The Smiley Smile Message Board

The Mike and Bruce Tour 2014 thread was locked by Billy, so here is the Mike and Bruce Tour 2015 thread.  :drumroll

Discuss tour dates, setlists and other developments. Where will M&B play in January/February? Are we likely to hear any new songs?

Found some early dates here:

(http://s4.postimg.org/4yml62m9p/Sk_rmavbild_2014_12_06_kl_19_20_47.png)

Are you willing to see Mike and Bruce perform at Sunrise Theatre for 315.53 dollars for example?

That comes with a Foskett lapdance, so it's actually good value!

These tickets cost more than the C50.

Staymoes doesn't come cheap.  :lol

  Mike Love is the greatest authoritarian in the history of rock & roll. Is that a compliment? Up to you.

 ;D   Another myth falls by the wayside. In this case, by about 3-fold.

Those prices are stub hub prices. GA Tickets for the Port Canaveral show can be bought for $37 on ticketmaster.

I am disappointed to see M&B are using false advertising to promote their show:

(http://s29.postimg.org/udaugh5yf/Sk_rmavbild_2014_12_06_kl_21_03_03.png)

Link: https://www.choicesecure03.net/mainapp/eventschedule.aspx?Clientid=Sunrise&prod=3248

The show is sold out - how many people have bought their tickets believing they will see Brian, Al and Dave? Is this M&B's new modus operandi?

That will be their '50 Years of California Girls Tour' or whatever song they decide to use. :lol

From BBFC:

Jan. 3, 2015 — Tucson, AZ (Tucson Arena)*
Jan. 5 — Naples, FL (Artis-Naples Center, with the Naples Philharmonic Orchestra)*
Jan. 6 — Sarasota, FL (Van Wezel Performing Arts Hall)*
Jan. 7 — Clearwater, FL (Ruth Eckerd Hall)*
Jan. 8 — West Palm Beach, FL (Kravis Center, Dreyfoos Concert Hall)*
Jan. 9 — Fort Pierce, FL (Sunrise Theatre)*
Jan. 10 — Cape Canaveral, FL (Exploration Tower at Port Canaveral)*
Jan. 15-17 — Niagara Falls, ON, Canada (Fallsview Casino)*
Jan. 24 — Redding, CA (Redding Civic)*
Jan. 23 — Napa, CA (Uptown Theatre)*
Feb. 12 — Cedar Falls, IA (University of N. Iowa)*
Feb. 13 — Kansas City, KS (Ameristar Arena)*
Feb. 15 — Bloomington, IN (Indiana University Auditorium, 7:30 p.m.)*
Feb. 14 — St. Charles, MO (Linderwood University)*
March 18 — Austin, TX (Rodeo Austin, Travis County Exposition Center)
March 22 — Nashville, TN (Ryman Auditorium, 7:30 p.m.)*
March 28 — San Tan Valley Arizona (Encanterra Country Club)*
April 17 — Lincoln, RI (Twin River Event Center, 8 p.m.)*
April 22 — Easton, PA (State Theatre)
April 24-25 — Westbury, NY (NYCB Theatre at Westbury, 8 p.m.)*

19+ show?

It'll be a good old bait and switch as Mike brings up a young lady and he (gasps!) takes his hat off :X

Does the band set the ticket price?

http://rockandrollguru.blogspot.co.nz/2010/03/who-sets-prices-for-concert-tickets.html

Interesting read.

Sorry???   Mike Love and Bruce Johnston's Beach Boys tickets???  Is that how it's officially being promoted or is it just some site listing the shows as such?

 AND...the one show which suggests that it's a part of the 50th Anniversary Tour is priced at almost 2 1/2 times the next highest priced shows.  It's also the 2nd closest to being a sell out...with only 2 tickets left as I started to type.

That is a pretty significant difference...it can't just be an oversight can it?  What's up with THAT?

Thanks.

Nashville March 22nd.     thanks for the heads up.   Think I'll drive down for a nice road trip and a Beachboys show.   Ryman and Beachboys,   A few beers on Broadway before and after the show.    Can't wait!!!!!

It's amazing how much time people devote to discussing individuals whom they despise......

I'm gonna go head over to the nearest Pearl Jam board to bash Eddy Vedder for eternity .......

..... Wait! Why would I waste me time?

Sorry but it`s no myth that Mike and Bruce`s concert tickets are, on average, much cheaper than C50. Below are the ticket prices for the majorty of shows that they did over the summer (obviously their busiest period):

Epsom - $55
Newmarket - $50-55
Newbury - $40
Mad Garden Festival - $55
Marbella - $22
York - $35-55
The Great Auditorium - $45-60
Freeman Stage - $40-70
American Music Theater - $70
Ohio State Fair - $30
Ventura County Fair - $12
Mountain Winery - $35-95
Sioux Empire Fair - Free with fair admission
Ashley for the Arts Festival - $5 (20,000 attendance)
Ferro Pavilion - $25-100
Freedom Hill - $10-69
Pomona - $20-50
Sun Center - $49-75
Columbus Park - $10 (10,000 attendance)
All American Summer Concert Series - Free
Hampton Beach - $37-?
Newport - $39-65
Indian Ranch - $37-54
Bureau County Fair - $27-37 (8,000 attendance)
Conner Prairie Amphitheater - $23-28 (three shows)
Britt Pavilion - $43
Casino amphitheater - $35
Silver Reef Casino - $74 - 89
Salem State Fair - Free with fair ticket - $35
Foellinger Theater - $39-99
Honeywell Center - $29-100
Wayne County Fair - $15-25
Utah State Fair - $7-10
The Pavilion - $35-?
The Carson Center - $30-135
Bicentennial Weekend Celebration - Free
Diamond Jo Casino - $39-99
Surf Ballroom - $45-55
Cannery - $29-?
Humphrey`s - $76
Big Fresno Fair - $18-25
Majestic - $45-65
Biloxi - $39-59

There are some more expensive venues in there but I don`t think anyone could deny that many of the ticket prices (especially at the better attended venues) are very reasonable and certainly much cheaper than C50.

Objectively, I have to ask at what point does the grace/forgiveness period on all of this end? The last official 50th Anniversary "C50" show tickets were sold in early Fall 2012, and I'm with you on this one: I'm disappointed to see a show scheduled in 2015 being advertised like this no matter who shoulders the blame for this listing. Again, at what point does this become something beyond a "mistake" or anything of the sort, and start getting scrutinized as it possibly should be? I'll say again, I share the disappointment because there is no rational explanation to have a 2015 show billed as a 50th Anniversary event, no matter who is to blame for the listing reading that way. If it were a 2013 show, I'd be a little more forgiving and chalk it up to someone's legitimate confusion, but 2015?

Using my (admittedly biased toward benefit of doubt) logic: Mike owning the license for the "Beach Boys" name, may also own the license for the C50 logo, therefore he can do whatever he wants with it ..... And generally, I recall most/many/lots of C50 shows were billed using said logo and then listing David,  Mike, Al, Brian, Brooth off to the side in a separate section of the advert, or above or below the logo.... Mike knows any Beach Boys fan likely to give two shites already knows it will just be him and clap-meister, therefore what should he care? .... Yeah, I think it's silly he wouldn't update it to "52 Anniversary Tour" ..... but if it matters so much: ......... Brian has shows coming up and an album coming out, why not focus on that?

This is the link to the venue`s site:

http://sunrisetheatre.com/shows/the-beach-boys/index.html

Tickets are $65-75.

And certainly no room for confusion over which band people are going to be seeing based on this site.

I'm going to start referring to events like this latest 50th Anniversary billing as a "Niekro moment", in honor of the former major league pitching brothers Phil and Joe Niekro. Every time something like this happens, I'll post for my own amusement a picture of one of the Niekro brothers as a reply.

For those who are baseball fans (I know a few of you definitely are), I'm sure you remember or have at least heard of Phil and Joe. Phil is in the Hall Of Fame, while Joe has one of the more infamous moments in baseball-blooper history that gets replayed constantly to his credit.

For those unfamiliar with baseball, here is the rundown. The Niekro brothers were knuckleballers, which meant they'd throw junk from the mound, average speed around 70 mph (while the average is around 90 in the MLB today), but their pitches would dance more than Fred Astaire as they reached the batter. So these guys pitched beyond the age limit of most pitchers because their arms didn't wear out as much as normal pitchers.

But beyond that, they were known to employ several methods of "doctoring" the ball, in fact if doctoring the ball were a profession, the Niekros would be like neurosurgeons their field. Rumors of them doing everything from hiding Vaseline in the bill of their cap to throw a spitter, hiding a swatch of sandpaper inside their glove to scuff the ball, sharpening a fingernail so they could cut into the stitching on the ball, stashing nail files and other sharp or rough tools in their pockets, etc. It ran the gamut. But if they pitched for you, it was funny and you were glad to have them. If your team couldn't hit for sh*t against one of the brothers, you'd be mad. Typical sports fan stuff.

So one game, Joe Niekro was pitching, throwing his usual knucklers, eephus pitches, and all-out junk to the batters, and something that day must have made his pitches look like the ball was dancing the Tarantella in front of the batters, because the game was stopped and the umps started coming towards Niekro on the mound.

Joe Niekro must have forgotten he was pitching in a televised game, in a stadium with at least 30,000 fans watching, and with the full umpiring crew and other players around the mound. Because in front of everyone, ol' Joe tries to reach into his back pocket and throw away a nail file which he had been hiding during the game. Then he puts up his hands in a "what did I do?" pose, and one of the people on the mound spotted the file hitting the dirt...then the umpire sees it, and immediately ejects Joe, followed by a 10-game suspension by the league.

It's the fact that Joe was so bad at trying to hide the fact that he had just thrown a nail file out of his back pocket in front of everyone, then gives the "I didn't do it" hand/arm gesture that makes it so funny. If this Gif translates to the board, here it is, the ultimate "Niekro moment" in honor of the knuckleballing, ball-doctoring Niekro brothers:

(http://mlb.mlb.com/images/2/8/8/73260288/Niekro_oq0urivp.gif)

Yeah, but we're talking about The Beach Boys: a rock band ......

I once went and saw WAR, I don't remember when, and was very sad and disappointed to discover it was only Lonnie Jordan and a bunch of other guys ..... Not even an Brooth equivalent anywhere on stage.... I was a bit pissed, but ya know, I could have done 5 seconds of Google research beforehand, and it's not like WAR's been anywhere near much media discussion ........ in a few decades at least ..... unlike our Beach Boys ...... But I also understood that Lonnie owns the name and has every right to keep on keeping on however he needs to do it.... Lee Oskar and the rhythm section have always been my favorite WAR members, so it's not like I'm a Lonnie Jordan apologist ..... Life just does what it does sometimes.

I'm gonna say it will take a call to this theater to explain this listing one way or another. Why doesn't someone do that before we get too deep in the weeds with armchair wondering?

(http://www.tradingcarddb.com/Images/Cards/Baseball/105/105-645Fr.jpg)

Nutty Jerry could not be reached for comment.

(http://stillisstillmoving.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/nutty_jerrys_70154049_std.jpg)

Which is as it should be as one is only getting 1/5th of the original band.  ;D

Guy camera right is clearly Bruce :)

He cracked the Kokomo Code!

Absolutely right.

That`s the way it should be and IS. Certainly no myth.

Don't see that this has previously been mentioned, and there is no source listed, but this is clearly the site of a ticket re-seller. Consequently, the prices listed are inflated, but nevertheless manage to irritate some who want to believe that they're what everybody had to pay. These Beach Boys are a bunch of bandits!

The advertising is the responsibility of the venue, not the band or BRI. The bands management provide the venue with approved promo material. Not their fault if the venues PR dept. stray from that. So, no, M&B are not using false advertising. Next.

So then Mike's people have contacted the venue to correct the false statement?  Mike hasn't been shy in the past about correcting misinformation, so I trust there is no reason he would let this one linger.

Given that they read this forum, yes, they likely will very soon, as they have in the past. But of course, that would spoil the overall credo of certain posters here of busting a gut to find something to bitch about concerning Mike.

Well there does seem a pattern of M&B shows being billed as C50 shows! You should care because you threw a fit over BW's Tulsa show over imagined mis-reputation of the setlist.....

Andrew, I try to remain impartial in all of this, but people like you make it difficult.  As SB just pointed out, just a couple of days ago you had this to say about a *perceived* inaccuracy:

"Now, because I'm a picky SOB, if I'd been daft enough to fly over and make the gig, I'd be suing the collective ass of the venue for lying in the write up. Tracks from his new album ? I don't see any. Do you ?

False advertising, sirrah. False advertising, and I will have satisfaction."

Quite a rant, suing, lying false advertising, etc.  But that was about a Brian Wilson show.  Now that it is a Mike Love show, no big deal, it happens...and Mike is an angel, he will take care of it in short order.  As you seem to be the primary defender of Mike on the board, the double standard makes it tough to take seriously.

It's happening again. What a déjà vu feeling.

(http://s28.postimg.org/exq9q0b3x/Sk_rmavbild_2014_12_07_kl_17_34_20.png)
Picture of Mike Love with Brian Wilson, Al Jardine and David Marks. Tagline: Join the 50th anniversary celebrations!

(http://s27.postimg.org/koc7y8o83/Sk_rmavbild_2014_12_07_kl_17_40_49.png)

What really gets me are these lines:

The Beach Boys officially broke up in 1998 shortly after Carl Wilson's death, however Mike Love and Bruce Johnston maintain the rights to the name and continue to tour with their own band as The Beach Boys. In December 2011, the group's five remaining members - Brian, Mike, Al, Bruce and David - reformed in celebration of their 50th anniversary of the group's creation, announcing a new album and a 50-date international tour.

Unsuspecting concert goers believe they will see Brian, Al and David, but end up at a gig with Mike Love, Bruce Johnston and lesser known musicians for hire.

The tickets are fairly expensive:

(http://s17.postimg.org/ljuywebfj/Sk_rmavbild_2014_12_07_kl_17_48_39.png)

Can this be considered a scam? It seems so deliberate.

Link: http://www.niagara-falls-theatre.com/theaters/casino-avalon/beach-boys.php

Nm

I doubt it is a scam.  And, I've seen them (The Touring Band) at that venue. No one was expecting a reunion show.  There have been ads or photos with old 1964-ish photos attached to ads or blurbs of band history. These didn't necessarily represent the "look" of the band at the time, but somehow was used as part of an ad.  This looks like background history.

Remember, the casino business is primary, the entertainment is secondary, even if it attracts multi-purpose visitors.

Those tickets were less expensive when first offered for sale. Closer to the show, things get more pricey.  

Mike and Bruce benefit from these inaccuracies. It took me 5 minutes of googleing to find them. Why don't Mike and Bruce's wives and managers do the same? Is it really that hard? Why are they not interested in people's perception of The Beach Boys? Seeing The Beach Boys in concert should be a positive experience.

The Beach Boys are turning into Scamerica's Band.  :(

Like the original stubhub listing at the start of this thread, the linked site is a resale site and says so right on the disclaimer. It is not affiliated with the venue or artist. The prices simply represent what some broker in Des  Moines thinks he can get for tix as of today. As such the prices listed are completely irrelevant to this discussion

No they don't, only the reseller ( "scalper") does.

Again, you should probably direct your complaints to the venue. Tell them you want to complain that though the the blurb was accurate, you managed to take it wrong. Who loves you? Cam.

Andrew doesn't need my help but maybe you missed this part of his quote "I'd be suing the collective ass of the venue".

  :lol

This rider says the M&B have to approve all tour promotion beforehand....
 http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/beach-boys-rider

That thing's got to be 25 years old now.

They need to fix that, and quick. I don't think the advert was done to intentionally mislead, but that's an error that cannot and should not be left unfixed.

Edit...

Many of the leaked riders on Smoking Gun are indeed old and in some cases, outdated. The picture certainly is.

Edit x 2

Very old, in this case. It requests Copenhagen chewing tobacco , and nobody in the band dips to my knowledge. Also requests Marlboro Lights, which havent been sold under that name in about five years.

Which makes it doubly unreasonable! Must Bruce demand vintage cigarettes!?!?!? He doesn't even smoke them, he just tears them up in front of a shocked teenage girl who sobs intermittently as he sharply lectures them all about how it was just to make sure they were paying attention!

Some people will gladly search twice that far back in history in their endless pursuit of being critical of band members they don't  like.

I remember when Smoking Gun posted those, the one I saw at the specific link posted above is not 25 years old. They posted three contract riders from different eras, if you notice it still says at that website, quote: "Here's a Beach Boys bonanza, culled from three different tour riders."  There are older pages posted, but if the specific one linked to were 25 years old, some of the references would not exist as Carl was still alive and BRI would have been in charge of these things.

That specific page is more recent, check some of the terminology used.

Three (3) BIC type Large lighters (preferably without Child Guards) NOT GREEN!


...huh.

One of those 3 riders used to have the line the band was not to be referred to as 'an oldies act' or the like. That was back in the 80s.

And the specific contract rider posted at the link in this thread has details that would exist only after Carl passed away.

We need this!

http://www.ebay.com/itm/THE-BEACH-BOYS-Vintage-Concert-Rider-Texas-1990-Rare-/361139110046?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item541591809e

I do remember a thread on a board about a rider and posters felt there were items Dennis would have required. Was sure it was the same but may not be the case.

Surely that was the doing of Carl or Al, right?
I almost feel like a latter-day M&B rider would have a line stating the band was to never to not be referred to as an oldies act.    ;D

Rock Stars have tour riders...

Who cares....

You mean on a site that states, `The tickets offered for sale are resale tickets that may be sold at above face value.` that they are expensive??? Surely not.  :lol

Tickets available from $35 from the official site.

No. It was more the fact they were still recording albums.

I've often wondered about requirement they not be promoted or listed as an oldies act.   Was it concern about their  not being current or relevant or people's perception of the act, or was it to protect them from lawsuit when they chose to do newer material to the exclusion of older material?

I think it was an image thing..... Even if they WERE basically an oldies act at that time, best not to rub it in with the public and media ..... The Beach Boys have been straddling that weird line since, what, 1966?

That demand certainly puts a dent in the Mike-controlled-shameless-oldies-nostalgia-act accusation.

Don't it.

I posted earlier about attending the show at the Ryman in Nashville March 22 (on a Sunday night).  I just looked at tickets direct from the ryman.  $150.00 to $60.00.  The  most expensive tickets listed for the entire upcoming first half of the Ryman season for 2015.   Twice what the best seats cost for WILLIE NELSON at THE Ryman!!!    This should come with The entire reunion lineup for this price ...........somebody understand what is going on here?  I normally don't bitch about shelling out some bucks for a favorite act, especially one of my favorite acts.    but this??

I said $150.00 a ticket.    For a basic Bb road band show.     Or did I miss something.   

You should get in touch with Nicko1234, he seems to know where to score the good prices on these tickets.  :lol

Is there a Symphony with them?

That's very, very odd. M&B don't typically have seats over $100 unless it's a benefit or gala type thing.

Though Mike's band is reported to be very good, $150 is five times the sum I would pay to see them. I don't think I would pay that much for a Brian show!

I note the Ryman is using a C50 clip advertising their 2015.

http://ryman.com/events/TheBeachBoys

Sloppy, sloppy, sloppy.

OK, been in contact with Mike's promo people and the issues will be addressed asap. The ads should be "50 years of Fun Fun Fun", so I'm guessing someone googled that and used the first image they got.

And then we'll have world peace, but probably without candy bars.

Different situations - the Brian thing was me being an ass and going off on one over the wrong gig, which I admitted and apologised for (and for which I was rightly ragged in PMs... and note, I didn't ream Brian's people a new one for false advertising, but the venue)... the M&B thing is the usual suspects here straining to find something new bad to say today. Yes, the adverts are misrepresentative, but I know how BRI M&B promo works, and this is down to the venue, and will be rectified soon, as will any other such incidents if brought to their attention. Again, approved promo material is sent to the venue, which includes non-C50 photos. If someone deviates from that, that's down to them, not BRI.

So, thanks for finding these things and posting them here, as it makes it much easier to fix them.  ;D

Granted that's wrong, but the other image - which you didn't post - is of Mike & Bruce... and it's being seen to.

Care to tell me where I`ve ever stated that Mike and Bruce never play expensive shows?

And also, sorry to break it to you, but there are many tickets right in front of the stage for that show available for $65. The most expensive tickets include soundchecks and Club Kokomo experiences.

Sorry if that fails to fit your agenda.  ;)

The most expensive tickets are for things like Warmth of the Sun VIP packages and Club Kokomo.

Regular tickets are well under $100.

Well perhaps point out that  FFF was 1964 and was a 50th 2014 theme. They need a 1965 song surely.

I think we`re all expecting California Girls to be announced before too long.

Why don't you get one of the $60 tickets you mentioned were available?

50 Years of I'm Bugged at my old man :D

In 2027 they'll do yet another short-lived reunion celebrating 50 years of Ding Dang. Can't wait. Joe Thomas is going to make sure the song, in its new concert rendition, will have a sexy Sade-like feel.

"20 Years Of Summer Of Love"

"47 Years Of Bruce"

Not my agenda if a fan posts that the tickets he wanted to buy for the Ryman were the most expensive listed for the entire first half season of concerts at the Ryman. I'm not traveling to Nashville to see the show.

I just thought since you've been posting so much info about how affordable the tickets are, maybe you have another channel to help a fellow fan get these deals which you've posted here and in other threads whenever ticket prices come up in a topic. If you can't help score a better deal or aren't in the ticket-brokering business, what's the agenda in trying to inform someone who just shopped for these seats personally of how these prices came to be, short of explaining the differences in price?

What does it matter to you if a fan posts that the tickets are expensive, and what does mentioning VIP packages or Club Kokomo have to do with a fan trying to buy tickets and finding them the most expensive on the upcoming schedule of shows?

Andrew, that's good it's being fixed. I chimed in because it seemed unusual to have a specific tour now over two years old still showing up and being used for promoting concerts scheduled for 2015. Something in the process was either broken or wasn't being done to correctly promote those shows, hopefully it will be fixed from this point onward, benefit all around.

That one contract page which Smoking Gun had posted seemed to suggest such advertising/promotional material had to be approved prior to it being released by the "purchaser" as named in the contract (purchaser covering all those contracting the band to play the show, I assume), so there seemed to be a disconnect between that contract and what was going on with these mislabeled show ads and related photos and other materials. I'm assuming that element of the contract would still be in effect in a current agreement, it's pretty standard in concert promotions and booking in general to give the management and production of the act control over the names and imagery used to promote their shows, so I think it's a question of what is happening to have these continuing to slip through the cracks, especially if it is in a contract agreement?

Side note: Just to remove any doubt, that page linked to in this thread on Smoking Gun is something from the post-Carl touring era, more relevant to the present structure than "25 years old" or whatever some were suggesting. Those saying otherwise are not correct, or perhaps aren't aware of the various elements in that contract. But just to clarify/confirm, a contract with that specific wording would not have existed when Carl was still touring with the band. Which is why it was relevant to those asking how these billings were continuing to happen.

Side note 2: I checked out the Ryman press release at the link, and this stood out "In 1974 Mike Love’s concept album Endless Summer ignited a second generation of Beach Boys fans and stirred a tempest that rocked the music world."

I had assumed (based a lot on what Mike described in his 1992 Goldmine interview) that Capitol had the collection ready to release as "Greatest Hits" volume whatever, as the Beach Boys were signed to Reprise at that time. Then Mike suggested they call it "Endless Summer", which paid off for all involved. But I'm curious how a Capitol plan to release another Greatest Hits followed by a title change suggested by Mike is reported as Mike's concept album, is there more to the story? The concept was already in place (greatest hits) at Capitol, Mike offered the name, I'm wondering how that gets reported as his concept album?

Hopefully this gets straightened out as quick as the Wrecking Crew's BB's session mess ups.

I could.  Or I could afford the 150 if I wished.   Point is, I've seen the band in similar venues all over the country and had good seats for never more than half that.  I'm not sure what has driven the price up.  I am well aware of the cost of buying from professional online scalpers which I avoid by dealing as directly with the venue as possible.  Is the addition of Jeffrey Foskett worth paying twice the price?  I see no other difference in the shows or other members participating in this tour.  Maybe Jeff AND Alan.  If memory serves, the reunion show I saw in Pittsburgh, with good seats, cost less than this.  The cheap seats at the Ryman are way back, binocular back.  I guess it just strikes me as not worth it given the overall expense of the trip.

Is there any possible limit to Mike related nitpicking?

Sure, calling Endless Summer a concept album might be a stretch, but the concept is somewhat there in that the album has a "title" beyond "Greatest Hits" which suggests a feeling/ethos/lifestyle (and a demonstratably powerful one, at that) which the music, split into 4 conceptual sides, "surf, cars, girls" etc, compliments.... No one said it was the next Tommy or anything.

I think GF needs to be put into 24/7 "Landy-style" care running up to (and beyond) Mike's book release.

Have you asked the venue why the price is what it is?

If the smoking gun contract is still in force perhaps it shows that not all purchasers honor their contract. Someone should contact these purchasers and ask them if they honored their contract.

Seriously????, GF is one of the best posters on the board!

Calling endless summer a concept album is ML bullshit at its finest!

"Bullshit" that certainly paid off at the bank. I've yet to hear Brian complain about it.

And yes, for GF's own safety! He'll likely be found running naked down Mt. Vernon/Fairway carrying a flaming turban and shooting holes in as many copies of Looking Back With Love that he can snag off e-bay!

But seriously, you can find major fault with a guy simply because he suggested a greatest hits album have a unique title??? Really? Really?

Since Mike has publicly laid out that he nor the group had input as to the album beyond his suggestion of a title, who or what is it we are wondering about again?

We're wondering about new and fetish-feeding ways to bash our biggest celebrity guilty crush

Mike is your crush since you want the SIP album  on 180-gram virgin vinyl.....

You selling a copy???? ;)

We're wondering why Mike took credit for Endless Summer being his concept album even though you just alluded to the fact all he contributed was a title.

For instance, on his Beach Boys page in 2002, this was actually posted. I sh*t you not...


That is real. And as you see, that was a Mike Love approved statement of how Endless Summer is his concept album. Besides the utter ridiculousness of this bio in the first place, it's just wrong that he would take credit for something that even you, his biggest apologist, admits isn't true.

What's the issue? .... Endless Summer works as a concept album if one wishes to see it that way.

Its Mike acting like a fucking genius and visionary when the truth is far different than that. Mike just happened to help name a greatest hits album that went crazy on the charts due to the cultural climate of the time.

I agree Endless Summer is an ML concept album. ML's concept is to use cousin Brian's songs to make some dough.

Page 3 of the Rider asks for beer,cigarettes, ashtrays and lighters. Surely a request from an older (70s-80s) contract. If they were still demanding cigarettes after Carls passing I would be shocked.


Page 6 has the 'oldies' reference.

You gotta admit it's a pretty darn good title and certainly does put a nice bow on the whole package ....

Can someone please provide a quote from Brian complaining about it?

Now, unless someone outright thinks the title "Endless Summer" sucks, what, again, is the issue?

Or, AGD, can you please talk to Mike's people and have him make a public apology?

Love is also supposed to have thought of the title of Pet Sounds. Does that make Pet Sounds Mike Love's concept album?

Goldmine (GM) interview with Mike (ML) from 1992:

GM: Capitol's treatment of the Beach Boys' catalog on CD has been fabulous. What was your impression of the slew of two-fer Beach Boys CDs?

ML: I don't even know. I don't know.

GM: Have you seen them?

ML: No. I don't know. You find that amusing?

GM: Yeah, it's hard to believe that being a Beach Boy you haven't seen something like that.

ML: It is hard to believe. I find it hard to believe too.

GM: Why is that?

ML: Why is that? Because I'm a Pisces, is that a good answer [uproarious laughter]? That's as good as I can come up with. There is nothing that we can do to stop them from merchandising our records the way they want to merchandise them so we're at their mercy. So if they've done something that in the opinion of the caring public is well done, then I'm glad to hear it. But having no recourse or say-so ...

For instance, they were going to do a Best Of The Beach Boys Volume Three in 19 - , whatever the hell it was, and I came in there and went, "Wait a second, call it Endless Summer." And instead of being Volume Three which sound nauseating to me, like ...

GM: The third rung of hits.

ML: Exactly. Endless Summer has a whole other vibe to it and sold several million copies just with the switch of the title. But then I'm a title guy anyway.

GM: The artwork was so strange on that album. I could never tell who was who.

ML: Yeah, I know, it was awful ...

Promotions for the tour 2014:

50 years of 'Fun, Fun, Fun': The Beach Boys come to Napa
October 22, 2014 1:58 pm
The Beach Boys at the Uptown
The Beach Boys
Uptown Theatre Napa
For ages 10 and over; under 16 must be accompanied by an adult.
Friday, Jan. 23, 8 p.m.
Tickets: $70, $85, $105
Info, 707-259-0123, ext. 6
The Beach Boys, troubadours of the endless California summer, come to Napa to perform at the Uptown Theatre on Jan. 23.
Since they formed in 1961 in Hawthorne, the rock band, then consisting of brothers Brian, Dennis and Carl Wilson, and their cousin Mike Love and friend Al Jardine, the group epitomized the California sound and lifestyle, the music, surfing, cars and young love with hit after hit, including “Surfin’ Safari,” “Good Vibrations,” “Surfin’ USA,” “Surfer Girl,” “I Get Around,” “Fun, Fun, Fun (Till Her Daddy Takes the T-Bird Away)” and “California Girls.”
Brian Wilson went onto a solo career, Dennis Wilson drowned and Carl Wilson died of lung cancer, but Mike Love, who produced the “Endless Summer” album in 1974, now leads the group, and with Bruce Johnston, Jeff Foskett, Randell Kirsch, Tim Bonhomme, John Cowsill and Scott Totten continues to tour and perform an average of 150 shows a year.

And most recent:

http://ryman.com/events/TheBeachBoys
Captained by Mike Love, The Beach Boys play an astoundingly busy schedule of concerts, averaging 150 shows a year, ranging from sundrenched summer festivals to gala New Year’s celebrations and special events worldwide.   In 1974 Mike Love’s concept album Endless Summer ignited a second generation of Beach Boys fans and stirred a tempest that rocked the music world.


I'm just curious why the narrative on the Endless Summer project with Capitol seems to have changed, or at least has been reported in 2014 with a different narrative now then Mike himself had suggested in 1992, or what most fans have heard about the project. And I'd say what most fans of the project have heard is that it was another Greatest Hits package put together by Capitol to sell some of the Beach Boys' back catalog of hits made for Capitol and in the Capitol vaults, as the band was currently on Reprise.

So now there is promotional material being released to advertise upcoming shows, and the examples suggest both that Mike produced it, and that it was his concept album, and those claims would seem to contradict the previous history and info about that project, which Mike spoke of in at least that one specific Goldmine interview where he suggests only that he suggested and gave the project its title (which was a very good and beneficial move for all concerned). Is it a mistake in the newer press releases circa 2014, is there more to the story, etc. ? Previously Mike got credit for suggesting the title and naming the album, but I'd say that's different from either producing it or developing the concept enough to call it his concept album as of 2014. I just assumed it was a greatest hits project already planned and compiled by Capitol which got a much better and more marketable title to sell it in 1974.

The title IS the concept!

There, done.... Can the world now continue turning?

This is another beauty ::):

" Love's role as the bands front man sometimes overshadows his stature as one of rock's foremost songwriters. Surfin', The Beach Boys first hit , came from his pen. With his cousin, Brian Wilson, love wrote the classics Fun, Fun, Fun , I Get Around, Help Me Rhonda, California Girls and the Grammy nominated Good Vibrations".  

One of rock's foremost songwriters! Ooo, I hope he keeps up this line for the book. Should be fun!

One of rock's foremost title guys, anyway.

So, you're saying he DIDN'T co-write those songs?

None of those are at issue and I'd say were not relevant to the discussion to begin with: They are from older contracts, no doubt (and there never was any doubt, as the site says they posted excerpts from *3* separate contracts). However: The specific one which pops up when you click on the link posted in this thread is the one which is more relevant to the post-Carl touring situation, and which has specific wording that would/could not have existed prior to Carl's death and the decisions made about the touring situations after Carl's passing. It is absolutely *not* from the touring years prior to Carl's passing, as some were suggesting. Can we accept that at this point, that the page referenced in this thread is a more recent one and not 25 years old? It's not difficult to prove.

The endless title.

Isn't a tour rider kind of the band's business?

All bands have staff, handlers, wives, family around at these shows.... So, someone smokes? Who cares?

Should Bruce Brown get some credit for the album's concept and production as well? 1966.

(http://www.surfclassics.com/wp-content/tn3/0/EndlessSummerHalf.jpg)

I for one hope one of rock's foremost songwriters still has it in him to dump a big creative load on us again. Pisces Brothers, Santa's Goin' to Kokomo... these are but appetizers for the festering mother lode of creativity bound to be boppin' around that head of his.

Say, he should go to Capitol and try to get the same deal Brian Wilson did. Surely they wouldn't refuse such a proven hit-maker a solo album, toss him a bone and give him some DUEEEEEEEEEEEEE. Get that Bruno Mars collaboration going and prove that the man who wrote Surfin' has STILL GOT IT with a tasty concept album.

No. That was a movie that had nothing to do with The Beach Boys.... Nor does that poster resemble the Endless Summer jacket (which Mike had nothing to do with)

Again, what is the point here other than to beat on Mike like schoolyard bullies?

In 1974 Mike Love’s concept album Endless Summer ignited a second generation of Beach Boys fans and stirred a tempest that rocked the music world.

This is incorrect. It should have said "generations", not "a second generation". You want evidence?

(http://zumic.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/lana-del-rey-endless-summer-tour-dates-ticket-presale-750x375.jpg)

Exactly, Pinder! If that Brian Wilson get a Capitol deal, surely Mr. Positivity can too! What with Kokomo and everything! Should be a piece of cake. I mean, it's not like he made up that one of rock's foremost songwriters thing. Everybody thinks that. Pitchfork especially. They count twice!

50 years of FaRts or The Brown Album. ;)

P.R fluff pieces are a dime a dozen.... I'm sure there are plenty worse.....

That is obviously a mixture of various riders.  The first two pages are from a Beach Boys rider I saw as early as 1992.  It references Elliott Lott and BRI as contacts-in contrast, the very last page (page 6) states that the dressing rooms should be labled "Beach Boys Family and Friends".  These are from 2 separate groups...

Nope! MIKE LOVE: BAD!

That's what it means! Don't argue with the authorities!

Pinder, who are you ranting at?

It's indeed a good title, absolutely. But to have an official press release of sorts equating the idea of a title with it being a concept album is a huge stretch, don't you think?

I'd be surprised if it wasn't his own idea to retroactively call it his concept album, or at the very least, even if that was someone else's idea, I'd imagine he'd had to have signed off on that verbiage. It just gives one the feeling that Mike has spent copious amounts of time over the years sitting around, mulling over every last bit of contribution he made to the band, with the primary intention of finding a way to spin those contributions into bigger things than they are.  

Problem is, it works as a concept album in the ways I noted earlier, therefore I see no issue.

From page 3:



Still questions on this? Click on this link, which was posted on page 2, read through it, and someone/anyone post the reason or reasons why this *specific* document is or isn't from the touring arrangements after Carl passed away, and wasn't drawn up when the situations were in place which are still in place today regarding tours and booking. I know the answer, but would be happy to be proven wrong and will admit as much if anyone can do so based on what is in this document.  :)

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/beach-boys-rider (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/beach-boys-rider)

Did Mike produce the Endless Summer album?

No..... But the title and sequencing and jacket do lend a coherence to the whole package.... The title is a good one....

Who cares.

Pinder - honest question: is Mike capable of making a statement (or presumably approving a press release) that you would concede is somewhat of a braggadocios stretch? And if so, what would that be? I'm not saying that claiming Endless Summer is Mike's concept album is as though he said he invented the cronut, but within reason, what claim actually *would* be a stretch in your eyes?

I'd have to first have a problem with batshit crazy rock stars bragging..... Which I do not.

;)

The document in the link includes a mish mash of pages (not even in order) from various Beach Boys related riders from various years and tours.  It is not one cohesive document, not even all from the Beach Boys. The last page references "The Beach Boys Family and Friends."  The first two pages are from a rider pre-dating Carl's passing, pages 3-5 I am unsure of, page 6 is from Jardine's F&F group after Carl's death.

Pinder, we get that ML is your hero. ::)

http://www.corporationwiki.com/Nevada/Incline-Village/meleco-llc/46143382.aspx

ML aside, I can handle some batshit crazy rock star bragging... to a point. When it passes a certain point, it gets to be mighty, mighty hard to keep the eyes from rolling. I'd think that most everyone would have a tipping point, including you. I think Billy Corgan and Mike Love are in some sort of competition for self-congratulatory pats on the back.

Agreed, but at least Mike has co-written some earth shattering hits and classics.

Wasn't that a Capitol Records biography web page? Edit: Yeah, I think it was according to Earcandy's website, whose commentary you posted, and he credit's the source which diverts to Capitol Records these day.

I don't see any mention of ES on Mike's webpage's "About" tab.

Pages 1 and 2 do *not* predate Carl's passing, and if you think they do, it's simply not correct. And that can be proven. But what are you basing this on to say they come from the years before Carl passed away?

Nobody (or maybe some, but not most) is disputing that. I'm certainly not. Doesn't mean that the concept album terminology isn't a stretch of a claim.

As unreleased backgrounds pointed out, Mike would have as much (or as little) as a claim to call Pet Sounds his concept album, right? Because if the title was a play on words to indicate the little, intricate sounds that Brian heard... well, Pet Sounds is just full of those, from start to finish, right? Just as the name Endless Summer is indicative of that album's content, which is full of songs that are imbued with summertime vibes. Same difference... right?  :lol

I actually believe that there are approximately 3 or 4 people on this board who, if Mike Love claimed that Pet Sounds was in part his concept album due to his coining the title, would actually find a way to defend that statement, or passively defend such a statement by not posting anything in opposition.

It's *okay* to be a Mike fan and to still admit that some of the things he says/claims border on absurd.

So someone in the post Carl touring Beach Boys camp SMOKES!!!!!! OMG!!!!!!! NOOOOOOOOO! ;o

I hear you.... And I actually do look at Pet Sounds as a concept album.... Or at least a narrative of sorts. And it works beautifully ..... Best album ever to put on when heartbroken!

No arguments here on that!

I just caught this thread. I was busy listening to the Classics Selected By Brian Wilson album. I was digging "Sail On Sailor", the song that Brian introduced in concert by saying, "I don't like this song".

I don't remember where I read the interview, but I thought I once read Mike Love saying that he met with Capitol Records to plan the Endless Summer album, even picking out the tracks, and of course titling the album. However, I'm not optimistic that too many people would remember that interview.  

Hey, Scott Totten, are you out there? It appears that this board doesn't really care what you have to think or say about Mike Love. One thread can be locked, but you can be sure another one will immediately follow with the same intention(s). That's what this board has become....sadly.

It looks otherwise EXACTLY like a tour rider I had seen from approximately 1992.  However, fair enough, I can admit I am mistaken on that. The fact remains the linked pages are not one document and at least some of the pages are from a BBF&F rider

There is no mention of smoking or tobacco at all on pages 1 or 2, beyond the fact that that's not even the issue at hand, it isn't even on the documents in question...pages 1 and 2.

Sorry, I obviously didn`t explain myself clearly enough in my previous post.

You asked me to find how to buy cheaper tickets and I did. By looking at a little known website called Ticketmaster.

Donald asked why some tickets are $150 and the reason is...BECAUSE THEY ARE VIP TICKETS!!! Seriously.  :lol  Club Kokomo packages or Soundcheck VIP tickets are the only ones vaguely near this price. You couldn`t make this stuff up...

Regular tickets are $55-80 (plus booking fees). Not cheap but not exactly unheard of for theater shows. And if he doesn`t want to pay $55 for floor seats in front of the stage then that is up to him but they are not exactly exorbitant.

And his comments that The Beach Boys tickets are the most expensive of the season are simply not true so no point in even debating that one.

The fact is that pages 1 and 2 are from a Beach Boys tour rider that was written after Carl's passing. Those pages couldn't look exactly like a 1992 document for the same reasons there are no documents from "Brother Records" prior to 1967, and no documents from "50 Big Ones" production company before the C50 tour. The companies didn't exist prior to those years/events.

OK, did you notice I said "otherwise" and admitted my error?  Calm down...

OK.  I'll call the venue as Cam suggested earlier.  The ryman site did not make that clear at ALL.

No need - just click on "tickets" then hover over the seating map. You'll see that the most expensive regular (i.e. non-VIP experience) seat is $69.50 ($80.55 with taxes and fees). However, the usual suspects were so busy being outraged at this latest example Mike's sheer greed that they couldn't be bothered to do such a simple thing. Really, it's like shooting fish in a barrel with a bazooka, with the fish handing me the shells.
That's about £51, which isn't too unreasonable.

BTW, the pic on the tickets page shows Christian, instead of Jeff. Don't hear anyone bitching about that.  ;D

Does anybody know when these riders were posted to Smoking Gun? Seems like a while ago. 5 or 10 years?

I can put this to bed right now with a clarification.

There are pages on that Rider that have got to be 25 years old now.

Everyone cool with that? :hat

These mykolites are such a pain over a lame nostalgia act like M&B. What kind of reward do you get from being Mike's water carriers?

Do you get pointed at by Mike at a M&B show?, paid with free tickets?, and mentioned in Mike's book?

I don't get why you guys are so negative about Brian Wilson and so high on his fucking slimeball cousin.

We're all bald.

And here is the reason why:

Brian Wilson = Beach Boy
Al Jardine = Beach Boy
David Marks = Beach Boy

Jeff Foskett = not Beach Boy
Christian Love = not Beach Boy

Aren't they at least Beach-Type-People?

But it's still misleading advertising concerning an M&B gig - you guys really missed a trick there.  ;D

but when Mike points at me does this mean I'm going backstage or to his trailer?

Irrespective of the perceived merits of the various bands, a comment like this makes me feel ashamed to associated with such a small-minded cadre of so-called "fans" of this wonderful band. Were I you, I wouldn't expect to be posting on this board for a while, as I can't believe the mods will let this pass.

AGD, that isn't a board rule. You made that up to try to get me and OSD banned.

I wholeheartedly agree. It's ridiculous to think that attacks on band members are worthy of banning folks on the board.

Frankly, I always found OSD's exile curious for that reason.

He was banned for something else entirely, as Billy explained several times.

Part of rule #2: "Please behave and not be an embarrassment to the good name of Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys." I think referring to the lead singer of said combo as a "fucking slimeball" in a public qualifies as an embarrassment given that they monitor this forum and others.

There is a double standard here for sure:

1. attack Mike and risk a ban.
2. call BW a puppet of others and its accepted.

If it was up to you, it would be "do not ever attack Mike Love since he is the BBs legacy keeper. Attacks on BW are okay since he is controlled by his wife and managers against his will and loving cousin."

Nope, if it was up to me we'd have reasoned discussions without one party snarling, growling and foaming at the mouth like a rabid dog at the mere mention of someone's name. No-one is above deserved criticism.

But it's not, and that's probably a very good thing.

Rules from Rules and Guidelines - read this before posting.

"Rule 2) Treat others as you want to be treated. Think about what you are saying before you post a message. Lift each other up, don't  tear each other down. Harassment of members is not tolerated. Please behave and not be an embarrassment to the good name of Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys."

There appears to be a "presumption" of the good name of all the members.  That would mean every member.

That appears to be the underlying concept, here.  

When's the last time someone called Brian Wilson a fucking slimeball on this board?

And there's talk of negativity?

Personal attacks on either,  esp on their families are what i myself have an issue with. As far as banning for that, though,.that's not happening unless it's an issue that could result in a libel suit.

As I've said numerous times, osd was not banned for not liking Mike...that would be a very stupid reason. I wasn't even the one who.actually put the ban in, although i supported it. In any case, he's back now, and hasn't done anything for me to regret reinstating him, so let's leave the past in the past.

Point me to a thread where the specific posters accused are negative on Brian. Not being sarcastic. ..i really do want to see the posting url so i can see the posts for myself.

You have any problems with this?

Post from 11/30/14 -  Wirestone wrote: A petty, short sighted, self centered, insecure, conniving, little dipshit of a man.

A "little dipshit of a man"? If somebody wrote that about Brian Wilson, you'd be the first one in line calling for a ban.

Mykolites is a good term though :)

Brian Wilson has never been called a fucking slimeball because he isn't one.

My intent was not to add to the Mike is satan tone of things, I was sincerely shocked at what I thought were the actual venue price for decent seats.    The website lists cheap to best price seats along side dates and pictures of upcoming acts.  Having been to the Ryman previously I thought these were straight up prices.   I didn't even know they had VIP for the basic Mike and Bruce and company shows.   Now I see club Kokomo etc.  by the way, WTF is club Kokomo?

by the way, I have seen every Mike and Bruce show Playing wherever I can manage to attend since 2008.  I am not a ML basher.  Nor a Bruce or JF basher.     the thread title is 2015 tour.   I was talking about show prices.

Neither is Mike

If you actually believe that, you must not have read my posts particularly closely over the past nine-plus years. I have never, ever called for someone to be banned based upon their opinions of anyone in the group. And that's because I do think, honestly, that posters should be able to say whatever they think on that subject.

In general, I am uncomfortable with anyone being banned -- outright harassment and bullying of other posters excepted.

Re: the last point, I'm with you. I very rarely ban anyone...i personally dislike having to. Heck, there have been members who have criticized me privately (and occasionally publicly. ..) for letting things 'get out of hand'.  So, yeah, i would never ban anyone for their opinions.

Some the attacks people are making on each other,  however,  ARE seriously crossing the line, however.

Who isn't calm in this? It's all cool, but no need to tell me or anyone to calm down. Seriously, it was explained back on page 3, and not singling you out, but this whole thing from the first replies that were posted to the Smoking Gun link did not consider the most basic content of that page, or specifically pages 1 and 2 of what the SG site posted. That content being the fact that such a document could not have existed prior to a certain date, end of story, case closed. Yet there were still attempts to suggest otherwise, to discredit it, to remove its relevancy to the discussion at hand, etc based on its age. If something that is a hard and established fact, as in a date or year, is put through the wringer like this, it's surprising everything stayed as relatively calm as it did.

Wasn't there a recent autographed album or something that a poster linked to on this board which featured a Dennis Wilson autograph on an album, and the point was that the album came out after Dennis had passed away...or something like that? Let's say we all as fans know exactly when Dennis passed, and there was the owner of said album trying to tell us fans it was legit. What would be the reaction? How long before frustration would set in since we fans know beyond any doubt that anything released after 1983 claiming to be autographed by Dennis was an outright fraud...and how long would the patience last if the person defending such an autographed album refused to see what the hard and established facts of the timeline were saying about his/her claims?

It's the same deal with this contract in question. Yes, some fans may not have known or spotted the specifics, but they are there in black and white, hard facts that are established facts and not subject to opinions. Those facts from the first time posters clicked on the SG link proved 100% that the document was not as old as some were saying. My analogy earlier is probably the best one to consider: If there is a Beach Boys document which is not dated, yet has official/legal references to "Brother Records", we know beyond any trace of doubt that it could not have been written before a certain point in 1967. There is no debating or nuancing that kind of fact. And the same situation existed on at least two pages posted by Smoking Gun...yet it was challenged by numerous posters. There is/was the issue.

Right, Mikie, and I highly doubt you ever will. In the case of Mike Love, it must be common knowledge that he is not held in high regard not only here, but other boards as well. youtube, Facebook, and various and sundry sites, such as I Hate Mike Love or Mike Love Is An Asshole, and so on. Are there sites or boards that follow suit about Brian, Carl, Dennis, Al, David or even Bruce? No. So then, why Mike and only Mike? Of course there have been negative, even bashing comments made over time about all of them but in the long run, it's clearly the lovester that draws far and beyond the bulk of the ire of fans and the general public as well. Look at his pathetic fan club site where he periodically gets bashed.
There has to be very strong, clear reasons for this type of  disdain for any individual. The answer? Simple-he's clearly earned this reputation by acts of greed and jealousy through time. He is, without a doubt, the most hated, laughed at performer in the music business. The list of reasons reads like a dictionary. He has supporters, but the general consensus is, no matter what is said in defense here or elsewhere, this individual sparks controversy and heated debate that has followed him throughout most of his career. This will never subside or ever go away. Look at me- I'm not a well liked poster on this board by quite a few members. I've earned that, but truth be told, it really doesn't matter. I'm not trying to alter anyone's opinion. It is what it is regardless of what those "defenders" say.  

I want to add a few thoughts on the directions this discussion has taken, and in general some of the comments which have been posted.

I think one of the strengths of this board and the community that keeps the board active is the ability to discuss, debate, and fact-check when necessary issues that get put into the conversation. We have fans, historians, researchers, published authors, musicians on board...everyone knows that. Historians in most if not all fields tend to argue and debate each other! There are specific facts which are established, then after that it's open season. Look at any area of history, you'll find debate and disagreement among those who study it.

On this board, some of the history and fact-checking has been valuable beyond what I think we realize sometimes. If there are incorrect dates-places-credits, whatever the case, there are people on this board who have raised an eyebrow and said "that doesn't sound right", and the corrections have opened up and established a lot of solid information important to telling the history of this band and their music. In some cases it was widely held beliefs or "myths" which got busted. Case in point: How many classic 60's tracks were not played by the session musicians but rather played by the Beach Boys themselves. A widely held and reported factual error that board members here have corrected. That's a good thing.

What came up in this thread via some of those press releases and news articles related to promoting the current tour may have struck a similar chord among other members here. Some of the wording or claims didn't sound right, they didn't seem to agree with other published information including what some of the band members themselves have said. So we put it on the table, and pointed out the discrepancies. Endless Summer was one of those. Seeing a 2015 show billed as an anniversary show was another.

One of them turned into being an actual error, which was forwarded and will be corrected/addressed as necessary. The other, the Endless Summer issue, turned into something different. I'll use my own rationale on that one, and say when that link to the Ryman show was posted and the wording said the ES project was Mike's concept album, it didn't sound right to me. I had seen a similar article this fall saying Mike produced the album, it turns out I had posted that article among others in the thread which got locked down and didn't mention it there. Then I remembered Mike directly addressed it in that '92 Goldmine interview, and reposted all of them together to compare and open the discussion.

I thought that was or could be an error in what was written in those press releases and promotion. It didn't line up with what was known about that album previously. I even asked if there was new info to consider, and suggested again that the info in those PR writings didn't ring true.

If that kind of discussion and questioning is going to be labeled "bashing", what does that mean to any similar fact-checking, correcting, or just plain ol' discussing things like this going forward? Something gets published that a board member here feels isn't accurate, or even wants to explore further with an eye toward it being inaccurate, isn't that what the board has always done? We have dates fact-checked and corrected, we have events fact-checked and corrected, we have enough people who actively read and follow these things and have done so for decades on board to run these topics through the wringer and know enough about the history to decide what is accurate and to also call bullshit on something where it fits.

In the case of Endless Summer, the claims written in those releases doesn't agree with the history, at least to me, and I think it can be discussed here without being labeled "bashing". These are facts which can be researched and considered just like the Wrecking Crew-Beach Boys credit issues. Either the claims add up or they do not.

That contract issue with the billing and labeling: It's good it's being corrected. But when some previous documents or information related to this suggested a disagreement with what was said here, and some posters pointed that out, look what the reaction was. It reached a point of finger-pointing and requests to find other cases of "bashing" to compare or make relevant. What about the original issue from several pages ago, does that just disappear into all of the offshoot discussions and comments or is it a valid enough question to put on the table and discuss? How and why do these mistakes continue to happen if there are editorial controls in place within the system of marketing and promoting live shows? How and why does a band member who no longer plays in the band end up in promotional material for an upcoming show? How is a two-year old long-gone anniversary tour mentioned in promotions for a 2015 show? If anything, maybe fans genuinely care about the perception all of this might be sending out, or might want to suggest some controls need to be tightened or at least looked at so a band photo or a concert billing actually represents the current tour accurately and current to 2014-5 rather than several years old. Are some of the ways of expressing it and stating opinions on it sometimes a little too personal and passionate...I'd say yes. But it doesn't mean that simply pointing these things out equals bashing or anything like it as a general rule.

I like the debate, the discussion, the historians arguing the points, in anything I read or jump into. But maybe trying to deflect and distract and put the original issues into all kinds of subplots and subtexts and even totally unrelated stuff as a general rule when there are legitimate facts and points to consider does lead to some unnecessary interactions. However, pointing out various things said in PR releases or tour promotions or related media is part of what the board has always been and has always done.

The best rule of thumb, I think...offer up the facts. And it's said the character never said it directly, but there is really no substitute for "just the facts" according to Joe Friday. In a few of these cases in this thread, just as an example it's a simple case of did Mike produce Endless Summer or did he not, and instead of pinning a bashing label on the question, how about offering up some facts to agree or disagree with that statement taken from one of the news articles? It might uncover some interesting info, if we can get beyond trying to label someone anti-Mike or a hater for bringing it up.

Yeah, yeah! It's OK to call Mike Love a fucking slimeball because knuckle draggers all over the internet do it!

Typical bully defense of questionable actions..... Look at just about ANY YouTube video and you'll see haters bashing something/anything.... Try looking at any random U2 clips and scroll through the Bono bashing etc etc....

We're only responsible for our own actions though, and there comes a time when it needs to be questioned just why certain individuals will spend inordinate amounts of time discussing people they think are fucking slimeballs, trying endlessly to reinforce this view, and trying to drag a whole bunch of other people down the gutter with them along the way.... Other people who have a more nuanced and empathetic point of view regarding the members of a band we all purport to be fans of..... Mike may be guilty of some things, but after a while, when pointing out another human being's faults becomes one's mission in life, a long hard look in the mirror might be in order.

And GF, the debate about Endless Summer was not about any fact, but rather if the album could be considered a concept album or not.... but nice try.

"Knuckle dragger". Isn't that a derogatory racist term directed toward African Americans? Last time I checked it was.

To me, that's much worse than calling somebody a fucking slimeball.  :P

Um, no, it is not ...... It's a term to describe less intellectually evolved people ....... in other words ..... idiots....

If it is used as a racist term, I was not aware, and therefore apologize for my ignorance .....

..... Now, what about the point I made?

If one is to consider Mike the "producer" of Endless Summer, or if he at one point stated himself as such, it probably has about as much meaning as the "executive producer" credit on TWGMTR, meaning that it's a credit that doesn't ultimately mean very much. It seems like someone trying very hard to go out of their way to make a statement about how much they matter.

I'll throw a genuine bone of empathy Mike's way in that he surely was (and will probably forever be) scarred from the injustice of being denied proper co-writing credits during the 60s, and that really messed up his brain. It damaged him somehow, and I can understand that.

The fact that Mike somehow kept those feelings inside (unless one could consider other actions of his as passive aggressive venting over the real injustice) must have set off something in him to want to actively pursue and inflate credits, like the "concept album" nonsense, in the future. This is in stark contrast to Dennis Wilson's "You Are So Beautiful" crediting omission, which Dennis seemed to more casually brush off in his lifetime (although one must wonder how the official crediting for that song would have played out if Dennis had lived... would a cleaned-up Dennis at some point have tried to pursue a credit, especially at a time of financial hardships?)

I would say that Mike's public and published witness that he had no input into ES beyond suggesting calling it ES instead of Greatest Hits No.? would settle it so far. I don't think it is trumped by a Capitol Records bio page which seems to be the source of the controversial concept album text which has now been repeated by some venues. Is there something I'm missing?

Do you really think that the notion of Mike Love as the creator of the concept album Endless Summer could have been entirely created in a vacuum, by some anonymous Capitol suit, with neither Mike's input or approval whatsoever in that? Does that honestly seem likely to you? I find that mighty unlikely.

I agree with you completely regarding Dennis..... It even hurts to imagine what that sort of good break could have done for him ..... Though Dennis was thrown some pretty amazing good breaks in his life, as it was ......

"concept album nonsense?" ...... See this is where there seems to be a schism between certain cabals of posters here .... Some take a silly PR fluff piece (the kind there is no shortage of in show biz) and go onto hysterics over something like "Mike Love's concept album" and then toss out their opinion on such a statement being so horrendous as basically evidence that the statement is unequivocally false ...... And then there are others who will read such a statement but then take a step back and think past their own emotional reaction and admit that, though the statement IS something of a stretch, there are still enough traces of logic to determine that reasons for getting upset over it are quite slim to none....

The idea that the "did Mike produce Endless Summer?" debate is a tale of one team standing on the side of hard facts and hard facts only, and another side grasping at the straws of opinion is false ...... The question "did Mike produce Endless Summer?" was put out there as if the obvious "No" answer would somehow settle something that the facts themselves would prove ..... Again, false .... The question was put out there to support an opinion and to somehow nullify further discussion...... A tactic seen at play often around here .... I presented logical reasoning to where the mere title offered by Mike somehow encapsulated the entire Endless Summer package into something of a (loose loose loose) concept album, aided by some clever sequencing ..... only to be ignored, and the tactical question repeated ...... as another tactic ....... Frustrating and silly.....

Mike Love has every right to call Summer In Paradise his "concept album"; it's his baby, through and through, and it was apparently written and conceived from the onset as the perfect summer record, or something to that effect.

One cannot call a greatest hits package, or what amounts to a prehistoric iTunes playlist, as a "concept album".  One cannot retroactively compile a list of pre-released (and previously re-released, and so on) songs and call it a concept album. If they could, then the random, anonymous Capitol suit who inexplicably put Frosty The Snowman on a late 60s BBs greatest hits LP should be able to proclaim himself as a concept album creator. It's absurd (even if Mike co-wrote a bunch of the old songs). It's a purely retroactive straw-grab at a credit simply because of the unexpected success of the album, and because of an insatiable desire by Mike to find ways of getting respect in a press release. I feel bad reading such text in a press release, because it's just nutty. Nuttier than Nutty Jerry's.

Case in point. I asked you directly if Mike produced Endless Summer, you said this: "No..... But the title and sequencing and jacket do lend a coherence to the whole package.... The title is a good one....Who cares." Yet it was published as such: "Brian Wilson went onto a solo career, Dennis Wilson drowned and Carl Wilson died of lung cancer, but Mike Love, who produced the “Endless Summer” album in 1974"

And Mike himself said of the so-called "jacket" : "It was awful".

Who cares if something is published that doesn't agree with what you yourself said through a "no" answer? Then post 'who cares' in response to anyone on the board who steps in to correct anything, like, say, an erroneous concert date or even a news article that credits Hal Blaine for a drum track Dennis played. Since it's all "who cares" in the long run, right?

Example: Someone says "Glen Campbell played lead guitar on Help Me Rhonda", another corrects them by saying "No, Carl played lead on that song", then you can say "Who cares! The song is a good one." See how that goes over.

Case in point: It was published as such "In 1974 Mike Love’s concept album Endless Summer ignited a second generation of Beach Boys fans and stirred a tempest that rocked the music world."

Your reply to that was, quote: "The title IS the concept!", suggesting because Mike offered the title to Capitol, that means the whole album project in general was his concept, even though the songs and the greatest-hits package itself was already assembled by Capitol before Mike offered the name. And as another poster pointed out, by that logic Mike can take credit for the "concept" for Pet Sounds too because he suggested that title. Or is there a way to nuance that logic to fit however you want it to read?

Another case in point, this exchange:

Completely unrelated to what was being discussed, completely unrelated to the documents or pages in question which don't even mention this, completely unrelated to anything at all, but anyone reading this is welcome to scroll through both this thread and the previous related thread which got locked down, along with any number of others, and maybe they'll notice an M.O., a pattern, a common thread. Or maybe similar pure coincidences that have seen any number of threads spin off in wild directions and side-bar topics leading to arguments and statements which had nothing to do with what was being discussed or who was discussing them, and they might be able to pinpoint it. And it won't be hard to find, they're almost all similar to this one in subject matter and participation and they often end in shouting matches, which I have to think is the desired result. Old news, though.

 

Mike publicly proclaimed in his own words that he did not have input into the ES album so I do find it extremely unlikely that he is also responsible for Capitol Records' contradictory claims. According to the Earcandy article that was quoted earlier, the bio was only up for three days or something before being removed.

Mr. Guitarfool ...... Sir..... I don't care what Mike said about producing the album. It's a non-issue ....

What I was speaking to was the "can Endless Summer be considered a concept album?" debate ...... and I offered my reasoning as to why my opinion is, sure it can.

You can call anything whatever you want. What rule is there that a packaging of old hits can't be considered a concept album? Who wrote that in stone? No one..... And in the case of The Beach Boys early hits and the entire Endless Summer package being something of a conceptual whole, ESPECIALLY with the title being what it is...... Yeah, it works, if you want it to..... So, in my opinion, the PR release, though silly, is a non-issue.

Quit derailing the thread, it's three pages and counting. ::)

Oops sorry! Should I get back to calling people I don't know fucking slimeballs?

How the project went from what Capitol had assembled and had plans to release as "Greatest Hits vol. 3" into becoming a "concept album" envisioned by Mike because he suggested a different title remains a mystery to me, at least. A Greatest Hits package is a Greatest Hits package, no matter what someone labels it. That's one of the points which I'd like to see at least expanded on a little, because at this point even the premise of the statement doesn't match what the album actually was or how it was created.

I suppose someone could take a 1/2 pound of raw ground beef, garnish it, put it on a plate and advertise it for $29.99 labeling it as "steak tartare", but that doesn't change the fact that it's still a 1/2 pound of raw ground beef on a plate surrounded by garnish and people would know the difference.

I've used a tiny sliver of spare logical reasoning to explain how (not to everyone, sure) Endless Summer can be considered a concept album, but you choose to ignore it and continue with the wide-eyed exasperation tactic.

*yawn*

To me it seems this Capitol bio was the source of the claim and text. Maybe you could determine if that was the source and then contact Capitol records and see if they can illuminate where/who the text came from.

Have you contacted the venue(s) that published this claim to see where they got it? Off the internet or was it MELECO approved copy?

if you're tired, PLEASE go to sleep ......

Or head over to the "who wrote what" thread..... Plenty of opportunity to call Mike bad words over there.

ZZZZZZZ

So where did the info come from related to publicizing these recent gigs like the Ryman calling it Mike's concept album or saying he produced it if the production/PR company who handles the tours provides the venues and media outlets with "approved" information, according to what Andrew wrote earlier? If Mike said in his own words he did not have input into ES, then why is information that needs to be approved by the production company being published which contradicts Mike himself about his role with ES?

That's part of what triggered my questions to begin with, how is this stuff getting printed as recent as the Ryman press release if it is subject to an approval process, if it isn't accurate?

Hey, I have an idea!

How about we wait till Mike's book comes about and see if he talks about Endless Summer! I can't imagine he'll make no mention of it.

That Goldmine interview is decades old, and we all know how these Beach Boys can change their tune about things!

I'm sure that the vast, majority of people, music fans, if you ask them what a "concept album" is, would not think this is a term that would apply retroactively to old songs being assembled together. I mean, you can call anything anything if you really want to, but what meaning does it have? You can call a burlap sack a dress suit, and why would I have the right to question you on that?  


It's a big stretch to use the term... and for the term to be used, it would in my estimation be more geared toward less discriminating people who might read such a press release (ie. people who wouldn't fact-check what that album actually was/is), and would just read it and think it adds a layer of legitimacy to the person they reading about. And hell, I suppose that constitutes a large swath of the M&B crowd anyway (people who don't even really know/care about the names of the BBs onstage, past or present). It just seems like a paper-thin argument to call it a concept album, and under close examination, it feels a bit like false advertising.

Keeping going Pinder, someday you will convince somebody.....

Yeah, you're right. It is odd and rare and a stretch, but since someone DID call it such, then it's worth examining as such.

I remember David Gilmour referring to the "Echo's" double CD "best of" thing as something of a concept album since the songs had been partially re-edited and mixed to flow from one to another as a continuous experience.....

At the time I took it as the Floyd just being a bit leery of and generally disliking greatest hits albums, but I have come to consider the package as having something of a concept ..... I see no reason to be angry with The Floyd for this.

 ::)

Man, really! Haven't you been sated for one day calling Mike a fucking slimeball?

I'll bet it felt good ...... Can it be enough for now?

If there's actually some new editing/remixing, etc done, then the argument I suppose could get a tiny bit better, but it still seems cheap. And coming from The Floyd, I'd also think that's a lame claim to make, seeing as they have other, multiple truly legit from the ground up concept albums under their belt.  I never said Mike Love isn't the only guy who can make a silly claim like that. If Gilmour did it too, then I think it's near-equally as hogwash a statement. Just my opinion.

This is another example of something that never would have existed if Dennis or Carl were still here. I highly doubt we'd ever see a BB press release with the Mike Love Concept Album statement.

But hell, I suppose if M&B = the BBs, then Endless Summer can be Mike Love's Concept Album. I think the legitimacy level is about equal on those.

Fair enough. I can fully accept that argument :)

In the end it's just a silly press release.....

I tend to stay as clear as I can of such things ..... Even when I agree, PR fluffing just rubs me the wrong way most always ......

So, basically, it's an incredibly stupid claim, but one that we can grudgingly accept is true?

Kind of like M&B equaling The Beach Boys. Grudging agreement. Yeah, um, I guess so.

Hey, who do we have to thank for creating the original schism to where it's perfectly OK for all Beach Boys not to appear on stage together?

And that was what I meant about anti-BW posts!

How is it an anti Brian post?

Did I call him a fucking slimeball and somehow forget in the space of 10 seconds?

I point out a simple fact ..... No judgements.

The sarcasm was all over that post against BW's nervous breakdown.

If the circumstance for the schism is because the overly-stretched-too-thin brains of the operation wanted to take time off the road to write gorgeous songs for the group, thus funneling a bunch of super awesomeness right back into the group to make the group even better... then yeah, I'll give that schism-causer a pass.

I give him a pass too, but, ya know ..... Brian could have put his foot down and said The Boys would only tour when he was ready ......

All in all, it created the reality where ALL Beach Boys were not necessary for The Beach Boys to tour and play live.

But it isn't just Brian...it's almost all of them really. Actually, I'd go as far as to say it's all of them except Mike Love.

Alan was really the first to approach his involvement this way, of course, his was probably the most legitimate and/or honorable of all excuses.

Then David's quiet removal...Brian's breakdown...Dennis's drunken days...Carl's solo excursions.

The Beach Boys have always been a pretty faceless entity as far as live shows...EXCEPT, I think most people know that they're gonna see that nasal guy with the ball-cap front and center when they go to a concert.

So the problem occurs because people know the NAME: Brian Wilson (as they damn well should). Thus, you get the general public which I believe takes the name Brian Wilson without much or any history and associates that with the live show. However, I don't think this started at all because of C50 or the lineup changes to follow.

The Beach Boys did this to The Beach Boys from the beginning. That's it.

you put that much better than I could....

I don't think Brian requires or needs, or wants, his fans to be so overly sensitive about him that they can't withstand any mere mention of any of his problems and/or the effect they had on the band ...... Especially if they're perfectly capable of turning around and calling his cousin a fucking slimeball.

Brian was missing shows before his breakdown, back when Dave was still in the group. He really didn't enjoy touring that much back then.

Ok, this has been mentioned enough times to suggest putting an end to repeating and reposting it. The point has been made, no need to keep hammering it into the ground.

If it's perfectly OK to post it in the first place, then it's perfectly OK to talk about it.

Way to keep it classy.  This is the second time you've trivialized Brian's debilitating problems, only last time you were quick to delete any evidence.  So when someone acts like an @ss publicly it is wrong to opine and call him out on it, but it's ok to criticize and blame Brian for things that were largely out of his control?  Oh that's right, as you said before (also deleted) you enjoy lashing out at Brian and his mental illness in order to get revenge on people for saying bad things about Mike.

Pinder, you are awesome.

EoL

You mean I should have just called him a fucking slimeball?

Brian's problems understood and respected: you think Mike Love doesn't have human feelings and emotions and tragedy in his history?

I'm not trivializing Brian's troubles at all. I simply pointed out that all Beach Boys not being necessary on stage at all times is a reality that was created long long ago.

Where did I say anything insulting about Brian? When did I call him anything that involved cuss words?

I did not.

As for "removing evidence" ..... You mean a poster on occasion realizing they went over the line and then edited their message ....... Wouldn't this be a good thing?

This is why people don't like Beach Boys fans  :lol

Frankly, this is why people don't like The Beach Boys...sometimes it's just not worth the fandom. Put the records on and enjoy...

Wasn't ok in the first place, though.

But yeah, this going back and forth is getting tiresome,  and I'm *not* just talking to you, either.

Amen.

To keep repeating this, it's now been at least 6 times so far, is getting into baiting/provoking territory, and I'll repeat again it does not need to be reposted another time.

People talk about mentioning that Brian created the reality that all Beach Boys are not required to be onstage at all times as some offense to class, yet everyone's just fine with someone calling Mike Love a fucking slimeball?

Yeah, our definitions of class most certainly differ.

And of course you take issue with talking about it rather than any issue with the original statement itself....

Yeah, class again.

Jesus Christ, dude, i said I DID have a problem with the post you were responding to. I was sticking up for you, and now you're turning on me, too?

Hell with this mess. I'm trying like hell to be objective here but you're making it next to impossible.

I get the original point you were trying to make, that a not-every-member-is-necessarily-always-present precedent was set early on... but if we're talking about the legitimacy of a post C50 "BB" band out there, it's really irrelevant to bring up the past circumstances, which were completely different. Just like the Endless Summer Concept Album - one can call something anything they want. There's no law that is broken by that press release, nor is there a law broken by a post C50 (in the manner that it imploded) M&B project. But in both cases, it's the "laws" of common sense and class that have been violated.  In both cases, it's just lame, and grudging acceptance is the best truth one can find.

And one more thing, Pinder - I do believe that you weren't viciously intentionally trivializing Brian's mental problems in your post, but I think that you wound up inadvertently doing it anyway. Or not realizing how your words could very obviously be taken to mean such by others. And the same repeatedly goes for the guy who you always come to defense of.  

The issue was addressed while I was on the road working this afternoon and unable to view or post to the board. It was addressed, it should have dropped into the history of the thread, but instead you've reposted it over and over, including several times after being asked not to.

I've stepped in...Pinder is out for seven days.

No more of this garbage.

So damn well said CD. And who do we have to thank for shitcanning Al after Carl died and ending the C50 tour because he couldn't have things his own way?  ::) ::)

I can only imagine what Al Jardine really, truly, in his heart, thinks of Mike Love. Like, seriously. I'm sure he's grateful to cash his BRI checks, and is grateful for the success of the band, which is partially due to Mike, and I know Al was classy enough to appear at Mike's award show... but I feel confident that Mike wouldn't have if the shoe was on the other foot, if somehow Al had caused Mike to actually be fired, and then 14 years later to "feel" fired, respectively.
Brian is (and has always been) too nice for his own good, but Al is devoid of any family ties to Mike. An Al autobio would be super too.

Keep it clean-The Al Jardine story. ;)

The only way Al could publish an autobio is by using autotune

:lol

I just wanna say that I'm being bowled over by the KAEOS tunes, and for whatever crap I may be giving the Lovester for his actions, he (along with all the Boys) are just ruling the school on those tracks. So, so, so good. It's in stark contrast of real life 50 years later where a situation is essentially down to ego issues, control freakery, and BS, preventing a proper final act for this wonderful band, and that bugs the hell out of me, as much as I wish it didn't. I'm sure Mike "did what he had to do" in order to be happy, but to make the understatement of the year, damn if that man isn't short sighted. Mine, and most fans' deep frustrations (which obviously we have to simply "get over") are in direct proportion to how insanely great this band was, and should be thought of as such by many more people, but aren't - in large part to that very short-sightedness. It's the Beach Boys Endless Loop Of Awesomeness And Frustration.

Just got back. Big honkin' billboard on I-35 in KC advertising the BB coming February 13. This is something rarely seen in this town; highway signs?  Truly amazing.

Do you think phase 2 of the advertising campaign will include any of these around town?  ;D

(http://stream1.gifsoup.com/view4/3472079/air-dancer-o.gif)

SMiLE Brian, we get that you hate Mike's guts with religious fervor and there's nothing we can do to relieve you from your hate.

Personally, I prefer enjoying both Brian's and Mike's positive contributions to their music without having to hate them. And yes, Brian's contribution is about 100 times as Mike's.



Who is, actually? If you count "not slamming Mike" as "being negative about Brian", well, yes, then, but... that's not the case.

I'm afraid this may have actually been the case. But I'm surprised it earned him a ban. I'm not saying it isn't a good thing to end a pointless discussion, I'm just surprised.

This is all very confusing to me: so someone can get banned for repeating something unpleasant that someone else posted... but the original poster doesn't ?

By this "logic", I've got a free pass to call anyone on here anything I like, as long as I don't repeat it, but anyone who repeats my description gets canned. Have I got that right ? 'Cause that's what it looks like from this side of the pond.

It's tempting... very very tempting... but no. I won't lower myself to their level. Unseemly and unbecoming an Englishman of my advanced years and impeccable manners*.

I shall, however, think terrible things of them.  ;D

[* irony alert, with a light frosting of sarcasm]

Did anyone, who has these questions about where the ES concept claims came from or got published, done anything to get an explanation from the record company, venues, or dealers who published it?

Maybe some actual info from those who actually put it out might be more helpful than repetitive name calling and so-far unfounded suspicions have been. Just a thought.

This thread has been preposterous from the first post...which was doubtless the OP's intention.

Why can't he hammer it into the ground? Other posters are constantly hammering the same point into the ground? Perhaps Pinder should've called Mike a "conniving, little dipshit of a man" like Wirestone did. The moderators seemed to be OK with that. Hypocrites.

Which will be dismissed as myths by people who don`t want to accept them eh...  :)

Because it's boring. Even without a mindset that makes you go mad when someone defends Mike, I wish he'd not repeated it that often. There's really no point to that. Whether that makes him eligible for being banned - I'd rather not discuss that.

If people were banned everytime they were boring then there wouldn`t exactly be many people left.

Andrew - my take on the banning was that the "reposting" was perceived to be "provocation" and not for content-based. Pinder looks at this from a bigger picture. He appears passionate about it.  None of us would be here, but for the enormous  corpus of fabulous music and vocals.  The music would not have the vocal spectrum without Mike's baritone and Brian's falsetto.  Brian wrote and arranged for every voice.  

Some of this is reminding me of students with a substitute teacher sufficiently harassing them to leave the scene and generally for amusement.  And those who are "hyper-focused" - and "fixated" in the case of Attention Deficit Disorder.  

Andrew - Please don't take the bait, as you are one of the "adults in the room."  And I don't mean age, strictly.  I respect your scholarship even if we don't agree on other issues.  I'd hate to see you banned for getting into a joust with a poster or a faction of posters, who had nothing to do but try to provoke you and send barbs your way and "raise your ire."  :lol

Further below, a poster wisely pointed out that the intent was a repetition of the recently locked thread, under another pretext. (Nicko1234) One for you!   :beer

The tendency to run an analysis in 2014, on 1965 events or interview is ridiculously absurd.   Adding a "fantasy" spin on very innocuous "likes and hates" for a nearly half-century old teen mag is in the same category, in my view.  It is revisionism at its worst.

The intended audience for that article was pre-teens and teens.  I only learned recently that the record companies owned, and/or operated a lot of these print publications that were music-based.  They certainly weren't intended for high-level scrutiny by music historians 50 years post, but, largely for "teeny boppers" (as I was at the time) who contemporaneously were readers and listeners "at that time." And actively in the "marketplace" with a small disposable income, as consumers!  Who knew we had all that power back then?  ;)

I hope Rule 2 is enforced.  The "presumption" is a good name for each and every member.  Personal attacks should not be permitted.  Can one be constructively critical of the actual music? Ya.  Could things have been done differently? Of course. But, value judgments about "perceived" events or "reported" events should be off the table, as well as personal attacks on individual band members.


 

Thank you kindly sir.  :)

I think quite a few people who should know better have been played in this thread...

Whether that makes him eligible for being banned IS THE POINT.

SMiLE Brian and OSD REPEAT the same boring, idiotic, character defaming points day after day, thread after thread, and the moderators take the position "Oh, that's OK. We don't have a problem with being critical of a Beach Boy. We won't stop that." Then, Pinder repeats - REPEATS WORD FOR WORD - what SMiLE Brian said, and he gets banned. Not for making the original statement - which was deemed acceptable by the moderators - but for repeating it. If the original statement is acceptable in the first place, why is it unacceptable to repeat it? That's a rhetorical question. I already know the answer.

Guys, thanks for the positivity and well wishes in this holiday season. Sure keeping with Mr. Positivity himself....

These Cassius vs. Sonny threads are really, for the most part, 'yawn festivals' which NEVER-ever end well and resolve absolutely nothing...but..."water builds up" and the opportunity to let off steam has its 'merits' ... I guess.

That said perhaps these specific threads should be adorned with 'Drive Carefully...Children At Play' signs.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OjJUNh8QATw

You enjoy that kinda sh*t. Go for it.

We'll wait with bated breath for your findings.


Now go get 'em Cammy!

You are seriously calling me a hypocrite? Why are you ignoring the fact that i was in agreement with Pinder up until he went off on me too? Why are you ignoring the fact that i said more than once that SmileBrian' s post pissed me off?

I'm seriously fed up with this. Obviously it doesn't matter what i say or do here. Thanks for confirming that for me.

First, Billy, I admire and respect the work you do as a moderator. It's a thankless job, and one that I wouldn't and couldn't even considering doing. That being said... :-D

You state that SMiLEBrian's post "pissed you off." Did it piss you off personally, or as a moderator, or both. If it pissed you off as a moderator, then what did you choose to do about it? By not editing SMiLEBrian's post, or deleting it, or banning SMiLEBrian for making that kind of statement (and he's made other similar ones), you accepted it. Maybe begrudgingly, but you accepted it. I mean, the last I looked, it's still there. So, once you make that decision to accept such, in my opinion, inappropriate, unacceptable character defamation, you better be prepared to live with it. What's good for the goose...

But you weren't prepared to live with it. Don't you see (I hope you do but I'm not sure) that Pinder was just trying to make that exact point. He was basically saying, hey, if that's the kind of verbage that's gonna fly around here, and nobody's gonna do anything about it, then fine, here it is right back at you. When Pinder started to repeat the phrase, it looked pretty bad didn't it. But, hey, he'd didn't originate the phrase; he was merely repeating it, again like SMiLE Brian and OSD do every day, over and over. Again, what's good for the goose...So, did you - or any other moderators - go back and say, you know, we can't tolerate this kind of character defamation - even of a Beach Boy we don't even know one bit. No, you didn't. You basically banned a guy for imitating, imitating what SOMEBODY ELSE SAID AND GOT AWAY WITH.

I get what you're saying about accepting criticism of the individual Beach Boys. But I think there has to be a line. That's just my opinion. I think there are some dangerous precedents being set and followed and I think it's gonna come back and bite the board in the ass, if it hasn't already. Right, Scott Totten?

Hey, look at the bright side. Now there's offically a free pass to call ANY BEACH BOY a fucking scumbag, mentally handicapped person, douchegag, asshole etc, as long as it's not provocative or baiting.

Except i don't see the point in hammering this kind of idiocy in every thread.

I'm calling a time out on this for the moment. The comments being posted are being posted before anyone knows what went on or what is going on, and it's not going to be a case of coming after Billy or coming after anyone else without getting an explanation if that's what is being asked for. Please hold off for now.

These decisions are majority decisions. Which means when it comes up, and whenever possible including as soon as everyone gets on board, the decision is discussed and either agreed or disagreed. That happened here, that is happening here. Please hold off on throwing around criticisms until this gets clarified. As we all work different schedules and are in different regions of the world, I ask for you patience until we clarify this together and move forward with what we agree on. It will be addressed. And some will disagree, some will agree, as with anything else.

Gonna make this brief as I'm at work about to clock in. My issue with Pinder is that he was asked repeatedly to stop and he kept going and then went off on me even though i was sticking up for him. Nothing to do with his views on Mike, any more than I'd ban SmileBrian for his views on Mike. I wish he'd turn it down, though. If he'd have continued after me and gf said to stop he'd be gone too

More later but i gotta get on.

I respect this ^ and will refrain. I just wanted to make clear that, while I did address Billy in my above post, I am not singling him out. I am aware that banning decisions are made as a team because it has been pointed out numerous times in the last few months.

Enforcing Rule 2 should be easier to enforce and more straightforward than assessing whether there is a "provocative" or similarly-toned post.  

The mods have an almost impossible job, and are pretty fair, reasonable, and, frankly, I'd be far less tolerant of the "goading" than they are.  A lot of the posts are calculated to resurrect concepts that have been debated ad nauseum, and are readily identifiable as "hate" posts.  Much is offensive, mean and borderline slanderous, notwithstanding public person status.

Hate, if you must, but do it in your own domain. (Pun intended.) Many of us treasure the opportunity to just discuss the music that we love.   :love

And this garbage is a distractor from that.  

Can we lock this thread now please and maybe start a proper relevant thread about Mike & Bruce's touring activities for 2015 ?

The thread will not be locked until the mods have a chance to address and explain. What I asked above is to hold off on addressing the specific issues or pointing fingers until we've had a chance to discuss everything. Let me say again, this is not taken lightly and is something which is being discussed. Please hang tight.  :)

Oh yeah. I want to marry it.

If it were a mystery to me I would, but it's not. Those to whom it is still a mystery or makes them curious or wonder how it happened should do the legwork like Nicko and others did for the ticket prices. Maybe we could have avoided being deep in the weeds on this ES issue.

So you don't think Mike had a thing to do with a self-aggrandizing bio posted on The Beach Boys' Capitol Records page in '02? And the fact that it was up for like three days? You think a random Capitol staffer just threw it up there?

And you think that the bullshit about Endless Summer being "his" concept album being repeated word for word even 12 years later is just a crazy coincidence to which Mike and his people have no knowledge? Right.

Since Mike has publicly debunked the ES claim, yeah, I think probably some unknown Capitol copywriter made a mistake or misunderstanding on a Capitol bio and so far there is no evidence otherwise. If it were Brian or Al or any of the Boys or anybody really and the same thing happened I would assume the same thing until proven otherwise.

Well, you must admit that Mike, much much moreso than any other BB, has a long history of being more of a braggart than his bandmates (if that's not accurate, I'll eat my shorts - please go ahead and claim how that is untrue, I'll prep the salt and pepper), so while that isn't conclusive proof that Mike had a hand in writing or approving it, logic would tend to point in that direction.

I don't think anybody can or should argue that. It takes a certain level of bravado to be a front man on stage. It's necessary,  really.

I support Billy and GuitarFool and I wish more 7-day chill-out sessions were handed out to everyone - ON BOTH SIDES - who insist on making every thread a Brian v. Mike thread. People are so damn defensive...."oh, poor persecuted me, the whole board is part of a conspiracy to discredit my viewpoint, it's ALWAYS the same..." bla bla bla.

What a load of crap. The signal-to-noise ratio on this board is so far beyone negotiable levels for those of us who only have time for a few minutes every day or so to browse through the BS to find some actual news...

I would fully support and would love to participate in a much more heavily moderated board. If one poster can't respect another poster and starts being an a55hole, their posts get wiped. Simple as that. Say what you want about the Hoffman board but you never see pages and pages of pure crap over there. Instead you get - imagine this - actual informative and pleasant reading.

And to me it's not about having a "thick skin" - go ahead and attack me if you want, I don't care...I'm just sick of wading through all the arguments which is a HUGE WASTE OF TIME.

If I want arguments I'll listen to the Vega-Tables skits. If I come to this message board, I would actual prefer - gasp - to read about the Beach Boys and the music. I don't give a rat's ass about any of your arguments.

So about that Beach Boys 2015 tour, a UK date on 31st May 2015 at The Royal Albert Hall has been announced according to Andrew. I might just go to that didn't get to go to TRAH last time around.

Have Mike and Bruce ever played RAH without any other BB's?

Not trying to toss more logs on...just genuinely curious! Seems like a very odd choice in venue for their show.

.

Actually Pinder's repetitive posts made me skip reading his after a while, so I didn't even notice his attacking Billy which would in fact be a reason to ban him. That shows how hard the job as a moderator is: You basically have to read anything.

I hereby declare pointing my finger at one certain poster, and it's not a moderator.

Back to cool headedly discussing venues now.

excuse my ignorance, but is there a 'ignore buttom' or are there plans to have it in this message board?

There's not, and i wish there was.

Where was this announced?  I see no info.  (OMG!)

Enjoy your shorts. Like mine with gravy. I would not agree he is a braggart, I would agree he is more out-going.

We disagree again because to me your direction is illogical in the face of Mike the opposite of bragging by disclaiming involvement with the creation of the extremely successful ES.

This. It's not merely buttock-clenchingly, mind-numbingly BORING reading the same thing ad nauseum, it's also a classic example of trolling, thus:

"In Internet slang, a troll  is a person who sows discord on the Internet by starting arguments or upsetting people,by posting inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community (such as a newsgroup, forum, chat room, or blog) with the deliberate intent of provoking readers into an emotional response or of otherwise disrupting normal on-topic discussion."

Here's something: neither SB nor OSD have made a single post in the thread about the latest digital copyright extension release, a topic which would surely excite any real fan of the band to comment. But... I guess there was no latitude to diss Mike, so... no point in posting.

Andrew, don't you think that's an unfair standard or expectation to apply to anyone here, to call out anyone for what they didn't post? That could be applied to you or I on any number of discussions, and just as an example earlier in this thread there were people questioning and challenging the date of one of those "Smoking Gun" website contract riders, and you could have jumped in and confirmed the date based on what you know but I don't recall that you did. For me, any number of topics I could be called out as well for not chiming in, but do we want to apply such a standard of expectation for anyone to post or ignore?

That definition of trolling as well could be applied to what happened in this thread and what escalated to an unfortunate dust-up and admin action, as well as similar recent cases where the same patterns played out and people got upset and the topic(s) were disrupted. In some cases the posts and/or posters were reported to the mods, and in some cases actions were taken off the board through PM or otherwise to address them, but those actions are not public.

I think the best action in a lot of these cases, and one which I myself need to apply more often too, is to let some of it slide or ignore it. The board is in large part self-policing, and it is democratic, which means the flow of the discussions is in the hands of those participating. The posters set the tone, and if some opinion or even an incorrect fact gets posted, it's kind of expected that someone who disagrees will offer a rebuttal. A lot of the issues come down to the tone of respect and even tact and taste, and that will be addressed shortly in this thread. If something is posted that seems incorrect or doesn't line up with what someone knows as the truth, offer a rebuttal.

I think it's unfair that we have to put up with such repeated puerile and disruptive posting. I think it's unfair that SB appears to have a free pass to post whatever the **** he wants to with complete impunity. I think it's unfair that this situation is seemingly set to continue. I think it's unfair that two or three trolls are allowed to derail any thread they care to. That's what I think is unfair.

Know what this forum is crying out for ? An ignore function.

The situation in this thread opened up some issues and has hit some raw nerves, and explanations and clarifications are being requested. So from an admin standpoint, this will be handled a little different than perhaps it has been done before. There is an explanation and clarification on what happened and what is happening, then in a new twist each of the moderators if they choose can add their own opinions, comments, explanations, and anything else to the discussion.

I'll say again, the decisions are discussed and made in a committee fashion. The issues are discussed, debated, and sometimes we do not all agree on every point, but it's all put on the table among us to be discussed. The action itself, again, is something that is agreed to by all of us. Sometimes the immediate decisions are made as a judgement call in the moment, for example to diffuse a discussion that escalated to an unreasonable point. Whichever moderators are on board at the time make the call, and it goes back to discussion to iron out any debates or disagreements as well as to get agreement among us.

It is not taken lightly, all sides are considered, and I believe we all approach these issues by weighing all sides free of anything except what concerns the decision on the table. It is not taken lightly, no one wants to see actions escalate to these levels, and when they do they are given fair consideration.

The issues at hand: The ban stands as it was issued. There were previous bans, warnings, and contacts made with the poster on similar issues, which the board publicly would not know about, and attempts were made to address complaints and various issues, try to correct them, and move on. What played out in this thread escalated to the point of a moderator who had addressed the issues both current and on previous occasions being challenged on the board after requests were made to stop. What played into this as well was the previous actions that led to suspension and warnings for much the same things, and it happened again.

The action taken was discussed and agreed on, so it stands.

Regarding SmileBrian and the specific post in this thread, it stands that an official warning is in place, and in general the wording of the post is not welcome and should not be part of the discussions here. Consider that an official warning as well as notice for the board as a whole moving forward.

As it stands there is no ban offense for criticizing band members. It could set up an impossible standard where any negative word could be subject to admin action, do we want that level of control on an open forum? There is definitely a better way to express the criticism than to use profanity or slurs, and that is what is encouraged going forward. And expect those who disagree to challenge or rebut that criticism as well if they choose. However, there is no standard which can be applied to determine what kind of criticism is or isn't allowed. These are public figures, this is an open forum. If someone sees a bad live show and posts how bad it was, is that considered off limits? There are many ways to stretch that standard which would lead to a place many members might not want to go. Just think before posting, disengage when things get too hot, and if something genuinely crosses any number of lines it will be called out and addressed by the admins.

The line was crossed in this thread, language was used which was not appropriate nor welcome in the discussion, it was addressed at the time and it is being addressed now and moving forward as a warning.

Hopefully that explains what has been going on, and once again in a break from previous actions each of the moderators will comment as they see fit.

Craig

While criticism of a performance should be allowed, personal attacks on band members should not. Let us use some common sense in here. Honestly, I feel like I am dealing with eight year olds in some of these threads. Either back up your personal attack on bandmembers or be banned. No if, ands or buts. I'll bet you things calm down real fast. Just my 2 cents on the subject.

There is no fair or even remotely logical way to ban "personal attacks" on band members. Is criticizing Brian for having his "wife and managers" run everything a personal attack? Some would say no. Others, who know Brian, would insist that yes, it is an attack on his character. Amplify that a million fold to Mike and the other guys, and you have a rule that would be impossible to enforce.

Agreed.

What the bandmates have and haven't done to themselves and each other, both in terms of good and negative, are essential parts of the story. There's massive amounts of revenge, and actions which most people would quantify as crappy behavior, that they have inflicted on each other over the years, and to deny that's the case is to attempt to rewrite history. Some bandmates' actions at times really aren't particularly defensible, but that's just an opinion of course.

One can't really talk deeply about the band, the story, and the evolution without hypothesizing about the bandmates' motivations and feelings over the years, and sometimes it ain't gonna be pretty. It's all interconnected, and we learn more by communicating, even if we sometimes disagree, and even if some bandmates' actions are discussed harshly. I've learned to have more of a measured, nuanced opinion of various people/events in the band's saga as a result of reading this board. It's good to read conflicting opinions and have debate, sometimes more heated than other times.

As long as we are polite to one another in our discussions (not necessarily the people who are the topic of some of our discussions), I'm not sure why there's a desire for certain posters to be muzzled. If it's a matter of the board being afraid of actual repercussions of some sort from people who are treasured inside sources of information, then I can understand that, but then the mods should just be honest and come out to publicly state such.

It's...not quite that for me. I do talk to people in both camps, and I consider some of them friends (and not just online, either). There was once a post that did in fact severely offend somebody close to the band, and it was nuked VERY quickly and for good reason (considering some of the posts that HAVE been left up, you know it was offensive). That said, no matter how honored the guest, I don't let that dictate how the board operates. I'd say so otherwise, or I'd resign if it ever got to be a conflict of interest.

Okay, and now my 'official' statement. This is from me, not from Guitarfool or Smile Holland. Not to say that we are disagreement (far from it); rather, I'm making it clear that this is my own personal stance on the board issues. If any of you only read one post I make for the rest of my time here, let it be this one.

I've gotten complaints from an honored guest or two about the board being too 'anti-Mike'. Likewise, I've gotten similar complaints saying the board is too 'pro-Mike'. Truth is, I'm neither. I don't know Mike Love personally. I'm not friends with him, I've never had a discussion with him, and the closest vicinity to him I have ever been was seeing a C50 show. Brian Wilson is my musical hero, for many reasons. Personal note here...some of you know this story, some of you don't. About 20 years ago, I was going through a very rough time emotionally, and not all related to the normal 'teenage angst'. I came very close to saying 'to hell with it all'... if not for someone being nosy, I wouldn't be here posting this today. Sometime during all of this, I discovered Brian's music. Or more accurately, I discovered Brian's story *first*. My therapist had a copy of Wouldn't it be Nice in his office and I started to read it when he went out for a smoke break. He came back, saw me reading it, and said I could borrow it. No, his name was not Eugene, either :lol  Anyway, reading it made me interested in the music (until then, I just knew the Beach Boys from the oldies station that usually just played Barbara Ann or Shut Down, and thought they were 'lame'), so I bought his 1988 solo album for 99 cents on cassette tape from Blockbuster Music. I ended up hooked immediately, a and ended up buying Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, 20/20, Friends, IJWMFTT, and Pet Sounds (in that exact order) over the next few months, and saved up my allowance to buy the GV boxed set. I was still going through issues, but the only thing that kept me going was the excitement of hearing BB/BW music that I hadn't heard yet. Frankly put...the music gave me a reason to live at a time when I had none (in my eyes). So, needless to say, I'm quite partial towards Brian, and that's why I get so pissed off when I'm accused of being 'anti-Brian', which bluntly put is the biggest crock of sh*t I've ever been told since the board started, and hell yeah that offends me. With that in mind...

I'm not anti-Mike either. I can understand those who are to a point, especially those who grew into the band from things like the David Leaf book, for instance. However, there's a difference between those who bring up valid criticisms and those who just repeat the same things over and over, and not always in a relevant thread. More to the point, I take major issue when certain posters make accusatory posts about anybody who does take issue with the Mike-bashing, about how they only 'support' Mike because they're getting something in return. Like, nobody here is allowed to be unbiased. Hell, I WISH I was getting something out of it...I was just raised in a way that I would never say something that I wouldn't say to someone's face, especially if I don't even know the person on a first-hand basis. That's me, though. However, I don't understand the logic in going to threads and posting the same stuff over and over again. Alright, we get it, you don't like Mike....so why in the hell do you keep posting about it? We freaking know already. Broken records get tossed in the trash. Again, this is not directed towards those making valid criticisms, but rather the posts along the lines of the ones Pinder kept quoting. And about that...

Pinder was NOT suspended for supporting Mike. That's ridiculous and stupid. Rather, he was suspended because he was asked to  quit quoting the offending (and offensive) post ad nauseum, and kept doing it, completely disrespecting Guitarfool, then turning on me even though I had been supporting him earlier in the thread . That right there let me know that at that point, he wasn't debating anything but rather trolling just to get a rise out of people. So, a 7 day suspension was immediately enforced...and then was extended to 60 days when I went back and looked at the board log and realized I had already suspended him before for the exact same thing.  Now as for why SmileBrian wasn't suspended for baiting (which to be perfectly frank, he was), well he came very close to it. I normally wouldn't bring this up on the board, but Andrew's post above requires me to be very clear about this. Neither he nor anybody else on the board is allowed to troll and derail threads while others get punished for it. Wasn't the case here, as Pinder basically said 'f*** you' to me and the other mods and figured he was going to do whatever the hell he wants. Not going to happen. Although I generally let things go on for a bit before getting involved (by design...I've been on too many other boards where the mods act like it's a dick measuring contest to see who can ban the most people), I am not going to sit back and let someone make a mockery out of the board having moderators in the first place.


I'm with you...CenturyDeprived however does have a good point in his response to Wirestone. As much as I'd like to, I can't. Too much of a grey area of what constitutes a personal attack. That said...  if someone says something derogatory towards Mike and Scott or John tell that person off...or if somebody posts something derogatory towards Brian and Ray or Debbie tears that person a new asshole...well...I'm just going to microwave me some popcorn and sit back and watch. Hey, if you want to talk mess about someone, you better be able to take it.

*Note: the scenario mentioned above was hypothetical

After all of that longwinded stuff, let me sum it up like this...not everybody here is going to agree. Just be more decent to each other. I don't want to have to be one of 'those' mods on other forums who run their sites like a police state.

Man, Who are the brain police?

? Not sure I follow.

You know, Smile Brian's and OSD's posts are completely worthless and make me embarassed to be a fan and a member of this board. Ignoring the issue is just postponing the problem. Yeah, I get their point, Mike is an asshole who should have been fired in 1966. I got it the first 15 times they wrote it, I don't think their other 20.000 posts have really added much. Is it gonna be ok as long as profanity isn't used anymore? Really?

"Oh, then you want every member that criticizes Mike to be banned?"

Hell no. Just those which when read make me want to delete my account.

I agree with this.  What you (Billy) and other mods have said in this thread are acceptable and make sense, but only when looking through a microscope.  SB and OSD do the same damn thing in every thread.  It's fine that they don't like Mike, but using that opinion in every thread as some sort of fact that proves their argument is a load of crap.  It's called trolling and nothing else.  Breaking out the ban hammer on them is not going to turn this forum into a police state. 

The exact same thing goes on in a car forum that I post on.  Some people like to use GM's bailout for reason to not like a certain car they make.  Yeah ok, fine that's your opinion.  But bringing it up every time a new GM product comes out is ridiculous.  The mods stepped in and started issuing warnings and if you still kept it up guess what?  You're gone. 

Neither of them do the same thing in every thread, tho they do,  perhaps, post their dislike more frequently than some others.
Maybe we should ban everyone that talks about GM cars, on this board, without any BBs reference(s) or ANY post that's not absolutely directly thread related?

Well, let's see what happens now that the warning is issued.

I should have clarified I meant Mike related threads.   No, we shouldn't...  I think you are misunderstanding what I'm saying if that's the conclusion you're coming to. 

But yes, let's see what happens now that warnings have been issued.

In this case of trolling, In think it is ok to call them out for what they don't post. That's because they don't post anything else but "Mike (paraphrased) has an abominable character" and "You don't agree, you're anti-Brian".

At the moment there is a thread that celebrates one certain song that I find extremely dull. I know I have the right to state my opinion and I could go there and post about me not liking that song, but what good would that do? If I had a SB mindset, I'd post that on and on and go bashing people for liking that song, endlessly. I think it's a good thing I didn't post these things. (Which is the point of this paragraph, not implying one shouldn't ever criticize anything.)



What dictionary is that definition from?

  Not that SmileBrian can't defend himself, if need be,and OSD likewise, but I checked by pulling up " the last posts" of SB ( 25 of them) and what I found was (maybe) 7 of those 25( admittedly by my count) could be construed as bashing Mike; that's a FAR cry from "they don't post anything else


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Troll_(Internet)

Good points...

Are you referring to All this is that? If so, i do entirely disagree, but that's okay. Just like others like Don't Hurt Mt Little Sister,  and it happens to be my least favorite song Brian ever wrote. :lol

How high is Mt Little Sister? :wink

(A little "spelling police" joke, if you don't mind. :))

:lol I hate this phone...typing is a bitch!

Wait 'til my Bill and Sue appreciation thread comes around! :angel:

I'm hoping you're referring to Smile Brian there and not me. I've been a lot of things here and elsewhere - arrogant, condescending, dismissive, unfeeling and flat out rude and abusive (and proud of none of it) - but I've never trolled.

As for what constitutes fair, acceptable criticism...

"Mike seems to sometimes take too much credit" - acceptable.

"Mike is a f****** s********" - unacceptable and if anyone needs to have that difference explained, then, well...

I post here because I love this band and this music like no other: both have materially affected the direction of my life. I've been places I wouldn't have otherwise, made lasting friends and had relationships I wouldn't have otherwise. I've got to meet the people responsible for this and personally thank them. Now, they know me, and sometimes ask me for such little help as I can offer as regards their own history (as Brian would have it, that's a real trip !). Even before I loved the band, I had a hugely overdeveloped accuracy gene, and The Beach Boys only made it worse. That I care to have their history and music accurately documented is why I (and others such as Stebbins) kept nagging tedesco about his website, and why I'll give Carol Kaye a hard time for her lies any chance I get (she does the same to me). I enjoy, for the most part, the exchanges here but when two or three posters routinely cause any given thread to degenerate into a Mike Love bitchfest, then I have to wonder. yes, in the last couple of years I've moved my position on him more than somewhat and yes, during this time he and his wife have extended their hand to me and improved my access, which I admit is a two-edged sword, and in some eyes the mark of a turncoat. Initially, like most here, I swallowed the Leaf Line on Mike from 1978, hook, line & sinker, and know something ? He has said and done some things that make you go "hmmm" (and next time we meet, I'm going to ask about the HOF speech, promise)... but so have the rest of the band. I don't pretend Mike is my friend, any more that I think David or Bruce are, but I've got to know him a little since 2012, and know something (again) ? He's just a man. He has feelings. The person I see, albeit briefly, in "private" isn't the brash front-man. And yes, I know that around the fans he's on. Might be many things, but I'm not dumb. I edged towards the center after the frankly nonsensical reporting over the end of C50, when anyone with two functioning brain cells to rub together should have seen that no-one fired anyone else. The true story of what happened in June-September 2012 needs to be told, if only to show there was wrong on both sides. But I digress. I'm not a Brian-hater. I don't think a whole bunch of his organization, and haven't since, oh, about 1998, but as Dennis pointed out in 1976, he IS The Beach Boys. No-one else comes close, even Dennis at his very best, and certainly not Mike (know something, pt.3 ? he knows that too), Alan, Bruce, Carl or David. Brian's a once-in-a-lifetime event, a true genius, but there's only one Brian in the BB: without the others, I don't doubt he'd have found an expression and outlet for his amazing music, but we'd have had to manage without the likes of "California Girls", "WIBN" and "GV". Without The Beach Boys, there would have been no TLOS, to my mind his crowning solo achievement. But I digress, again. Currently, this place is like a great party at which the kids have been allowed to to stay up for, and they're bored, and running around, making noise, screaming "look at meeeeeeeeee" and frankly being a royal pain, and recent posts in this thread have shown I'm not the only one of this opinion. Time to get the house in order, the kids in bed and the guests out the door.

Also time to remember that the neighbors are watching...

Back OT-ish - the guy who came up with the concept for the Endless Summer album is noted in the (sparse) credits. I don't have my copy to hand, but his initials aren't MEL.  :)

I'll keep clear of that one, rest assured! ;D

I'd even accept "Mike always takes too much credit and I hate that".



The same? She gives you a hard time for your lies? :angel:

My truths are lies to her.  In this I am far from alone. Ask Alan Slutsky. ;D

As mentioned previously, this thread was clearly started as an attempt at trolling and it has succeeded spectacularly.

I think Billy does a fine job as a moderator with little assistance but I think lessons can be learnt from this. The thread could have been closed or, at the very least. actions should have been taken to keep it in order.

Beg to differ, but Billy does get excellent support from Klasse & Craig. Right now, we have, for the first time in a looong while, three fine, fully functioning mods, none of whom has an agenda (or in one case, much hair  :) ). This has been their first real test and valuable lessons have been learned. Teams take time to gel. Next time I foresee swift and decisive action. Hopefully not directed at me.

What if those 7 were directed at Brian Wilson, with the same tone of hatred and hammer-like frequency? I doubt it would be given a free pass.

Is it childish to make this comparison? maybe. But I'm not writing 10 posts a day in their style bashing Brian just to make this point. Thank God I've got more to do with my time. Do I want or need frequent and idiotic Brian-bashing to make it even? No. Mike isn't my idol and it doesn't hurt my delicate TM soul to read bad things about him. It's just plain pure embarassment. But if this is the messaeg board the majority wants, fine.

The Albert Hall seem to have updated their site today.  Tickets go on sale on Friday at 9am.  Yay!

:lol yup I'm bald ;)

So this is really JUST Mike & Bruce? No other bands on the bill?....no other band members on the bill?

...good luck guys!

I would like to chime in here and apologetically get on a soapbox to do it.

I know both Smile Brian and Pinder from conversations on this board and the fact is I believe both to be good people, and they are both capable of meaningful contributions here. I think the antagonism here in this thread is proof of a greater issue, which is that when someone disagrees with you on a subject, you have a tendency of writing off that person entirely.

If you really like a movie and meet someone who despises that movie, you might conclude from that that this is not a person you want to be friends with. And this can become even more exacerbated when two people agree on a great deal. If I considered myself a movie expert and I met another person who was a movie expert, I might be even more upset if we disagreed over a particular movie.

And I think that happens here to an extent. Two people are fans of the same band but have very different opinions on the band. But is this a good reason to write someone off entirely? In this case, I’d say not. Again, both SB and PGTK are good contributors. And to be honest, I can see where both are coming. Both are working to compensate for what they consider to be a mythical representation of history. When one side ups the ante, the other side feels obligated to do the same. The fact is, I don’t think this will ever end (if not with these two posters than with others) because, in reality, it’s a clash of values not a clash of facts. Both sides know the facts, but they both reach different conclusions from those facts. Is it because they enter into the discussion with an already-established conclusion? Perhaps, and one should work to overcome that but that’s always going to be an ongoing process.

The reaction to this (and here I am NOT referring to the actions of the mods), in my view, is not to try to eliminate the discussion or to tone down the rhetoric. Discussions happen and conversations get heated. Yes, things would help if we all recognized that the anger (or annoyance) we express and feel about a topic does not equal the rightness of our position. What I think would help more though is if we recognize that the person I am talking to is not a monster or incapable of good discussion just because, right now, they happen to be expressing a point of view I don’t like, using an argumentative style that bothers me. Yes, this is a trap I fall into myself but I try to avoid it.

As an example, I have had many a heated debate with guitarfool over politics in the sandbox. Granted, I don’t things ever got too far out of control there (maybe others would disagree, though nothing was ever said that got anybody banned) but there were definitely heated moments. Nevertheless, while I know that guitarfool and I will always disagree on politics, sometimes to the point of hostility, we can nevertheless have perfectly reasonable discussions about other topics elsewhere. In fact, we share a great deal of the same point of view on many subjects. So, yes, have a debate but also recognize that just because you disagree with someone, it doesn’t mean that you can never ever find common ground with them. Once you recognize that, perhaps things will feel much less frustrating.

The fact is, this is a community of sorts. And maybe in your actual community there is someone who doesn’t cut their lawn the way you like, or makes their own property look so ridiculous that you feel it’s driving down the property value of the whole neighbourhood. Even in situations like that I feel like the wrong response is to band together and throw that person out for good. I think that toleration (for everyone) is the key. And if you can’t tolerate views that you really dislike, then toleration ultimately means nothing.

Ultimately, what we need to realize that if we keep squabbling over this, we lose sight of the fact that we all have a common enemy: Adrian Baker. It’s time to wake up and realize that. If we don’t live together, we’ll die alone.

God bless. (CURTAIN DRAWS, end of Act I).

I doubt they'll have trouble filling it.  The capacity's about 5000 or so, bit more.  But their last indoor show here was at the rather grotty Hammersmith Apollo.  Quite a jump in terms of the quality of venue.

Well said rockandroll

Wow. I just read all of the pages in this thread and I'm glad to see order somewhat restored.  I really enjoyed reading AGD's post regarding how he views the band.

I just wanted to mention this (it was more appropriate to the discussion many pages ago) regarding the Smoking Gun rider.  I can tell you with absolute certainty that the rider (or parts of different riders) on that site is definitely not a rider being used by Mike and Bruce post 2007.  I have seen every rider from them as well as the C50 tour as I work for a venue that has booked them every year since 2007. 

A very thoughtful posting, rockandroll, but I think I respectfully disagree. Your post reminded me of a thread where another poster and I agreed on Today! being our favorite album. But the track I found weakest was one of his favorite tracks and vice versa. No big deal, no animosities.

In this case however, what I perceive as being the problem is that some posters have this totally black-and-white mindset: If you're not 100% anti-Mike, you're negative against the divine Brian Wilson. And it enrages them and they accuse other people instead of accepting their opinion. I'm not sure what let Pinder go off the way he obviously did, as he's not anti-Brian at all.

If you don't share my view, I'm fine with that! :)

There we go some solid info. Do you know who writes the copy for your ads or where the copy comes from etc.?

It's solid info why? Because somebody named "shark" shows up on the board and told you something you wanted to hear? I mean, sure he very likely could be telling the truth, but what prior evidence do we have that says this person is telling anything near the truth?



Also by the way, I have a source named "marlin" who has informed me that Bruce will be leaving the group for the rest of the month to pursue a reunion of Bob Sled & The Toboggans to celebrate 48 years of their classic hit "Here We Go (The Surfer Boys Are Going Skiing)"!

So be on the lookout for that! Solid info!

I think someone is being silly.  :)

Can you try and get your friend "marlin" to join us here so he can give us some more solid info? Pretty please?

Why are we such dicks to each other?

Who's "Shark"? 

According to Cam, someone with "solid info".

Or someone who must be a fraud and imposter because you don`t like what they are saying?

:thumbsup :thumbsup :thumbsup

I was trolling and baiting "Shark".  I sacrificed myself as bait.

:lol-good one, Mikie, but I'd prefer to see you trolling than be arrogant, condescending, dismissive, unfeeling and FLAT OUT RUDE and ABUSIVE. No one should have to put up with that kind of behavior IMHO. ::)

Very true, Sir.  Been following this thread for awhile and remembering what Rodney King said. 

And as the late great Carl Wilson once exclaimed:

It's about time we get together and be up front and love one another - brothers sisters everybody - we better start to help each other now. We need it now!

To answer Cam's question, the management of the performer or their PR staff will supply us with images, etc. for advertising.  I don't believe we have ever supplied a "bio" of a performer anywhere on our website or to the press to advertise a show so I can only speak from what I know first-hand.  For instance, you may remember the "commercial" for the C50 tour that showed a lot of the "lost" Good Vibrations recording video along with other montages through the years.  We were supplied with that to advertise the show.  For this year's Mike and Bruce show we had received the latest band photo- inclusion of JF and no Christian Love.  We just booked them w/America for the spring.  I haven't seen a rider or any other media come through yet for the show but we probably won't put it on sale for another month or so anyway. 

I can't speak for other venues, promoters, etc. on what they use to advertise shows.  We promote our own shows so we don't deal with bringing in outside promoters.  We book the acts ourselves and promote the shows ourselves.  We get our promo materials from the artists' management or tour management.

I haven't a problem with Shark at all. Maybe he's for real. I don't know either way.

I just find it funny that Cam doesn't like to believe ANYTHING unless it's been totally vetted, but then some person pops up here posting as "Shark" and all of the sudden, we have "solid info". It's almost like Cam likes to act like he gives a fair shake to the known facts, but in reality, he picks and chooses just like the rest of us.

But what if he's a lone Shark? Would you see him differently then?

I personally have no reason to not believe Shark. All they've said is that the "rider (or parts of different riders) on that site is definitely not a rider being used by Mike and Bruce post 2007". I'm glad that someone had that tidbit of information and shared it. It's not like Shark is offering up "solid info" on a new Beach Boys album in the works or an upcoming BW tour.

I just bought that 1990 rider off of ebay for $10 just because I thought it would be fun to flip through. Clearly, you don't need to be a insider with direct contacts to obtain this kind of info.  

You know, the shark from "Jaws" was named Bruce...

oh, god, I think Mr. "Iwritethesongsgrammy1976@aol.com" himself has infiltrated the forum!

I was trying to get that across earlier.  Not necessarily that it was old like pre-1998, but that this one was at least five years old, because again to my knowledge none of the current members dip, making it unnecessary to be included in a rider.

OMG, it's like you are in my head. That is solid info and I have no reason to doubt you.

Candygram.

I must be in your head. You've managed to go like three posts without absolving Mike of responsibility for all the bad things related to him. You better get back on that bud!

Are we really doing this again?

You know Billy...when the moderators HAVE to spend this much time in one thread...and for days on end no less...it's pretty easy to figure out that the thread, not unlike the one locked down just before it's twin brother rose from the ashes, is flawed and not worthy of any more oxygen.

It's a thankless task you folks perform...but you're trying way too hard with this one.  Put it down.  It's a dying dog.

I think that this was an honest, interesting post.

First off Andrew, I think you have been an invaluable part of The Beach Boys fan community for quite a while now. I've been part of it for maybe 11 or so years, and honestly I don't remember a time on this forum (or The Smile Shop) where you weren't extremely helpful in figuring out the truth about what's gone on through the history of the group.

However, you do seem to have become a bit starry-eyed because of your recent induction into Club Kokomo. I mean, I find it interesting that the "Mike haters" like OSD and SMiLE Brian are the proverbial annoying kids at the party, but Mike apologists like Cam Mott and Pinder (who do nothing but try to advance the Kokomonian* agenda) are considered amongst the grown-ups? Just seems like if you were bothered by the one-sidedness of one side, you'd be just as annoyed by the same ridiculousness of the other side. It seems to me that the Mike attacks seem to bother you more than the attacks on Brian and Melinda because you're somewhat closer to the Mike world these days, whereas on the other hand, you're not exactly a huge fan of the former Miss Ledbetter. So yeah, now of course you'd point out that Mike has feelings but you don't seem to give a damn about Melinda's when trashing her.

Personally, I think some of the attacks on Mike are ridiculous. However, a lot of the time he just brings it on himself by being so damn insecure. He always seems to have this need to puff his chest out and tell us how great he is. And why? Any of us with a brain cell knows he sang some of the most popular, classic leads in music history. We know that he wrote the lyrics to classics like "I Get Around" and "California Girls" and "Good Vibrations". We also know he's co-written some really tender, artistic stuff like "Please Let Me Wonder", "Aren't You Glad" and "All This Is That". And that's only scratching the surface. The dude is a legend, and if he stopped trying to remind us that "Kokomo" was a huge hit and that it him, yes ladies and gentleman, him who co-wrote it without any help from Cousin Brian, many of us would probably be much more understanding of Mike's thoughts on The Beach Boys and his place in the group.

I mean, to put it in perspective, it would be like George Harrison bragging about how successful "Got My Mind Set On You", "When We Was Fab" and the Cloud Nine album was in 1987, while constantly pointing out how Paul McCartney hadn't had a hit like that in a while. I mean, I'm sure George had a bit of resentment built up due to being slighted next to Lennon and McCartney, just as Mike does when he's slighted next to Brian. However, it seems that whereas George decided to let his accomplishments speak for themselves, Mike needs to point out again and again and again how he did "Kokomo", how he didn't do drugs, how he took the guitar out of McCartney's hands and played him "Back in the U.S.S.R.", how he kept touring and flying The Beach Boys flag while Cousin Brian was being lazy, etc.

It all just reeks of a sad, insecure man. And I don't say this to make fun. I think it's a shame. I don't think he should be insecure. He's done a lot of great sh*t, and hopefully will do some more. I don't doubt that Mike's a good family man who wants to provide for his wife and daughter and everybody. I'm sure he does love "Cousin Brian". But I just think he's either tone deaf to how pathetic the bragging and everything looks. I will say one thing though. I was going to complain how he tackily wears a "Beach Boys" hat everywhere even though he's the lead singer. Then I thought about it. I think since he came from next to nothing and he has that middle-American, conservative, business-owner vibe, he just likes wearing the hat showing the logo of his business (The Beach Boys) just as the guy down the street who owns his own pool cleaning company likes wearing his polo shirt with his companies logo on it. For pride. They are proud of their work and they wanna show it off. The only difference is that in rock 'n roll you don't see stuff like that. I doubt you're gonna catch Pete Townshend with a Who logo on his sports coat or Keith Richards sporting a shirt with a pair of the Stones lips on it. They're "too cool" for that. Mike isn't. For better or worse.

Regardless, I for one am looking forward to hearing Mike's side of things in his book. I truly hope he tones down the braggadocios stuff and focuses on his story. And more importantly, I hope he releases some more damn music. I personally really like a bit of his solo music, and I think it's a shame that most of the stuff recorded for First Love and Unleash the Love is unreleased. Not to mention the fact that the Celebration stuff and Looking Back With Love isn't on available on CD or digitally. Truly a shame that he hasn't had either the interest or confidence in getting this stuff out there.



*Did I make up "Kokomonian"? Maybe not. I don't know.

Shark is a legitimate poster who has previously contributed some terrific firsthand, eyewitness information about what he saw during the C50 tour while it was "breaking news", including interesting bits about song selection and other interactions.

The Smoking Gun pages in question are 1&2, we know they could not have come from prior to 1998 (no need arguing that anymore), and if we go on what has been posted recently, they most likely date from 1999-2007. And that was the point, they date from when the current touring and promotions operation more or less was handling the tours.

We also learn that the band's PR or touring/management staff supplies the venue with materials to use in advertising the show, in this case, so if a wrong photo is used or specific language appears, if it's this venue...they had nothing to do with it and are publishing what they were sent by management. And if there are mistakes or names/titles that are in question, the material came from management. Again, at least in this case.

That seems to be the case.  :)

Exactly. I have a shot at posting some of my thoughts on all this, and want to cover just a few things, but first I'd like to address this:


First of all, I have a thick skin and stuff like this rolls off rather easily. Others may not.

So the question is, why would you post a cheap shot like that inside of a discussion which saw a number of posters calling for civility, respect, less personal attacks, and a less cynical or negative tone overall on the board? What was the purpose of posting a flippant remark like that, was there a reaction from me or from anyone else you had hoped to get in return? Was it to start something up, get someone angry enough to start engaging a pissing match again?

I honestly don't know, but I'm curious. I'm doing this to point out something which will be addressed later. The remark itself means nothing to me, but again in the context of these calls for less of the personal attacks and more of the civility, why include this in a reply?

Feel free to contact anyone off the board. Seriously. If something is done by the mods or otherwise that upsets you, or that you have a question about or an issue with, drop a line.

I called this out to use as an example, I don't care who said it or who specifically it was targeted to, but at some point the tendency to post a cheap shot like this may be what everyone is sick and tired of seeing in general, particularly between posters  who are known to each other in this "community".

And also, consider if someone who read this and felt it was a personal attack, if some of the suggestions being made about deleting posts, censoring posts, responding a certain way to personal attacks in general...the poster here would be subject to a warning or a ban, right?

That's why I cannot see enforcing anything close to the standard which it seems some are advocating. Someone's definition of a personal attack might be different than another, so who decides how much someone should or should not take a flippant remark to heart versus ignoring it?

I can truthfully say that most of us have never heard of him. Could be new to the board or "Shark" is an alternate alias. Can't remember him contributing anything during the year 2012, much less during the C50, at least under Justin's threads. So without formal introductions and with only 16 posts under his belt, it's no wonder his credibility is questioned and previous contributions all but forgotten.

Those riders on the Smoking Gun site have been there forever and two days. I remember they were discussed a long time ago, if not on this board or at least one other. Anybody with half a brain should have known they're way outdated now.

Really good post, and a balanced honest view of things. Well said.

Check the board archives, it's all there.

You must have missed the current discussions, then, because 1998-9 at the earliest those two pages which were referenced out of the 6 posted could be is still a version of the current touring arrangements, how much the actual wording changed isn't exactly known. Probably the only time this booking/contractual arrangement for a Beach Boys tour has changed since 1999 was C50 which was done by a separate company.

http://www.thesmokinggun.com/file/beach-boys-rider

This rider was discussed on message boards many years ago. Looks like Page 1 is missing for some reason. So you're suggesting, GF, that this same rider was used by The Beach Boys from 1998 through 2012 when it was changed?

I'm not saying the exact same rider was used, but the rider page specifically at the link you just posted could not have existed before 1998. I have no idea what language was changed or what was added or removed through the years, but that specific rider mentioning management needed to approve any advertising materials from the venue or the "purchaser" would stay relatively the same through the years unless something drastic was modified. It's like any terms-and-conditions fine print, most of the language doesn't change if it's the same company involved.

While searching for the original date for the late 90's rider, I ran across this. Bedtime reading material. Note Stamo's guitar requirements. Look familiar to someone else's guitars? Sorry if it's been posted previously - didn't feel like wading through the arguments.....

http://www.zaphodproductions.com/about-us/the-beach-boys

Agreed. This is a really well-put post, and I think only a very, very small amount of people would think there's anything off-base (or anti-Mike in any kind of unfair, unrealistic way) in that statement. It's when incredibly balanced statements like this get refuted (and fingered as a harshly inaccurate portrayal of Mike by a handful of people on this board which admittedly, it's their right to refute if they really think it's off-base), that bickering creeps in. IMO, to call this anything but fair, balanced, and largely accurate is a stretch. Similarly, the silence of the "pro Mike" faction to when someone makes  accurate statement like this also speaks volumes, and is frustrating.

Mikie, you are the man...how you found that...anyway, thanks for posting! Clears things up. So it's confirmed. A 2014 Beach Boys contract rider that says basically the same thing as the one on Smoking Gun about promotional materials and advertising for the concerts.

All promotional materials and advertising must be approved. Which means however much anyone wants to read into that regarding statements made in these press releases, errors made in those press releases, and various correct or incorrect promotional materials used in those press releases.

Nice find, Mikie. That helped clear up some doubts or debates about the contract situation.

Today I'm puzzled. I'm puzzled about sweetdudejim. If you want to reply to this post of mine, please read all of it first.

First sweetdudejim attacks Cam in - excuse the wording - Brianista style:


It seems to me for some time that certain posters have a quasi-religious take on their antipathy against Mike, like a belief so strong it becomes unreceptive to rational argumentation, and here sweetdudejim uses a word like "absolve" which clearly is a reference to religion.

He continues with, after a short AGD praising, a short attack on the same AGD with some "Brianista" acrimony:


"Induction into Club Kokomo" - come on!!! This isn't some kind secret society that really exists, and you know that! To phrase your opinion that AGD is biased in Mike's favor that way is bad style (and actually made me use the word "Brianista" here in an equally bad style, my bad).


AND THEN... in the SAME POST...


...sweetdudejim gives us a perfect example how criticism of Mike should be done in an appropriate and reasonable way:


With this criticism of Mike I absolutely agree.

2014 as well.

Amazing find. Bravo Mikie. However, as regards the highlighted bit, I have this to say: at work, I have a thing called "proceedure", which states how things must be done, and of course so does everyone else in employment, from brain surgeons down to road sweepers. This is part of my contract and must be strictly adhered to, on pain of disciplinary action. Except... I don't. Like everyone else, I cut corners, or do things my way. Because... it's human nature. Sometimes, it's unavoidable, as in keeping no more than £XXX in the till at any time: other times, it's just a pain to follow, so I don't because it's easier. So, I'm guessing (and I'll check, later) that either not every single item of promo material is signed off, or that the venue & promoters don't submit everything for approval. Over the last few years I've brought several examples of what we're discussing to the attention of Mike's people, and every single time, they've expressed exasperation, not gone "oops, my bad" (er, as if they would...).

And while I'm here, to answer a small section of sweetdudejim's outstanding post, I give Cam & Pinder something of a pass because, while they're certainly playing essentially the same tune, they do vary the melody line somewhat, they do refrain from provocative and profane language while so doing, and they do post on other topics.

Am I starry eyed ? No. I'm 59 and deeply cynical. Am I hugely flattered (and surprised) that first Bruce, then Mike, initiated contact with me on a personal level and let me become, if not a friend, then certainly an acquaintance ? sh*t yes, of course, just as you would be. Am I a fully paid-up member of Club Kokomo ? 'Course not, but I'm not arrogant enough to deny any bias. Jon had a leaning towards David, Ray's been Brian's close friend for decades (and en passant, I'm pleased and proud to call Ray a friend, online and in real life), I tend to stand up for Mike (especially when it all gets very, very silly, or personally abusive). But above all, we're Beach Boys fans. All of... actually, no, on recent evidence, not all of us here are Beach Boys fans. The vast majority of us here are beach Boys fans first and foremost. I loved the music way before I knew who was who and I wish with every fiber of my being I was still in that state of blissful ignorance and just digging the songs. But I don't have a Delorian.

This board has its spasms every now and them, like a dog shedding fleas and when that's done, it plods on until the next upheaval. Nothing much ever changes. It's like work: generally I like it a lot, but I don't like everyone involved.

Let Dobie Gray have the final word:

And when my mind is free
You know a melody can move me
And when I'm feelin' blue
The guitar's comin' through to soothe me

Thanks for the joy that you've given me
I want you to know I believe in your song
And rhythm and rhyme and harmony
You've helped me along
Makin' me strong

Oh, give me The Beach Boys* and free my soul
I wanna get lost in your rock and roll and drift away...

[* I know. Shut up.  ;D]

Re: The highlighted part. Naturally procedures in place do not always get followed and sometimes the mechanism simply breaks down. I think, though, it is worth considering that the contract rider posted back on page 2 of this thread has been argued, debated, dissected, etc, not to mention the motivation for posting it in the first place being questioned up to page 14. And it turned out that everything which I had posted about it and argued regarding dates/relevancy and the like was correct since it was first posted here (I know, get over myself, right?  ;D ) - The wording of that original link on page two no matter what year it dates from 1998 onward is still in place in a 2014 touring contract for the Beach Boys. That's the way many contracts, whether they be the fine print on a bill of sale to a standard loan contract from a bank exist, the main wording of it often stays basically the same as long as the same party owns it, and whatever changes or tweaks need to be made through the years sometimes do not affect a bulk of the wording already in place, as a lot of it is procedural or defining things which do not change through the years. Again, stuff that was pointed out pages ago.

What triggered some of this was seeing some of the claims made in the text of promotional materials as recent as the Ryman, and as recent as shows from this fall. Not to mention the outdated band photos, etc. The ones which stood out were the claims made regarding Mike's role with the Endless Summer project. One release (as we've debated to death already) claiming it was Mike's concept album, the other stating Mike produced Endless Summer.

For fans who know the album and its history, those stand out as contradictions, along with a few other lines from those releases regarding other parts of the band's history. Grammy awards that never happened, the wording of certain claims, etc. But the one we're discussing is specifically Endless Summer.

So fans read this, something doesn't quite add up, and we're wondering how something like this gets printed if in those contract riders it says that promotional materials can also be provided, including biographical information to those booking the band and signing the contract. Which suggests the promo materials can be sent to the venue/promoters and printed verbatim, if necessary.

An incorrect band photo or a mislabeled booking header is the type of issue and mistake that has been pointed out and will be corrected.

But claims of producing an album or suggesting things about it which some fans don't believe is entirely accurate, as in the case of Endless Summer - it doesn't make sense to see claims like that if the materials are handled as the contract suggests. When an article promoting the upcoming show is put through the process, would the writers on their own add a production credit for Endless Summer on their own initiative? If it's a mistake, will it be corrected as well?

I think he meant "little assistance... from the posters who keep attacking each other".  :)

So "Shark", if that really is your name (just kidding). To your knowledge has your venue ever been provided with false or possibly misleading content for promotion by MELECO or anyone connected with the Beach Boys of the sort some venues cited in this thread have published? (I may not be a big city lawyer but I paced back and forth with my thumbs hooked in my suspenders while typing)

Re. controversial promotion: We had a couple of venues highlighted as having controversial copy in their event promotion, did anyone check all of the other venues to see if they are publishing the same "controversy"? In other words, is there a pattern or just a few offenders?

.

Cam- to my knowledge we have never been provided anything misleading by Beach Boys management.  As I said, we were provided with the updated band photo for the 2014 appearance.  We never post performer bios so we never request them from the artists. Do some places cut corners or get lazy?  I'm sure they do.  I could see it being done very easily if a venue booked the C50 tour and then booked Mike and Bruce last year.  A lazy employee in advertising (and one who probably has no interest in the band) could very easily say, "We've booked the Beach Boys before.  It was just 2 years ago!  I have all the advertising for that show saved.  All I have to do is change the date on the collateral for this show.  Makes my job easier!"

And on a personal note, obviously I have posted very little on this board.  I read it for years and joined in 2012.  I posted a long while ago under "Shark" on the Male Ego board.  Back in the days of Mike's the Greatest taking on Dan Davidson and a guy named Alan.  After Junkstar shut that board down, I started reading this one.  Just never registered until a couple of years ago.  In my opinion, even though this board sometimes breaks down in personal attacks, it is by far the best Beach Boys message board going and has been for quite some time.  I love the insiders who post here as well as the historians like AGD, Stebbins, etc.

Solid!   ;)

Hey Micha, I appreciate your questioning, and I'm gonna try to be honest as can be answering this stuff.


With Cam, it's not about "Brian or Mike" in my opinion. He, honestly, is just annoying to me. I've noticed he's never, ever participated in threads about the music or anything pertaining to it. He only pops up when he can "defend Mike" either about stuff that happened during the SMiLE era, or C50, or defending how he releases bios with braggadocios untruths in them. I feel like he's just always playing defense, and never giving an inch. Very OSD-like in my opinion. Even AGD pointed out that him and Pinder always seem to go to their obvious defensive postures when an argument comes along, (although he says that they don't bug him like OSD and SMiLE Brian because they aren't quite as vulgar, which I'm not sure I agree with). I pointed out how Cam acts like he's just "sticking to (and looking for) the facts" except of course when the facts don't agree with his agenda. But yeah, I'm sure I've been overly critical of him. He just strikes me as the Ted Cruz of this board. And I don't like Ted Cruz. Just admit you're wrong sometimes Cam. I know you won't though.


Not a mistake, and good eye catching that. However, my use of absolve is more about how there are people (Cam, Pinder) who are religiously trying to "turn the tables" and show that Mike is just a good little Beach Boys soldier and has always just happened to be in the line of fire, never being of any blame when those infamous Beach Boys quarrels have taken place. And any fan, of Brian, Mike, Dennis, whoever, would be able to say that their favorite guy hasn't majorly screwed up the group's trajectory before. So for people like those posters to feed us that BS, it's just a bit rich. I'd like to think I'm pretty fair about spreading around the blame in these events. And while I feel like OSD might be super unfair against Mike, Pinder and especially Cam are super unfair for Mike. And neither of these things are good for a clearheaded evaluation of the group and their continuing history.


With AGD, I'll be honest. I've had private conversations with him outside of public view, and I think he knows I greatly respect his work and his inside view of a lot of Beach Boys land. And, in my opinion, the Club Kokomo thing is just a bit of ribbing. Hell, even Pinder has jokingly alluded to the fact that he is part of Club Kokomo. There's obviously no real group. But even Andrew himself has admitted that access to Mike has changed his tune a bit. But yeah, I guess I coulda been a little less snarky about it. I do feel that Andrew knows it's good natured though. Hopefully.

Are you trying to insult me or something? Whatever you keep attempting to do, I guess it is fine with the Mods so carry on.

I comment on what I comment. Am I in violation of a board rule?

Is it any wonder that the people on this board who have the hardest time admitting they may be wrong, even just giving an inch sometimes, are the most fervent at defending the BB who by most accounts seems to fit that similar personality type?  This cannot be a mere coincidence.

(http://i.imgur.com/zWyhSda.jpg)

What an appropriate cover for mike's upcoming saga. I so need to have this hatless rendering of the lovester adorn an entire wall in the man cave. absolutely PRICELESS, Dudd and thank you!! :love

This board has jumped the shark. But most of the members don't pay for it so it's up to those who do to do something about it. If anything. It's not that important, and neither are the Beach Boys, including Brian Wilson, who is not God or Mozart. 

.

You know people could stop making it personal and insulting and stick to content. Just a thought.

Here is my personal opinion post on the recent events, speaking solely for myself. I thought about what to write, what to say, and wanted to address some of the comments, suggestions, and criticisms on the last several pages of this discussion.

A lot can happen off the board, via PM's and otherwise. Sometimes there are complaints, reported posts, or just people who know each other having a bull session about the board if something is upsetting, or any other case.

I am one of those who before being asked to join two of the best people on this board to moderate had some issues with the negativity. It's simply the way I felt. Others felt that way too, but were not vocal or even public about it. Not only regular posters, but some really good people who felt there was a tide of negativity including what were perceived as personal attacks related to various news that would come out about Brian Wilson. I know others disagreed strongly, I know I got called out several times for it, but just like some have issues and posted them here, I had issues and posted them there too.

With that in mind, there were suggestions and calls to have some new rules put into place regarding posts that would be considered personal attacks, including those directed at band members and associates. I have tried to explain where I stand on this, basically I feel it could set up a situation of more censorship than an open forum would suggest. And beyond that, who sets the standards with which the offending posts would be judged? What qualifies for a ban, what qualifies as a joke, what qualifies as an off-the-cuff statement? Is it a case like the old statement about judging indecent material, "you'll know it when you see it..."? Is it a case of judging who is posting versus what they are posting? Is someone's standard more harsh for one band member or individual over another? Is it really an issue of content or the way something was expressed? All those things come into play. Do we want that?

So to show some of what I have had in the back of my mind in all this, what I remember of some of the discussions mostly from this past year but a few possibly older, I am going to post some comments which have appeared on the board in various discussions, most of them related to what I'd term a "Brian Wilson" topic or thread.

I'm posting these anonymously, and I am NOT doing this to call anyone out or point fingers or anything of the sort. I am also not trying to cherrypick a "worst of" or target anyone or anything to make a better point, I'm just pulling some examples that I remembered.

What I want to do is show the type of posts that some fans did find offensive, some that did cross the line in some opinions, and some that were posted in response to the various discussions where the negativity directed at Brian was happening. Again, no names necessary, no calling out...just a cross-section of those posts.

Consider this, in the name of seeing all sides. If you were a fan coming onto the board for the first time, and you saw any number of these posts, what would the impression of the board be? If you were a member of Brian's family, and saw some of these, what would your reaction be?

Most important, if you were in a position to moderate or control the posts on the board based on what is offensive or considered a personal attack, how would any of *these* fall into that standard of what is or isn't appropriate? Or, should any of these posters have been warned officially for any of these words? All things to consider, again in the spirit of seeing another side in all of this.

In italics:

1. I'm just saying, Brian doesn't have a fucking clue who any of these people are, and all of a sudden picks them out of everybody in the universe to record music with.  It's forced.  It's bullshit.  It's fake, and I can smell it a mile away.  This bodes BADLY for the album.

2. Yes, Al is being asked questions about the "end" of the reunion, but you would think Al, a 72 year-old man who has seen so much go wrong in his band, would find a more tactful and appropriate way to answer these questions. I mean, take the high road, show a little class, if you have any.
If you don't like speculation or an honest opinion, then click on.... What I really find sad (mad?) about Al's comments is that he doesn't appear to realize that he is being used by Brianandhiswifeandmanagers just to sell tickets. Sure, Al alone ain't gonna sell many tickets, but he does add something to the package, and that's what Melinda is selling - a package deal. I really think Brian could care less whether or not Al Jardine is on stage with him. But, maybe they do like his over-the-top praising of Brian, his constant ass-kissing, and his forced laughter at every syllable Brian utters.

3. Brian took advantage of his family and wrongly hogged all the creative credit of lots of songs and solely profited from that theft from his family.  Mike sat on his lip for thirty years without a word of ever taking credit for lots of his creativity in lots of songs while Brian was fucking him over and not only taking all of the credit for but also all of the money.  Who is the credit hog and over self promoter and selfish prick that is callous toward their family? 

4. I felt that Brian looked like a puppet and I could almost see a Eugene Landy-like hand in control of him.

5. Shouldn't it have the word "advertising" inserted in it, as PR pieces once were in news venues?   This isn't just talking about the album in a positive way, it's re-writing its history, for those who have been following along. It's not doing Brian any favors, either, to put words in his mouth. He didn't know most of these artists. Somebody or other decided to introduce them to him and to have him work with them. Being honest about that is less of a negative than lying about it. I'm sure Tony Bennett had to be told about some of the people he did duets with, too.

6. I do wish Brian had better/ less greedy handlers. He really shouldn't be touring.

7. Unreal! Who would question that Pulitzer Prize winner Jason Fine for issuing PR shill stuff in the guise of a news article! Ooops, I shouldn't have said that! I'm sooooo sorry! That's real journalism, end of story! END OF STORY! I have to get my smug, condescending, patronizing hat on and start writing five paragraph posts how we should only write positive things about the music of 72 year old Brian Wilson, who is FULLY in control of every note written on his new album. He wrote every song, every note! He arranged every flyspeck on e every chart played on by Jeff Beck and all other session players. He decided every song that was to appear on the album. He produced it all, sliding every slider. He hand-picked every singer who appeared on the album, deciding all the way to last year to have Lana Del So and So and Frank Ocean to sing on his album, because they are his favorite artists, because Jason Fine said they are his favorite artists. Sure, I have to believe that, he's 72  I can't wait to hear it. It will be the best thing since "Pet Sounds" and every bit of an example of how Brian is in total control.  Joe Thomas is just there to worship him from afar. Probably working for free, like a student auditing a master class

8. As far as SMiLE is concerned, Leaf and Prioire both heaped praises on the Brian's posse during the SMiLE period. But seeing them during the Beautiful Dreamer documentery (especially Loren) made me want to take a shower afterwards. THESE were the great thinkers around Brian? Vosse, Loren, etc. Sheesh, the word leeches come to mind. Only Van Dyke and David Anderle were worth a damn. And from someone who knows him well, Van Dyke has some Mike Love in him. Take that for what it is worth.

9. By the time I reach the second song on TWGMTR, the pitch correction is like fingernails scraped down a blackboard. I've been consistent in my contempt for the production of this album since it was released. Judging by the 10 second clip, this album will be no different.

10. You do realize he can't name these songs or the singers singing them. It's all so forced.


Then, here are a few replies that were posted in the middle of several discussions related to those posts.

- Your opinion is not welcomed here. Pay attention! Certain posters will tell you what you should think and say. If you want to think and say something that is critical of Brian Wilson...don't. It's not welcomed here, unless you can find an honored guest to come on to back you up. Good luck with that. The studio janitors might have some interesting things to say, though.

- I mean just the amount of social media Mike bashing is absolutely staggering. Nor can I remember a single Mike fan (yes we do exist) ever suggesting that Mike bashers should not even be allowed to put their feelings out there in cyber-land. We should be wary of what such suggestions might someday lead to.... I suggest trying on the sort of thick skin Mike fans (and most "Beach Boys" fans) have to endlessly wear. It might be heavily informative.

- I want to thank those who are telling us what we should think, how we should feel, and what we should or shouldn't post. That way we won't be subjected to the asinine and clueless opinions from those "who don't get it". Thank you again and keep up the good work.


The last three: Should those statements and opinions apply equally to some of the current issues raised in this thread?






 

But it's right there in Wikipedia:  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_Lippincott

"...Shortly thereafter, Andy made posthumous appearances in the strip, first declaring "Brian Wilson is God" in a note found in his hand (having been listening to Pet Sounds on CD as he died),[2] and then making several more days of appearances in a self-made video shown during his memorial service.[3]..."

Doonesbury wouldn't lie to us...http://aug72.tumblr.com/post/62983592406/crackatyourlove-brian-wilson-is-god-a

Well that settles it, then - if it's in Wikipedia, it must be true.  ;D

Have to defend The Camster here: I've known him via the BB online community for, oh, well over a decade, and in that time he's done some sterling original research on such arcane subjects as the Capitol art dept (he's the dude who got in touch with the man who lettered the Smile album title and discovered that there was absolutely no significance in the lower case i - the guy just thought it looked nice), tracking down obscure players in the saga and generally filling in the odd unshaded corner. Not recently, I concede, but, he's also never, to my knowledge, used unacceptable language. I for one could learn from him in this respect.

Brian is not God or Mozart,  true...he's Brian Wilson, and that's good enough for me and most of the other people here, I'd imagine.

No, I don't think so. It's just a worse spasm than usual: by and large we're pretty tolerant of the, ah, more confrontational posters, but every now and then everyone gets fed up with them at the same time, which is what just happened. The board will continue and it'll happen again sooner or later... and given the warnings just handed out, that should be most interesting.

It makes all the difference to me.

sweetdudejim, one thing I can agree with you about Cam, is that he really never "gives an inch". My own experience in arguing with him is that his points of view are so firm that he isn't receptive to arguing and won't rethink his view. But, as AGD pointed out, he don't use foul language, and I felt treated respectfully when arguing with him. And I don't remember him bashing Brian. In fact, some of the Mike condemners criticize people who state that Brian was a mere puppet, and Cam does the opposite: He claims Brian is always in full control - IIRC. And of course I don't see him cheering when someone says something negative about Brian, as OSD and SB do when someone says something negative about Mike.

I share AGD's feeling though that, as you said, Pinder and Cam don't "bug me like OSD and SMiLE Brian because they aren't quite as vulgar". You may be right in stating that Pinder and Cam are overly biased towards Mike and defending him too much, but they're not part of that insane "wifeandmanagers"-bashing either.

I liked the tone of your last post, which I felt was arguing in a reasonable way. That's the way we should treat each other.

Thanks AGD and Micha for your lukewarm endorsement. Just kidding, I love you guys even when I don't agree with you.

My wish is that Jim can get over his crush on me. I'm sorry but I'm not into dudes, sweet or not. Not that there is anything wrong with it. I'm flattered.

Good find on the riders Mikie.

Now those with questions can contact Melanie (if that is HER real name) to get some solid info and either alert her to the malfeasance or correct her history and find out what Mike knew and when did he know it.

Not sure if a lot of tickets have already gone or not for the RAH show.  Have seen hardly any stalls or grand tier or loggia box tickets this morning at all on the RAH site.  Maybe they've gone already, or are being held back until the cheap, circle seats have all gone and they're trying to get rid of the worst first.  I note that Ticketmaster are selling VIP packages for the stalls, but not ordinary seats.

Stargreen has Arena and Stalls seats for sale.

As for all the fighting, those posts which guitarfool put up look like sincere arguments with more than a few words to them.  That sort of thing's fine, whichever side it's coming from.  But it's the endless, bitchy one-liners which are the nuisance, usually made against Mike, as well as the 'woot, woot' cheerleading bs that's increased with it lately.

RAH is pretty much sold out. Granted, the scalpers may have bought the bulk but either way, they're mostly gone.

I note that Ticketmaster's £199 stalls reception package uses a C50 picture.  They really ought to change that.

Were their promotional materials misleading by any chance?

Edit: answered while I was posting. Thanks.

Edit edit: you said Ticketmaster. Noted.

Yeah, only them.  Not that it matters too much, I guess, but you'd think Ticketmaster would be on the ball.  They're only selling the VIP packages, which I note is just a fancy room with free booze, not an offer to meet the band at all.  I suspect these won't be sold and then these good seats will go on sale at ordinary prices.  

Most tickets are just sold through the Hall's own site, where they had a correct image.

I am reliable informed that Albert Hall's sales page has a correct picture with Foskett but a blurb that says "The Beach Boys are led by Mike Love and Bruce Johnston, who along with Christian Love, Randell Kirsch, Tim Bonhomme, John Cowsill and Scott Totten, have toured as the Beach Boys regularly since 1998 when Carl Wilson passed away."

Christian Love! An obvious falsehood perpetrated by Mike to brag up the fact that he has balls.

 ;D

No doubt

Brian or no Brian that is a great achievement

Have a great night everyone who is going, they are the greatest band of all time, The Beach Boys.

Audience/IEM audio mixes on these recent Youtube videos:

Santa's Beard - Little St. Nick https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4iM3BoEM-_0

California Girls https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UT9pjAtjKf4

Sloop/WIBN: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WB-bpsZyWa0

CG sounded pretty good but why the slowed down tempo. Like they were tired or something. It is quite noticeable to me.

The Christmas tunes sound great...I wish they'd do a Christmas show close enough to me one of these years.

California Girls gets slower every time I hear them play it...otherwise it sounds great.

Sloop John B melodies were really rocky in some places, and Wouldn't it Be Nice was really distracting in that you could clearly tell Scott AND Jeffrey were both singing lead. It sounded like two voices, instead of one strong one (which I'd think is the sound they're going for).

And it doesn't need to be said but....damn Bruce, tone back the handclaps.

Someone can correct me but without the extended outro, they both clock in about the same 2.45.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fmIsdMWzdaE

Open up two windows and start them at the same time. It's uncanny.

Hey!  Thanks for the on-topic posts.  One reason why I like to check in to this thread is to see what fans like you (and me) think of our show.  That's why it's been so frustrating to see all the off topic stuff that's been going on.

As for CAL GIRLS, Andrew Hickey pointed out earlier this year that it was too slow.  So I started picking it up.  I think if you look at where the organ comes in you can see me conducting and that seems to be close to the right tempo, but it ends up settling down a few bpm.  I'll run it today at soundcheck.  On the record, the band plays the choruses a tad slower than the verses, while the vocals seem to be ahead of the beat most of the song.

As for Sloop, Bruce wants me to double him at the top, and from this youtube I think that sounds ok.  I note that Mike has made up a counter melody that isn't on the record.

As for WIBN, the melody is doubled on the record, that's what we were going for.  Maybe we'll try it with just Jeff.

Thanks for your thoughts!

Scott

Scott- Thanks for posting a reply! I noticed your conducting and I recall you addressing the issue previously on the board. It's one of those things you don't really notice until you look for it...but once you've found it, it's unavoidable.

Perhaps it's Mike's counter-melody that was sounding off to me. I just noticed something different/not quite right.

Again...thanks for posting and not just giving up on this board. Some of us here DO actually care about the music!  ^-^

This is a fantastic sounding band, and I think it starts with Mike's vocals, which seem really on point here. Christmas songs sound great.

I have no dog in the fight between Brian vs. Mike -- I like The Beach Boys as a whole -- but until Brian's band fixes the "Mickey Mouse with a sore throat" falsetto tag on California Girls, then I'll contend that Mike's band has the better vocals and Brian's the better instrumentals. And I'll go see either one when they come to town.

It's nice to see pics of the full group in the background on these videos, instead of avoiding Brian and Al pics as they were doing for a while. It seems that Brian's and Al's requests to not include pictures of them have been rescinded.

I have yet to see the Beach Boys in December, so I've never heard the Christmas songs live, so video is always a treat!

Scott thanks for taking the comments in the right manner. I'm here for the music too and it's great for fans to have some input into the shows through you, the band leader.  I also like the fact that you keep it fresh and pull out some of the rare (and brilliant) album tracks.

The band are sounding great, come to Scotland in 2015!