The Smiley Smile Message Board

Not much has been posted about Mike’s potential album he’s been working on, so I might as well start the conversation with some screenshots from producer Michael Lloyd’s Facebook page. It looks it’s really coming along! Spoiler: We got Stamos!

(http://i.imgur.com/0Tw5Y3z.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/X1eqO5n.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/qdp7H5n.png)

(http://i.imgur.com/xg5xSz8.png)

Hopefully something materializes. Anything new as far as Beach Boys music, solo or otherwise, will be welcome.

Mike Love does really deserve at least once good record up his sleeve.  Hopefully this may be up there with Al's 'postcard'.

So I'm guessing that 2007's Mike Love, Not War/Unleash the Love album is pretty much completely in the can now? I'd still love an official release of "10,000 Years", that songs kicks ass!

Hopefully this one can actually see the light of day, Lookin Back and First Love show he actually has some potential as a solo artist, so I'm interested in what he and his crew can cook up.

Sounds good. I love Foskett and I love Tim Pierce.  :afro

Just like the "Unleash the Love" material (and First Love and Country Love), I bet nothing happens with this material. We'd be lucky to see some kinda one off digital single. It seems Mike just doesn't have the guts to put his stuff out there in a major way (i.e. an album) and be judged on it (read: potentially lots of embarrassing reviews I suspect). Either that or he thinks it deserves a major label to come and release it...and let's face it, that ain't happening. The only Beach Boy who can get a major label day right now is Brian.

Regardless, if Mike ever does release a new solo collection, I'd be first in line to buy it. I actually really like a decent amount of his non-Beach Boys material. I would buy any new material from Brian, Mike, Al or Bruce.

Then he should stop writing embarrassing songs.

5… 4… 3… 2…

2... 3... 4... 5...

I am serious. If you sing "fun, fun, fun" and "wouldn't it be nice" in every song since 1979 the songs become embarrassing and artistically irrelevant.

I do look forward to this album and I hope Mike treads new ground with it and does not re-visit his old output.

Mike is a world famous songwriter remember, he wrote the 'she's giving me excitations...' and he wrote 'goodnight, baby, sleep tight, baby'.
He also wrote 'kokomo' without Cousin Brian, let us not forget that  ::)
actually I would not be too keen to hear many new Mike Love tunes, I sure hope he has pulled some solid material from the pen of other writers.
I sure HOPE it is not a bunch of rerecorded BB hits. 

I would like to be proven wrong and have him deliver something good, I'm sure we all would. Hopefully he's got people with him, ready to say 'no' if needed. I hope he can rein it in a bit and keep the references to a minimum!

That'll never happen. I mean really, why even bother? Additionally, a healthy slice of the populace has no idea who he is or if they did, they thought he died years ago.  :lol

Maybe he's (re)recording music to listen while reading his book.  For context, you know.
One song per each chapter.

I would guess a solo set (which makes sense to piggyback on his book) would be similar in quality to the "Unleash the Love/Mike Love Not War" stuff. Meaning, generally decent production, some reasonably catchy songs, some dire lyrics and puns, and stuff that's generally better than his old solo stuff from the 70s and 80s.

However, I believe that circa 2004 stuff was done with Paul Fauerso, the same guy he did some of his late 70s solo stuff with. This newer stuff has this Michael Lloyd guy producing (and a bunch of session guys, who I can't say aren't great musicians, but none of whom I've ever heard of), so I'm curious how different it'll sound, and of course whether they started from scratch or used any of the 2000s material.  

I believe Lloyd produced the "Alone on Christmas Day" remake, and that was pretty mediocre. It sounded like it was trying to ape the retro/Be My Baby sound that Brian does on his solo stuff (and I'm not a huge fan of Brian's latter-day solo stuff when it's drenched in digital reverb and sleigh bells either), and that Christmas track also had either pretty heavy autotune or some sort of vocal processing that was pretty distracting. Mike's voice seems to sound worse with autotune applied than Brian's, to my ears, perhaps because of the more trebley, nasal tone it has. Autotune kind of accentuates that. When autotune is stuck on Brian or Al (I don't like it used on them either), it just maintains the standard "robo" effect.

I thought at least some of the 2004 Fauerso stuff *sounded* better than that one Lloyd track. But we have little to go on.

The best solo thing Mike has probably ever done is "Cool Head, Warm Heart"; that's about as good as it gets. So, an album full of tracks of that quality would be solid. Nothing mind-blowing. If I were Mike, I would have Foskett sing the mid-range stuff instead of the falsetto, perhaps have Christian Love do some mid-range harmonies or something, and maybe keep high falsetto parts to a minimum. For some reason, whenever Baker or Foskett or anyone does the really high, retro-sounding falsetto parts on his solo stuff, it sounds too generic and starts sounding like the Hawaiian Tropic/Hyatt Regency jingles and stuff like that. Think how sort of cheap all those 1990s Adrian Baker sessions with Mike sound.

Seconded regarding "Cool Head, Warm Heart". No audible pitch correction, at least to my ears. I hope any solo material he releases will go that direction.

An addendum to the comment above "...this Michael Lloyd guy..."


Michael Jeffrey Lloyd (born November 3, 1948) is an American record producer, arranger, songwriter and musician. After working with Mike Curb, Kim Fowley and others in the mid and late 1960s on musical projects including the West Coast Pop Art Experimental Band, and Steven Spielberg's first short film, Amblin', he became a highly successful producer of teen idol pop stars including The Osmonds, Shaun Cassidy, and Leif Garrett in the 1970s. During the 1980s, he supervised the music soundtrack for the movie Dirty Dancing, and produced the hit "(I've Had) The Time of My Life", as well as working with Belinda Carlisle, Barry Manilow, and many others. By his own account, he has gained over 100 gold and platinum records.[1]

And a nice guy, and a huge Brian Wilson fan (he worked with him on Shaun Cassidy's version of It's Like Heaven) to boot.

With Jeffrey Foskett on board it's going to be decent.

Definitely familiar with Michael Lloyd when his name was brought up by Mike last year in relation to the Christmas album. As I said, the one track he has produced didn't particularly impress me; the Fauerso stuff from a decade ago sounded better, and was a bit more "modern" sounding and wasn't trying to ape the old Brian/Spector sound.

Beyond "Cool Head", one of the best songs on that circa 2004 compilation was Christian Love's remake of "Too Cruel."

It'll be interesting to see if Mike carries over any of the Fauerso stuff, and if he carries over any of those Christian lead vocals (we obviously don't know if there was *ever* any intention to release those leads on a Mike solo project).

Mike might get this new stuff released if he can put the Beach Boys name on it. Is Bruce on it? Obviously he's got 2 faux BB's - Foskett and Stamos. I don't know why he doesn't just put his recordings on cd and sell them at shows. I doubt that Mike himself has set foot inside a record store....uh, I mean cd store....no, I guess they don't exist anymore....okay, I wonder if he has ever gone to iTunes or amazon for a download? I think he could sell a lot of cd's at his concerts, people are excited about being at a concert, they want some souvenirs to take home, they might even like the new songs. That's how I've bought a lot of cd's in recent years.

As we all probably know, there's no way Mike's stuff would be released under the BBs name. BRI and Brian (and Al) wouldn't allow it, and Mike wouldn't try.

Mike doesn't need a major label, or a label at all, to get a solo album released. He can release it himself online (as he did with the XMas cut). My guess is, perhaps to tie in with his book, he might get a mid-level or indie label to release the album digitally and physically, or just put it out himself as a digital-only release. (There's also the "MOD" physical option through places like Amazon, as Al did with the first 2010 version of his solo album).

As for Bruce, I always get the feeling that Bruce and Mike kind of have an "Ed McMahon/Johnny Carson" sort of relationship in that they mainly do the touring together and public appearances and not a whole ton else.

I feel pretty confident in thinking that if Mike could get it released as a "BB" album, that he'd do so without hesitation.

Yes. I was suggesting that Mike would never try under the current trademark circumstances of which he is well aware.

+1 - looking forward to anything new from Mike, Brian, Al, Bruce, Blondie, Ricky, The Honeys - anyone! or more from Dave.

Totally,  agreed.

With all due respect to them, surely there are producers younger than Michael Lloyd and Joe Thomas dying to work with Brian and Mike and the BBs.

You mean Brian , myKe and Al, right? As far as I know, they're the only surviving BBs.

Some surviving BBs may be surprised to hear they are deceased, but close enough I guess.

Especially since Mike will probably be the last BB to die, he's in pretty good shape for his age plus all that TM.

And the *other* surviving BBs would be...   ???

David and Bruce I would say, others might argue Ricky and Blondey.







Or Stamos.

With Mikes new book coming out he just might actually releases this album! Would love to hear any kind of new tunes by any of the beach boys! Or by the Beach boys!!! :)

Ones with shares and votes. And don't  even be tempted to categorize StaymoHs as a BB.  ::)

They may not have corporate shares, but I think David and Bruce both qualify as surviving Beach Boys. I know that not everyone would agree with that.

David and Bruce absolutely qualify as surviving Beach Boys. Really, so do Blondie and Ricky.  They have all been official members of the Beach Boys, and all of them are still alive.  But especially David and Bruce--one was an original member who played on almost all the songs on their first 4 albums, and the other has spent much of his life in the band--not sure why either of them wouldn't be counted. 

Anyway, I hope that Mike pulls off something good.  I'm sure he has it in him, especially if he can avoid peppering the songs with too many lines from old BB's songs.  He's a talented guy and can write good lyrics when he puts his mind to it.  Foskett's involvement is also an encouraging sign.

Not sure why they need Stamos to rock the electronic bongos though.     

I mean in the sense of making albums (not corporate decisions) with some new lifeblood instead of more old balls.

I was afraid I'd hidden that Stamos easter egg too well for old balls like us to trifocal out.

Don't know if John C. is involved. Stamos probably does it for free.

Stamos??? The making of SIP part two has begun.

Are we expecting several songs from Mike's previously unreleased albums rehashed? I'd just like to have First Love released instead, if that's the case.

Considering that the last two songs he has "released" are both rehashes ("Pisces Brothers" apparently is mostly or fully the decade-plus-old recording, while "Alone on Christmas Day" is a new recording of a 1977 song), I would guess there's a good chance at least some of the stuff on any future solo album will include some old compositions and/or partial recordings.

That wouldn't surprise me: both Brian and Al have done it on their own solo albums. That just seems to be The Beach Boys' M.O. for some reason.

Definitely; mining old material isn't exclusive to Mike by any means. The circa 2004 Mike stuff is itself is some amount of rehash ("10,000 Years", several remakes of his late 70s stuff).

I've probably listened to that 2000s Mike stuff more than his other solo stuff, especially the dire synthetic Adrian Baker remakes.

(rap intro) the Lovester is back and he's here to say
the surf is up, those good vibrations are headed your way
it's fun, fun, fun when me and Bruce start to play, 
so wouldn't it be nice if you joined us today

the surfer girls and guys they can dance along,
dance, dance, dance to each and every song,
california girls come jump into my car,
soon we'll be rockin' back in the ussr
(sung)

help me Rhonda get to surf city,
let your hair grow long you're so pretty

don't worry baby, mike and bruce put on a show
we'll take you from Hawaii down to Kokomo
I get around and i'll be in your town this year
i'll getcha back for all the songs you want to hear

caroline and wendy both are gone
but Barbara ann just keeps rockin' on

Shampoo the Dog , Love's got a new album comin'

He loves Fruity Pebbles in a major way?

https://youtu.be/g8aqAgtwqcU

Mike talks about current studio work in the last couple paragraphs of this interview:  http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/05/10/beach-boys-singer-mike-love-talks-touring-and-new-music/84189868/ (http://www.desmoinesregister.com/story/entertainment/music/2016/05/10/beach-boys-singer-mike-love-talks-touring-and-new-music/84189868/)

11/10 would sue for royalties

Nobody did.

lol

Give it up guys. Mike is 75 now so I think the boat has sailed on any possibility of a good album. Pisces and the Christmas song were both very poor IMO.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current" - Read: adding horrible vocal/auuutttooo tune to everything.

Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.

That's an interesting observation and I agree that's how things read at face value.

When I read the full article Q & A's, I'm not convinced they've printed the actual verbatim questions.

Yes, Mike can duck, weave and ramble with best of them, but I'd like to get a sense the article's been presented accurately - as I would for any of the band.

Right. And that boat sailed decades ago and sunk in the deepest reaches the ocean has to offer.

Whether Mike intended to or not, the way he answers a question about "The Beach Boys" getting in the studio soon by often using "we" to refer to his in-progress solo stuff could certainly give a casual reader the impression that Mike is recording a "Beach Boys" album.

It's not a huge deal; it's going to say "Mike Love" when it comes out, but it's funny how Brian and Al get harangued for too prominently using the "Beach Boys" verbiage to describe themselves for their solo shows, yet Mike by virtue of promoting a "Beach Boys" tour and then answering questions about potential "Beach Boys" studio activity by talking about his solo stuff, is indirectly using his license to promote his solo stuff.

Not saying it's against any rules or contracts, but it's ironic that he feels he can use the Beach Boys name to promote his solo stuff, but Brian and Al get "friendly" letters reminding them to not use their original "Beach Boy" status too prominently when advertising shows. And yes, I get why those two scenarios are not exactly the same. But maybe Mike should get a friendly letter reminding him to make sure his words don't "inadvertently" imply he's currently spearheading a Beach Boys album.

I think those could be the actual questions that were asked; the interviewer just seems to not be very familiar with his subject.

Seriously, asking Mike this question: "What was behind the decision process to get back out and tour again?" strongly suggests the interviewer isn't aware that Mike has indeed been touring more or less non-stop for decades.

Even if he's referencing going back out after the reunion (which I don't think is the case), it still makes no sense because Mike is in his fourth year of heavy touring after the reunion.

Also, if the author knew the current fractured state of the group, and understood how the tour license works, he probably wouldn't be casually asking if a the "Beach Boys" were headed into the studio soon.

Not at all, he (Mike, not BBs) answered he (Mike, not BBs) is in the studio for an album to go with his autoboigraphy (Mike's, not BBs) and far as anything else we'll have to wait and see.

Umm.... no.

Interviewer's question: "Do you see the Beach Boys getting in the studio soon?"

Mike's answer: "I have been (in the studio), yes."

Mike gave no kind of answer addressing the question, which was about "The BBs" getting in the studio. The band called "The BBs" is not going into the studio. Same deal would apply if Brian gets asked "Do you see the Beach Boys getting in the studio soon?"... Brian can't just say "Yes, I'm going into the studio", and avoid talking about The BBs when that was the only actual question.

It's false advertising by Mike. You KNOW Brian would answer any question like that by addressing that the BBs aren't going into the studio, before any mention of any Brian solo studio activity. You know he would do this. And I've heard Mike address questions like this appropriately in the past - by mentioning that The BBs aren't currently together in the studio. He is capable of answering it honestly, he just apparently chose to avoid dealing with it this time. I can understand, it must be emotionally hard to deal with that type of question where the authenticity and difference in branding between the live vs. studio band are two different things. I can understand he wanting to brush it aside and not even go there. But that doesn't mean his answer was in any way accurate.

Mike answered as though she said "Do you see yourself, as a solo artist, getting in the studio soon?", which wasn't the question at all.  

Then he goes on to say "we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music)..." which, while obviously Mike is going into the studio with other humans, implies that members of studio group "The BBs" are going into the studio (since that was the question asked), most especially when using the plural "we're" term.

That said, I'm interested to hear what Mike has to offer, and I hope it's in the vein of Cool Head, Warm Heart (which itself has smooth, not-overproduced production not terribly dissimilar to what Brian did on That Lucky Old Sun). I just don't want it advertised as a "BB" album, which is basically what Mike is doing in this article. A not-well-educated-in-BB-history reader could very easily get the impression that Mike is referring to a "BB" band project.

It all just implies that Mike seems to think "The BBs" = "Mike Love".

As with most of the stuff Cam parses, the whole point of this is that what Mike says is not factually incorrect. It's just a case where a reasonable person (e.g. a person not predisposed to making excuses for everything someone does) might point out how an objective analysis of the wording suggests some people would get the impression he's talking about *THE* Beach Boys, or that he's blurring the "group" with his "touring band" and with his "solo" material. Continually making references to "we" in response to a question about "The Beach Boys" is what might help give this impression.

Nothing Mike said is inaccurate, because he's just not really answering the same exact question that is asked. The following hypothetical is also not really inaccurate, only confusing and potential misleading:

Q: Do you see Celebration getting in the studio soon?
A: I have been (in the studio), yes.

or

Q: Do you see The Archies getting in the studio soon?
A: I have been (in the studio), yes.

Now, Mike may have put extra stress on the "I", but the more *clear* answer to whether "The Beach Boys" are getting in the studio would be: "No, but I have been in the studio."

By answering sort of vaguely affirmatively (he ends his first answer with "yes") to a question about "The Beach Boys", and then going on to make numerous plural references to recording ("we"), the statement is simply potentially misleading.

I don't think Mike was trying to make people think his album is going to be a "Beach Boys" album, and I certainly don't believe Mike was trying to make people think *The* Beach Boys are recording. I think he's rightly embarrassed and rightly feels awkward about the fact that the full band is fractured (or, rather, feels embarrassed and awkward having to address the issue in any detail), and doesn't want his solo recording sessions to sound like a sub-par consolation prize for those looking for a "Beach Boys" album.

It's the same reason he has, in the past few years, been asked about the reunion tour and he'll QUICKLY simply move on and start talking about his current touring band, even when the interviewer wasn't asking about it.

Mike is a Beach Boy speaking about his solo projects.  If the same question was asked of any of the other Boys, they would also be a Beach Boy talking about their solo projects.

Only when it's clearly defined that a solo project is what is being discussed.

Mike is a Beach Boy, but he is not "The Beach Boys" which is what the question asked about.  I missed the part where he identifies any of his projects as solo projects. Please point me in the direction where Mike says that. And based on his answer, where would any reader (beyond us nerds) draw the conclusion that Mike is talking about solo projects? Just because he says that he "I" is in the studio, and then "we're"... how is anyone supposed to know this is solo material, based on the interviewer's question, and Mike's not mentioning anything about a solo project?

The vaguer the better for Mike. Just like my friend, who a few years ago, saw "The BBs" at a local show and thought she was seeing Brian and the whole gang. Better for Mike that she not know the full details.

Listen, Mike doesn't need to be lambasted about it beyond mentioning that it's not accurate and probably unfortunately related to not wanting to get into details that are undoubtedly a pain in the arse to discuss, but that doesn't mean he didn't give an inaccurate impression with his answer. We can have empathy for what must be a tough situation for him, but doesn't mean it's right or accurate.

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?

Yes, same thing, a member of the band talking about his solo efforts.  If it were John Lennon asked about the Beatles and he answered about what he was doing solo but said otherwise we would have to wait and see, I would take it that Lennon was working on his described solo projects but wasn't sure about any other plans.

And using a plural, which obviously when this is the response to the question of a BAND's presence in a studio, would lead most readers to think the answer is in regards to the band, not a solo project.

Yeah, John Lennon would have said "we're going in to work on vocals..." in response to a question about The Beatles, but when he would in actuality be referring to (but not mentioning) it's referring to his own solo work? That's a laugh!

Not one other member of this band or The Beatles would be foolish enough to do that as blatantly as this article, because nobody else has been in the tough emotional pickle regarding the band name that Mike is in right now. That's an unfortunate fact. Again, Mike isn't Satan for doing it. He just omitted pertinent info and answered a different question. He's taking lessons from Hillary.

In fact, I see Mike used the term "we" not once, but twice, and one of those was with regards to redoing vocals, the thing THE BEACH BOYS are certainly best known for. Dude, it's obviously misleading. Maybe not intentionally so, but the end result is quite misleading unless you are a superfan who knows the true details.

A plural (used twice) doesn't bug ya either?


EDIT: I didn't look closely enough... Mike used "we" (plural) 6 times in answer to "The BB" question.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current, in terms of the guitar here or the drums there ...  maybe we’re re-doing some vocals or a lyrical change or two. Yes, I’m busy in the studio.

In addition to my book, we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music) … one of which we hope to have come out kind-of at the same time as the book, perhaps. Around that time, late summer (or) early fall. That’s what we’re hoping to do. We’ll have an album, a book ... and we’ll see what else happens."

---------------

Yet according to Cam, it's reasonable for a reader to magically know that this is all about a SOLO project, when the question was in regards to "THE BEACH BOYS".  ;D

Mike was definitely speaking about his solo projects. He wasn't, however, asked about his solo projects. Again, he's just answering a different question (one he's more comfortable answering) than what is being asked.

The result, as a byproduct, is that some people may be confused about the nature of what he's recording (he doesn't mention other Beach Boys by name, but answers "yes" when asked about *The Beach Boys* recording, sort of implying he's solely going in to record "Beach Boys" material, but then starts referring to an undefined "we" later in the answers).

Again, this is nothing major whatsoever. He's simply obviously sidestepping a question about *The Beach Boys* by talking about his solo stuff instead. I just find that amusing, and acknowledge that some casual fans/readers might be confused about on the group versus solo issue.

The sidestepping issue isn't new. There's an audio/radio interview Mike did a year or two ago where he was *specifically* asked about the C50 tour/lineup and he almost immediately, without prompting, started talking about his current touring band. The corporate/naming/licensing issue creates these awkward issues, and through a mixture of most interviewers ignoring the issue and Mike avoiding talking about it (how many times has Mike, in specific language, mentioned in interviews that he pays for a license to use the Beach Boys name?), the awkwardness only comes up on occasion, and sometimes only the hardcore fans even notice or care.

It's like being in high school or college:

Professor: Talk about the symbolism in "The Scarlet Letter."

Student: I think there's definitely some noteworthy symbolism in the story. You know what else is symbolic? My awesome new tattoo with flames and skulls! I got it yesterday, and it's pretty rad........

 :lol

Yeah, but what if he had an A tatooed on his chest?

It would probably then play out like some Mike interviews: The professor would then stop and listen for a bit longer, and then eventually still realize they're being bulls**tted!

Seriously, I'm quite familiar with the "change the subject while trying to seem like your answering the question" tactic (and the similar "quickly answer the question and then change the subject and talk long enough so that the initial question won't be asked again" tactic), I watched it for years in college.

And his answer is about what he knows of Beach Boys in the studio which is he himself, "I", working on solo material. He used "we" in the context of recording his solo album/material, so still not referring to the Beach Boys, just those involved in his solo projects.

Let's not pretend that either of us don't know what he's talking about. Obviously, both you and I know what he's referring to. We are nerds.

Yet my discussion with you is about what perception Mike's responses would lead to in the average reader. You honestly think the average reader would have any inkling that Mike is talking about solo material? Especially with all those "we's"? C'mon. Honestly. The average reader would have every reason to be excited about a new album by The Beach Boys based on the album.

Man, you guys will argue about anything. I read the article and knew right away that Mike was speaking of his solo release. I know he was asked Beach Boys, but I thought he was clear that it was his own solo material.

It's easy for you to know right away, because you, just like me, are nerds who obviously know there's no imminent "BB" studio reunion.

But try to think about reading the article from the perspective of a casual fan, or even a bigger fan without much current, modern day knowledge of the brand... do you still think it's clear? Or that he actually answers the interviewer's question?

It's very, very likely being omitted for one reason, and that's because it's uncomfortable to talk about. I get it.  I just don't think we should be in denial about that either. I feel bad that Mike has to continually deal with that difficult situation, yet it is an uncomfortable position of his own making.

I just made an observation. As usual, it was a simple observation ("hrrm, interesting, I could see how a casual reader might be confused or misled by that interview snippet, and I believe that Mike's slight dodge of the question is a result of his aversion to discussing the full group"), and someone then had to go the extra step of parsing Mike's comments to defend him.

Of course *we* all know what Mike's talking about. One might say the objective observation that an unspecified casual reader might be confused by Mike's comment or that Mike is dodging a question about the full group is a useless observation, and that person can then ignore the observation and discussion.

Quick observations like the one I made are not meant to provoke a debate. The thread could have easily died with my innocuous (and arguably useless) observation. The response to the innocuous observation, predictably defending Mike against what barely even amounts to any sort of accusation, is what then kicks off the debate/argument.

Mike is the BBs in his warped mind... ::)

Yes, they are. And you do it well. Very well.

I don't mind engaging in debates, but I don't set out to start debates, and certainly not arguments. I can see how some, particularly folks whose modus operandi is to defend Mike regardless of the circumstances, might take away that impression.

But as I said, observations were made, and the whole topic would have died an unceremonious death were it not for someone trying to parse and defend Mike. At that point, yes, I don't mind engaging in that debate for some length of time. Sometimes, as with cases where I'm literally having the same debate with Cam I had in 1999, I might eventually tire and move on.

Like anyone, I don't tend to dig it when someone questions my motives, but when the characterization is wrong, and comes from someone whose motives I (not coincidentally) apparently equally question, I don't give the accusation or characterization much weight. Like any reasonably thoughtful person, I'll take the criticism and do some self-reflection. That's always good. In this particular case though, the accusation and characterization that I intended to provoke a debate is incorrect. That a debate has resulted does not prove I intended to provoke one.

Now, I *am* aware a debate may result whenever I point out a lamentable aspect of something Mike has done or said, because the same small group will tend to come out and offer the predictable defenses. So, while I didn't want a debate and didn't intend to provoke one, I *was* aware that it was quite possible one would result. But obviously, I don't think editing discussion because a small group will predictably disagree is the way to go either.

It's very difficult to read the article and take away anything less than that... or to figure out how Mike wouldn't realize that's the impression he could give to people by his answering a different question than the one asked. Him not realizing that is the one thing for me that is hardest to understand - not that he would find it emotionally difficult to answer the question about THE BEACH BOYS in the studio - that is easy for me to understand. Yet I'll bet Mike (like most any of us) would be a guy who, if watching a presidential debate, and a politician gave that kind of switcharoo response to a question, would find their response laughable.

The whole BB license/name/trademark is muddled, and that's all of the shareholders' faults. Even when they weren't all splintered, it was confusing what was what.

Mike, not surprisingly, frames his comments about his current touring band as though it's the same band that has existed since 1961, and that all of the changes have happened *around* him. Technically and in terms of business entities, this is not the case. The band he fronts now is a tour run by "Meleco" which licenses the use of the "Beach Boys" trademark and employs the musicians in the band. *That* setup is *not* the same band that existed in 1961, or 1971, or 1981, etc. It *is* the setup Mike wanted in the 90s, which is one of the reasons Al ended up pissed off and then marginalized.

Again, all of the "corporate" BBs hold some responsibility for this muddled, sometimes acrimonious state, where one Beach Boy can use the BB name for his tour, but can't use the name for his recordings.

I guess it was the only way to keep Mike from suing BW and Al until the end of time. Mike is a vicious guy in that 2005 lawsuit.

I just wanna throw in here that I don't think Mike has the balls to put out a new album, whether it be a compilation of his best solo work or new stuff or even a re-release of Looking Back With Love. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'd love to be proven wrong, but it's just the way it seems to me.

I don't see a reissue of LBWL or an archival release of his old stuff as very likely. But I could envision him doing a digital release of a solo album. I think to him it's just a little boutique, side thing. But given he's done several digital "singles", I could picture him using the book to promote a solo CD.

I used to think that too, but with the way he's been talking about this solo project, as well as social media photos of studio sessions trickling out there, it's hard to think that he'd do all that and then not ever actually release stuff. I think he's gonna release some new material this year. Best chance he's got to get any attention payed to the music is to piggyback on notoriety from his bio.  I hope it's good, and I truly want to like it and will give him the benefit of the doubt that there could be some decent stuff on there.

I'd be interested to see whether any other BBs appear on Mike's album, as happened on both Al's and Brian's most recent solo efforts. Ongoing conflicts aside, there are currently six others he could invite to be guests. In which case anyone might read even more into his answers. Probably mistakenly, but not without foundation.

I'm looking forward to it, whatever.

We know Foskett is on the stuff. Totten almost surely too. After that, I'd say Dave would be an easy bet. Bruce ironically a bit less likely, but Mike could easily get Bruce some small cameo.

Al and Brian? Doubt it. Al *maybe*. Brian? No way. Mike walked away from those guys, so I can't imagine he'd expect them all to want to reform for his solo album.

And really, if by some miracle they all wanted to sing together again, it would be misguided to hide such a collaboration away on a Mike solo CD. Then they *should* be making it another BB project.

My other two were Ricky & Blondie (though they're perhaps as likely as Brian!). Jeff and Scott, for all their superb credentials and lengthy affiliations, I don't count as core BBs. Touring BBs for sure, to me, but not recording Beach Boys.

Yes, by all means, myKe, be sure to bite the hand that feeds you and enrich your legacy as one who goes for the jugular. The Litigious Lovester.

I wasn't defending Mike or anything else, except my reading comprehension. ;)

Same sessions as the Christmas single here, so Jeff and Bruce are present. From my understanding, no other boys for the "project"...(and, this board sucks without AGD).

If this board is so stinking bad without the arrogant one, why in the hell are you here posting?? Huh?

I didn't respond to your post, my responses were to Century Deprived and the same small group again piled on and offered the predictable defenses.

Getting back to Michael Lloyd, fans of post-PS West Coast "pop psych" should get their hands on Lloyd's 1968 LP called The Smoke, a record lost in the ozone layer between PS and a truly psychedelic Smiley Smile (in other words, Smile-lite tracks with guitars). The song "Odyssey" is a pretty ingenious knockoff of Smile modularity. Pretty impressive for a 19-year old!!

http://www.longplayerlateblogger.com/article-the-smoke-1968-usa-83914081.html

There are several more bloggers who covered this very interesting LP, but this gives you the gist.

Mike doesn't seem too keen to revisit much BB material from the short lived Blondie/Ricky era.  So, I'd say that's unlikely. 

I just hope John Stamos doesn't get any lead vox on any Mike project. 

Vocals, no, we don't need him to do any singing.  But Mike's album NEEDS Stamos to be playing the electronic bongos, or at least to be playing the electronic bongos in videos. 

When is Brian going to hire Dave Coulier to play mouth trumpet in his band? 

Or, if he wanted to go an album with TLOS style narration, get Bob Saget. 

I definitely wasn't counting Foskett or Totten as "Beach Boys." I was just running down a list of known players/singers that we have confirmed have popped into those sessions. Right now, that's pretty much just Foskett. I was then making a relatively safe leap that Totten is likely involved, as Totten has done other recent ML sessions, and I believe Totten plays on some of the decade-old Fauerso stuff as well.

As for Ricky and Blondie, yeah, I'd say that's about as likely as Brian. Though, I would imagine if Mike called Fataar up and Fataar had time in his schedule to do it, he'd probably play on Mike's stuff. Dunno if Fataar is out of Mike's budget range though (and I'm not trying to be funny). He's an in-demand dude. No offense to the other guys in those recent studio pics, some or all of which might be familiar to folks knee-deep in whatever is left of the session musician scene, but I'd guess Fataar is a more in-demand (and thus more expensive, and tougher to book) player at this stage. Whereas, I'm sure Stamos would pay to play on Mike's sessions if he needed to.

Al *did* get Alec Baldwin to do narration on "A Postcard from California." Ironically, Baldwin has a good voice for narration and book reading, but probably not the best "sound" for reading back Stephen Kalinich's very earnest, heart-on-its-sleeve poetry.

Alec Baldwin narrated the America's Game documentary on the 2000 Baltimore Ravens, and I thought he did a great solo.

Less so on Al's spotty, but overall pleasant, solo album. 

:)

Mike could do When I Grow Up (To be a Tanner) with Joey Gladstone doing brief Popeye impersonations for the "16, 17..." age countdown part. And add Comet the Dog's barking as a nod to Banana and Louie.

Mike can do the soundtrack to the Full House Tournament Fighter video game when it comes out.

Hahahaha. That would be a hilarious game. I think I would play.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTg4KIxdpic

WOW!

It's not real; some guy took Street Fighter II as a template and animated that. I'd still totally play that game with a Lovester soundtrack.

Very cool… wasn't even aware Ricky was still doing a lot but I'd say there's a reason he doesn't come cheap: he's one helluva drummer.

Or BW vs. the lovester. >:D

I can see it now: "No love and mercy for you or your friends tonight, Mike!"

Yes! :lol

"Mike, your nose was on the critical list back in '64...now it's on a watch list!"

 :lol  :lol  :lol

"Cousin Brian knows that when you take a ride on the Love train there's bound to be a bumpy track. I already told him once...I like Van Dyke Parks. He's a NICE PERSON. At least I didn't call him the biggest butthole in the world!"

The new ESQ says Mike’s project is slated for a fall 2016 release and features members of the Beach Boys band, John Stamos and Mark McGrath (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6COCZ9Z1fw).

Mark McGrath is literally at the top of my list of most horrible musicians/bands ever...."iiiii just wanna fly..." maybe the worst song ever made....

Great news thanks for sharing! any track list out yet??

Well...that sounds far from promising.  :lol

I couldn't agree more.  Sugar Ray was one of those awful late 90s, quasi rappish, ska-ish, pop bands.  All the singers had frosted hair.   Wow, what an awful time for music. 

Stamos I can at least stomach.  Love him or hate him, he did help introduce a younger generation to the Beach Boys.  There's a lot of people in their 20s and 30s I see at Brian Wilson and Mike & Bruce shows who might not be there if not for Stamos. 

That's how I chose the groups I liked.  Whatever Jamie Farr was into was good enough for me.  [The Chiffons.  The Nylons. ]  Stamos is not a musical asset.

Still...given the right notes...geographically influenced lyrics and the backing of some pretty talented guys...this could turn out to be at least partially OK with perhaps 3 or 4 decent songs on it.  Just 'cause Mike ain't my favourite fella doesn't mean that his group doesn't do a good show and make some excellent sounds.  [and THAT doesn't include Grandpa John S. who's an amateur at best]  
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

It's W A Y more likely that I'd buy this as a c.d. than  spend actual money on a 'book'.  Ultimately...with the Beach Boys and offshoots...it was always about the music and never much about the clothes or 'the story' . ['cept for Brian's which is both inspiring and compelling.]  How I went from a gas-jockey to mega rich and usually oh-so miserable with nothing but an atlas and 3 cousins who had a ton o' talent is not my idea of a must read.]

Sugar Ray has a BB connection. Carl's first wife Annie remarried and is step-mother to Sugar Ray's Murphy Karges.

Pretty sure they did a version of Little Saint Nick too.

Mark recorded a version of Getcha Back for Herbie Fully Loaded (2005). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6COCZ9Z1fw (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e6COCZ9Z1fw)

Michael Lloyd is a producer that worked those 70s Wall Of Sound productions for Shaun Cassidy and Leif Garrett. In the 80s, he produced Belinda Carlisle's first LP away from the Go-Gos with the great single Mad About You. So he can get that Beach Boys sound. He produced Leif doing Surfin' USA and Shaun doing It's Like Heaven.