn't help things. A (flawed) human thing to have happen, yet very sad.

In other words Mike is the same jealous teenager of 1961 in 2016. ::)

First off, I don't know why people get upset that Melinda gets involved in the business end of things. I think it's pretty clear that she is a member of Brian's management team. She clearly had a say in approval for Love and Mercy, for instance. She has been referred to as having been "in meetings" at various times. (When Darian talked about Brian's episode when he was alone with him and Melinda couldn't be reached because she was "in a meeting.") And I think it's perfectly appropriate for her to be a manager. It's no less appropriate than any other entertainment manager, really. And she's been with Brian for more than 20 years, so she's more than experienced at this point.

In fact, it's more very appropriate for Brian, who really hates the confrontation that I'm sure is sometimes involved in handling the business of the Beach Boys, as well as other logistical things, and who probably trusts Melinda more than anyone. I think Melinda has shown she's intelligent and more than capable of handling herself in a professional situation-- not that she has anything to prove to anyone. So to object to her involvement in Beach Boys business is a little weird. It's quite possible that she is his wife AND a manager.

Also, I could imagine that Brian asks Melinda to be "the heavy" in some situations...to express disagreement or dislike for something on Brian's behalf...and she agrees in order to protect him. If so, she would get a lot of the blame. I certainly think she's always acting in his best interests.

As for Mike's conflicting stories, could it also be possible that he misspoke? He's 75 years old. Could he have mixed up what she said? My 80-year-old father will sometimes do that and then only realize what he said when he's corrected. He's perfectly healthy, but you do get moments of confusion when you get older.

Agree with all your points. Regarding Mike simply misspeaking because he is getting older, it's very possible. And it makes me very, very sad that these guys are getting older and older, and that Mike wants to spend his later years, while he is still of sound health and mind, stirring up all sorts of BS instead of owning up to his own actions - or instead of just not making a big fuss about stuff and keeping his mouth shut. It's like, is this really what he wants to be doing in your later years?

CD - you are calling someone a "flawed" human.  Last time I checked that would fall under being judgmental.  

And as to whether it is relevant to discuss the book -CBS  was interviewing Mike about the book.   It is the book that prompted the interview. He discussed a variety of items including Manson.  

this is more than just mixing up his words.
the account Mike gives in the interview paints a completely different picture of what actually occurred (according to his book) and he specifically states that she told HIM she was MIKE'S partner... rather than telling Jackie that she was Brian's partner.

Nobody said it isn't relevant to discuss the book in a thread about Mike's CBS interview about the book. The problem is that you're contending nobody should bring up the CBS interview itself.

As for calling someone flawed, stating that we're ALL flawed is not judgmental. It's a fact.

FDP - For crying out loud... I, MYSELF am a flawed human too! Am I being judgmental against myself? Let's just be real here. We all have flaws, including Mike. Difference is, I'll cop to mine, Brian cops to his, but Mike LARGELY doesn't cop to his, and blames everyone else.

Have you ever, in your personal life, known someone who regularly doesn't own up to crappy things they do? Like all the friggin' time? Blame-shift-o-rama?  It's A THING. It happens. And it's not pretty, as in this case.

If we are parsing sentences, I'll point out that Century did not just write "a (flawed) human" but "a (flawed) human thing to have happen". So flawed is not an adjective for human, but flawed and human are adjectives for thing.
In other words, Century was being judgemental to a thing. :hat

Yes, we are all flawed.  Do we need to get insulting?  

The CBS interview referred back to the early CBS Sunday morning tape.  The touring situation is a high-stakes/high-pressure.  And exhaustion, day-after-day.

People sometimes have "words" when they get stressed out.  And, I do think that (as someone said earlier) the person's report had the narrative in the wrong person.  It was not between Melinda and Mike - it was between Melinda and Jacqui.

And -I do not even see a "by line."  Who wrote it?

S/he may have looked at a copy of the book and "moved the players around." Or, mixed-up what happened.  There is more to learn from in that book about the Beach Boys, than spotlighting this event.    

But Mike is being directly quoted. Are you saying he's being misquoted?

CD - yes we are all flawed but I am not sure it is our place to point out someone else's flaws...Something like, "Let he who is without sin, cast the first stone."  It is not up to us to tell anyone else to beg for forgiveness.  What is up with that kind of thinking?  I don't care if you hate Mike.  That is your prerogative.  

There is a lot of really great BB stuff in that book. And excuse me for insulting you in the hypothetical, I think that you are a damn fool if you don't read it if you are a lifer fan.  (only kidding with the insult)  :grouphug

If you are against people pointing out other people's flaws, I would hope you would say that Mike himself should take that to heart when he regularly points out Brian's flaws with his weight, his voice, his use of Autotune.

He is being quoted but that is not what is in the book. The scenario is not what was in the book account.  Those words were reportedly spoken "about" Mike not "to" Mike.  The book account was mis-reported as far as who said what, and to whom it was said.    

And we don't even know who wrote it. Can you find a by-line? I cannot.  

Come on CD - the use of autotune - during those C50 CD's - give me a break.  The Youtubes were better.  I am not pointing out personal flaws but technical flaws with technology that was probably unnecessary.  It is the same way people gripe about SIP and the technology used for that.   

About that CBS interview Chewie?

Mike is the one misquoting his own book and flat-out stating that Melinda called herself his f*cking partner, which according to his book never f*cking happened.

Yes, which is why I'm asking if it is your contention that he is being misquoted in this interview.

The problem is not Mike forgetting details about an episode. As Amy said, that's more than understandable at 75, and maybe at any age. The problem is that he never forgets putting the blame of everything on others (usually a Wilson, with appearances by Al Jardine).

As far as healthy memory troubles go though is it healthy when you claim to remember something having happened to you four years ago that never actually happened to you at all?

Exactly, Mike thinks he is the BBs and everybody else is his employee. Hence trying to tell BW what to play at the C50 show dustup.

So you excuse the Autotune comment. I take it that there is not a single thing that Mike could publicly say about Brian or Melinda that you'd quantify as pointing out their flaws, right? Oh right, you don't like hypotheticals.  Nothing Mike ever says about even Melinda Wilson is remotely of the nature of pointing out what he perceives as her flaws. Ha. Ha. Ha. What about Al supposedly being rude to subordinates? Isn't that Mike pointing out Al's flaw?
 

CSM - I think I already responded. 

Is there a difference as between the "nameless" interview and the book? Yes, there is.

CD - let' not spin a yarn here. Get the book and see for yourself. 

You are making this personal, as to me. It is not personal.  I think this book has value, as I think Brian's book will have value to enlarge the history of The Beach Boys. Who else is left who can tell the story?

Actually, this is completely unclear. I have no idea what you're talking about.

The only thing that is clear is that you're still ignoring what people are asking and ignoring the main crux (the CBS interview) of the thread. Still.

OK, but the book is not being quoted. So I'm quite confused as to your point here. Can you elaborate further?

FDP, I am curious to read the book, and I may well get my hands on a copy. Yes, Mike surely has some unique perspective.

But that's irrelevant to what I'm talking about here. You said you're against people saying judgmental things about others, yet you don't seem to think that applies to Mike.

THAT and THAT ALONE is the only thing I'm concerned with discussing here in this thread at this moment, and you don't want to address that.

Hey Jude -  Get the book. Go to p. 401.  Then compare it to the article.  See for your self.

Are you suggesting CBS fabricated the interview? What are you trying to say?

CD - get the book and compare the article to it.  P. 401.  They are words to compare.  Download it.

Are you?  Just get the book.

Gotta earn those M&B comps... ::)

 :o

No - dear, the checks.  :lol

Why are you refusing to answer this simple question? I already stated *numerous times* that I simply don't have the book in front of me and won't be able to for many many hours to come. It doesn't mean I don't already have the book. It just means I don't have it in front of me. I wouldn't doubt that you plan to carry your copy around everywhere you go, but I don't and can't.

I'm going to assume you don't have the book and/or haven't read it or haven't read it thoroughly until you can produce the quote in question.

I will further suggest that continuing to assert your point without citing or even paraphrasing the quote in question, and referring people to "buy the book" is both a weird, I guess, way to try to goose sales for the book, and effectively trolling at this stage.

If you refuse to address what anyone else is saying in this thread, and can't offer anything else than "go read the book", then please stop posting in this thread. You're not adding anything to the conversation at this stage.

Compare the two, it ain't rocket science.

I'm going to come right out and say you're just trolling the board at this stage by asking "Are you?"
I believe you're dragging this board and this discussion down. Again.

Once again, the modus operandi appears to be to create acrimony and chaos in any thread related to Mike or his book in order to deflect legitimate discussion and criticism of Mike and his book.

I'm clearly indicating that it's highly unlikely CBS fabricated a Mike Love quote. So I guess you're suggesting CBS fabricated Mike's quote.

Hey Jude - you are a BB website operator.  The book is part of their history.  You are at a disadvantage to engage in the discussion about this book or articles that have resulted as part of releasing this book.  

And I would strongly suggest that you refrain from posting about this book until such time as you have read it.  Because you are not informed as to it's contents.  

It's a FDP thang... ::)

What you are doing is THE worst fangirl viral marketing campaign in the history of the internet.

Capped off by Mike's own use of a negative review, and proudly using the "gossip" term (used as an insult in the review, but spun as a positive by Mike) on his own page. I guess that's ok in your eyes too, right? Using a negative review, but taking one sentence out of context to try and sell the book, trying to hoodwink people into thinking the New York Times liked the book?

The very thing that pisses me off the most and makes me NOT want to read Mike's book, and not engage in conversation with you either, is the outright refusal of addressing why it's ok for Mike to say judgmental things about others, but not ok for others to say judgmental things about Mike. And guess what? I don't need the book to know Mike's said PLENTY of judgmental things about MANY other people. That is common knowledge, and if you need a list of quotes, I'm sure there are hundreds that can be found on this site, without the need for the book to prove my point.

Is there no room to entertain the possibility of journalist sloppiness with an unsigned article?  Or, just speculation?  

This is extraordinarily rude. And a disjunction between two sources does not automatically follow that one of the sources is fabricated. That's just speculative reasoning.

This is not about me.  The topic is an unsigned article connected to the book.  

What I think is rude is the continuing harangue about a book that you have not read and compared to an unsigned article.

How do you know I haven't read the book?

And now you're engaging in personal attacks to go along with your trolling. Can we just put a stop to this now?

Not that it matters, but I'm not a "website operator." I have a rarely-used Blogger page, and a relatively infrequently updated Facebook page to accompany that Blogger page. No actual website. Wouldn't know the first thing about operating a website.

Thanks for ignoring everything I've said, as usual.

I hope you're as forgiving about Mike using a negative review to pretend to insinuate the New York Times liked his book as you would be the next time you spend hard earned bucks to see a turkey like The Wicker Man, Lady in the Water, Southland Tales, or The Garbage Pail Kids Movie in the theater (that you buy tix for based on a "positive" review you saw in the paper).

I hope the usage of twisting a bad review into a positive won't bug you one bit. Everything's ok as long as it's Mike who does it, right?

Garbage Pail Kid Vibrations

You need to specify what your allegation is then.

I don't trust the media a great deal, but I trust CBS more than I trust you, so I'm waiting for some indicator that CBS fabricated or incorrectly transcribed an interview with Mike Love.

Excuse me, but I have tried since page one of this thread to get someone who has read the book to explain whether or not there was a disjunction between the two sources. I haven't commented on the substance of the book whatsoever. If you are suggesting that I have, please demonstrate it. Otherwise, am I to understand that I can't even ask a question about a book I haven't read?

What I think is rude is purposely trolling a thread and refusing to discuss the *actual topic* of the thread in question. It's also potentially rude to imply with no evidence that CBS is fabricating stories or quotes.

I'd say this thread should just be locked, but I think that's what the purpose of trolling this thread is. Is there another solution?

Your questions are completely fair, and you shouldn't have to have read the book to participate in these discussions.

I find it odd that someone who cites specific page numbers and claims to have read the entire book refuses to actually cite or even paraphrase a very simple point that is in question.

 :lol

CD! :lol

CSM - here is the disconnect.  The nameless-byline article has a different version of the account from the book.  Read it or don't read it - your choice.   You have a page to look at.  Can't be more specific than that. 

Keep it up, you are getting west coast M&B comps at this point...

I don't know how many here saw the video yesterday that has since - thankfully - been removed.  What I read in the article appears to be a transcript of the interview, verbatim, so I don't think attributing authorship is necessary.  It's a transcript. CBS has published it.   I heard the quote indicated in this written link and it was in Mike's voice with his usual semi-tearful comments as he launches an attack.  

I'd love to think we can move on from the trolling, but I seriously doubt it.

There's one way to be more specific: Offer the actual quote from the book. Or paraphrase.

Anything else at this point is disrespectful to the person who asked the question, and amounts to trolling. My opinion is that this trolling should be dealt with, as it, and it alone, has derailed numerous threads relating specifically or tangentially to Mike's book.

Exactly. I was going to bring up that there was video of this interview as well, which apparently may not be able to be viewed anymore. Calling CBS's report into question is specious at best.

Hey Jude - you have the pages, too, if and when you decide to be read the book.  You have the cites.  I am not paraphrasing anything.  It comes straight from the material.  

Nothing is coming straight from the material, because you're not actually saying anything.

I'd say more, but sorry everyone, you'll have to go buy my memoirs.....  ::)

Debbie - I saw no video.  There is a disparity as between the article and the book.  A lot in the media is edited for whatever reason whether for space or time or whatever.  All I can say is that the words are not an overlay as between the book and the article.  Whether things got lost in translation or whatever.  I can't speak to that.  Nor should I be expected to account for the discrepancy as between the two.  

This is insanity to say only Mike's words matter even when it's a video interview of him contradicting himself.

Any response, FDP? Are you cool with spinning negative reviews into positive, isolated, out-of-context snippets to spin a positive? Would it not bug you to find yourself in the theater having spent bucks on The Adventures of Pluto Nash, Ishtar, Troll 2, or Mars Needs Moms based on "positive" reviews in the newspaper?

Even if Mike's book is light years ahead of those (as I'm genuinely sure it is), does the concept of spinning a bad review into a positive not bug you at all?

More specifically, Mike is quoted as having a different version of the account from the book. And like I said above, there are numerous possibilities as to why there is a disjunction.

If it is the case that the article is fabricated, I would be curious as to your thoughts as to why Mike Love's Twitter account linked to what appears to have been an earlier version of the same story from CBS on his twitter account:

https://twitter.com/MikeLoveOFCL/status/776431117133946880

Quite interesting though that that article, which led one Twitter follower to observe that it's a shame how "things were/are so contentious" leading me to believe that the substance of the two articles was probably similar.

EDIT: After reading Debbie's post above, this earlier article was obviously the one with the video.

man you guys are a patient lot. I stopped addressing fdp directly a long time ago for obvious reasons.

I guess in her roundabout way she is confirming that indeed Mike has offered two very different accounts of Melinda using the f-word, to whom she was addressing, and about whom she was describing.

so yes, Mike took an isolated incident from early in the C50 tour in which Melinda was standing up for her husband, spun it around and completely changed the specifics in an attempt to explain why the reunion fell apart. once again, he is deflecting the blame onto someone else and inventing yet another false reason as to why the reunion didn't continue.

and it only took 7 pages to get to the bottom of this!  ;)

I can't deny, this does sum it up quite well. Well put!

Then show some respect for those of us who saw it and recognize the script - offered by CBS - as a transcript.  It's a blatant discrepancy between your book quotes and what he said to CBS.

Did I say it was fabricated?  I don't think so and do not put words in my mouth.  I said there were discrepancies as between the two which Smiley-morphed into "fabrication." This is Mike's book.  I like what I read in Brian's book preview and will read that, too.  ;)

Have a great weekend!  ;)

Speaking of Troll 2...

Well if you want to play that game:

Did I say you said it was fabricated? Please show me where I said so. Otherwise, I would like an apology for you accusing me of putting words in your mouth.

May I also suggest, as I have concerning the idea that certain parties likely would love to derail such threads, that certain parties would also love to craft a narrative that detractors of Mike "haven't even read the book."

Other than CD's aforementioned "worst viral marketing campaign ever!" theory, I think this may be the reason for the constant "go read the book" proclamations and refusal to actually confirm or deny what is in the book.

I theorized long ago that the issue of when, how, and whether fans would actually purchase and read Mike's book would probably become one of those weird subtexts to these debates. And I think this is dangerous and potentially offensive to people on this board.

Obviously, if someone hasn't read the book, they shouldn't claim things about what is or isn't in the book. They can certainly ask. But there are a TON of reasons why someone either might not yet have the book, or can't carry it around with them 24/7, or haven't yet read the whole thing, etc. Maybe they're saving money up for it. Maybe they have it but have an actual job and life to attend to and can't give the book their full attention just yet. And so on.

The "if you haven't even read the book" thing is also funny because Mike has admitted in interviews that he never read the very Brian fake autobiography than he sued over. He certainly felt he could speak to its contents sufficiently.

Thank you!  I knew I remembered that Brian joked, "That's one of my leads!" but I couldn't remember where I heard the story.

;)

The video was never brought up and I never saw it.  Whose fault is it that there is a discrepancy?  Not mine.  I merely pointed out that it did not match what was in the book, that most who opined here, did not read and declared that they were not going to read.  

That is not disrespect.  That, disrespect (and baiting) was directed towards me.  I took the time to read the book, share some of the insights that I found significant in BB history (such as the last tour that Carl did) and got pounced on.  

He didn't accuse you, but asked you, and as usual you twisted his words.  Does the "Have a great weekend!" mean your off for a few days?  Somehow, I think not.

pretty interesting that the video has been pulled, huh? can't find it anywhere.

perhaps litigation proceedings are under way?  ;)

Nope. Let's back up. We're not talking about discrepancies between the interview and the book. That was a question pages ago and you were the one that derailed that discussion by saying only the book should even be considered and implying the interview wasn't germane to the discussion even though it's actually the very topic of the discussion.

You most certainly were calling the CBS article into question by questioning the byline of the article NUMEROUS times. What's the point of referencing the lack of byline several times other than to call the article's veracity into question?

S**t, bossaroo is right.  :lol

And also this:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24401.msg590114.html#msg590114

Have "most" people really actually said they're not going to read the book? Really?

That sounds like something that's just crafted to fit a narrative that detractors "aren't even reading the book." As I've been saying, I assumed this would probably happen. I just didn't think someone would play that card so early and so hard, only three days after the book came out.

And once again, we're left with Mike's words, that seem to change according to convenience.

The wonderful news appears to be that Brian's book shows no signs in the previews of being some self-serving tabloid garbage.  Maybe we'll finally have some "Peace and Love."  I'm looking forward to reading that book.  As far as being cajoled into buying Mike's book, I'll need more than what I've seen so far to get me to go near it.  My responses are to FdP's own accounting of Mike's bio.  Is she now going to argue her own credibility?

Checkmate.

Normally, it would be a he said-she said scenario. But yeah, if Mike's own interview contradicts what he wrote in the book, and especially if the "interview version" is the incorrect version, then that is kind of a serious deal potentially.

Definitely, two different meanings. The book quote is Melinda claiming to be Brian's partner, where the interview seems to allude to her saying she was Mike's partner.

Jeez, hash all that crap out at the beginning of the tour, then let the musicians play their music. Mike shouldn't be trying to insert his daughter (or Stamos) into the reunion shows. Too much talent on stage for that, let's hear the original guys sing. And Melinda shouldn't be slapping auto tune devices on mic's or making decisions related to the stage, at least not on the fly while the tour is in progress. It really is a miracle this thing went off at all.

A real question is what would have happened if Ambha was going to sing one of Mike's leads instead? I wonder if that would have posed the same level of pushback.

I can't speak to the CBS video (haven't seen it and evidently it's gone now). What Mike says in the book is in a nutshell:

1. He met with Brian and Melinda about the reunion tour. He was assured he would be writing some songs with Brian. Brian tells him "We still got it, Mike!".
2. Then Mike is told they must only use songs from Joe Thomas' stockpile. Mike is given a few lines to write to placate him. When Mike asks what happened to the agreement that he would write songs with Brian, Melinda tells him "Brian doesn't write like that anymore".
3. An agreement is made that Brian controls the studio side of things and Mike will control the concert side.
4. At rehearsals, Mike finds the setlist he drew up is altered and that Melinda has asked for autotune to be applied to their live mics. The guys all refuse except for Brian.
5. The "partner" argument as discussed (ad nauseum) here...I believe Mike is referring to himself as Brian's partner, as in they both should control the music side of things. An argument ensues. Mike walks. He agrees to come back only if Melinda is banned from rehearsals. She complies.
6. The "Sail On Sailor" situation. Melinda asks what would Mike say if her daughter wanted to sing one of Mike's lead. Mike's wife says he'd be cool with that.   
7. Mike calls the tour the most stressful tour he's ever been on. The tour employs more people than it can afford to pay and loses money until they go overseas.
8. The "no more shows" email comes as a response from Mike (or his team?) about an offer to go to Israel.  


Obviously, there's much more about the C50 tour in there but those were the takeaways for me (YMMV) and anyone interested would be better served by actually reading that section.

Okay, someone has to get Brian's daughter Daria to crash one of Mike's upcoming shows and ask to sing "Kokomo."  :3d

I have a lot of issues with Mike’s take on C50, but I’ll hold off on that and make sure it’s thorough, and post in in the proper thread.

Thanks Ghosty. I am reading currently, though only at Manson chapter.
So what are your thoughts? First, do you get a sense that these events, as you laid out above genuinely happened? I can see how this started to unravel, and it doesn't mean either side is blameless.

Poor Al..... Seriously.

As with any of these things, there are two sides to every story and I a) keep an open mind and b) thank God the music is so good that I can brush off these inter-band squabbles.
I'm wondering if Brian will address any thing about it in his book, but I have a feeling that Mike's book is the "event and date" book whereas Brian's will be more about the creative process.

I can understand and empathize that this must have been a frustrating situation for Mike. But the thing is, Mike hasn't been around Brian much, if at all, for the last couple of decades. And he hasn't written a new record with Brian in the old-fashioned way for a LONG while before that. During this time, Brian has gone through lots of changes, regarding meds, gaining more general emotional stability, etc. Brian's a SPECIAL CASE, and for Brian to even still be with us on planet Earth after all he's been through is a miracle. I'm sure Brian's comfort level has been carefully curated/aided by the people around him, to make sure that potential stressors are minimized. None of us know the exact parameters of this. Jeff probably has a good idea. In any case, that means that some things are simply gonna be different.  

It's not just like these are factors that can simply be ignored, but there doesn't seem to be any (from the points listed above by GhostyTMRS) acknowledgement of this stuff from Mike. It seems to me (without having read the book yet) that Mike is implying in the book, "why isn't writing songs with Brian exactly the way it used to be?", with a giant dumbfounded look and shrug. That's my takeaway. If I'm wrong, I happily stand to be corrected.

But none of these points can be realistically made by Mike without him showing some sort of understanding that there are legit REASONS why Brian's songwriting and support system is what it is. Doesn't mean it's a flawless system, nor does it mean that other people aren't sometimes gonna feel shut out. It's surely imperfect, but publicly complaining about it without ALSO showing any understanding whatsoever comes off as just plain ridiculous. And incredibly insensitive and immature to not show any sort of balance. It's ALL about Mike, without him "getting" why there might be obstacles which, while frustrating, might have a legit reason to exist - obstacles that exist which weren't in place due to any sort of direct intention of screwing over Mike Love.

In any case, some of Brian's solo albums are great, some are not so great. There are surely reasons for this, including inspiration (or lack thereof), or probably just some experimenting behind the scenes in terms of how things are done, and modifying those parameters from time to time. I feel confident that Brian and Mike could absolutely have come to a place where they'd be working together again in a more organic way, but there's NO WAY that was gonna happen if Mike was gonna start throwing his weight around, acting like a victim, and giving ultimatums, as it seems was the case from the very beginning of this reunion. There's a REASON why, for example, a record like That Lucky Old Sun is so rad. You can bet that Scott wasn't giving ultimatums and complaining about how much he got to (or didn't get to) do in the studio with Brian. He probably knew his place, he went with the flow, and eventually a rad album came to be. Mike, by comparison, brought WAY too much baggage, EGO, and unrealistic short-term expectation to the table. That's perspective.

Even though Mike was a longterm bandmate of Brian's, and not a hired hand, it doesn't mean that he doesn't have to selflessly take these things into consideration. IMHO, it doesn't seem like he has much nuance for grasping this concept.

As I mentioned, I'll go into more detail later on in a more detailed thread, but the deal with Capitol for the album was scored based on Joe/Brian songs. It's presumably what *they* wanted. There was also a time crunch as well to get the album done before the tour started.

One does wish that they had just further placated Mike and stuck him in a room with Brian for a few days to either wring out some songs or prove that the spark isn't there, and either way put that complaint to rest.

Melinda would probably know more about how Brian writes now than Mike would. When was the last significant Brian/Mike collaboration, where the two of them worked on songs from scratch? Maybe a few songs on "Keepin' the Summer Alive" recorded in 1979?

FWIW, I haven't commented on this thread but I've been following all day...  I'm a Brian fan to the core, and though I wouldn't say I'm a fan of Mike's, I'm still gonna read Mike's book. I feel like taking in all the perspectives doesn't necessarily mean I have to adopt everything I read as being gospel, but it sure does contribute to a larger understanding of the whole.

A very fair opinion. I feel similarly.

Wow this thread expanded to 8 pages since I posted! Sorry if the following was already posted and clarified:


Here is half of the relevant passage from the book:


Here are other relevant passages from a couple pages earlier:

Firstly, Mike does have a chip on his shoulder coloring his actions.

Secondly, I agree with Mike that I don't think it's cool for Melinda to have put Autotune devices on stage without the band members having input on that decision.  Then again, I wonder if Mike was actually really all that upset about it at the time. Would he have been pissed if she had just put a vocal reverb pedal (with on/off switch) in the pedal chain on everyone's mic? Most all pedals, Autotune or not, can usually be turned on and off at will, by the band members.

I do find it hard to swallow that he has such an aversion to pitch correction for many reasons which I don't really even need to mention here.

Thirdly, this is all just really sad. Mike had some legit gripes, and I can empathize with them. Doesn't mean he gets a free pass to not acknowledge other stuff of his own doing in the book. Can we all just agree on that point? If Melinda acted uncool to Mike sometimes (and I don't doubt this), it doesn't mean it happened in a vacuum.

Agreed on the fact that Brian's process probably had changed since the Love/WIlson days. Also, I may be naive but in anticipation of this reunion, could Mike have not started seriously working with Bruce on some songs, and bring a bunch of stuff to the table that, if good, could not have been ignored? I mean the fact that Bruce was talking about submitting a redo of She Believes in Love Again, is mind boggling. Yes I sympathize with Mike somewhat if he was told one thing and it didn't pan out. And Mike points out in his book that he is a procrastinator, but man here's your shot. Wow everyone with some demos and get yourself re-invited to the party.

Now Joe Thomas was providing some of the financial wherewithal for this tour? Was that a factor in how the album(credits) was to play out?

Only issue is...that statement as written is not true, as the shows where auto-tuned was used had Mike and Bruce's voice autotuned as well (not sure on Al). Those devices ceased being used circa end of May, as well. Also, on solo tours, Brian has not used them, yet Mike has.

Yeah, it does seem like an all-too-convinient excuse to use in hindsight. As I said, it's hard to think that Mike has some giant beef against Autotune (I wish he did, and I wish all band members did!) in a general sense, because pitch correction has blatantly been used on multiple recent Mike products. I can understand the concept that he wouldn't like someone coming in and making a change like that without getting his input though.

I did find that claim odd given that Brian and band don't use the extensive vocal processing that Mike's band has appeared to use recently.  I thought maybe it was just the recordings I was hearing until Stephen Desper confirmed the fact that it was used live at one of Mike's recent shows on this MB.  At Brian's shows over the past years, I didn't have any sense that Brian's voice was altered in any way, nor anyone else's.  But Melinda was the one dying for "auto-tune?"  Another thing that's difficult to integrate.

I also find it interesting that Brian was able to get the 50th deal, and it certainly benefited Mike's profile (and probably ticket sales for his subsequent "BBs" shows) to agree to it, so I don't understand all the complaints - well other than the source of the complaints.

I would presume the idea of Melinda putting these devices on stage is meant figuratively. I somehow doubt she personally was sneaking in over night and adding the devices herself.

Does autotune even work that way? I'm sure there are a bunch of different formats, outboard gear versus plug-ins used at the mixing board, etc. But wouldn't they most likely apply autotune back at the board versus actual devices attached to microphones?

Digital plug-ins.

I don't have any trouble with the idea that Melinda, perhaps at the behest of, say, Joe Thomas more than arriving at the idea herself, may have been fine if not supportive of autotune. The autotune thing seemed to reassert itself and rear its head in a more forceful fashion when Joe Thomas came on the scene. If she was pushing autotune, and I'm pretty 50/50 at best on Mike's credibility on stories, then that's lamentable and a legit gripe.

But Mike's later use of autotune kind of undercuts that he even has a distaste for it, let alone that it really had *anything* to do with him quitting the reunion.

And that's okay, I'm not even saying everything Mike tells us about C50 is meant to be a justification for quitting the reunion. But it all seems to contribute towards a narrative of the things he didn't like about it.

Yeah, that's what I'm thinking. So are there ever actual devices hooked on stage onto the microphones? I figure it's all done from the board, which is why some artists probably don't even know they're being autotuned.

Well, the fact that Mike was apparently able to NOT use Autotune (either by switching a pedal off, or by telling a stage hand to get the mixing person to deactivate it) means that at least it was in his control to not use it, if he had such a problem with it allegedly being implemented by Melinda. I could totally understand him having a problem with it, if he were at all consistent about that topic  ::)

"Consistent" would be the key word.   ;)

I wonder if this is all news to Brian?

I know Brian's case is special but spouses and business don't mix well as a rule. (shelters under a rock! ;D)

No attacks here so no worries, PF - at least from me. - just an alternative observation.

I'm thinking that after Brian's experiences with mixed results at best with various pro's in his past, and with his own family,  He found that a person who has been smart and consistently has had his back for over 20 years might be the preference - Melinda.  Might that person make mistakes?  Certainly.  So do the so-called "pro's."
As far as wives being involved - I think it's pretty clear that both Mike and Brian have their wives on their management teams in some capacity from the previous posts in this thread.  As far as Al, well, I feel certain MaryAnne has her say as a big defender of her husband. 

It's hard to find people who love and genuinely support you in that business.  I'm not surprised by this at all.  Yes, it's had it's problems.  So has dealing with the supposed pro's and highly complex band/family interaction.

At the Hollywood Bowl reunion show in 2012, I remember how different Brian's voice sounded during Isn't It Time, it sounded prerecorded to me.  Maybe it was auto-tune.

This kinda gives us some perspective on Melinda a bit. From now on, when I think of her saying "people look at me and don't realize what a tough women I am", I'll know she really means business.

Someone will correct me but didn't Scott say somewhere that Brian double tracked the intro only to that song? I think it was in answer to a critic in the media saying the whole group was lip-syncing the tour.

I have heard/read Brian, Bruce and Mike tossing the F bomb over the years and now Mrs W.

Not sure how I feel about it coming from Seniors. (OSD and Add Some being exceptions ;) )

If I had not already made up my mind about not even looking at Mike's book, let alone buying it, I'd have made it up now. The guy still manages to surprise me, and not in a good way. I also wonder at most people's patience here. Mine is below zero, by now.

Again, as is SO OFTEN the case, one person with a seriously flawed and ever-so obvious agenda participates in yet aother thread and upsets the discussion with dollops of on-line slight of hand...and in doing so slights most thinking participants with razzle-dazzle and enough bullshit to sink a great lakes freighter.  

Imagine what that will do to North America's largest source of fresh drinking water.  There's NO 'sand' involved whatsoever.

The book is the only source which matters or pertains to the discussion?  FDP...please purchase a kite and take it for a long series of flying lessons.  Spend an inordinate amount of time perfecting that craft instead.

The book is the only source worth considering?  The book became obsolete the moment it was signed off on and went to print.  The wheels of life kept turning and interviews happened subsequent to the completion of the novel.  It's the book which is as least as out of date as documented history...and your never ending attempts to sidetrack REAL.

Well said!

Could you MC Mike's show? >:D

This thread is like Katrina Pearson stopped in for a chat. I'm still not clear what was said, exactly, in the book about the his partner, my partner, your partner. In any case, I don't think it's a negative illustration of Melinda Ledbetter W. And if the Smiley Smile recounting of the sound check from that show is accurate, Mike Love's recounting is inaccurate.

What is hilarious is that when I brought up the SIP (Kokomo?) airplane story Van Dyke Parks told a New York Times reporter suddenly Van's credibility seems to come into question because of a twitter post pertaining to baseball 14 years later. So when can we use multiple sources filledeplage? Oh, only when its convenient for the guy you ruthlessly defend whenever he does something controversial (seems to be a daily occurrence).

Seems to be a trend amongst associates of Mike who talk sh*t about Melinda.

Its a love thang. ::)

One less...I banned Chewbacca. Sorry it took so long, had to wait til I had a break

"see ya" filleplage. ;)

I tend to wonder sometimes if Melinda is secretly holding half of this forum's posters at gunpoint.  :-)  Just an observation. 

1. I'd be pissed if Ambha Love came out to sing SOS during a C50 show I was at. No other children sang except when all the kids did their thing. No Carnie/Wendy, No Matt. Why Ambha? The other 3 are much more talented vocalists.
2. Jacqui Love being involved is no better or worse than Melinda. Neither should one should have been that involved.
3. The auto tune was a mistake, someone learned their lesson and it was stopped on C50.
4. The lyrics on TWGMTR were far overall better than Mike's lyrics of the past 40 years. Some weak, but overall much better.  Mike is the consummate wants his cake and to eat it too guy. It was a good decision.
5. I haven't read Mike's book but it reads like everyone else did things to Mike.  Does he take blame for anything?

As usual, I can speak only for myself. Nobody is holding me at gunpoint. I just can't help noticing that Brian never talks ill of anybody, at least in public. Nor does Melinda. Nor does Al, or anybody else except... The mudslinging always comes from one, and only one, source. That's, very simply, the truth. The beginning and end of it, in this context.
No, no gunpoint. Just seeing the obvious, and saying it. As someone said, it's no rocket science. Requires just a bit of honesty. The rest is just smoke and mirrors.

Found this from Scott.


The show in question. Jeff is singing the intro with Brian.

https://youtu.be/bJmrYzJMqQE

sorry i can't help it but...
 
 ;)

 You enjoy banning people.  :police:

It would appear, ad infinitum, that some people have begged to be banned.  One can only wonder WHY it took so DAMN long.  There is 0, nada, ziltch, NOTHING wrong with appreciating the positive things Mike has contributed along the entire path because there WERE, after all, some positives...and he and his cohorts still deliver a mighty fine live show...thus highlighting the music we all love.  [and the music he sometimes had a hand in writing with composer Brian...and also Terry and John]  B U T...and as you can see it's a big but...the tearing down of valid sites is not good for the Beach Boys...regardless of whether is obviously misguided fans gumming up the works or Mike himself throwing dried out, farm field cow chips onto the fire he lit and apparently loves to keep a-blazing.

Wait. Are we talking about Lowbacca? Or filledejenkem?

The latter. Lowbacca is a well respected user and contributor who probably would be the last one to get banned.

Mike needs to be told off more often.

Yet then there are lawsuits, the guy is bully and a disgrace.

I'm getting more confused about what constitutes a ban. Not pretending to know whether or not FDP was warned about certain behaviour or not privately, but I was curious as to what got her the boot. I have nothing against her personally. Yes, sometimes her posting tends to lead threads off topic, and I chuckled when the Chewbacca Defense was mentioned. But, I dunno...banned? Keep in mind there are two or three posters that call her out everytime she posts. Then they push and push, frustrated that they aren't getting answers to questions like "why won't you admit Mike is wrong?", while in truth, they can choose just to ignore the post. Anyhoooo....it is what it is I guess.

  Toe the company line or get banned. 

Wrong board.

  I don't know. A lot of Love-centric posters seem to end up this way when they voice displeasure with Melinda's actions.

I think that's a pile of fly attractant.  Don't try to upset the apple cart with an oversized load of rotten road apples... forever and a day ...is more like it.  Filled is a fine person when she isn't stuck toeing HER company line.  And it's ever-so obvious that THAT is exactly what was happening.

Red herring. It wasn't her views it was how she was choosing to "debate". 

Imagine that you and I are debating quantum physics and I start chiming in with irrelevant tidbits about puppies, rainbows, and vanilla ice cream in response to your very legitimate arguments. Substitute Moon Dawg with Hey Jude, CD, Chocalate Shake Man, Debra Keil Leavitt and then switch Yours Truly with FDP, and you get what just happened.

Has nothing to with being pro Mike. Last post in this thread explains pretty well why Chewbacca got banned. There are other pro Mike people here and they are in absolutely no danger of getting banned.

 :3d

I'm sorry you feel that way. Name one person who was banned solely for being pro-Mike, please. Not trying to start an argument, and to be honest I'd rather not do it in this thread, but if that's what it takes to hash it out, so  be it.

Filledeplage (referring to her as Chewbacca due to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chewbacca_defense )

And THAT'S how a thread gets hijacked.  Don't fall for it Billy.

Meanwhile back at Mike complaining about Brian's partner in life...and showing why Brian wants dick-all to do with him

You must be confused.  You are commenting in a thread about Mike opening up about Melinda in TV and you want to fl discuss Carl's last days on tour.  You are in the went thread comment get about the wrong things.  The majority of your posts are circular non-sense.  Please go post in the correct thread so the rest of us can talk about the topic which accords with the title of this thread.

If I were a mod here I would ban you permanently for obfuscation.  If no such rule existed I would create one so I could ban you.  You would only last one post, two max, before you violated the rule.

EoL

Mods - Maybe in the sandbox or rules & guidelines, you can set up a thread to identify any bans or suspensions, leave it open for a bit if you feel commentary is appropriate. Lock it if not.
Then that won't become the topic here.

EOL - your suggestion above has already happened.

already did...but THAT'S the word I was looking for...obfuscation.


That's a good idea..I'll discuss with craig and see if he agrees

It's pretty clear Melinda has a business interest, as in the legal entity is named after her, BriMel.  Also, why is this a problem for the pro-Mike crowd when a similar dissatisfaction is not expressed for the involvement of Mike's 28th wife?  And don't say because she never brings attention to herself like Melinda does.  Melinda doesn't bring attention to herself, Mike does.  And just as Brian has enough decency not to bad mouth Mike, so he doesn't bad mouth Mike's wife.

This all seems so easy to understand.  Mike complains about Brian being controlled for one and only one reason, he prefers to be the one controlling Brian.  If he can't have control he will slander others who he imagines are filling the role in Brian's life that he so desperately covets.  It isn't hard to see he is projecting, a common psychological tell.  He knows what he wants, control, and projects that onto Melinda.  Everyone who knows and loves Brian denies it.  Mike, AGD, and Beard are the only three singing another song (and SJS)...but it isn't hard to figure out its all coming from the same source, Mike.  Then someone sees a little dust up backstage between Brian and Melinda and they interpret it through the lense of Mike's narrative.  Next his cronies come to the message boards (and PMs, yes, I received one of the now-famous PMs) to preach his gospel - with the hope that if they say it often enough (Cam) or if sufficient confusion is interjected (FP) people will eventually believe it.  Those not in the know, such as myself (previously) and The Cincinnati Kid more recently, begin to believe it.  Those who know and love Brian set the record straight, there is no reason to doubt them (outside of the single source of Mike-the-most-envious-man-on-planet-earth-Love narrative), yet aforementioned people persist in the vain hope repetition and confusion will eventually trump reason and facts.

It is both obvious and nauseating.

EoL

FP:  please stay on topic, your topic, Mike's book.  Brian's book isn't in Mike's book.  You've ruled out discussing anything and everything not in Mike's book in this read.  If you are going to spin us all in circles at least be consistent when so doing.

EoL

Is this a tacit admission that the book and interview contain two different stories?

EoL

Late to the party.  Was years in the making.

EoL

 :woot :woot :woot

I'm pro-Beach Boys, meaning if Brian puts out something I'll buy it, same with Mike, same with Al & Dave. Very few of us left, I reckon.

I don't know about that. Although, yes, Brian is my musical hero and I'm a fan of his first, I am interested in everything they put out. In fact, the only one I'm *not* a fan of artistically is Bruce.

I know Bruce is kind of a douche Billy, but have you ever heard Surfers Pajama Party? I think it's a great freakin' live album (not to mention that it's also Bruce's debut album). And "Don't Run Away" from his Bruce & Terry era is beautiful. And it's a Johnston/Love co-write.

Yeah, actually I have and wasn't that impressed. Just wasn't my thing.Granted, it's been a bit so maybe my opinion might change.

Yeah, to be honest I don't think there's a band in the world where I would buy everything every member put out. I consider the Beatles to be my favourite band but I'd rather get a great Left Banke compilation than get every single album Ringo ever put out. I guess if that means I'm not pro-Beatles, so be it. But I think you can be pro-music without having to purchase every single piece of music ever released.

I'm pretty much a completist.  Only stuff I'm not that familiar with is the Flame material.

The Beach Boys, whether together or solo, may not be for wverybody all the time. Speaking for myself, I'm a completist as well and for the most part I find it all fascinating, as it helps color in the lines of the bigger picture.



Am I banned now for derailing this thread?  :)

Debbie, do you refer to this post from Stephen?
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24128.msg584236.html#msg584236

He doesn't seem to say for certain that auto-tune or pitch correction was present at the Mike show, only that it could have been for all he knew.

What he does talk about in more detail is the use of digital EQ and compression/limiting.  I have been to recent shows by both bands, and to me such processing was quite obviously present at each of them.  I would imagine that concerts by the vast majority of major acts are mixed and processed through a digital signal chain in this day and age.

I'm quite confident that specifically auto-tune or something similar is not used at Brian shows.  I don't know about Mike's shows, though if they do it is not that obvious to me.

I enjoyed both shows.

I'm talking about the comments of Stephen's and what I heard in recordings of Mike's shows.  Is there a difference?  The vocals all seemed altered.  When I'm sitting live at Brian's shows, I don't have a sense I'm hearing Brian's, or Al's or anyone else's vocals being altered (well, amplified, obviously).  They are real with the occasional "flaw."  Stephen seemed to object to what was being done at Mike's shows enough to consider not going back. 

One of my favorite things in the late 60's was watching Stephen work the boards at the shows and at the studios when I got the privilege.  The voices weren't in some weird, processed form.  I'm certain he'd know the difference.

Maybe we should merge the threads about these interviews since there are several active.

This may be an answer to the "other" discussion about Mike and Brian writing together, but going back to the first post in this one, Mike was on CBS This Morning, they published the video and the transcript of the interview online...

...then for some reason all 5:46 of the video clip was pulled offline or disappeared entirely - Whatever happened, it's no longer there to watch. But the transcript is, and here is the segment in question:


>>>>In 2012, they came together for a 50th anniversary tour.

In an interview for “CBS Sunday Morning,” the reunion appeared to get off to a promising start.

“Brian says to me after we did, ‘Do It Again,’ how does a 70-year-old guy sound that good?’” Love said then.

“I meant that literally, not in a bad way,” Wilson said.

But the tour later unraveled, in part because Love resented interference from Melinda Wilson, Brian’s wife.

“Yeah. She once told me that ‘Brian’s not your partner. I’m your f****ng partner.’ That’s what she said,” Love said.

“And your response to that was?” Mason asked.

“Well, I think my response was to turn and leave. That was not a pleasant thing to hear. Because I wrote all these songs with my cousin and as I said before and I still say, if it was just he and I, it would be fine.”

Love said he hasn’t talked to Brian since because “he’s unavailable.”

“For those who believe that Brian walks on water,” Love writes in his book, “I will always be the Antichrist.”

So the cousins have gone their separate ways again. The Beach Boys are playing the same songs but riding different waves. <<<<


For those asking about the two getting into a room with a piano to write songs again, how much more beyond that transcript is needed to understand why that isn't happening? How much more beyond that? Factor in the legal actions for the past two decades, the interviews with the regular comments directed at the usual topics like Brian being "controlled", and it really is not that hard to understand.

I am curious why the video got pulled down. I'm also curious if it had anything to do with the comments made on CBS looking contradictory to what was written in the book as some here pointed out.

Hi Debbie thanks for your response.

I'm perhaps being a little pedantic.  I think there is a difference if we are talking specifically about pitch processing (which I think this discussion seemed to be about) and digital processing more generally.

To me it sounds like the voices at both shows are altered by some form of digital processing, as I'm sure is very common in the modern era.  I don't think the guys working the boards nowadays will be doing with the same kind of workflow Stephen apopted in the classic era - for either band.

I think pitch processing for live shows is a very specific thing; it seems widely agreed that it's not used at Brian shows, my point is that it hasn't been confirmed either way if it is used at Mike shows.  If it is used at Mike shows, then Mike is perhaps being hypocritical and inconsistent taking issue with Melinda supposedly insisting on auto tune being used for C50.  If it is not, then he was more within his rights to take issue with it.

'Digital processing', for all intents and purposes, IS autotune. How else does something sound 'digitally' processed in this band? Compression, tube distortion, plate reverb, tape delay, equalization, ADT, these are all effects that can be digitally processed, but nobody would say it sounds 'digital'. Unless you have audiophile ears, which very few people have, those effects are indistinguishable from 'analog processing'. And autotune is the quintessential 'digital' sound.

The removal of the video is a mystery, isn't it?  As are so many of the strange comments made in this interview and others.  I understand allowing someone their POV, but when it starts sounding further and further removed from reality, it becomes a problem for me - particularly when it includes some open, and other more convoluted attacks on good people who are Brian's family and support system.  

They, so far, haven't chosen to respond.  I'm thinking this may well be due to the fact that Brian doesn't want to take the low road.  We'll see how things unfold. Responding wouldn't necessarily be the "low road" that this tabloid/click-bait stuff offers.  I wouldn't know what would be the best approach if I were being attacked here.

I doubt Brian will be talking about being in a shower with a Manson girl from the tidbits we've seen so far, nor does he need to (nor was he likely there).  I think that Brian's approach so far seems to be that people want to better understand that wonderful, creative, challenged mind of his a bit better, along with his life, I'm guessing to understand themselves a bit better.  I like that idea.  Regurgitated stories about Manson?  I'll leave that to the crowd who are into the latest click-bait with a Kardashian butt involved - not my thing.

Not sure I agree.

Check out Stephen's post linked above, he talks about the use of a digital console and digital plugins in more general terms as well as specifically talking about digital EQ and limiting.

He didn't seem to know the difference when Mike and Co lip synced through the Memorial Day show that was broadcast 'live' a few months back.  He was adamant there was no need for them to do that.  To his credit he then realised they were lip syncing.  Stephen's work with the group was always top notch and he was as much an innovator in his field as the group were in theirs.  A great combination that has stood the test of time.

Here's the thread:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,23977.0.html

Back on topic and I have just received Mike's book.  The parts I read were full of inconsistencies and offensive comments towards Brian and Melinda.  Nothing I didn't expect unfortunately.

I single out point #4 not just to clarify what is actually said in the book, but also because it raised a red flag for me as something that didn't sound right, or even possible based on the tech side...beyond other reasons.

The quote is actually this (and just so it's not a case of reprinting material against copyright, it's freely available on the Amazon preview of the book) :

"She had also ordered live Auto-Tune devices, to correct off-key vocals, and attached them to the mics used by Brian, Al, Bruce, David, and me. But no one used the device except Brian..."


That makes it sound to people reading as if Melinda ordered the devices, and actually attached them to the mics. To me, that is absurd.

Like quite a few others here, not only have I used Autotune and various other digital pitch-correction units and plug-ins, but I own such a device in a rackmount unit, with the actual Antares Autotune program.

You do not "attach" it to a mic. There is no way to do so. You have to patch it in. If the live board for C50 were being run via computer, digitally, a device like this would have been a plug-in, which the tech guys would have to install into the programs.

Beyond that, it would need to be programmed, and if used optimally, it would be programmed specific to every song's key and all parameters like sensitivity and levels set and programmed (and stored) by the sound techs and those running the board. Then, the performers' in-ear or monitor mixes would have to be balanced with the house mix going into the audience, in order to have the proper blend and so the performers would not hear the effected feed versus the natural voice in their monitors.

And all of that would be in the hands of the sound crew. You don't just attach a device like this.

So beyond the premise of Melinda Wilson herself showing up with 5 autotune devices and attaching them to mics, as written in the book, it is a statement in the book that I think should be challenged at least for further clarification. Because as written and as is being read, it seems to paint a scenario which just wouldn't happen. No one except the sound crew and those running the board and doing the live and stage mixing would be doing anything like this to the mics or any other part of the on-stage signal chains. And with this specific claim, the devices would need to be programmed in order to work.

It wasn't just that Melinda Wilson had asked for it to be applied, as the summary quote suggested, the passage reads as if she personally handled doing it. And I'd ask for a clarification on that.

Had she not been banned (my use of the word) from all rehearsals except one open to the media at this stage, yet turns up at the first gig with the said auto-tune equipment? The rehearsals were also to nail down the sound systems for the tour I would think as well as the musicians. The idea sounds absurd really

Downright laughable, possibly?

I understand allowing Grandpa or Uncle Joe to tell their stories of ancient wartime and other exploits and feeling really good about their adjusted memories.  It is rather charming. 

When it comes to re-writing history that diminishes people who have passed on, and another, oh say, musical genius who doesn't tend to want to engage in conflict, I'm a little less tolerant.  I will be delighted when the media stuff has passed, this nonsense is over, and the music speaks for itself.  And anyone who can read and understand who had and agenda and who didn't in the written history would have a pretty good idea who to believe about who created what.

According to the book she was banned after the first rehearsal.

I also find it absurd Mike would try to make it seem Melinda ordered 5 auto-tune devices and added them to the mikes like they were actual physical products.  He sounds very out of touch, and it makes other claims he makes less credible.  Did no-one challenge him on this?  A lot of things Mike says in the book are full of holes and contradictions.  I can't say I'm surprised.

According to the book Mike asked Brian if Ambha could sing SOS in San Diego.  An article at the time said his musical directors approached Brian.

Or, "You can mess with me, but don't disrespect my family" when Melinda and Jacquelyne had their exchange.  Mike ignores the fact that implying Brian is controlled by handlers and his wife could also be construed as hurtful towards Brian's family!

Happy reading!

actually you can't mess with Mike either, judging from his reaction to being told he has a chip on his shoulder. he stomped away like a child and threw a tantrum threatening to walk out on the reunion before it really even started. it's amazing that he expects sympathy from this story. does he really not see what a huge brat he paints himself to be?

This is fair thing to say, especially in light of people defending Mike endlessly, saying the book is great despite what he said about his cousin's wife. As if fans don't care big time, let Mike say bad things about Melinda? As respect for Brian, at least, he shouldn't have mentioned her, the little incident during C50 etc. as we found it's very little reason for him to wish to quit the reunion shows plus as many stated, the pitch correction device can't be placed to the mic. I'm going with the experts. I will agree too with posts in this topic that it's strange for fans to be bothered by Melinda dealing with business, when Jacquelyne is involved in Mike's business too. They must be treated equally. Thanks for giving your honest take on Mike's book, Mr. donn.

No problem! :). I just don't know if I can read anymore of it!  Hopefully the early chapters might be more balanced.

Not only that, but once rehearsals have begun and shows have been booked, I really question how plausible it is that he'd actually quit the tour. Heads would freaking roll big time for anyone who walked on such a tour. Maybe if *one* member had walked, the contracts would have allowed for *any* four Beach Boys to be on stage. But I still think Mike could have potentially been sued like nobody has been sued before if he had just walked after signing to do the tour.

Further, does anyone really think that Mike would have allowed a lineup *without* him to do a tour as "The Beach Boys?"

Not only does Mike's own account indeed paint him to be as immature and dysfunctional as he seems to want to paint others to be, but it also seems all bark and no bite in terms of the plausibility of his actual supposed threat to walk away from the tour.

I haven't read in full the C50 section of the book yet, but it also also appears based on quotes and reports that Mike confirms in the book that there was an actual agreement that Brian would be the "studio" guy and that Mike would be in charge of the "tour" side of things artistically. Further, Mike describes drawing up the setlist himself.

While I understand the political need to throw Mike that rather large bone to get the tour to happen, I'd say it's pretty ironic that Mike doesn't see any problem with not having other members of the band have any particular say in the setlist. Mike drawing up songs that work for the reunion band? It was mostly Brian's band; had Mike ever even listened to a recording of Brian's band prior to C50?

This does explain Al's public comment just prior to the tour starting that he would have to "ask" Mike to include a given song in the setlist. This might also help explain Jason Fine's characterization in Rolling Stone of Mike's reaction to Brian suggesting "Marcella" a few weeks into the tour. I wouldn't be surprised if Mike just assumed it was Melinda's idea to add the song just to f**k with Mike.

I'd also like to know if, by the last two UK shows, if Brian and/or Melinda just told Mike "F**k you, we're closing with "Summer's Gone"", because I can't particularly imagine (given Mike's reaction in Rolling Stone to the album's ending song suite) that Mike would want to do "Summer's Gone" at all, let alone close the show with it on a downbeat note instead of closing with "Fun Fun Fun" or whatever.

What could also be clarified or followed up, alongside the autotune issues and attaching the devices to mics, would be exactly what did Mike have issues with in these setlist constructions to cause such a reaction? Were fans happy with the setlists that they did get to hear on C50? I'd say, yes - and perhaps if a poll were taken it may be 99 to 1 that the setlists struck a good balance of the hits, the deep cuts, the new album cuts, and also showcases for each band member to do his thing.

The clarification would be a question such as "What songs did Mike object to, and what did he want to do instead?" Was it some of the Smile-related material, was it as HeyJude just suggested Summers Gone or any of the material along those lines, or was it songs that Mike would have rather put into the set?

If it were a case of putting in cover songs over originals, when you have those 5 guys on stage together in such a monumental event, I don't see where the benefit would be any more than putting in stuff from Mike's solo albums or even Brian's solo albums. It was a Beach Boys show, right?

So what did Mike want and what did he want to cut, and what caused him to react as he did over the setlists? More specifics may help paint a better picture of some of these comments.

I remember Mike vetoing surf's up and H&V in the SMiLE arrangement.

Then playing surf's up with M&B to stick it to BW.

I don't remember that, but maybe it's just me. I remember though, that it's been said, that Mike was unhappy about "Our prayer" being added

Didn't myKe write and record the autobiographical "Tooting My Own Horn"? I swear I've heard it quite a few times but only the disco version in mono.

She may have asked for The Butterfly, but she got The Switchblade

 :lol

Do you think we'll ever get a follow up or a clarification on some of these points and apparent contradictions? On the setlist point alone, it would go a long way to clarify what songs or what changes Mike objected so strongly to which almost led to him walking. On the autotune devices issue, that one speaks for itself, but how did that claim come to appear in his book if it seems so unlikely if not improbable on the surface? And the issue of the CBS This Morning video getting pulled down, there was an apparent contradiction between the people involved as told in the book versus as told by Mike on CBS, then the video disappears from CBS' website while other segments from the same show remain up and available to watch.

There has to be some follow up, I'd like to think at least.

This one I don't understand. It's...what...a minute long? It's not really crazy and esoteric. It's super impressive but it's not something that's gonna have people running for the restrooms. I don't get why it'd be a bad idea to do.

Someone who went to the Southend on Sea show spoke to Al and posted on FB that Al had said they'd worked on Surf's Up. I hope this is true - I would love to see Brian and his band do this again, reclaiming it after M&B did it.

 :thumbsup

I believe they did it last year after Mike's band had done it. It survived for some 2015 shows. I think on one of the band members mentioned Brian tends to not like doing "Surf's Up" and "Busy Doin' Nothin'" because they're so verbose. Not that he dislikes the songs, but I basically got the sense that he feels like it's kind of a pain in the ass to sing them with all those words.

But I could picture them putting the song back in for some shows.

Only if someone who knows his sh!t will get an interview with Mike. I don't know how probable that is.








Well, let's not forget, that they did it. It was just that I remember reading that Mike wasn't happy with that. I don't think closer details were mentioned. Maybe he just wasn't in the mood that particular day.






They did it with Jeff Beck.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wp1y1H-n_TI


And yes, also in 2015.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2RYgNsWMIzs

(Soundcheck)

That Mike Love's wife is listed in the business filings for his company is most probably for tax purposes, namely to keep them as low as possible and keep control within the family.  That is not the same as someone actively making important decisions about how a band tours, how the show is presented and how they go about recording an album.  I doubt that Mike Love's wife is an active decision maker for his band, other than sharing her opinions with him about the band.  I suspect that on Brian's side of things, his wife is quite active and assertive in the running of his operations.  Various comments that are posted on this board from time to time seem to confirm this.  That Mike Love found it difficult, ultimately unacceptable, that he would have to deal with a band member's wife after years of calling the shots, a woman with no background in the music industry, I can understand his irritation at that.  I completely disagree with the decision Mike Love made to end the BB's in 2012, but recognize that on Brian's side of things they gave him plenty of reasons to go the way he did.      

Read the book and you'll learn about her role in Mike's band

I do hope that's covered, although I haven't seen it.  Although FdP is no more here to derail threads, why don't I beat the feminist drum here?

I've always been under the impression that she's quite actively involved in Mike's operations.  Am I wrong?  Or did the book not cover it?

I'm thinking that there may be a few businesses under the umbrella of MELCO?  Who profits from merchandise? Who books Mike's tour operations with the subsequent fees?  I wouldn't know, but it would have probably been a good business plan for maximizing profits from the BBs brand/music to include such options and more.

Does the book address this?

I will read the book when it becomes available at the library.  Since you've read it, what was/is Jacqueline's role?     

 The impression I got from reading the book is that Jacquelyne calls the shots!  It was her decision to trim the touring band and cut the costs.  I also got the impression she would have been the one who told some people they were no longer required.  I think that may have been alluded to in the past in this board by friends of disgruntled former members.

The Beach Boys were/are band with brothers and a cousin, with a father/uncle for a manager, then later a cousin/brother as a manager, and another brother/cousin and, separately a cousin, as "handlers," with nieces, nephews, sons and daughters performing on stage with the band, with a sister/cousin performing as harpist on recordings, with a wife and in-laws doing vocals on recordings, and a wife having power of attorney for a time, sitting in as substitute for a band member on business decisions.

Given all this, are you really discussing whether a wife involved with management should be considered offensive/irritating/inappropriate?

Poor Brian. That he managed to do anything good in such a milieu, let alone what he actually did, is nothing short of a miracle.

Why do you say that?  I understand that he had pressures to write and produce hit records when he was young, but compared to most, where there is finding a job, trying to make enough money to make the house payment, groceries, tuition, etc., he had it easy.  His problem was mental illness and lacking a doctor to properly diagnose and treat it, and drugs.

How about being in the music business and producing records with the use of only one good ear? Beyond all the family crap he had to deal with, of course. It is pretty amazing he managed to accomplish what he did at that young age, with one ear no less, and he's still making people happy with his music up to the present day, defying the odds many gave him even 20 years ago. That's pretty damned impressive.

Damn straight GF, even with your Eagles kicking my Bears ass...

So you doubt and suspect, then this would be your opinion of how things happen behind the scenes. Do you know or are you going on what people have told you? You're putting more stock into what you've heard or been told about one of the wives than you are about the other, yet knowing little firsthand about either case. Is that an accurate read?

All I can say is this to consider: How has Brian's career been since 1996? I'd say it's been pretty solid and successful. Wildly successful on some fronts. He's still making music, he managed to release a dozen plus albums over those 20 years and he probably has more in the works. He has a successful and loving marriage and family, he's doing what he wants to do for the fans and we're reaping the benefits of having the chance to see him play his music live and buy the records, and he has people who care about him and love him backing him up.

If writing songs alone in a room with Mike has somehow been a casualty of the past 20 years of Brian's life, so be it. The man is happy where he is, I'd say. Unless some board members can try to dispute that via their sources.

To whom is your question directed?

"So you doubt and suspect, then this would be your opinion of how things happen behind the scenes. Do you know or are you going on what people have told you? You're putting more stock into what you've heard or been told about one of the wives than you are about the other, yet knowing little firsthand about either case. Is that an accurate read?"

I'm going strictly on what I have read in articles and on this board and others over the years.  If Mike's wife was trying to throw her weight around during the C50 tour and sending faxes or e-mails that said no more tours with the original Beach Boys, that would be a fair point.   

I agree that Brian certainly is healthier and better than days gone by.  With the exception of Lucky Old Sun and Orange Crate Art, his albums have been mediocre.  I don't believe he produced TWGMTR, Joe Thomas probably did.

TWGMTR was more Thomas, but Thomas's involvement with NPP on the production-side was nil after a certain point.

The point in bold, I'll go back to asking the question about that email often cited - What was the context, and what if anything came before it? You have a multi-million dollar tour with a large crew and a lot of people having a stake in it...as a corporation it does not rest on one lone email. So, what if anything preceded that email? Do we know? Do you know? Maybe the scenario you speculated on (in bold) was part of it. It's as valid enough of a point to consider, right?

As for context there, consider this reply to your original questions about roles in the whole thing, from another person here who has the book:


He's not wrong. That's the impression from Mike's book.

I have not gotten to the chapter on C50 yet, but I did skip ahead to read the account of what happened with Melinda over SOS and did see the interview with Mike where he addresses the same issue.  Regardless of who Melinda said it to or who she claimed she was partners with, the fact of the matter was and still is Melinda Wilson will always be a problem for Mike and vice versa.  The two don't like each other, plain and simple.  This was far from the only dust up involving them around this time.  I've heard another story straight from one of the principals regarding a meeting that took place between Melinda and Mike (Brian was not present, but some other band members were along with Jackie Love) that ended ugly.  I could certainly take the position that Melinda is only looking out for what she believes is her husband's best interest.  Obviously, Mike is going to be looking out for his best interest.  It's amazing the whole thing went as long as it did. 
There were posters on this board who were hoping that Mike would address C50 in his book.  Well, he did and now it seems it isn't good enough and we need more follow up and clarification from him.  Why is no one hoping that Brian addresses C50 in his book, so we get to hear his side?  I personally would love to hear what he has to say about it.  We got Mike's recollections and views, so I would love to hear Brian's.
And to address the differences in how the wives are involved, I think urbanite was somewhat close.  Jackie is definitely involved from a business/money perspective.  She does not act as the band's manager/her husband's manager or their tour manager.  However, she certainly has influence but Mike does make his own decisions. Melinda is much more involved and I think due to the personal feelings involved, Mike will never get over that and has a very difficult time dealing with someone he doesn't like.  I'm sure in his head he truly believes that Melinda is keeping Brian from him.  Honestly the only thing that can happen at this point is for Brian to call Mike directly and say "I never want to work with you again."  That may finally be the end and life can go on for everyone.

Who said anybody is not hoping Brian addresses C50 in his book? I certainly hope he does.

As for Mike's take on C50 from his book, it just doesn't offer much new he hasn't already said, and one would often hope that one's 350 page (or whatever it is) autobiography would expand on shorter interviews and pieces he has written. C50 is the most divisive *group* issue to happen since, arguably, the splintering of the band almost 20 years ago. It's a big deal.

I'm still working towards a bigger write-up on the C50 segment of Mike's book, but the long and short of it is that he largely reiterates things from his interviews and his LA Times piece (at times using seemingly almost identical wording), and sprinkles in some unflattering stories about Melinda and Brian. Al (and Dave and Bruce) are never mentioned. He offers some of the same conflicting reasons for ending the reunion. He says it was always going to be a limited tour and he always planned to go back to his own thing, but then he cites an e-mail from Brian's camp as the reason. He says he booked his own shows only *after* that "no more shows" e-mail, but then also claims he is *required* to book shows to abide by his license from BRI. And on and on.

I beg to differ.  I think it does seem to go into more detail than any interviews I've seen from him since the end.  He may offer up some of the same reasons but to my knowledge he never once mentioned Melinda specifically or any strife with her until the book came out.  Also, I hadn't seen him say that he was ready to quit the tour as he did in the book.  If you are looking for Mike to come out and say, "I just wanted to be the boss of the entire operation again," that isn't going to happen.  So we get the same reasons he gave before and then mentions the issues with Melinda.  Bottom line, he was never going to be THE boss working with Brian as long as Melinda was around. 

HJ- I believe you mentioned before that you would like for a band member or someone else to write a detailed look into C50.  I personally would love that too.  However, I'm actually surprised we got as much as we did from Mike about it and I actually don't have too much faith that we will get much of anything from Brian on the subject in his autobiography.  I hope he surprises me.

This is why the group needed a manager to deal with the factions and advance the interests of the Beach Boys as a group.  I would bet that Mike Love thinks he's smarter and more knowledgeable than Melinda, and vice versa.  The truth is they've both been milking the oldies all along.  A manager would have pushed another album and a tour to back it up.

The book certainly offers a bit more raw information from Mike's perspective on C50. But it does nothing to further the "why" question. And in the case of  "new" stories about Melinda and Mike threatening to quit the tour, I call partial bulls**t on the former and total bulls**t on the latter. I have no problem believing he butted heads with Melinda, but by Mike's own words it wasn't really the actual reason he ended the reunion. Similarly, I suppose it's an interesting factoid to know that Mike *threatened* to quit the tour on at least two occasions, but it's only interesting to the point that you realize it was a totally empty threat. That Mike *doesn't* have the humility to point out that he was just full of bluster and would have likely been sued into oblivion had he quit, is disappointing.

His explanations are always full of contradictions. He says he wanted to write with Brian and work with Brian, but then goes into plenty of detail about how Brian was out of it during C50.

This is a point I'm going to make in my larger write-up, but I think the way Mike appears so *surprised* by Brian's good days and bad days during C50 speaks to out of touch Mike was and is with Brian and how little Mike actually knows Brian. Any fan that had followed Brian for the previous 10-15 years could have told you that's how Brian is. Mike seems utterly flabbergasted that Brian's energy and attention wax and wane. That, or Mike's just pretending to be surprised.

And the fact that Mike never discusses any of the other members during the C50 chapter is less problematic in and of itself, and more a case of speaking to the larger issue: In my opinion, when Mike thinks about C50 or talks about it, he doesn't think about the band or the music. He thinks seemingly almost exclusively about Melinda.

Regardless of the reason(s) that caused Mike to not realize, accept, and be pubicly understanding of Brian having good/bad days, it makes Mike come off as having a staggering lack of empathy... and that's a big reason why he's vilified.  If I didn't know better, I'd almost think that Mike believes Brian is faking everything, because I'd think a family member would be publicly more respectful in this situation.

You know the way Jack Rieley came along stating he had an itemized plan on how to rehab The BBs' public image? Has Mike himself never been offered such a plan by someone? He could surely use it. I'm sure Brian's indecisiveness must be frustrating for Mike, but a little public empathy for Brian's situation by Mike would go a long way.

I think one of the underlying themes I see is that Mike just doesn't know Brian well anymore, and hasn't had much interaction with him in decades. I don't expect him then to know a lot of things about how Brian is now. But he seems determined to believe Brian should just be however Mike thinks he should be, that he should be how he was decades ago when Mike remembers him.

Is anybody asking or expecting Mike to be just the way he was 30 or 40 or 50 years ago?

Imagine someone running into a friend they haven't seen much in a decade or two and just expecting them to be the same. This is basic human interaction stuff we're talking about. A similar thread was found in one of those David Beard "articles" last year, the idea that Brian just isn't the same as he was 50 years ago, as if anybody should be. It's crazy, and frankly insulting.

I do think there is potentially a true human emotional aspect to the idea/theory that Mike doesn't want to admit to himself (or anyone else) that he isn't close to Brian anymore and doesn't know Brian well anymore, that he isn't Brian's "partner" anymore. I think Mike holds on to his own personally crafted idea of Brian more than anything else.

I'm thinking even the final scenario you presented wouldn't work.  He could very well think Melinda "made Brian do it" even if she weren't on the same continent.  It's not a new thing for her to be blamed for most anything, whether it's logical or not.

As far as the extent of Jacqueline's role in Mike's business, I'm thinking we don't know.  I'm not challenging your assumptions.  I simply think none of us has a clue.

I agree, Debbie

Somewhere I have an print interview where a group member, perhaps Dennis, jokes that The Beach Boys are " unmanageable". Nothing has changed 35 years later.

Let's be honest here. Is it really "The Beach Boys" that are so unmanageable, and so problematic, or really mainly one member being a stick in the mud?  

I dunno...after a certain point, it seemed like none of them could agree on anything.

It's all of them

I'm of the opinion that it's very much a specific thing about the chemistry/politics/dysfunction of the exact group of people. Yes they may *all* be difficult in their own ways, absolutely. But if you alter that chemistry, and add or take out one person, it can change the WHOLE shebang. Just look at the effect Carl's absence had on the group. The inverse of that is that I think one person can bring a certain level of unmanageable dysfunction to the equation, which would otherwise be manageable (not necessarily fully peaceful in every way, but *manageable*) in their absence.

I believe that to be true in 2016, as well as in the year Denny said it (obviously it was even more complicated then though).

Well keep in mind the group and events in 80-81.

I disagree. 

During some eras, the unmanagebility certainly was contagious. That much I'll certainly agree. 

I disagree as well.  I've heard that Brian worked very hard in the studio on TMGMTR and NPP, from people who would actually know. There have long been rumors that TLOS was the work of others - pure crap.  Hopefully there may be an archive related to this from Ray Lawlor as he was at those sessions, and was well aware of all that Brian composed before he worked with Scott.  But people love to diminish Brian for some reason.  I guess it's a popular rumor.

Debbie, the mediocre don't like genius, or great talent (for example, see how Mozart was treated in that awful "Amadeus" movie). Nor do they like, or respect, people with mental issues (no need of examples here). Brian falls under both categories. That, imho, is more than sufficient to explain the relentless attempts to "diminish" Brian by many people, sadly including a good number of BB "fans".

A quick listen to Scott's other work shows pretty well how much Brian was involved. No way was that all Bennett.

Yes, and I am still waiting for the solo masterpieces by Joe Thomas. ;D

P.S.
This is not meant to disparage Brian's collaborators, each of which has been very important in his own way.

Concerning Brian's recent studio work with Joe Thomas, I think fans and spectators could be forgiven for being confused as far as who did what and how much each contributed.

Many folks have pointed out that Thomas wasn't involved in later NPP sessions. The indication seems to be Thomas was *less* involved in the production of NPP than he was on TWGMTR. Yet, Thomas got a full co-producer credit on NPP while he only got a "Recorded by" credit on TWGMTR (a credit seemingly made up that I guess is meant to fall somewhere below "producer" but above "engineer").

Producers and co-producers play different roles on different projects. Some of the folks in Brian's solo career who have been his right-hand man in the studio on various projects are folks who probably, in certain circumstances, might warrant a co-producer credit based on some folks' criteria. *If* Thomas warranted a full co-producer credit on NPP, he probably warranted one on TWGMTR. But we don't know how all the deals and contracts look. Thomas may well get "producer points" on TWGMTR despite the politically and functionally ambiguous "Recorded by" credit.

My other main thing with Thomas is that I disagree with any assertions that he isn't a prominent part of Brian's last two studio projects even if he exited the studio/producer role at some point during the NPP sessions. I say that only because *most* of the songs on those last two albums are co-written by Joe. Between Joe co-writing them, often helping with producing the backing tracks, and Brian also taking on some of Joe's arrangement ticks (claves, oboes, etc.), I do still hear a Thomas stamp on the stuff to varying degrees.

I don't think there is some vast conspiracy of other people churning stuff out and sticking Brian's name on it. But I certainly would love to hear a more "pure" Brian project, perhaps something with just him and piano and not much else. I think *creatively* Brian could do it. But guys like Thomas are the rare folks who Brian *likes* working with and can help get projects finished. Say what you want about Thomas (and I have plenty of issues with his production/arrangement style), but he has been able to do on multiple projects what a bunch of other guys like Gary Usher, Andy Paley, Don Was, Sean O'Hagan, etc. weren't able to do, and that is to aid Brian in finishing a project and getting it released.

And to get back to the topic of how this related to Mike, I think one of the problems Brian would have in working with Mike is that it wouldn't necessarily be productive in terms of getting projects released. "Baywatch Nights" sounds totally lame, and they couldn't even make that happen, even with Don Was involved (and Was was hotter as a producer in the early-mid 90s especially).

I agree with you that the title "Baywatch Nights" is lame, but you don't think the song (or at least what of it got recorded) wasn't good do you? I thought it sounded great with a nice stompin', rockin' instrumental track and a nice vocal from Carl, along with the perfect Beach Boys "somewhere out in Malibu!" group vocal line. I really thought that this track shoulda been brought back out during the reunion as, first of all, it included Carl (but was not an outtake, just an unfinished thing from their last unfinished original project) and secondly cuz it sounded like an uptempo Beach Boys classic, but not in the pastiche type way that Al's "PT Cruiser", Mike's "Camp California" or Brian's "Desert Drive" came off.

In fact, I still think it would be worth finishing, even if they can't all get together, perhaps as a *new* track on some new project in the next few years. Get Brian and Al (and hey, why not Blondie) to do their vocals and then Mike and Bruce as well. And then you have a new Beach Boys track, something to get people's attention, and a nice little tribute to Carl with a great performance from him.* I know this won't happen though, cuz it won't involve Brian and Mike in a room writing together.

Sorry though, I know I went way off on a tangent.


*Unlike "Waves of Love" which, though I personally love it, did not seem to be Carl giving his all on what he thought would be a releasable vocal.

I wish that "Waves of Love" had just used a single-tracked lead vocal by Carl. I don't know what it would have sounded like, but my problem with the song is the poor synch of the double-tracking.

Welcome back S. D. Jim! I feared you were lost in "stranger" land! :)

Some of the last true momentum for original material with Brian and Mike writing was the period after Brian got away from Landy, when Was had the documentary going, and when Was reported Mike and Brian were writing together and dozens of songs were in the pipeline. For more detailed info search some of my archived posts on the subject, including Don's humorous take on how "Baywatch Nights" came together. Some misconceptions were also shattered, including the fact that as soon as he could, Brian asked Don to approach the Beach Boys about working together on new material, and they did. And that Mike would have been in Don's film had there not been a lawsuit.

I just mention that so I'm not repeating myself on a topic that's been discussed a lot, but consider what happened and specifically how and why it never happened.

And what I still vividly recall as a fan was reading at least two interviews with Don Was from this time, and getting really excited about this "reunion" of the band. I was excited to hear this "Baywatch Nights" track knowing from the Was interview that Brian and Mike had cooked it up together. Then I waited, and waited, and waited...kept checking TV Guide for Baywatch and Baywatch Nights listings where the song or songs might be broadcast.

When Baywatch finally did feature the BB's, it was for lack of a better term a debacle. "Summer Of Love". John Stamos behind an electronic drum set on the beach, closeups on Mike and numerous dancing models...again, I've said all that before and it's old ground.

But I still can't get over the disappointment and thinking in a major way how they simply blew a terrific opportunity. Blew it. The reunion of Brian and the band cast Brian as an extra on the beach as a song several years old played on the soundtrack.

Then the recorded tracks themselves, the new songs...they were scrapped.

So all of this about reunions and writing together and all of that stuff - It happened, then what happened within the band managed to derail it. For all of those who always want a reunion, who want a co-writing session in that room with a piano or in a studio, it actually did happen and original songs were created. Instead of going down that route, they put "Summer Of Love" on TV as the song to push, complete with video. And it went nowhere, as expected. Were the other sessions in the can from Was and Paley any worse than that Baywatch appearance? Yet they chose not to go that direction.

I don't dispute for a moment that Joe Thomas was more or less heavily involved in TWGMTR and NPP. As HeyJude said, the credits themselves confirm that!
Still, more "claves and oboes" don't necessarily mean more Joe Thomas involvement.  Brian has always loved mellow sounds and never more than now ("mellow" may be one of his favourite words). So claves, oboes, flutes etc. aren't necessarily Joe's choices, though he is surely favourable.
And by the way, I happen to love those sounds, too, and maybe that explains why I seem to like TWGMTR, and especially NPP, more than the average Joe (not Thomas). :)

It's impossible to know who contributed what to the actual recorded backing track arrangements. I feel like the particular fashion some of the claves/oboes, etc. are used are much of the Joe Thomas "adult contemporary" sort than how Brian used instrumentation in the 60s. It's quite possible Brian likes the sound now and uses it more as a result of Joe's influence as well.

I don't have anything against any given instrument or sound; I just think there's too much plinky, tinkly stuff on a lot of the stuff Joe Thomas has worked on with Brian. It's just grates on me eventually. I wish I could just mix out the percussion on something like "Summer's Gone."

I love "Strange World", but when the instruments come in behind the piano in the intro section, it starts sounding like a "Full House" music cue for a few moments.

It's not like I disagree with any of this, nor with you on anything that you've said.

I guess I just love so much of TWGMTR and NPP, and appreciate how hard I was told that Brian worked on them, that I'm happy overall.  And Joe working with Brian seems to help get the job done, when he's involved.

Referencing Mike Love, I have a strong suspicion that he wasn't around much for the recording or mixing sessions beyond doing his parts.  If he doesn't like what Brian did with the recordings, or processing his voice to suit Brian's desired sound, he's certainly free to express that.  It's just a bit ironic when vocal processing on his own few releases is so obvious.