The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: Shady on August 22, 2012, 02:19:09 PM



Title: "Made in California" Box Set
Post by: Shady on August 22, 2012, 02:19:09 PM
So information has come out in the last few days about the career spanning box but it seems to be spread over various threads and pages..

Here's the 411

It's called "Made in California".

It has 6 discs..

And will be released on the 16th of November (In Germany at least)

http://www.amazon.de/Career-Spanning-Box-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=sr_1_6?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1345607952&sr=1-6 (http://www.amazon.de/Career-Spanning-Box-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=sr_1_6?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1345607952&sr=1-6)


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on August 22, 2012, 02:21:14 PM
how much is 80.99 in US money?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 22, 2012, 02:24:17 PM
how much is 80.99 in US money?

About 100 dollars, Roughly.


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on August 22, 2012, 02:24:46 PM
how much is 80.99 in US money?

About 100 dollars, Roughly.
not bad


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 22, 2012, 02:25:37 PM
Cool news. Can't wait to see artwork and a tracklist.  :afro


Title: Re: \
Post by: Summertime Blooz on August 22, 2012, 03:04:50 PM
Figures the box set is timed for the Christmas season.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Banana on August 22, 2012, 03:21:02 PM
I can see it priced out right around $99.99 in the US.  I know Amazon runs deals on day of release now-and-then...so maybe it will be cheaper.  That's not a bad price for six discs as long as there is a good selection of stuff we haven't heard before (or at least heard legit).  If the bulk is just singles and album cuts I might waffle...but I'll probably give in.  Heck, I never know what to ask for when it comes to Christmas...maybe I'll have something to ask for this year!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 22, 2012, 10:23:28 PM
Is there any info on will this be an independent box set (you know, with all the hits included) or a sequel to GV box (with no overlapping material)? If this replaces GV box, will GV box go out of print? Should I finally give in buy GV, just in case all the rarities aren't included on this new one?

Gosh darn, so many expensive things to buy. Oh the plight of the Westerner.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on August 22, 2012, 10:43:23 PM
Is there any info on will this be an independent box set (you know, with all the hits included) or a sequel to GV box (with no overlapping material)? If this replaces GV box, will GV box go out of print? Should I finally give in buy GV, just in case all the rarities aren't included on this new one?

Gosh darn, so many expensive things to buy. Oh the plight of the Westerner.

The GV box set is already out of print.  I'm pretty sure you can only buy it digitally nowadays.  That being said though, it will probably still be there (iTunes, Amazon MP3).  But I got my copy earlier this year in good condition for only 25 bucks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on August 22, 2012, 10:46:18 PM
Now we're talking.  This will be where the action is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 22, 2012, 10:49:17 PM
Do not buy box sets on iTunes. Do not download cars unless you can do so illegally. But do not buy box sets from iTunes. Just do not do it. It is the evil power.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 22, 2012, 11:15:26 PM
No fear, I wouldn't dream of buying anything legally. It's gotta be physical format for me, cos I'm a physical guy.

I sure hope they don't pass Summer in Paradise when compiling the new box. Summer of Love would make a grand opening.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Al Jardine: Pick Up Artist on August 22, 2012, 11:19:11 PM
No fear, I wouldn't dream of buying anything legally. It's gotta be physical format for me, cos I'm a physical guy.

I sure hope they don't pass Summer in Paradise when compiling the new box. Summer of Love would make a grand opening.

HAY NOW (well it's a love thing)

oh god that'd be amazing


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 22, 2012, 11:28:43 PM
No fear, I wouldn't dream of buying anything legally. It's gotta be physical format for me, cos I'm a physical guy.

I sure hope they don't pass Summer in Paradise when compiling the new box. Summer of Love would make a grand opening.

When the box set tracklist comes out, I'm going to start torrenting dozens and dozens of copies of "Summer Of Love" relabelled as the tracks from the box set. Capitol will thank me, as they'll be putting out fake torrents, anyway.

"Oh my God, after all these years, 'Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again!'"

*goes to track 13*

*DUHduhduhduhduhduhDUHduhduhduhduhduh "I CANT WAIT TEEIL EEITS SUMMER CUZ ITS GUNNA BE A SUMMA OF LUV. HAAAY NOW (WELL ITS A LUHHHV THIIING)"*

"GGGAAAAAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH"


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 22, 2012, 11:36:03 PM
I just made a test playlist, and my gosh it works! The box opens with SOL, and after that we'll get the Surfin' rehearsals and Surfin'. Start with a bang, kind of like theme song playing over the opening credits, and then rewind all the way to the beginning. Try it. Makes the perfect opening for the box.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 22, 2012, 11:39:59 PM
Do not buy box sets on iTunes. Do not download cars unless you can do so illegally. But do not buy box sets from iTunes. Just do not do it. It is the evil power.

… which raises the prospect of iTunes-only bonus tracks, Best Buy special editions, and merchdirect exclusives. God in hope not… it'd be wonderful to have everything in one place, in one edition, without having to grumble about the fact that five individual tracks are exclusive to five different retailers, or having to covet the free embossed surfboard that comes with the special $1m edition. I hope it can be simply about the music for those who love the music.















Somehow I doubt it though…


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 22, 2012, 11:45:11 PM
I just made a test playlist, and my gosh it works! The box opens with SOL, and after that we'll get the Surfin' rehearsals and Surfin'. Start with a bang, kind of like theme song playing over the opening credits, and then rewind all the way to the beginning. Try it. Makes the perfect opening for the box.

If only the people compiling the box were so forward-thinking. But no. It'll be some sappy garbage like "Surfer Girl" or something. They may as well just call this flaming pile of sh*t "brian wilson large emotional man animal collective prototype pet sounds created sgt. peppers" or some sh*t.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 23, 2012, 12:39:14 AM
how much is 80.99 in US money?

About 100 dollars, Roughly.

CDs are usually cheaper in the US than they are in Europe, so I bet it'll be less than that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 23, 2012, 12:49:23 AM
Maybe the 6th disc is the remastered Summer In Paradise  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 12:51:38 AM
Maybe the 6th disc is the remastered Summer In Paradise  ;D

I'd be genuinely happy about that. Both versions!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 12:56:45 AM
Maybe the 6th disc is the remastered Summer In Paradise  ;D

Maybe it could be the original SiP remastered, the original remix remastered, and both originals remixed and remastered.  :D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dove Nested Towers on August 23, 2012, 01:12:28 AM
And then we'd FINALLY have world peace! :)


Title: Re:
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 23, 2012, 01:18:37 AM
Maybe the 6th disc is the remastered Summer In Paradise  ;D

Maybe it could be the original SiP remastered, the original remix remastered, and both originals remixed and remastered.  :D

No, we need that as a 4LP box set!


Title: Re:
Post by: Alex on August 23, 2012, 01:26:51 AM
Maybe the 6th disc is the remastered Summer In Paradise  ;D

Maybe it could be the original SiP remastered, the original remix remastered, and both originals remixed and remastered.  :D
On 180g vinyl, of course.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on August 23, 2012, 01:35:40 AM
I would seriously not complain if they ignored anything post-LA Light. After that all the production lost any warm feeling to it. I guess I would survive an acapella Goin' On or Where I Belong, but apart from that anything after 1979 can be buried with my consent!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on August 23, 2012, 01:54:32 AM
Made in California, huh ? Nice title. Better than 120 big ones or something like that. Although they are recycling "Made in USA".


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 02:16:56 AM
I would seriously not complain if they ignored anything post-LA Light. After that all the production lost any warm feeling to it. I guess I would survive an acapella Goin' On or Where I Belong, but apart from that anything after 1979 can be buried with my consent!

Yeah, but that would be whitewashing. If they want to go career-spanning, they should go all the way to the end, warts and all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on August 23, 2012, 02:30:43 AM
Is there any info on will this be an independent box set (you know, with all the hits included) or a sequel to GV box (with no overlapping material)?

Which part of the phrase "career spanning" don't you understand ?


Title: Re: \
Post by: STE on August 23, 2012, 02:32:56 AM

So there won't be anything off M.I.U. album?  
 ;D


I hope the 80's-90's-00's are well represented.
For example, a semi-chronological collection of good music and non-album tracks:

- Keepin' The Summer Alive (live at Knewborth '80)
- Goin' On
- When Girls Get Together (track only)
- It's A Beautiful Day
- Chasing the Sky
- Getcha Back
- Where I Belong
- California Dreamin'
- Lady Liberty
- Rock & Roll To The Rescue
- The Spirit of Rock'n'Roll ("BB live" version '86)
- Crocodile Rock
- Problem Child
- Kokomo
- Somewhere Near in Japan
- Lahaina Aloha
- Summer in Paradise (live at Wembley '93)
- You're Still A Mistery
- Soul Searchin'
- vocals-only montage from Stars&Stripes
- Do It Again (2011)
- She Believes in Love Again (2012)
- (untitled TWGMTR outtake / I'd Go Anywhere)
- Waves Of Love (2012)
- Isn't It Time (single version)




Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 23, 2012, 02:38:24 AM
Yes, we need problem child! In fact, your list is near perfect - I can see it including TWGMTR though


Title: Re: \
Post by: Alan Smith on August 23, 2012, 02:42:14 AM
If Lady Liberty gets up, I'll buy 2 copies (one for smashin')


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 02:56:46 AM
Is there any info on will this be an independent box set (you know, with all the hits included) or a sequel to GV box (with no overlapping material)?

Which part of the phrase "career spanning" don't you understand ?

I understand them both parts, but their career could be spanned twice. I mean, they could choose songs from their whole career, but different songs this time. But yeah, I don't think they can leave all the hits out, even though they were included the last time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on August 23, 2012, 03:01:57 AM
I seriously doubt they'll leave ANY of the major hits out. Consider: six discs, which is roughly seven hours and fifty minutes of music.  The band have had something like 55 charting singles, let's say two and three-quarter hours. Still leaves over five hours for classics, deep cuts and a bounty of archive tracks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 23, 2012, 03:10:10 AM
Is there any info on will this be an independent box set (you know, with all the hits included) or a sequel to GV box (with no overlapping material)?

Which part of the phrase "career spanning" don't you understand ?

I understand them both parts

Yeah rite, ya fuckin' ignorant dotard! LOL


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 23, 2012, 03:19:22 AM
They could mix it up and put the Summer In Paradise 'Surfin'' ant the start and the original in the 90's section


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on August 23, 2012, 04:29:46 AM

So there won't be anything off M.I.U. album?  
 ;D


I hope the 80's-90's-00's are well represented.
For example, a semi-chronological collection of good music and non-album tracks:

- Keepin' The Summer Alive (live at Knewborth '80)
- Goin' On
- When Girls Get Together (track only)
- It's A Beautiful Day
- Chasing the Sky
- Getcha Back
- Where I Belong
- California Dreamin'
- Lady Liberty
- Rock & Roll To The Rescue
- The Spirit of Rock'n'Roll ("BB live" version '86)
- Crocodile Rock
- Problem Child
- Kokomo
- Somewhere Near in Japan
- Lahaina Aloha
- Summer in Paradise (live at Wembley '93)
- You're Still A Mistery
- Soul Searchin'
- vocals-only montage from Stars&Stripes
- Do It Again (2011)
- She Believes in Love Again (2012)
- (untitled TWGMTR outtake / I'd Go Anywhere)
- Waves Of Love (2012)
- Isn't It Time (single version)






Some session outtakes from the later material ('67-2012) would be great. I don't mean just alt. versions but also studio chatter, etc.


Title: Re: \
Post by: STE on August 23, 2012, 04:46:14 AM


I guess the problem is that in the digital era the "tapes are not rolling", so usually you don't have studio chatter or in-progress versions.
But yes, would be very cool.




Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 23, 2012, 04:47:22 AM
They could mix it up and put the Summer In Paradise 'Surfin'' ant the start and the original in the 90's section

Given "Forever" and "Surfin'" being recorded in hella late 80s/early 90s arrangements, I can only assume they did the same for their entire back catalog (with rewritten lyrics by Mike Love in 1992) and will be releasing all of it on this box set. It will include the Full House rap version of "Forever" as a "special" bonus traxxx

Hung surfboard overtaken me
Dim surfer girl, awaken me
To a surf dissolved in the durf
(Surfin', surfin')
The tourist beach, a costly surf
Our money all is lost for now
To a surfin' trumpeter guy
(Surfin', surfin')
Columnated surfboards domino

I'm a bro on a sunny day
Pretty soon I'll be cruisin' away
How long will the bros cruise?
How long will the bros cruise?
It tans my hide
Hey, hey, hey now!

The beach has got waves, but they ain't doin' me no good,
I wish they could
Each tide brings surfin' action again
I think I got surfin' good goin' for myself
But what goes wrong?
Sometimes I surf very bad
Sometimes I surf very bad
Sometimes I surf very bad

etc.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 05:36:19 AM
I seriously doubt they'll leave ANY of the major hits out. Consider: six discs, which is roughly seven hours and fifty minutes of music.  The band have had something like 55 charting singles, let's say two and three-quarter hours. Still leaves over five hours for classics, deep cuts and a bounty of archive tracks.

Still possible to cover their 50 year career with top-notch music without touching on the hits if the compilers so wished. And I hope they so wish.

And given that there'll be not one but TWO GHs packages out near-simultaneously, I hope they take that option.  JQP, if he's bought the GHs sets and is inspired to delve deeper, might be mighty pished if he finds he's shellling out for the same hits twice.

And if he's uncharacteristically started with the box, he ain't gonna shell for the GH sets subsequently.

Those of us who're gonna be shelling for the box don't need the hits again and there shouldn't be any incentive to include them on the box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 05:43:31 AM
Well put. Nothing against the hits, but everyone who is ready to shell megabucks for the box probably owns them all already. I know I do.

It just dawned me that the box might include some 2011-2012 outtakes as well, from the TWGMTR sessions. Could it be we get to hear rest of the suite on the box?


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 06:18:15 AM
Well put. Nothing against the hits, but everyone who is ready to shell megabucks for the box probably owns them all already. I know I do.

It just dawned me that the box might include some 2011-2012 outtakes as well, from the TWGMTR sessions. Could it be we get to hear rest of the suite on the box?

I don't think all elements of this suite were recorded beyond the demo stage. Joe Thomas mentioned having pout them together in ProTools but I think he meant Brian Wilson's demo compositions, not contemporary BBs' recordings. Here's a snippet or two from the lengthy interview:

Quote
He didn’t want the album to be this statement of “Summer’s gone. That’s the end.”
Exactly. And that was a big thing for me because we’ve got another 10 or 12 songs that we didn’t have time to put on this record, and he perceptively felt that and was like, This is a downer. I really do want to do this again. Maybe. And it’s not really over.” “Summer’s Gone” was never really about being over. It was about being in a chronological version of a year, you’re not a kid anymore, it’s not spring. Maybe you’re best days of summer are over. But it doesn’t mean it’s all over. It just means summer’s over. So he tossed that around for awhile and decided that, you know what, it should be the last song on this album but maybe not the title.

Another one that we had that was around was the first one on the second side called “Strange World.” Second side, I’m looking at…

The vinyl.
Exactly. That was done as part of a suite that he was always interested in writing. On this record it’s called “From There to Back Again.” He really wanted to do like a kind of reflection of California from the standpoint of a, you know, a guy who’s almost 70 years old. So it’s driving down Pacific Coast Highway and thinking about his life in retrospect. So this suite was a series of maybe one or two minute vignettes that he had like 15 of them that he would start and never finish. When I put them together on ProTools, it was eerie to me that they all fit together. It was like, wow. This song was written a year before the song that followed it, but yet they fit completely perfectly: modulation, key move, the whole thing. Then Brian started assembling these little bits and I kind of dreamed… I was 10 years old when Smile was recorded, but I kind of dreamed that was how that happened. I have no special authority to tell you that’s how it did. It just seemed like all these little pieces became like this theme, and instead of being Americana or whatever Smile was, it was his drive down Pacific Coast Highway.

So there were more pieces? There are only four or five on the record.
Right. We’ve got another 10 or 12 vignettes that we don’t know what to do with yet.

All on the same theme?
Oh yeah, yeah. They all fit together. I’m hoping someday that that will come out in its entirety. The whole suite, as it was always intended to come out.

Note that from what Thomas says the playing order of the vinyl was indeed shuffled prior to release from what was originally intended. I'd thought the shuffle was to accommodate timings, but this implies the possibility of an "otherwise"…

Worth reading the rest of the interview if you haven't already – there's some interesting info in there.

http://andrewromano.tumblr.com/joethomasbeachboys
 (http://andrewromano.tumblr.com/joethomasbeachboys)
But my guess is that if the suite were to be included in the box, the band would have to have returned to the studio to flesh out some of Brian's ideas that Thomas had down on tape for years.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SloopJohnnyB on August 23, 2012, 06:45:06 AM
Great stuff! I didn't think that "Summer's Gone" was meant to be the last Beach Boys song. Go out Rockin' and Rollin'!!! Rock and Roll album, please??!!!  ;)



Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 23, 2012, 06:54:19 AM
Great stuff! I didn't think that "Summer's Gone" was meant to be the last Beach Boys song. Go out Rockin' and Rollin'!!! Rock and Roll album, please??!!!  ;)



Brian said he wanted a harder sound if they do another album. It'd be much more appropriate as a Beach Boys album, to me, and I'm really hoping it happens that way and is the end result of Brian's previously mentioned rock & roll album that he's been talking about for ages now.

Don't know if I'd want them to end on that, but I definitely want to see it happen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SloopJohnnyB on August 23, 2012, 07:02:56 AM
I'd like to see as much unreleased archive material on the new box set as possible.

But how about a 'best of' disc of Beach Boys solo material?

Getting all the rights from various sources might be a problem but a collection of Beach boys solo material would be great!

Any material left from Dennis? Some cuts from POB and Bamboo would be included.

Carl's solo albums could be represented here.

Brian? Obviously. (I'd like to see the current group record "Love and Mercy" and some other Brian solo songs)

Al and Bruce have solo material. Throw in a few from David and the Marksmen.

Mike? He's got a few rare albums of material, too. I'd l like to see the Celebration material included. 'Almost Summer', 'Country Pie', 'Hows about a little bit...' were all originally recorded or played LIVE by the Beach Boys.

It's part of their careers...not as a group but still part of the story.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 07:16:53 AM
The solo compilation is a neat idea, but it's better kept separate from the big box. With so many great BB songs still in the can, it would be silly to "waste" precious disc space on solo stuff which, let's be honest here, just isn't as good as the full band stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 23, 2012, 07:17:09 AM
But how about a 'best of' disc of Beach Boys solo material?
I really don't see that happening. Quite a bit of that material isn't owned by Capitol. And besides that, Mike's album, Carl's albums and 'Going Public' are even worse than what The Beach Boys were releasing around the same time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on August 23, 2012, 07:22:53 AM
Eagerly anticipating the First Love/Country Love twofer. EAGERLY.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Loaf on August 23, 2012, 07:27:40 AM
In 2012, including all the usual hits etc... seems like such a waste of their time and my money.

Seriously, who doesn't have this stuff? I don't mind paying a lot for unreleased stuff, but i don't want it padded out by stuff i own multiple times already.

It'll probably be a variation on the GV 30 years box, but the 'rare' material will be swapped for currently unreleased stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on August 23, 2012, 07:31:34 AM
6 discs is rather a lot! We'll have to see.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 23, 2012, 07:36:02 AM
In 2012, including all the usual hits etc... seems like such a waste of their time and my money.
The box will need the usual hits, otherwise nobody besides a relatively small group of hardcore fans is going to buy the thing. I think that something like 1/3 hits, 1/3 album tracks and 1/3 rarities would be a fair deal.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SloopJohnnyB on August 23, 2012, 07:37:12 AM
The solo compilation is a neat idea, but it's better kept separate from the big box. With so many great BB songs still in the can, it would be silly to "waste" precious disc space on solo stuff which, let's be honest here, just isn't as good as the full band stuff.

Agreed. The more unreleased archive material the better!

But how about a 'best of' disc of Beach Boys solo material?
I really don't see that happening. Quite a bit of that material isn't owned by Capitol. And besides that, Mike's album, Carl's albums and 'Going Public' are even worse than what The Beach Boys were releasing around the same time.

Point taken. Again, the more unreased archive material the better!  :p

Eagerly anticipating the First Love/Country Love twofer. EAGERLY.

Hey, it's part of the history and part of the story. I think the Celebration material is worth releasing. Mike Nesmith, are you out there?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 23, 2012, 07:43:42 AM
I really hope we don't see even more songs go out of print and get buried.

Hits aren't mandatory for box sets. Nirvana's 2004 box set contained no hits or even album tracks sans a few early versions of hits and album tracks. It was filled with unreleased stuff of varying quality. Hardcore fans ate that sh*t up (sans the shoddy mastering job and some inferior sources) and it sold pretty well, too. The Beach Boys are probably capable of doing the same with a similar set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 07:47:38 AM
Skip the album tracks. Nobody's gonna buy the box because of them. Joe Public buys the box because of hits (why, I don't know: he could have the hits by buying any cheap greatest hits package) and us hardcores buy it because of the rarities. No need for album tracks here, at least in exactly the same form as on the albums.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 23, 2012, 07:53:56 AM
No need for album tracks here, at least in exactly the same form as on the albums.
I disagree. It would be a good way to introduce a casual fan or two to a bit of Friends and Sunflower material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 23, 2012, 07:55:44 AM
Hits aren't mandatory for box sets. Nirvana's 2004 box set contained no hits or even album tracks sans a few early versions of hits and album tracks. It was filled with unreleased stuff of varying quality. Hardcore fans ate that sh*t up (sans the shoddy mastering job and some inferior sources) and it sold pretty well, too. The Beach Boys are probably capable of doing the same with a similar set.
OK, good point. That's a really good box set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 23, 2012, 08:00:09 AM
No need for album tracks here, at least in exactly the same form as on the albums.
I disagree. It would be a good way to introduce a casual fan or two to a bit of Friends and Sunflower material.

Exactly. I bought the box set because of the SMiLE material, but ended up falling in love with stuff like Love You because of the album tracks on the set.

But if I had my druthers, I'd prefer all previously unreleased on this set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 23, 2012, 08:08:51 AM
Are we forgetting that all the songs will be remastered, and could be the only source of some new remasters of wild honey, friends, and 20/20 songs? (not even including later albums)


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 08:53:30 AM
I suspect there'll be a second wave of 12 remastered LPs at some stage:

Surfin' Safari
Wild Honey
Friends
20/20
Holland
Carl & The Passions
15 Big Ones
Love You
MIU
LA
Keeping The Summer Alive
The Beach Boys

In Concert, Concert, Live in London, Knebworth, Paramount '93 and Carnegie 72 (and others?) could form the basis of a career-spanning live box set sometime in 2013 or beyond.

That leaves the Christmas Album*, Stack o' Tracks**, Summer 'n Paradise***, Still Cruisin'**** and Stars n' Stripes***** to form the basis of a centenary box, Made In Colostomy, in 2062******.

* Actually due a reissue any day now…
** Most probably available either with the singles box, the 93 GV box or elsewhere, and the rest could be on Made In California.
*** Seems to be being written out of history
**** As half the tracks are available remastered on the remastered albums, the rest could squeeze on to the new box with hardly any impact on the inclusion of fresh unreleased material
***** The Tammy Wynette track, Caroline No and the Willie Nelson track would all be worthy of the box set, perhaps the latter two in a cappella format.
****** According to my 50-year almanac, Al will by then be the only surviving BB, and he's already anticipating this release by retouching, remixing, remastering and re-recording Loop-De-Loop.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on August 23, 2012, 09:05:40 AM
Why would a casual fan drop a hundred bucks just so they can have a CD with Kokomo on it?

answer: no one does these things.


Title: Re:
Post by: Jeff on August 23, 2012, 09:12:33 AM
I suspect there'll be a second wave of 12 remastered LPs at some stage:

Surfin' Safari
Wild Honey
Friends
20/20
Holland
Carl & The Passions
15 Big Ones
Love You
MIU
LA
Keeping The Summer Alive
The Beach Boys

In Concert, Concert, Live in London, Knebworth, Paramount '93 and Carnegie 72 (and others?) could form the basis of a career-spanning live box set sometime in 2013 or beyond.

That leaves the Christmas Album*, Stack o' Tracks**, Summer 'n Paradise***, Still Cruisin'**** and Stars n' Stripes***** to form the basis of a centenary box, Made In Colostomy, in 2062******.

* Actually due a reissue any day now…
** Most probably available either with the singles box, the 93 GV box or elsewhere, and the rest could be on Made In California.
*** Seems to be being written out of history
**** As half the tracks are available remastered on the remastered albums, the rest could squeeze on to the new box with hardly any impact on the inclusion of fresh unreleased material
***** The Tammy Wynette track, Caroline No and the Willie Nelson track would all be worthy of the box set, perhaps the latter two in a cappella format.
****** According to my 50-year almanac, Al will by then be the only surviving BB, and he's already anticipating this release by retouching, remixing, remastering and re-recording Loop-De-Loop.

I don't think there's any question that Wild Honey and others will be reissued.  The only question is whether people on this board start using a little common sense and stop acting like Phil wannabes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on August 23, 2012, 09:14:37 AM
Honestly, who wants crap like SIP and solo material hogging space on the box when we could get more rarities instead.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 09:16:34 AM
I suspect there'll be a second wave of 12 remastered LPs at some stage:

Surfin' Safari
Wild Honey
Friends
20/20
Holland
Carl & The Passions
15 Big Ones
Love You
MIU
LA
Keeping The Summer Alive
The Beach Boys

In Concert, Concert, Live in London, Knebworth, Paramount '93 and Carnegie 72 (and others?) could form the basis of a career-spanning live box set sometime in 2013 or beyond.

That leaves the Christmas Album*, Stack o' Tracks**, Summer 'n Paradise***, Still Cruisin'**** and Stars n' Stripes***** to form the basis of a centenary box, Made In Colostomy, in 2062******.

* Actually due a reissue any day now…
** Most probably available either with the singles box, the 93 GV box or elsewhere, and the rest could be on Made In California.
*** Seems to be being written out of history
**** As half the tracks are available remastered on the remastered albums, the rest could squeeze on to the new box with hardly any impact on the inclusion of fresh unreleased material
***** The Tammy Wynette track, Caroline No and the Willie Nelson track would all be worthy of the box set, perhaps the latter two in a cappella format.
****** According to my 50-year almanac, Al will by then be the only surviving BB, and he's already anticipating this release by retouching, remixing, remastering and re-recording Loop-De-Loop.

I don't think there's any question that Wild Honey and others will be reissued.  The only question is whether people on this board start using a little common sense and stop acting like Phil wannabes.

Uh?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on August 23, 2012, 09:17:16 AM
I would love to hear Mike's solo albums officially released. the quality on the bootlegs is terrible.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 23, 2012, 09:26:40 AM
Yeh, I suppose we do have to keep in mind, there is a market for people who buy box sets as 'definitive' collections of an artsit's work ... so as much as I don't need the hits (or even deep album cuts), they're part of the history and some 'more than casual/less than us' fans might want just this.

though I have a feeling we're in for a treat.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on August 23, 2012, 09:31:00 AM
Why would a casual fan drop a hundred bucks just so they can have a CD with Kokomo on it?

answer: no one does these things.

Good point, especially when this casual fan has opportunity to buy cheaper compilations this year with Kokomo on it, along with other major Beach Boys hits.


Title: Re:
Post by: Jeff on August 23, 2012, 10:04:32 AM
I suspect there'll be a second wave of 12 remastered LPs at some stage:

Surfin' Safari
Wild Honey
Friends
20/20
Holland
Carl & The Passions
15 Big Ones
Love You
MIU
LA
Keeping The Summer Alive
The Beach Boys

In Concert, Concert, Live in London, Knebworth, Paramount '93 and Carnegie 72 (and others?) could form the basis of a career-spanning live box set sometime in 2013 or beyond.

That leaves the Christmas Album*, Stack o' Tracks**, Summer 'n Paradise***, Still Cruisin'**** and Stars n' Stripes***** to form the basis of a centenary box, Made In Colostomy, in 2062******.

* Actually due a reissue any day now…
** Most probably available either with the singles box, the 93 GV box or elsewhere, and the rest could be on Made In California.
*** Seems to be being written out of history
**** As half the tracks are available remastered on the remastered albums, the rest could squeeze on to the new box with hardly any impact on the inclusion of fresh unreleased material
***** The Tammy Wynette track, Caroline No and the Willie Nelson track would all be worthy of the box set, perhaps the latter two in a cappella format.
****** According to my 50-year almanac, Al will by then be the only surviving BB, and he's already anticipating this release by retouching, remixing, remastering and re-recording Loop-De-Loop.

I don't think there's any question that Wild Honey and others will be reissued.  The only question is whether people on this board start using a little common sense and stop acting like Phil wannabes.

Uh?

I'm agreeing with you.  Maybe not on the details, but on the concept.


Title: Re:
Post by: joshferrell on August 23, 2012, 10:21:13 AM
I suspect there'll be a second wave of 12 remastered LPs at some stage:

Surfin' Safari
Wild Honey
Friends
20/20
Holland
Carl & The Passions
15 Big Ones
Love You
MIU
LA
Keeping The Summer Alive
The Beach Boys

In Concert, Concert, Live in London, Knebworth, Paramount '93 and Carnegie 72 (and others?) could form the basis of a career-spanning live box set sometime in 2013 or beyond.

That leaves the Christmas Album*, Stack o' Tracks**, Summer 'n Paradise***, Still Cruisin'**** and Stars n' Stripes***** to form the basis of a centenary box, Made In Colostomy, in 2062******.

* Actually due a reissue any day now…
** Most probably available either with the singles box, the 93 GV box or elsewhere, and the rest could be on Made In California.
*** Seems to be being written out of history
**** As half the tracks are available remastered on the remastered albums, the rest could squeeze on to the new box with hardly any impact on the inclusion of fresh unreleased material
***** The Tammy Wynette track, Caroline No and the Willie Nelson track would all be worthy of the box set, perhaps the latter two in a cappella format.
****** According to my 50-year almanac, Al will by then be the only surviving BB, and he's already anticipating this release by retouching, remixing, remastering and re-recording Loop-De-Loop.

I don't think there's any question that Wild Honey and others will be reissued.  The only question is whether people on this board start using a little common sense and stop acting like Phil wannabes.
But he is our lord and saviour..


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on August 23, 2012, 10:21:25 AM
I really hope we don't see even more songs go out of print and get buried.

Hits aren't mandatory for box sets. Nirvana's 2004 box set contained no hits or even album tracks sans a few early versions of hits and album tracks. It was filled with unreleased stuff of varying quality. Hardcore fans ate that sh*t up (sans the shoddy mastering job and some inferior sources) and it sold pretty well, too. The Beach Boys are probably capable of doing the same with a similar set.


This is the Beach Boys though, so there will be hits on the album. That doesn't necessarily mean that they will be thehit versions. I'm thinking along the lines of the Endless Harmony soundtracks. You had some hits tehre but in different versions (alternative, live, first time stereo, etc.). Maybe we'll also get another unreleased concert.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Amanda Hart on August 23, 2012, 10:35:21 AM
Maybe we'll also get another unreleased concert.



I like this idea, get the hits in via the Chicago '65 show or something on one disc and use alternate versions or mixes, demos, other live cuts and unreleased songs to fill out the set. That's something that would make all of us happy and sell to casual fans.

I would hate to see them ape the '93 box set. If it's mostly going to be a retread of that concept (hits, a few album cuts and a few unreleased studio cuts) I probably won't be buying.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 23, 2012, 10:40:14 AM
I've noticed the Amazon link that was working yesterday has been taken down..

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ki7vFYi4ylQ/SZhaQYVPOgI/AAAAAAAAAQg/vYu3Cik5aNI/s400/we_not_alone_02.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 23, 2012, 10:45:43 AM
I've noticed the Amazon link that was working yesterday has been taken down..

(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_ki7vFYi4ylQ/SZhaQYVPOgI/AAAAAAAAAQg/vYu3Cik5aNI/s400/we_not_alone_02.jpg)

Saw that. Kinda bummed. Figured an announcement was imminent. Maybe it still is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on August 23, 2012, 10:51:16 AM
maybe it will be like thee "beatles anthology",songs in chronilogical order and "hits" but done as alt takes/live/rarirites instead of the masters,after all BA was 6 discs too..with two or three new songs this may mirror BA..just a thought


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 23, 2012, 11:40:54 AM
maybe it will be like thee "beatles anthology",songs in chronilogical order and "hits" but done as alt takes/live/rarirites instead of the masters,after all BA was 6 discs too..with two or three new songs this may mirror BA..just a thought

No way that's gonna happen. It also makes no sense.

Only reason The Beatles did it like that was because they hardly had any truly unreleased titles ("That Means A  Lot", "If You've Got Trouble"), very few worthy alternates ("Ob La Di, Ob La Da", "One After 909", "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"), just a few songs later used on solo albums ("Junk", "All Things Must Pass") and a song one of them wrote covered by another artist ("Come And Get It"). So basically they had to fill it out with a lot of alternates and live takes that probably didn't totally need to be released. If The Beatles had the amount of unreleased material that The Beach Boys did, they wouldn't have been scraping the bottom of the barrel so much.

However, The Beach Boys don't really have this problem. They have a lot of unreleased stuff to fill up a nice collection, so hopefully the only alternate and live things that go on there are truly revelatory.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 23, 2012, 11:47:07 AM
There is so much potential for this box set to be amazing and to quench our thirst for some good hardy unreleased material that we've all been waiting for.  To think that there's a possiblity that we won't get that really bums me out.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on August 23, 2012, 11:52:13 AM
I would hate to see them ape the '93 box set. If it's mostly going to be a retread of that concept (hits, a few album cuts and a few unreleased studio cuts) I probably won't be buying.

We're talking 6 discs here.  That's more than a "few" cuts.  And yes, you'll buy it.
We all will.  People here need to stop expecting to be let down all the time.
Cheer up.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on August 23, 2012, 11:56:19 AM
maybe it will be like thee "beatles anthology",songs in chronilogical order and "hits" but done as alt takes/live/rarirites instead of the masters,after all BA was 6 discs too..with two or three new songs this may mirror BA..just a thought

No way that's gonna happen. It also makes no sense.

Only reason The Beatles did it like that was because they hardly had any truly unreleased titles ("That Means A  Lot", "If You've Got Trouble"), very few worthy alternates ("Ob La Di, Ob La Da", "One After 909", "While My Guitar Gently Weeps"), just a few songs later used on solo albums ("Junk", "All Things Must Pass") and a song one of them wrote covered by another artist ("Come And Get It"). So basically they had to fill it out with a lot of alternates and live takes that probably didn't totally need to be released. If The Beatles had the amount of unreleased material that The Beach Boys did, they wouldn't have been scraping the bottom of the barrel so much.

However, The Beach Boys don't really have this problem. They have a lot of unreleased stuff to fill up a nice collection, so hopefully the only alternate and live things that go on there are truly revelatory.

Well in regards to The Beatles, EMI originally wanted to release a single LP of outtakes entitled "Sessions" back in 1985 but it was killed dead because The Beatles at that time had quite the contentious relationship with their old record label and were in the process of suing them.  For what it's worth, I'm of the opinion that "Sessions" might have been better recieved by the general public if it had been released in 1995 in comparison to the "Anthology" series.  Don't get me wrong "Anthology" sold a ton but back when it came out, diehard fans were ticked off at all the remixes while causals ones were expecting a more traditional boxset probably in line with The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" box.  There was a great deal of gripes and grumbles from fans who thought they were purchasing a collection of Beatles hits and instead recieved a collection of Beatles alternate takes.  The "Anthology" also probably killed dead the possibly of any future Beatles releases (in the vein of The Beach Boys' "Hawthorne" or Dylan's "Bootleg Series") as well because "Anthology" truly exploited the most commercial material left in The Beatles vaults.  What remains in there now would only be of interests to the diehards whom The Beatles apparently don't market to.  But I digress.

Back to The Beach Boys
:  The session tapes for "Don't Worry Baby" turned up recently correct? (post-"Hawthorne"?)  I'd love to hear an alternative version of that if it truly exists.  What are the status of some of the other sessions for sixties gems not found on official releases or boots?  Warmth Of The Sun?  Little Deuce Coupe?

Back to The Beatles
:  The "Made In California" thing had me thinking, didn't The Beatles release a "Direct From Liverpool Box Set" back in the eighties that was more of a traditional box set that was packaged in a crate like package?  I think it was called "The Beatles Box" or something like that?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 12:05:04 PM
I’m toying with the idea of approaching Made In California 100% spoiler-free. I mean, imagine how mind-blowing that experience could be, just to sit and listen track-by-track, in the moment, in real time, dazzled and surprised by it all.

Anyone else considering something like this?

That would mean, of course, I wouldn’t be able to get within 100 miles of this message board!

If enough people are interested, is it crazy talk to maybe create a “spoiler-free” section of the board or something like that?


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 23, 2012, 12:08:24 PM
I’m toying with the idea of approaching Made In California 100% spoiler-free. I mean, imagine how mind-blowing that experience could be, just to sit and listen track-by-track, in the moment, in real time, dazzled and surprised by it all.

Anyone else considering something like this?

That would mean, of course, I wouldn’t be able to get within 100 miles of this message board!

If enough people are interested, is it crazy talk to maybe create a “spoiler-free” section of the board or something like that?

Now that you mention it, I don't think I would mind going in spoiler free.. It would be hard to not peep at a tracklist beforehand though.  :-\


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 23, 2012, 12:12:23 PM
I’m toying with the idea of approaching Made In California 100% spoiler-free. I mean, imagine how mind-blowing that experience could be, just to sit and listen track-by-track, in the moment, in real time, dazzled and surprised by it all.

Anyone else considering something like this?

That would mean, of course, I wouldn’t be able to get within 100 miles of this message board!

If enough people are interested, is it crazy talk to maybe create a “spoiler-free” section of the board or something like that?

big time!

Totally. wow, that's a great idea. I thought about this when I was randomly in a record store in Sacramento and saw TWGMTR on vinyl on the shelf. I bought it ... but I was thinking how much cooler it would have been, and how different my experience would have been if I didn't even know about it. 'woah, a new Beach Boys album!?!?' ... and you just take it home and put it on. Would have been a much different experience, and probably a better one.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 23, 2012, 12:13:24 PM
I would love to do that, but I don't have near enough the willpower. I'd have to live in an internet free world.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Amanda Hart on August 23, 2012, 12:13:49 PM
I would hate to see them ape the '93 box set. If it's mostly going to be a retread of that concept (hits, a few album cuts and a few unreleased studio cuts) I probably won't be buying.

We're talking 6 discs here.  That's more than a "few" cuts.  And yes, you'll buy it.
We all will.  People here need to stop expecting to be let down all the time.
Cheer up.

I'm not expecting to be let down, this could be a really great release. The Smile Sessions, The Pet Sounds Sessions and the Good Vibrations box sets were all amazing. As everyone has pointed out, including what I had in the part of my previous post that you didn't quote, there are a lot of ways to please everyone and maximize the appeal of this box to all markets. I just think it would be stupid of Capitol to put out another career spanning box set that's the same concept as one that is still readily available. I know it's going to go out of print, but it would still be really easy to get a hold of used copies. If it is just a retread, I seriously will probably not buy it. I didn't buy the singles box set or any of the last few comps that have been released. There isn't enough value for me to pony up $100+ for a bunch of stuff I already have with a sprinkling of new mixes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 23, 2012, 12:17:39 PM
I would hate to see them ape the '93 box set. If it's mostly going to be a retread of that concept (hits, a few album cuts and a few unreleased studio cuts) I probably won't be buying.

We're talking 6 discs here.  That's more than a "few" cuts.  And yes, you'll buy it.
We all will.  People here need to stop expecting to be let down all the time.
Cheer up.

It's better to set the bar low in life.

I've learned that the hard way  :-[  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 23, 2012, 12:20:19 PM
Well in regards to The Beatles, EMI originally wanted to release a single LP of outtakes entitled "Sessions" back in 1985 but it was killed dead because The Beatles at that time had quite the contentious relationship with their old record label and were in the process of suing them.  For what it's worth, I'm of the opinion that "Sessions" might have been better recieved by the general public if it had been released in 1995 in comparison to the "Anthology" series.  Don't get me wrong "Anthology" sold a ton but back when it came out, diehard fans were ticked off at all the remixes while causals ones were expecting a more traditional boxset probably in line with The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" box.  There was a great deal of gripes and grumbles from fans who thought they were purchasing a collection of Beatles hits and instead recieved a collection of Beatles alternate takes.  The "Anthology" also probably killed dead the possibly of any future Beatles releases (in the vein of The Beach Boys' "Hawthorne" or Dylan's "Bootleg Series") as well because "Anthology" truly exploited the most commercial material left in The Beatles vaults.  What remains in there now would only be of interests to the diehards whom The Beatles apparently don't market to.  But I digress.

I agree that Sessions would have been a MUCH better release. It basically cut away the fat and would have given us most of the essential stuff. You could have had "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" at the beginning, and that would be that.

However, I do think there is a bit of material left for a great Beatles archival release. You could have "Sour Milk Sea" with George on vocals, "Goodbye" by McCartney, a finished "Now And Then", and probably some other stuff.

But anyways, enough about The Beatles.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 12:26:11 PM
Cool, well, if the idea turns out to have legs, maybe I could at least start a "Made In California Spoiler-Free BB Discussion Thread" thread.

Even then, though, it would hard not to peep at other thread titles.

It would also be a trick to persuade other kind souls to post major news updates, miscellaneous items of interest, etc. into our thread.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 23, 2012, 12:31:53 PM
What would we post about?


Title: Re: \
Post by: SloopJohnnyB on August 23, 2012, 12:38:16 PM
I would hate to see them ape the '93 box set. If it's mostly going to be a retread of that concept (hits, a few album cuts and a few unreleased studio cuts) I probably won't be buying.

We're talking 6 discs here. That's more than a "few" cuts.  And yes, you'll buy it.
We all will.  People here need to stop expecting to be let down all the time.
Cheer up.

Agreed! Great things are on the way!

I'll buy the remasters and if they all end up on a complete works box set I'll buy that, too!... as long as they add a few unreleased concerts or something!  ;) So much potential! So much to look forward to! Get Happy!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 12:42:52 PM
What would we post about?

Well, there's a good question.  :lol

Hmmm. Other than general Beach Boys discussion, which might get pretty stale given a limited pool of contributors, we could keep a running list of other threads on the board that are "safe." - we would have to rely on other spoiled folk to do the scouting though.

Hmmm. The only other ideas I can come up with would involve involvement of moderators: for example, threads could be designated "safe" and labelled as such before you click on them? Or maybe a new section is created, a la the TSS section? Naw, that would be difficult to maintain and lure others to provide "safe" updates. A whole 'nother section would just get ignored.

Who am I kidding - the only real option here is to just ignore the board altogether!  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 23, 2012, 12:51:37 PM
What would we post about?

The Smile Sessions, TWGMTR, Love you?

 ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 12:58:44 PM
It would be nice to have the strength to wait until the box comes out, but I know myself too well. I'm too weak and curious for it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 23, 2012, 12:59:35 PM
I was thinking that a forum this important diserves a seriously try-hard mod, who would also redesign the site, while keeping the system easy to use.

I'm a young programmer, with no job as of now, I'd be happy to do it next week before I go back to school.

I know how to add "safe" and "spoiler" tags too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 23, 2012, 01:03:21 PM
I was thinking that a forum this important diserves a seriously try-hard mod, who would also redesign the site, while keeping the system easy to use.

I'm a young programmer, with no job as of now, I'd be happy to do it next week before I go back to school.

I know how to add "safe" and "spoiler" tags too.

At the risk of going off-topic I have to say, YES! this forum does need a redesign


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 23, 2012, 01:06:10 PM
I'm thinking it could look more like the cover of the album, or maybe a less futuristic look :p


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on August 23, 2012, 01:07:39 PM
I seriously doubt they'll leave ANY of the major hits out. Consider: six discs, which is roughly seven hours and fifty minutes of music.  The band have had something like 55 charting singles, let's say two and three-quarter hours. Still leaves over five hours for classics, deep cuts and a bounty of archive tracks.

And some  new songs, according to Mr. Jardine,


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 01:10:34 PM
I've never been crazy about the look and feel of this forum to be honest. JMO. Hope I'm not offending anyone by saying that.

Do you mean the cover of the TWGMTR album? That might actually be extremely effective. Such a simple, elegant motif with those waves.

Anyway, a full-on redesign might be a pretty big bite to try to chew.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 01:15:02 PM
I was thinking that a forum this important diserves a seriously try-hard mod, who would also redesign the site, while keeping the system easy to use.

I'm a young programmer, with no job as of now, I'd be happy to do it next week before I go back to school.

I know how to add "safe" and "spoiler" tags too.

At the risk of going off-topic I have to say, YES! this forum does need a redesign

Of all the boards I visit, this is the best laid-out and functioning of them all. It's practical and easy to use and most of the folk who post here are okay! That said, a "spoiler-free" facility might be cool.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 23, 2012, 01:16:41 PM
By re design, I mean the look, and not feel, but I could create a feature where you can mark a thread as "spoiler" when necessary.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 01:27:01 PM
By re design, I mean the look, and not feel, but I could create a feature where you can mark a thread as "spoiler" when necessary.

Topic deserves a thread of its own so it can be chewed over among the throng, if the mods and Chuck are willing.

Back to the topic of the thread, I'd love for a "Desper Disc" in the box which offers aural analysis of some of his glorious engineering work in the same way he's offered up studies of CCW and TWGMTR in his own honoured guest thread. One can dream!


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 23, 2012, 01:28:10 PM
Done. :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on August 23, 2012, 01:33:54 PM
I would love to hear Mike's solo albums officially released. the quality on the bootlegs is terrible.
I agree...I'd even buy Goin Public and that's sayin a lot


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 01:44:43 PM
I would love to hear Mike's solo albums officially released. the quality on the bootlegs is terrible.
I agree...I'd even buy Goin Public and that's sayin a lot

Same here... I've three editions already...

Y'know who else we should be including? Blondie - his solo offerings are some of the best of all the present and former Beach Boys. He might have had only a short tenure with the band but I wish this reunion was benefitting from his presence and his creative input. That could have been the sugar frosting on the icing on the marzipan on the cake!


Title: Re:
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 01:51:23 PM
Y'know who else we should be including? Blondie - his solo offerings are some of the best of all the present and former Beach Boys. He might have had only a short tenure with the band but I wish this reunion was benefitting from his presence and his creative input. That could have been the sugar frosting on the icing on the marzipan on the cake!

I probably wouldn't want solo stuff to take up precious space on the box set, but that said, the unreleased second Flame album is amazing. I heard it just the once, and I was blown away. I seriously hope to see that get released.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on August 23, 2012, 02:12:15 PM
Done. :)

Here's the link for anyone having trouble finding it. It's in another section (which makes sense).

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14170.0.html


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 02:22:58 PM
Y'know who else we should be including? Blondie - his solo offerings are some of the best of all the present and former Beach Boys. He might have had only a short tenure with the band but I wish this reunion was benefitting from his presence and his creative input. That could have been the sugar frosting on the icing on the marzipan on the cake!

I probably wouldn't want solo stuff to take up precious space on the box set, but that said, the unreleased second Flame album is amazing. I heard it just the once, and I was blown away. I seriously hope to see that get released.

Agree regarding solo stuff on the box... The space is too precious!

Would love to hear Flame II... Suspect that'll happen one day, along witha legitimate release of the First album. I digress…



Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on August 23, 2012, 03:52:21 PM
Maybe we'll also get another unreleased concert.



I like this idea, get the hits in via the Chicago '65 show


That's on the very top of my wish list.
It's also possible that a lost BBC session from '64 was found (they played "Hushabye" on the radio a few months ago from that session). That would also make a great addition. These shows are not very long and I guess both could easily fit onto one CD


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 23, 2012, 11:35:32 PM
Maybe we'll also get another unreleased concert.



I like this idea, get the hits in via the Chicago '65 show


That's on the very top of my wish list.
It's also possible that a lost BBC session from '64 was found (they played "Hushabye" on the radio a few months ago from that session). That would also make a great addition. TheIe shows are not very long and I guess both could easily fit onto one CD

I'd hope that the BBC might have other gems in its archive, sufficient for it to release its own set in future - bit like it has with the Kinks recently and is set to be doing with the late great John Martyn in the months to come.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 23, 2012, 11:46:49 PM
Live tracks would be great, but not on the box. I'd like to hear full concerts, but they'd fill the box up in no time, and I want as as much room as possible saved for the studio rarities.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on August 24, 2012, 12:51:31 AM
Do we know who is compiling the tracklisting yet? I very much hope it´s Alan Boyd or someone similar and not the group themselves, otherwise we´re liable to get Tears In The Morning, Student Demonstration Time, Don´t Go Near The Water (what was THAT lightweight fluff doing on Warmth of the Sun??) etc, and the usual under-representation of Dennis, who´s estate unfortunately has no say in anything.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Loaf on August 24, 2012, 01:21:39 AM
Well in regards to The Beatles, EMI originally wanted to release a single LP of outtakes entitled "Sessions" back in 1985 but it was killed dead because The Beatles at that time had quite the contentious relationship with their old record label and were in the process of suing them.  For what it's worth, I'm of the opinion that "Sessions" might have been better recieved by the general public if it had been released in 1995 in comparison to the "Anthology" series.  Don't get me wrong "Anthology" sold a ton but back when it came out, diehard fans were ticked off at all the remixes while causals ones were expecting a more traditional boxset probably in line with The Beach Boys' "Good Vibrations" box.  There was a great deal of gripes and grumbles from fans who thought they were purchasing a collection of Beatles hits and instead recieved a collection of Beatles alternate takes.  The "Anthology" also probably killed dead the possibly of any future Beatles releases (in the vein of The Beach Boys' "Hawthorne" or Dylan's "Bootleg Series") as well because "Anthology" truly exploited the most commercial material left in The Beatles vaults.  What remains in there now would only be of interests to the diehards whom The Beatles apparently don't market to.  But I digress.

I agree that Sessions would have been a MUCH better release. It basically cut away the fat and would have given us most of the essential stuff. You could have had "Free As A Bird" and "Real Love" at the beginning, and that would be that.

However, I do think there is a bit of material left for a great Beatles archival release. You could have "Sour Milk Sea" with George on vocals, "Goodbye" by McCartney, a finished "Now And Then", and probably some other stuff.

But anyways, enough about The Beatles.

Am I the only one who LOVED the Anthology Sets...? I was on the verge of casual -> diehard transition and it was perfect.

It's the alternative-universe Beatles narrative.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on August 24, 2012, 01:39:39 AM
Do we know who is compiling the tracklisting yet? I very much hope it´s Alan Boyd or someone similar and not the group themselves, otherwise we´re liable to get Tears In The Morning, Student Demonstration Time, Don´t Go Near The Water (what was THAT lightweight fluff doing on Warmth of the Sun??) etc, and the usual under-representation of Dennis, who´s estate unfortunately has no say in anything.

why does Dennis' estate have no say? I have seen this before, that only Mike, Al, Brian and Carl's estate has a say, but why not Dennis? I know at some point they took away his rights in the late 70's so Mike, Al and Bruce could override Carl and Dennis (and perhaps Brian's) opinions/decisions. Was this not key to Dennis getting depressed and falling out further?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on August 24, 2012, 01:40:08 AM
I do love them, kinda. Six discs filled with great songs by one of the greatest bands ever, what's not to love? But to be honest, I would be happier with one jam-packed double CD. All the unreleased songs and significantly different versions, and that would be it.

And they kind of screwed up by editing some of the songs, comping songs from different takes and not including Carnival of Light! So, George didn't like avant garde, like the official explanation? Boo-hoo! And those speech tracks on Anthology 1 were useless at best.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 24, 2012, 02:35:26 AM
why does Dennis' estate have no say?
They sold their share to BRI.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on August 24, 2012, 03:26:04 AM
why does Dennis' estate have no say? I have seen this before, that only Mike, Al, Brian and Carl's estate has a say, but why not Dennis? I know at some point they took away his rights in the late 70's so Mike, Al and Bruce could override Carl and Dennis (and perhaps Brian's) opinions/decisions. Was this not key to Dennis getting depressed and falling out further?

Not exactly - in the late seventies, Brian couldn't be bothered with corporate affairs, so he either just didn't show/vote, or gave his vote to Mike... but the end result was much the same. Dennis' estate sold his vote and share of BRI back to the corporation for a reduction in his outstanding debts.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on August 24, 2012, 03:55:47 AM
Do we know who is compiling the tracklisting yet? I very much hope it´s Alan Boyd or someone similar and not the group themselves, otherwise we´re liable to get Tears In The Morning, Student Demonstration Time, Don´t Go Near The Water (what was THAT lightweight fluff doing on Warmth of the Sun??) etc, and the usual under-representation of Dennis, who´s estate unfortunately has no say in anything.

Alan has apparently taken a step back from BB's archival product this year, for reasons including but not limited to his health scare earlier this year. Unless they're getting someone else in, you're looking at Mark Linett and Dennis Wolfe (who lead up TSS) as the guys behind it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on August 24, 2012, 04:36:55 AM
Do we know who is compiling the tracklisting yet? I very much hope it´s Alan Boyd or someone similar and not the group themselves, otherwise we´re liable to get Tears In The Morning, Student Demonstration Time, Don´t Go Near The Water (what was THAT lightweight fluff doing on Warmth of the Sun??) etc, and the usual under-representation of Dennis, who´s estate unfortunately has no say in anything.

Alan has apparently taken a step back from BB's archival product this year, for reasons including but not limited to his health scare earlier this year. Unless they're getting someone else in, you're looking at Mark Linett and Dennis Wolfe (who lead up TSS) as the guys behind it.

Well as the TSS box was fantastic that´s very good news, if its the case...


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on August 24, 2012, 04:42:04 AM
Ah yeah. Dennis Wolfe in particular seems very cool and totally appropriate for this sort of thing - he's the guy running things from the label's end, it would seem, so in light of that he was able to get TSS up to 5 discs and probably sell the big brass on things like the packaging and lavish booklet, which Mark & Alan noted they had a bit of difficulty with. [/speculation based on his job title]

He's also linked with the reissue campaign, lest we forget. So this should be great!


Title: Re: \
Post by: donald on August 24, 2012, 08:31:36 AM
The GV box had around 140-145 songs on 5 discs.  SOS had 30 songs on 1 disc.  If we had close to 30 songs per disc on a 6 disc set that could be around 180 songs.  That leaves room for about 40 more songs than the GV box.  Supposing they would leave off around 20 cuts from GV, that would leave room for 60 different cuts other than what was on GV.

Now, make a wish list of 60 cuts you would add IF YOU WERE IN CHARGE of this project.

I might include;

California Feeling with the Carl and Bruce vocals
SIP single and lp versions
Selected Live cuts from the Live BOX SET tour of 93 (remains unreleased)
Selected cuts from the Live Nassau show (remains unreleased)
A few DW gems
Selected tunes from TWGMTR
DFTS from the Postcard LP
Today from BLW
Maybe from BB85
A dozen of the best unreleased songs out there on boots, cleaned up

feel free to add or make your own list....there is room for much more



Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 24, 2012, 09:06:08 AM
The GV box had around 140-145 songs on 5 discs.  SOS had 30 songs on 1 disc.  If we had close to 30 songs per disc on a 6 disc set that could be around 180 songs.  That leaves room for about 40 more songs than the GV box.  Supposing they would leave off around 20 cuts from GV, that would leave room for 60 different cuts other than what was on GV.

Now, make a wish list of 60 cuts you would add IF YOU WERE IN CHARGE of this project.

I might include;

California Feeling with the Carl and Bruce vocals
SIP single and lp versions
Selected Live cuts from the Live BOX SET tour of 93 (remains unreleased)
Selected cuts from the Live Nassau show (remains unreleased)
A few DW gems
Selected tunes from TWGMTR
DFTS from the Postcard LP
Today from BLW
Maybe from BB85
A dozen of the best unreleased songs out there on boots, cleaned up

feel free to add or make your own list....there is room for much more

As others have said, I hope they omit live tracks from this set to allow for more studio work to find its debut release. A live box could find its way out there one day in the future consisting of some of the stellar gigs they have in the archive.

Same with the solo stuff… save it for a rainy day.

And I hope they're not going to duplicate much of any of the 93 box. Fans have had nearly 20 years to buy that now and if they've missed their chance, well, they blew it.  Let's have all-new stuff if possible.

Oh, and my copy of the GV Box had six CDs, not five…  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 24, 2012, 09:11:26 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Matt H on August 24, 2012, 09:13:54 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

I think the sixth CD was specific to Europe.


And I hope they're not going to duplicate much of any of the 93 box. Fans have had nearly 20 years to buy that now and if they've missed their chance, well, they blew it.  Let's have all-new stuff if possible.

I think it is safe to say that a lot of the 93 box set tracks will be there (hits).  It would be nice if unreleased tracks from the 93 set are not duplicated here, and we only get new unreleased tracks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 24, 2012, 09:16:19 AM
The GV box had around 140-145 songs on 5 discs.  SOS had 30 songs on 1 disc.  If we had close to 30 songs per disc on a 6 disc set that could be around 180 songs.  That leaves room for about 40 more songs than the GV box.  Supposing they would leave off around 20 cuts from GV, that would leave room for 60 different cuts other than what was on GV.

Now, make a wish list of 60 cuts you would add IF YOU WERE IN CHARGE of this project.

I might include;

California Feeling with the Carl and Bruce vocals
SIP single and lp versions
Selected Live cuts from the Live BOX SET tour of 93 (remains unreleased)
Selected cuts from the Live Nassau show (remains unreleased)
A few DW gems
Selected tunes from TWGMTR
DFTS from the Postcard LP
Today from BLW
Maybe from BB85
A dozen of the best unreleased songs out there on boots, cleaned up

feel free to add or make your own list....there is room for much more



Stuff I really want:

"Back Home" (B. Wilson/B. Norberg) 1963
"Where Is She" (B. Wilson) 1969
"(Wouldn't It Be Nice To) Live Again" (D. Wilson/S. Shapiro) 1971
"California Feelin'" (B. Wilson/S. Kalinich) 1974
"Barnyard Blues" (D. Wilson/C. Wilson) 1974
"In The Back Of My Mind" (B. Wilson/M. Love) 1975
"Goin' To The Beach" (B. Wilson/M. Love) 1979
"Boys And Girls" (B. Wilson) 1980
"Sweetie" (B. Wilson) 1981
"Dancing The Night Away" (B. Wilson/A. Paley/M. Love) 1995

I would also like to have the single mixes of "California Saga: California", "Rock And Roll Music", and "It's OK".

Besides that, anything else that I don't know of, such as late '60s/early '70s compositions by Brian or Dennis that we've never heard of. I'll take those if there are any.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 24, 2012, 09:21:36 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

I think the sixth CD was specific to Europe.
 

Sorry, I meant the fifth CD.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on August 24, 2012, 09:21:45 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

Not on my GV box set it didn´t. It had six songs, which appeared to have been picked entirely to appease the non-Wilson members of the group, urgo we got Tears In The Morning and Sumahama amongst others.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Roger Ryan on August 24, 2012, 09:28:07 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

Not on my GV box set it didn´t. It had six songs, which appeared to have been picked entirely to appease the non-Wilson members of the group, urgo we got Tears In The Morning and Sumahama amongst others.

The sixth disc was for Europe only and featured songs that were hits in Europe but not in the U.S. (which is why they weren't included among the first four discs).


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on August 24, 2012, 09:35:06 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

Not on my GV box set it didn´t. It had six songs, which appeared to have been picked entirely to appease the non-Wilson members of the group, urgo we got Tears In The Morning and Sumahama amongst others.

The sixth disc was for Europe only and featured songs that were hits in Europe but not in the U.S. (which is why they weren't included among the first four discs).

...is the correct answer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on August 24, 2012, 10:01:21 AM
Dennis' estate sold his vote and share of BRI back to the corporation for a reduction in his outstanding debts.


Which is too bad because Dennis gets overlooked (maybe because some people realize that his songs would outshine their own songs?). The P.O.B. re-issue was a big success and I guess it was only becaue of that that "Lady" got on Summer Love Songs. I was hoping that it opened the door for more Dennis material. Let's hope....


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 24, 2012, 10:07:11 AM
The sixth CD consisted of repeated songs from the other discs, because of prohibitive costs regarding publishing. Something to keep in mind for this new box.

Not on my GV box set it didn´t. It had six songs, which appeared to have been picked entirely to appease the non-Wilson members of the group, urgo we got Tears In The Morning and Sumahama amongst others.

Yes, I know this. The correction was already noted.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 24, 2012, 11:33:46 AM
Ian, the 6th CD was a Europe exclusive and had studio songs not found elsewhere on the set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 24, 2012, 11:47:53 AM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 24, 2012, 11:50:54 AM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on August 24, 2012, 01:54:01 PM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.

lady is fallin in love right?  It was on Summer Love Songs.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 24, 2012, 02:04:50 PM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.

lady is fallin in love right?  It was on Summer Love Songs.

Yeah, but it was actually a remix of different elements, so it's not really the original song.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 24, 2012, 02:13:03 PM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.

I recall someone saying here that Brian was on Sound of Free. I can't really hear him, but if that's true, it's a contender...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 24, 2012, 02:17:41 PM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.

I recall someone saying here that Brian was on Sound of Free. I can't really hear him, but if that's true, it's a contender...

I'd love to hear a cleaner version.

As a side note, although it wouldn't happen, an LP of the 'Best' Unreleased stuff would be brilliant for the super nerds in us!


Title: Re: \
Post by: willy on August 24, 2012, 02:41:06 PM
Back to The Beatles[/b]:  The "Made In California" thing had me thinking, didn't The Beatles release a "Direct From Liverpool Box Set" back in the eighties that was more of a traditional box set that was packaged in a crate like package?  I think it was called "The Beatles Box" or something like that?

Yes it was called 'The Beatles Box', released on EMI's subsidiary World Records..


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on August 24, 2012, 04:04:39 PM
The GV box had around 140-145 songs on 5 discs.  SOS had 30 songs on 1 disc.  If we had close to 30 songs per disc on a 6 disc set that could be around 180 songs.  That leaves room for about 40 more songs than the GV box.  Supposing they would leave off around 20 cuts from GV, that would leave room for 60 different cuts other than what was on GV.

Now, make a wish list of 60 cuts you would add IF YOU WERE IN CHARGE of this project.

I might include;

California Feeling with the Carl and Bruce vocals
SIP single and lp versions
Selected Live cuts from the Live BOX SET tour of 93 (remains unreleased)
Selected cuts from the Live Nassau show (remains unreleased)
A few DW gems
Selected tunes from TWGMTR
DFTS from the Postcard LP
Today from BLW
Maybe from BB85
A dozen of the best unreleased songs out there on boots, cleaned up

feel free to add or make your own list....there is room for much more

As others have said, I hope they omit live tracks from this set to allow for more studio work to find its debut release. A live box could find its way out there one day in the future consisting of some of the stellar gigs they have in the archive.

Same with the solo stuff… save it for a rainy day.

And I hope they're not going to duplicate much of any of the 93 box. Fans have had nearly 20 years to buy that now and if they've missed their chance, well, they blew it.  Let's have all-new stuff if possible.

Oh, and my copy of the GV Box had six CDs, not five…  ;D

+1


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 25, 2012, 01:49:33 AM
Of Course, while it's technically solo, you could finally have a CD release of Sound Of Free

Consider "Lady", among others.

lady is fallin in love right?  It was on Summer Love Songs.

Yeah, but it was actually a remix of different elements, so it's not really the original song.

Still - this recording was issued as a Dennis Wilson solo single and much later made a Beach Boys compilation. I wouldn't say "Sound Of Free" is unlikely to appear on the box set, with that considered.


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on August 25, 2012, 08:10:45 AM
It would be really neat if the box set actually used the (mono, where applicable) single versions of all the songs that have such versions (whether or not they're discrete mixes compared to the album versions), should those songs get included in the box. This would be especially excellent for the late 1960s and basically all through their 1970s catalogue!

I'd also love to see vocals- and track-only mixes of "A Day in the Life of a Tree", "'Til I Die", "Please Let Me Wonder", "Time to Get Alone", "Ding Dang", "I'll Bet He's Nice", and... oh, I'm sure I could find more if I looked but those come to mind immediately.


Title: Re:
Post by: Rocker on August 25, 2012, 08:55:35 AM
It would be really neat if the box set actually used the (mono, where applicable) single versions of all the songs that have such versions (whether or not they're discrete mixes compared to the album versions), should those songs get included in the box. This would be especially excellent for the late 1960s and basically all through their 1970s catalogue!

I'd also love to see vocals- and track-only mixes of "A Day in the Life of a Tree", "'Til I Die", "Please Let Me Wonder", "Time to Get Alone", "Ding Dang", "I'll Bet He's Nice", and... oh, I'm sure I could find more if I looked but those come to mind immediately.


Absolutely agree ! I hope for many 70s stuff and session outtakes


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 27, 2012, 10:04:53 AM
Just heard the entire "Love You Piano Demo" tape. It's without a doubt the greatest Brian work of art post-SMiLE.

I'm working on splicing out the mistakes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 27, 2012, 10:11:24 AM
Wow I would love to hear that!


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 27, 2012, 10:21:50 AM
Just heard the entire "Love You Piano Demo" tape. It's without a doubt the greatest Brian work of art post-SMiLE.

I'm working on splicing out the mistakes.

Anyone know if this is all that exists of these songs? Are there other Love You era songs with similar recordings that haven't gotten out yet? "My Diane" in this setting would be really cool to hear.

And yeah, indeed a great listen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 27, 2012, 10:23:19 AM
It's almost as amazing as Wild Honey in stereo!


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 27, 2012, 10:25:57 AM
"I bet he's nice" and "LPOHT" are amazing. And LPOHT is very very clear as well.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on August 27, 2012, 10:29:25 AM
"I bet he's nice" and "LPOHT" are amazing. And LPOHT is very very clear as well.

Hmm, you're referring to the demos you can find on 'The Alternate Love You Album - Brian Loves You' and 'Dumb Angel Rarities, Vol. 03', I guess?


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 27, 2012, 10:30:12 AM
They were sent to me, so I'm not sure... They're all good quality and complete recordings, 5 love you songs.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 27, 2012, 10:32:56 AM
Is this not a slight deviation I see occuring?


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on August 27, 2012, 10:34:03 AM
They were sent to me, so I'm not sure... They're all good quality and complete recordings, 5 love you songs.

Yeah! They're great - all though 'Rarities' have six songs from 'Love You', but also couple of other demos from the same year.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on August 27, 2012, 10:35:04 AM
Well, I meant to add that they should be on the box, but got sidetracked while typing haha


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 27, 2012, 10:38:29 AM
Is this not a slight deviation I see occuring?

If by "slight" you mean "relevant" :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on August 27, 2012, 03:20:45 PM
Ooh, I was just watching American Band and now I know what song I really want on the box set: "Rock and Roll Woman."  One of my favorite Buffalo Springfield songs and the Beach Boys version is awesome.

EDIT:  And "Okie from Muskogee" too.  I don't think either song has ever been on an officially released Beach Boys album.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on August 27, 2012, 03:54:35 PM
It just dawned me that the box might include some 2011-2012 outtakes as well, from the TWGMTR sessions. Could it be we get to hear rest of the suite on the box?

DROOL..................................................

.......................................SLOBBER....................................................DROOL..................................

 :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: Heysaboda on August 27, 2012, 04:12:49 PM
Of all the boards I visit, this is the best laid-out and functioning of them all. It's practical and easy to use and most of the folk who post here are okay! 

What John said times 1,000!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 27, 2012, 04:51:27 PM
I don't think we should change the board at all. It's one of the best around there is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 27, 2012, 06:23:10 PM
teh hell happened to this thread?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on August 27, 2012, 06:33:05 PM
teh hell happened to this thread?

I think most of us figured we were on the cusp of getting some big news on the box, and then.........nothing.


We can only fantasize about what we hope is on there for so long. Hopefully we get some substantial news soon.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on August 27, 2012, 06:35:06 PM
teh hell happened to this thread?

I think most of us figured we were on the cusp of getting some big news on the box, and then.........nothing.


We can only fantasize about what we hope is on there for so long. Hopefully we get some substantial news soon.

I'm sure after the other Beach Boys releases come out they'll start shedding some light on the box set. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: coco1997 on August 27, 2012, 10:27:17 PM
It just dawned me that the box might include some 2011-2012 outtakes as well, from the TWGMTR sessions. Could it be we get to hear rest of the suite on the box?

DROOL..................................................

.......................................SLOBBER....................................................DROOL..................................

 :lol

I thought the suite was never finished?


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 27, 2012, 10:49:47 PM
teh hell happened to this thread?

I think most of us figured we were on the cusp of getting some big news on the box, and then.........nothing.


We can only fantasize about what we hope is on there for so long. Hopefully we get some substantial news soon.
Maybe an announcement at the Grammy museum event in Sept? That's just before the albums get reissued so maybe appropriate for Mike or A. N. Other to let slip details of the exciting Christmas goodies which will be made available for anyone who likes 'em.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on August 28, 2012, 03:00:48 AM
It just dawned me that the box might include some 2011-2012 outtakes as well, from the TWGMTR sessions. Could it be we get to hear rest of the suite on the box?

DROOL..................................................

.......................................SLOBBER....................................................DROOL..................................

 :lol
Doesn't mean there isn't leftover stuff they could release.  ;) There should be a few 'finished' tracks leftover from TWGMTR alone.

I thought the suite was never finished?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 28, 2012, 06:37:52 AM
teh hell happened to this thread?

I think most of us figured we were on the cusp of getting some big news on the box, and then.........nothing.


We can only fantasize about what we hope is on there for so long. Hopefully we get some substantial news soon.

Haha, no, I mean suddenly there's heysaboda's post quoting something from a very different thread and you agreeing with him. I was cornfused.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 28, 2012, 10:20:27 AM
New teaser:

"Their upcoming six-CD career spanning box set, Made In California, is scheduled for late November and will include a substantial amount of unreleased and remixed tracks, along with all of the band's greatest hits."

http://www.wmmr.com/music/news/story.aspx?ID=1763692


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 28, 2012, 10:54:38 AM
Including their hits is painfully redudant, but expected. ARGHZ.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 28, 2012, 11:01:09 AM
I hope the "greatest hits" come in the form of an unreleased alternate take or newly remixed form...that would be the best way to include the tracks without having us to shell out $$ for songs we already have 100 times over.  I'm not even sure why they'd have to include any of the hits on this box set.  What new fan is going to buy a box set of greatest hits and unreleased tracks as their first introduction to the band?  No matter how great the '93 box set was or Hawthorne was...if I was a new fan, that'd be the last place I'd start.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 28, 2012, 11:13:02 AM
I know many casual fans who bought the GV box because it contained the hits, which they wanted all in one place. And they got into things like Smile as a result.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on August 28, 2012, 11:18:32 AM
I know many casual fans who bought the GV box because it contained the hits, which they wanted all in one place. And they got into things like Smile as a result.

How did the 70 prior hits collections elude them?


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 28, 2012, 11:19:32 AM
I know many casual fans who bought the GV box because it contained the hits, which they wanted all in one place. And they got into things like Smile as a result.

How did the 70 prior hits collections elude them?

I dunno, maybe the fact that none of them were truly career-spanning put them off.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GoofyJeff on August 28, 2012, 11:20:26 AM
It might also be that "Made in California" will become the quintessential collection... all the hits, a boatload of rarities and unreleased gems... all in one place.  

I'll withhold further judgement until I see the tracklist.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 28, 2012, 11:21:54 AM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-disc box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the entire catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 28, 2012, 11:27:14 AM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.

I agree about unreleased material. But The Beach Boys aren't seen as an album band by the mainstream rock listener, Pet Sounds/Smile aside. So a box set of theirs would have been looked at in a similar way to boxes by Patsy Cline, Miracles, etc.  There are probably many people here who haven't listened through every Beach Boys album. I don't think of the BB as an album-centered act myself, and that is a compliment.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 28, 2012, 11:27:33 AM
It might also be that "Made in California" will become the quintessential collection... all the hits, a boatload of rarities and unreleased gems... all in one place.  

I'll withhold further judgement until I see the tracklist.

Agreed. I take this as good news. We knew the hits were gonna be on the box - did anyone really think there would be a 6 disc box without the foundation of the Beach Boys' popularity? Skip the new greatest hits collections and splurge on the album reissues and the box - I'm sure there will be enough goodies to justify everything.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 28, 2012, 11:30:05 AM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the entire catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.

I don't know, I mean I think we're over-generalizing what a 'casual' fan is. They're not all 'I heard "Surfin' Safari" on the radio; that's a cool jam' people ... I mean, i know plenty of people who maybe have heard Smiley Smiley & Friends, are familiar with the early hits, but maybe haven't heard Sunflower ... who maybe would enjoy Adult Child, you know? Plenty of 'serious' music fans buy box sets to delve deeper into a band they are somewhat familiar with and want a definitive collection but don't want to do all the research to find the coolest stuff themselves.

For instance, I would buy a definitive Monkees box, but not all the individual albums or any greatest hits.


Title: "Made in California" Box Set
Post by: Heysaboda on August 28, 2012, 11:31:44 AM
Well, maybe the fact that they will have just released 2 separate greatest hits sets means that the new Made in California box will be light on the "hits" and heavy on rarities?


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 28, 2012, 11:32:09 AM

For instance, I would buy a definitive Monkees box, but not all the individual albums or any greatest hits.

Music Box is pretty excellent in that regard.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on August 28, 2012, 11:34:41 AM
Well, maybe the fact that they will have just released 2 separate greatest hits sets means that the new Made in California box will be light on the "hits" and heavy on rarities?


That is what I am hoping that this box set given it's apparent girth of six discs is going to be marketed to the collector.  Honestly I'd be happy with three discs of hits and three discs of rarities as unlikely as that will be. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on August 28, 2012, 11:36:02 AM
New teaser:

"Their upcoming six-CD career spanning box set, Made In California, is scheduled for late November and will include a substantial amount of unreleased and remixed tracks, along with all of the band's greatest hits."

http://www.wmmr.com/music/news/story.aspx?ID=1763692

Sploosh!


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 28, 2012, 11:37:43 AM

For instance, I would buy a definitive Monkees box, but not all the individual albums or any greatest hits.

Music Box is pretty excellent in that regard.

ha, yeh i had that one awhile ago ... good box


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 28, 2012, 11:39:17 AM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.

I agree about unreleased material. But The Beach Boys aren't seen as an album band by the mainstream rock listener, Pet Sounds/Smile aside. So a box set of theirs would have been looked at in a similar way to boxes by Patsy Cline, Miracles, etc.  There are probably many people here who haven't listened through every Beach Boys album. I don't think of the BB as an album-centered act myself, and that is a compliment.

Fair points...for those adventurous fans who'd be willing to get the new box set could have a nice "sampler" of the entire BB catalog.  I suppose such a box set could make a casual fan into a more serious fan.  They could hear the tunes in the set and then look for the albums for which they came from.


I don't know, I mean I think we're over-generalizing what a 'casual' fan is. They're not all 'I heard "Surfin' Safari" on the radio; that's a cool jam' people ... I mean, i know plenty of people who maybe have heard Smiley Smiley & Friends, are familiar with the early hits, but maybe haven't heard Sunflower ... who maybe would enjoy Adult Child, you know? Plenty of 'serious' music fans buy box sets to delve deeper into a band they are somewhat familiar with and want a definitive collection but don't want to do all the research to find the coolest stuff themselves.

For instance, I would buy a definitive Monkees box, but not all the individual albums or any greatest hits.

True.  I know I've shelled out some big bucks for a couple box sets of artists' I enjoyed casually but wanted to get serious about.  But they were mainly just box sets of their full catalog of released studio albums.  Mixing the unreleased stuff sort of trips me up...I don't like listening to an unreleased track without knowing its context of where it came from, what period/era it was recorded and etc etc.  That's just me, I guess.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 28, 2012, 12:00:30 PM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.

I agree about unreleased material. But The Beach Boys aren't seen as an album band by the mainstream rock listener, Pet Sounds/Smile aside. So a box set of theirs would have been looked at in a similar way to boxes by Patsy Cline, Miracles, etc.  There are probably many people here who haven't listened through every Beach Boys album. I don't think of the BB as an album-centered act myself, and that is a compliment.

Fair points...for those adventurous fans who'd be willing to get the new box set could have a nice "sampler" of the entire BB catalog.  I suppose such a box set could make a casual fan into a more serious fan.  They could hear the tunes in the set and then look for the albums for which they came from.

On the other hand, something that could support your point of view is that box sets sell nowhere near the amount they did in the 90's. Casual fans in this era are more likely to download all the tracks they want, now that the desire and need for physical product has been broken.
If this new box were a definitive career-spanning summary, the hits would be a must. But I have doubts that it will be. The mono format of the first two discs in the GV box will for me, at least, give that set the nod.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on August 28, 2012, 12:02:51 PM
I applaud anyone who is bold enough to jump into a multi-box set containing a mix of hits and unreleased tunes even if you're just a casual fan.  To me, it'd be an overwhelming experience that may or may not pay off.  Getting everything like that so early in the fandom sort of puts things out of context for me.  I work through the released albums and get to know the catalog and then later I "reward" myself by looking into the unreleased material found on box sets or archive releases when I can finally appreciate the rare items.

I agree about unreleased material. But The Beach Boys aren't seen as an album band by the mainstream rock listener, Pet Sounds/Smile aside. So a box set of theirs would have been looked at in a similar way to boxes by Patsy Cline, Miracles, etc.  There are probably many people here who haven't listened through every Beach Boys album. I don't think of the BB as an album-centered act myself, and that is a compliment.

Fair points...for those adventurous fans who'd be willing to get the new box set could have a nice "sampler" of the entire BB catalog.  I suppose such a box set could make a casual fan into a more serious fan.  They could hear the tunes in the set and then look for the albums for which they came from.


I don't know, I mean I think we're over-generalizing what a 'casual' fan is. They're not all 'I heard "Surfin' Safari" on the radio; that's a cool jam' people ... I mean, i know plenty of people who maybe have heard Smiley Smiley & Friends, are familiar with the early hits, but maybe haven't heard Sunflower ... who maybe would enjoy Adult Child, you know? Plenty of 'serious' music fans buy box sets to delve deeper into a band they are somewhat familiar with and want a definitive collection but don't want to do all the research to find the coolest stuff themselves.

For instance, I would buy a definitive Monkees box, but not all the individual albums or any greatest hits.

True.  I know I've shelled out some big bucks for a couple box sets of artists' I enjoyed casually but wanted to get serious about.  But they were mainly just box sets of their full catalog of released studio albums.  Mixing the unreleased stuff sort of trips me up...I don't like listening to an unreleased track without knowing its context of where it came from, what period/era it was recorded and etc etc.  That's just me, I guess.

i hear ya, but in the case of groups like our Beach Boys and the Monkees, often the unreleased stuff is superior to the released stuff (i.e. MIU instead of ADULT CHILD) ... the booklets inside usually provide context !


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ram4 on August 28, 2012, 02:17:22 PM
Well this went straight to the top of this years wish list.  Although I'll wait to open this gift.  SMiLE Sessions I couldn't wait for.  The wait was killing me because unlike many of you, I had not heard most of the sessions beforehand and it was all new to me.  Looking forward to what's going to be on this one! :-D 


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 28, 2012, 02:33:35 PM
This site...

http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/poprock/detail/-/art/Beach-Boys-Made-In-California-Limited-Bo/hnum/3084686

… Has November 16 release date.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 28, 2012, 03:20:52 PM
On the other hand, something that could support your point of view is that box sets sell nowhere near the amount they did in the 90's. Casual fans in this era are more likely to download all the tracks they want, now that the desire and need for physical product has been broken.
If this new box were a definitive career-spanning summary, the hits would be a must. But I have doubts that it will be. The mono format of the first two discs in the GV box will for me, at least, give that set the nod.

That's a very good point.  All of the Elvis box sets I own were all released in the 90's.  Fans haven't had a proper archive release like those in a very, very long time.  Those were great times for physical media lovers.  They have a fine line to balance with "Made In California"...a career-spanning box set is easy but a full throttle archive/rarities set is more rewarding in the long run.  Let's hope for the best!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on August 28, 2012, 03:23:04 PM
i hear ya, but in the case of groups like our Beach Boys and the Monkees, often the unreleased stuff is superior to the released stuff (i.e. MIU instead of ADULT CHILD) ... the booklets inside usually provide context !

Yes indeed good call.  AGD mentioned earlier that this is really their last opportunity to release such a huge product for it to make any kind of impact.  I'm hoping they do it justice.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on August 28, 2012, 03:51:55 PM
Remixed tracks?   ???

Hopefully they mean fresh full and bright sounding mixes of old favorites (Some "first time in stereo stuff" perhaps) and not any sort of "Club Mixes" if you know what I mean?

With this band you never know?  Maybe we'll get some mash-ups of Beach Boys favorites  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on August 28, 2012, 08:39:48 PM
Remixed tracks?   ???

Hopefully they mean fresh full and bright sounding mixes of old favorites (Some "first time in stereo stuff" perhaps) and not any sort of "Club Mixes" if you know what I mean?

With this band you never know?  Maybe we'll get some mash-ups of Beach Boys favorites  :lol

Of course they mean the type of remixes they have been doing for over 15 years now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shelter on August 28, 2012, 11:55:57 PM
Remixed tracks?   ???

Hopefully they mean fresh full and bright sounding mixes of old favorites (Some "first time in stereo stuff" perhaps) and not any sort of "Club Mixes" if you know what I mean?

With this band you never know?  Maybe we'll get some mash-ups of Beach Boys favorites  :lol

With the earlier rarities compilations in mind, I'm guessing that remixed in this case could also mean that there will be binaural mixes (vocals on one channel, music on the other), a capella mixes or radically different alternate mixes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: shadownoze on August 29, 2012, 07:12:41 AM
The band Jellyfish only put out two albums, but they eventually issued a 4-CD boxed set which contained NONE of those album tracks. Instead it had the demos of every song, alternate versions, live versions, b-sides and unreleased stuff. It was a great compilation which proved you could do a career-spanning box without including the "hits".


Title: Re: \
Post by: GeorgeFellInHisHorn on August 29, 2012, 07:28:39 AM
The band Jellyfish only put out two albums, but they eventually issued a 4-CD boxed set which contained NONE of those album tracks. Instead it had the demos of every song, alternate versions, live versions, b-sides and unreleased stuff. It was a great compilation which proved you could do a career-spanning box without including the "hits".

Uhm, what?! Why have I never heard of this boxset! I love Jellyfish.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 29, 2012, 09:10:37 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on August 29, 2012, 09:17:00 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

Awesome. And it also might indicate that 'Friends', '20/20'  and 'Holland' has been remastered in 2012. :D


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 29, 2012, 09:17:33 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

That bodes well for future stereo releases of their respective albums then. Cool.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 29, 2012, 09:41:28 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

Awesome. And it also might indicate that 'Friends', '20/20'  and 'Holland' has been remastered in 2012. :D

Not sure about 20/20; two of the three of the 20/20 era tracks on there – Do It Again and Cottonfields – had differing single mixes which might be the ones used here. That only leaves one from the album, I Can Hear Music.  I know, I'm being a pedant!!  ;D

Why the fork, however, isn't Breakaway on this set? I know, I know, you can only have 50 from the many, but still…


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on August 29, 2012, 09:45:41 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

Awesome. And it also might indicate that 'Friends', '20/20'  and 'Holland' has been remastered in 2012. :D

Not sure about 20/20; two of the three of the 20/20 era tracks on there – Do It Again and Cottonfields – had differing single mixes which might be the ones used here. That only leaves one from the album, I Can Hear Music.  I know, I'm being a pedant!!  ;D

Why the fork, however, isn't Breakaway on this set? I know, I know, you can only have 50 from the many, but still…

Good point - we can hope though. :)
And I agree, I rather have Breakaway any day over Cottonfields!


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on August 29, 2012, 09:51:31 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

Awesome. And it also might indicate that 'Friends', '20/20'  and 'Holland' has been remastered in 2012. :D

Not sure about 20/20; two of the three of the 20/20 era tracks on there – Do It Again and Cottonfields – had differing single mixes which might be the ones used here. That only leaves one from the album, I Can Hear Music.  I know, I'm being a pedant!!  ;D

Why the fork, however, isn't Breakaway on this set? I know, I know, you can only have 50 from the many, but still…

Good point - we can hope though. :)
And I agree, I rather have Breakaway any day over Cottonfields!
Cottonfields was in the live set, whereas Break Away was not. These 50 Big Ones with the exception of 3 songs have all been in and out of the Reunion setlist.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 29, 2012, 09:58:32 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

I don't see "Aren't you glad" on there, not excited  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on August 29, 2012, 10:11:16 AM
I don't see "Aren't you glad" on there, not excited  ;D

That's because it's a Greatest Hits release.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on August 29, 2012, 10:13:44 AM
I don't see "Aren't you glad" on there, not excited  ;D

That's because it's a Greatest Hits release.

Yeah I know..

It was just a joke  ;)


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on August 29, 2012, 10:21:09 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1

Awesome. And it also might indicate that 'Friends', '20/20'  and 'Holland' has been remastered in 2012. :D

Not sure about 20/20; two of the three of the 20/20 era tracks on there – Do It Again and Cottonfields – had differing single mixes which might be the ones used here. That only leaves one from the album, I Can Hear Music.  I know, I'm being a pedant!!  ;D

Why the fork, however, isn't Breakaway on this set? I know, I know, you can only have 50 from the many, but still…

Good point - we can hope though. :)
And I agree, I rather have Breakaway any day over Cottonfields!
Cottonfields was in the live set, whereas Break Away was not. These 50 Big Ones with the exception of 3 songs have all been in and out of the Reunion setlist.

True doctor, though I'd have Break Away in the live set any day over Cottonfields ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on August 29, 2012, 10:22:43 AM
.... waiting for track list for Made In California.....

....


...


..

.

 :'(


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ram4 on August 29, 2012, 10:29:16 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1
Also interesting that I Get Around, Help Me Rhonda and Fun Fun Fun are all still in mono but Do You Wanna Dance and Barbara Ann use their new 2012 stereo mixes.  Just to be 100% sure, I Get Around and Help Me Rhonda were remixed into stereo (as best as they could) on the new All Summer Long and SDSN CDs right?  Are they clearly inferior mixes to the usual mono ones?  I guess the stereo Fun Fun Fun wasn't kept because of that horrible fade out.

It also indicates a 2012 stereo mix for Heroes and Villains, which means this is yet another stereo mix attempt (unless it's a typo and is the 2011 mix).  Very cool to see the two Wild Honey tracks in stereo, can't wait to hear them.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on August 29, 2012, 10:34:11 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1
Also interesting that I Get Around, Help Me Rhonda and Fun Fun Fun are all still in mono but Do You Wanna Dance and Barbara Ann use their new 2012 stereo mixes.  Just to be 100% sure, I Get Around and Help Me Rhonda were remixed into stereo (as best as they could) on the new All Summer Long and SDSN CDs right?  Are they clearly inferior mixes to the usual mono ones?

They are extraction mixes, and would stick out a mile on the comp.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 29, 2012, 10:40:27 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1
Also interesting that I Get Around, Help Me Rhonda and Fun Fun Fun are all still in mono but Do You Wanna Dance and Barbara Ann use their new 2012 stereo mixes.  Just to be 100% sure, I Get Around and Help Me Rhonda were remixed into stereo (as best as they could) on the new All Summer Long and SDSN CDs right?  Are they clearly inferior mixes to the usual mono ones?  I guess the stereo Fun Fun Fun wasn't kept because of that horrible fade out.

It also indicates a 2012 stereo mix for Heroes and Villains, which means this is yet another stereo mix attempt (unless it's a typo and is the 2011 mix).  Very cool to see the two Wild Honey tracks in stereo, can't wait to hear them.

They probably didn't want to have anything with digital extractions on the compilation, which would explain why IGA and HMR aren't in "stereo".
H&V is probably the 2012 stereo mix that appears/will appear on the Smiley Smile remaster.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on August 29, 2012, 11:52:40 AM
German Amazon's tracklisting for 50 Big Ones indicates that Darlin' and Wild Honey will be in stereo.

http://www.amazon.de/Greatest-Hits-Ones-Limited-Edition/dp/B008LA7RH0/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1346256576&sr=8-1
Also interesting that I Get Around, Help Me Rhonda and Fun Fun Fun are all still in mono but Do You Wanna Dance and Barbara Ann use their new 2012 stereo mixes.  Just to be 100% sure, I Get Around and Help Me Rhonda were remixed into stereo (as best as they could) on the new All Summer Long and SDSN CDs right?  Are they clearly inferior mixes to the usual mono ones?  I guess the stereo Fun Fun Fun wasn't kept because of that horrible fade out.

It also indicates a 2012 stereo mix for Heroes and Villains, which means this is yet another stereo mix attempt (unless it's a typo and is the 2011 mix).  Very cool to see the two Wild Honey tracks in stereo, can't wait to hear them.
If it was a true stereo mix, it seems they used it. The songs that used digital extraction were left off and they used the original mono mix instead.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Zach95 on August 29, 2012, 12:31:53 PM
So...50 Big Ones suddenly becomes more appealing to the diehard fan base, no?


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on August 29, 2012, 12:33:47 PM
So...50 Big Ones suddenly becomes more appealing to the diehard fan base, no?

Sure, but I'm sure they will be on the big box, too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on August 29, 2012, 01:18:29 PM
Remixed tracks?   ???

Hopefully they mean fresh full and bright sounding mixes of old favorites (Some "first time in stereo stuff" perhaps) and not any sort of "Club Mixes" if you know what I mean?

With this band you never know?  Maybe we'll get some mash-ups of Beach Boys favorites  :lol

Here Comes The Night (Air Club feat. D. Guetta remix)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on August 29, 2012, 01:25:03 PM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on August 29, 2012, 01:34:02 PM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on August 30, 2012, 05:53:43 AM
Sure, but I'm sure they will be on the big box, too.

Don't be.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on August 30, 2012, 06:44:55 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Billgoodman on August 30, 2012, 11:46:12 PM
Bertus Distribution, Holland indicates the following:

Made in California, 16 november, 6 cd's, 76 euro



Way, way cheaper than TSS!


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on August 31, 2012, 12:37:29 AM
Bertus Distribution, Holland indicates the following:

Made in California, 16 november, 6 cd's, 76 euro



Way, way cheaper than TSS!

Yippee! (I live in Holland, the only foreign country the BBs ever named an album after...). Will order today.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on August 31, 2012, 12:55:02 AM
Isn't Bertus a wholesaler?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on August 31, 2012, 01:26:42 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!

I've never heard this 'hot' mix - how is it different from the usual version (Which I am not a fan of)


Title: Re:
Post by: Billgoodman on August 31, 2012, 02:55:39 AM
Isn't Bertus a wholesaler?

Yes.

Sorry, I said it before in the Remasters-thread. But this is the system Dutch shops use to order cd's. The price can be anything between 90-100 euro's, with taxes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 03, 2012, 03:44:33 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!

I've never heard this 'hot' mix - how is it different from the usual version (Which I am not a fan of)

It's on Get The Boot 2. It's quite muddy quality, because it's ripped from the radio (prefaced by a slightly sleepy sounding Carl interview), but there's a lot more guitar, I think it's sped up, and it's very compressed and loud. Knowing B-Dub, there's probably more moog. It's existence confuses me, tbh..... why did they play it on the radio when they had a single and an album mix?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 03, 2012, 06:01:15 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!

I've never heard this 'hot' mix - how is it different from the usual version (Which I am not a fan of)

It's on Get The Boot 2. It's quite muddy quality, because it's ripped from the radio (prefaced by a slightly sleepy sounding Carl interview), but there's a lot more guitar, I think it's sped up, and it's very compressed and loud. Knowing B-Dub, there's probably more moog. It's existence confuses me, tbh..... why did they play it on the radio when they had a single and an album mix?

They didn't, is the answer - the DJ refers to the track as being from the as yet-untitled double album.

There's also an extra verse you missed.  :-D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on September 03, 2012, 06:28:51 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!

I was actually thinking of an all new, 2000s-era remix.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 03, 2012, 06:31:40 AM
btw I see all the songs from WH, Friends, 20/20, CATP, Holland, 15BO and LA are 2012 remasters. I guess all the catalogue was done and a new batch will show up sooner or later. Hope they remixed some of them too!

I feel this slight curriosity towards R&R Music, I wonder if it will be an improved single version or a remastered album version. I hope for the former!

I actually wouldn't be surprised if that ends up being a remix.

The 1976 National Album Countdown 'hot' mix - now, wouldn't that be nice ?!

I was actually thinking of an all new, 2000s-era remix.

How 'bout the '76 hot mix but re-mastered? That would be the perfect solution for me!


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 03, 2012, 06:33:36 AM
Personally I hope no version of R&R Music make it to the box set at all. Unless of course it's the Beatles version, which wouldn't make sense at all ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 03, 2012, 07:59:10 AM
I forget how much good stuff is on Get the Boot - glad to finally have heard it - and I actually don't mind this version!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on September 03, 2012, 03:03:36 PM
Get ready folks because I guarantee there'll be some news on this box set this week. I'm away on business this week, with very limited time for "fun" stuff.  And every time that happens, something blows up with the Beach Boys. Last fall it was the audio samples of The Smile Sessions. Early this year it was the tracklist for TWGMTR.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 03, 2012, 05:16:38 PM
Get ready folks because I guarantee there'll be some news on this box set this week. I'm away on business this week, with very limited time for "fun" stuff.  And every time that happens, something blows up with the Beach Boys. Last fall it was the audio samples of The Smile Sessions. Early this year it was the tracklist for TWGMTR.

Actually I can back this up. When I was away in 04 Brian released BWPS; this year's breaks have seen the remastered announced and one of the London gigs. I leave home late Thursday and won't be back til Monday night at the earliest. Standby your wallets…!


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 03, 2012, 06:39:29 PM
I have a show this week, so will essentially not be on the computer..... it has to be!


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on September 03, 2012, 08:15:22 PM
IMO, I don't need to see the artwork. Just give a tracklist and i'm good.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 03, 2012, 08:38:28 PM
All i have to see is "Disk 3- Track 25. Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again" and i'll order.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 03, 2012, 08:41:14 PM
Sadly, it was moved to track 23 in the 11th hour. ;(


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 03, 2012, 08:51:02 PM
Well, what I mean is, it has to end the CD containing the Surf's Up Material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on September 03, 2012, 08:53:53 PM
Sadly, it was moved to track 23 in the 11th hour. ;(

But after track 23 comes 24, which is "In The Back Of My Mind" (The 1975 piano demo)  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 03, 2012, 08:54:24 PM
Well, what I mean is, it has to end the CD containing the Surf's Up Material.

I know. It was to be track 25, but was moved behind two alternate duophonic mixes of "Student Demonstration Time" ;( sorry to be the bringer of bad news.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 03, 2012, 08:59:46 PM
NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on September 03, 2012, 09:06:58 PM
ARGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 03, 2012, 09:47:10 PM
Well, what I mean is, it has to end the CD containing the Surf's Up Material.

I know. It was to be track 25, but was moved behind two alternate duophonic mixes of "Student Demonstration Time" ;( sorry to be the bringer of bad news.

And those tracks are preceded by a spoken intro by Mike Love explaining how politically relevant the song was. 

"Surfing and cars were okay but there was a war going on."


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 03, 2012, 11:43:57 PM
Still reckon the box set date announcement will be made around the time of the Grammy Museum and UK shows, with a track list around the same time.

In fact I've heard the current set lists have been thrown out of the window for two UK shows and they'll have completely different set lists for these.

The first, Royal Albert Hall will feature a selection of songs from discs 1-3 of the set, while the Wembley Arena show will pick up with discs 4-6 material.

My Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket, for which I paid $1m in used dollar bills handed to Bruce Johnston personally from the trunk of a car parked under the Golden Gate Bridge after midnight gave me access to to the London gig rehearsals.

Last night I had the privilege of hearing them run through Running Bear, Beatrice From Baltimore, Hey Little Tomboy (which had some neat spoken word sections - you'll love them!) and a version of Star Spangled Banner that makes Jimmi Hendrix's version sound like something a guitarist would put out.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 04, 2012, 12:11:34 AM
Still reckon the box set date announcement will be made around the time of the Grammy Museum and UK shows, with a track list around the same time.

In fact I've heard the current set lists have been thrown out of the window for two UK shows and they'll have completely different set lists for these.

The first, Royal Albert Hall will feature a selection of songs from discs 1-3 of the set, while the Wembley Arena show will pick up with discs 4-6 material.

My Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket, for which I paid $1m in used dollar bills handed to Bruce Johnston personally from the trunk of a car parked under the Golden Gate Bridge after midnight gave me access to to the London gig rehearsals.

Last night I had the privilege of hearing them run through Running Bear, Beatrice From Baltimore, Hey Little Tomboy (which had some neat spoken word sections - you'll love them!) and a version of Star Spangled Banner that makes Jimmi Hendrix's version sound like something a guitarist would put out.

I just had an online conference with the staff at CERN. They told me that you are the victim of magnetic field disturbances caused locally by the excessive top spin (AKA the Federer effect) of the Higgs bosons still doing their thang.

Also, they told me that both Wembley shows will exclusively consist of the whole of Summer In Paradise and all the outtakes and studio banter, the latter faithfully reproduced by all who were present at the time, recording this classic album. The whole shows will last about 4 hours.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 04, 2012, 12:12:59 AM
I hope we finally get a release of Dick ('what's long and thin and covered in skin and goodness knows how many holes it's been in?'). THAT would complete the box set for me...


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 04, 2012, 12:13:52 AM
That was played at rehearsals too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on September 04, 2012, 01:17:03 AM
Well, what I mean is, it has to end the CD containing the Surf's Up Material.

I know. It was to be track 25, but was moved behind two alternate duophonic mixes of "Student Demonstration Time" ;( sorry to be the bringer of bad news.

Heh.  Well...


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 04, 2012, 01:53:39 AM
Still reckon the box set date announcement will be made around the time of the Grammy Museum and UK shows, with a track list around the same time.

In fact I've heard the current set lists have been thrown out of the window for two UK shows and they'll have completely different set lists for these.

The first, Royal Albert Hall will feature a selection of songs from discs 1-3 of the set, while the Wembley Arena show will pick up with discs 4-6 material.

My Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket, for which I paid $1m in used dollar bills handed to Bruce Johnston personally from the trunk of a car parked under the Golden Gate Bridge after midnight gave me access to to the London gig rehearsals.

Last night I had the privilege of hearing them run through Running Bear, Beatrice From Baltimore, Hey Little Tomboy (which had some neat spoken word sections - you'll love them!) and a version of Star Spangled Banner that makes Jimmi Hendrix's version sound like something a guitarist would put out.

I just had an online conference with the staff at CERN. They told me that you are the victim of magnetic field disturbances caused locally by the excessive top spin (AKA the Federer effect) of the Higgs bosons still doing their thang.

Also, they told me that both Wembley shows will exclusively consist of the whole of Summer In Paradise and all the outtakes and studio banter, the latter faithfully reproduced by all who were present at the time, recording this classic album. The whole shows will last about 4 hours.

I don't know who you've been talking to Don, but this morning's rehearsal was fab:

First off, they ran through the whole Pet Sounds album IN MONO, AS BRIAN INTENDED. (It think they were referencing the 1966 New York flat master, but Brian handled the bridge on WIBN, so who can be sure?). That'll be the first half of the RAH gig.

For the second half, they ran through the entire Sunflower album, performing Stephen W. Desper's quad mix live, in its entirety.

I was so overjoyed that I sobbed uncontrollably into the hessian tote bag that came as part of the Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket package.


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on September 04, 2012, 04:49:06 AM
Still reckon the box set date announcement will be made around the time of the Grammy Museum and UK shows, with a track list around the same time.

In fact I've heard the current set lists have been thrown out of the window for two UK shows and they'll have completely different set lists for these.

The first, Royal Albert Hall will feature a selection of songs from discs 1-3 of the set, while the Wembley Arena show will pick up with discs 4-6 material.

My Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket, for which I paid $1m in used dollar bills handed to Bruce Johnston personally from the trunk of a car parked under the Golden Gate Bridge after midnight gave me access to to the London gig rehearsals.

Last night I had the privilege of hearing them run through Running Bear, Beatrice From Baltimore, Hey Little Tomboy (which had some neat spoken word sections - you'll love them!) and a version of Star Spangled Banner that makes Jimmi Hendrix's version sound like something a guitarist would put out.

I just had an online conference with the staff at CERN. They told me that you are the victim of magnetic field disturbances caused locally by the excessive top spin (AKA the Federer effect) of the Higgs bosons still doing their thang.

Also, they told me that both Wembley shows will exclusively consist of the whole of Summer In Paradise and all the outtakes and studio banter, the latter faithfully reproduced by all who were present at the time, recording this classic album. The whole shows will last about 4 hours.


First off, they ran through the whole Pet Sounds album IN MONO, AS BRIAN INTENDED. (It think they were referencing the 1966 New York flat master, but Brian handled the bridge on WIBN, so who can be sure?). That'll be the first half of the RAH gig.



Right, so all the musicians were basically placed in one long line fronting the audience - Brian first in line with a keytar  ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 04, 2012, 06:49:52 AM
Still reckon the box set date announcement will be made around the time of the Grammy Museum and UK shows, with a track list around the same time.

In fact I've heard the current set lists have been thrown out of the window for two UK shows and they'll have completely different set lists for these.

The first, Royal Albert Hall will feature a selection of songs from discs 1-3 of the set, while the Wembley Arena show will pick up with discs 4-6 material.

My Platinum VIP Higgs Bosun Ticket, for which I paid $1m in used dollar bills handed to Bruce Johnston personally from the trunk of a car parked under the Golden Gate Bridge after midnight gave me access to to the London gig rehearsals.

Last night I had the privilege of hearing them run through Running Bear, Beatrice From Baltimore, Hey Little Tomboy (which had some neat spoken word sections - you'll love them!) and a version of Star Spangled Banner that makes Jimmi Hendrix's version sound like something a guitarist would put out.

I just had an online conference with the staff at CERN. They told me that you are the victim of magnetic field disturbances caused locally by the excessive top spin (AKA the Federer effect) of the Higgs bosons still doing their thang.

Also, they told me that both Wembley shows will exclusively consist of the whole of Summer In Paradise and all the outtakes and studio banter, the latter faithfully reproduced by all who were present at the time, recording this classic album. The whole shows will last about 4 hours.


First off, they ran through the whole Pet Sounds album IN MONO, AS BRIAN INTENDED. (It think they were referencing the 1966 New York flat master, but Brian handled the bridge on WIBN, so who can be sure?). That'll be the first half of the RAH gig.



Right, so all the musicians were basically placed in one long line fronting the audience - Brian first in line with a keytar  ;D

 :lol :lol :lol to you and John M. for your excellent replies!


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 04, 2012, 07:02:10 AM
Don, what science explains Mike Love?  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 04, 2012, 07:48:30 AM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out



Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 04, 2012, 11:13:43 AM
^ Yup!


Title: Re: \
Post by: MBE on September 04, 2012, 03:08:17 PM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out


Stereo isn't what a Brian Wilson produced record is about. The Beach Boys sixties work was perfect the way it was. I have often been called a heathen for this view, glad someone else agrees with me.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on September 04, 2012, 03:18:28 PM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out


Stereo isn't what a Brian Wilson produced record is about. The Beach Boys sixties work was perfect the way it was. I have often been called a heathen for this view, glad someone else agrees with me.

I'm with you too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on September 04, 2012, 04:12:53 PM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out


Stereo isn't what a Brian Wilson produced record is about. The Beach Boys sixties work was perfect the way it was. I have often been called a heathen for this view, glad someone else agrees with me.

I'm with you too.

Me too. f*** stereo. Except Smiley Smile


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ram4 on September 04, 2012, 04:21:08 PM
 ;D I prefer the stereo mix for most of the tracks.  On some, the mono still works better.  It's nice to have both options.


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on September 04, 2012, 04:34:56 PM
Where listening is your main purpose and discrete mono mixes exist, that is obviously the way to go. Stereo mixes are neat to aid in deconstructive study or "close listening" where you want to grasp aural details (e.g., "I Just Wasn't Made for These Times") but I don't think I've ever ended up liking them more than their mono counterparts.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 04, 2012, 06:45:48 PM
I prefer mixes that sound good to me. Some are in mono, some are in stereo. Some mono mixes sound like ass, some stereo mixes sound like ass.

imo.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 04, 2012, 06:54:26 PM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out


Stereo isn't what a Brian Wilson produced record is about. The Beach Boys sixties work was perfect the way it was. I have often been called a heathen for this view, glad someone else agrees with me.


Absolutely.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 04, 2012, 07:58:50 PM
I prefer mixes that sound good to me. Some are in mono, some are in stereo. Some mono mixes sound like ass, some stereo mixes sound like ass.

imo.

Dat.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 05, 2012, 12:03:01 AM
Despite massively wanting to hear Wouldn't it be nice to live again, and pretty much every recorded note of Dennis material that exists, I'd almost equally love to hear clean versions of some of the boot stuff we all know and love. Carry Me Home/Sherry She Needs Me/Stevie rate up there with the best Beach Boys music, and they are only known from hissy sounding roughs.

RE: I've got a friend, isn't the Luxembourg version from a radio broadcast? Has anyone tried to track down the source tape? Would be amazing to hear a clear version of this song.

Personally I can do without ANY updated mixes of material the Beach Boys put out in the sixties/seventies, and I'd much rather see live/unreleased stuff come out



Agreed! It'd be nice if - amongst all the clamour to release WIBNTLA - they also remembered to include Carry Me Home as well, another Dennis masterpiece. Shocking that songs of this quality are still languishing in the vaults. How about giving us BOTH, if that's not too much to ask? (I can quite easily picture certain band members poo-pooing Carry Me Home's inclusion however - ''The Beach Boys are supposed to be a fun band, this isn't what we're about, this isn't what people want, etc etc''.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on September 05, 2012, 12:03:41 AM
Nothing against proper remixes, as long as the original mixes are still available somewhere. But if some some (any!) unreleased studio tracks are dropper from the box set to make room for remixes and backing tracks, I see red! I want it all, from WIBNTLA to Battle Hymn, from Everybody Wants To Live to Cocaine Sessions!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 05, 2012, 01:52:36 AM
Nothing against proper remixes, as long as the original mixes are still available somewhere. But if some some (any!) unreleased studio tracks are dropper from the box set to make room for remixes and backing tracks, I see red! I want it all, from WIBNTLA to Battle Hymn, from Everybody Wants To Live to Cocaine Sessions!

Wasn't it mentioned somewhere that the box will contain unreleased material along with hits? I would not care if a new live version or remix of California Girls ever happened, I'm dead tired of that song and the fact that it and others in its vein must be included everywhere.
Made In California should be about what you say: unreleased songs and live cuts, and those live cuts should be songs they performed rarely or only at a certain point. I dont care if Little Deuce Coupe live is from 1974, I fking hate it when placed next to their contemporary output. Leave the early hits off this box IMO!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jay on September 05, 2012, 02:24:31 AM
I think The Beach Boys should follow The Doors and the Hendrix estate, and form a "record company" that releases nothing but 100% unreleased material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 05, 2012, 02:32:24 AM
They're not gonna back down from including hits. It just ain't gonna happen, at this point. I have to agree, though. I cannot imagine being a collector when it comes to this band, and I'm puzzled by Capitol's endless hits regurgitations released year after year. No one needs a 23rd "remastered" version of "Surfin' USA", y'know? 50 Big Ones still somehow doesn't feel especially definitive to me even though the tracklist is okay (but not great).

If anything, I hope some of said hits at least include the occasional remix. I know it's blasphemy, but some of these vintage mixes just don't serve the songs well. I'm thinking less of their mid 60s stuff which usually sees stereo remixes and more of some songs from the 70s or 80s that lose something due to flat mixes that don't really serve the song well. I'm not looking for super modern mixes or anything of the sort, just something that does the song a little more justice. Think "Keepin' The Summer Alive" or something. It's not 1965 Brian Wilson jaw-on-the-floor incredible, but it's good and enjoyable enough. I hear Carl's vocal and there's still this sense of "I'm still young, I still have plenty to prove, I'm still vital", but the end result downplays that a great deal. It's a rock song, and unfortunately, the mix doesn't "rock" at all and doesn't serve the song well. Keep the original in circulation, on the album, but would I mind a remix of such a song? f*** naw, d00d. More organic mixes of something like "Getcha Back"? Sounds good to me. I know it's total blasphemy, but I wouldn't mind such remixes at all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on September 05, 2012, 02:54:36 AM
More organic mixes of something like "Getcha Back"? Sounds good to me. I know it's total blasphemy, but I wouldn't mind such remixes at all.

An acapella mix or stripped down version of Getcha Back would be awesome.  Virtually any remix that stripped away the 80's production of BB85 and later material would be awesome.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 05, 2012, 04:06:28 AM
More organic mixes of something like "Getcha Back"? Sounds good to me. I know it's total blasphemy, but I wouldn't mind such remixes at all.

An acapella mix or stripped down version of Getcha Back would be awesome.  Virtually any remix that stripped away the 80's production of BB85 and later material would be awesome.

That project would be amazing.
Look at double fantasy!


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 05, 2012, 04:11:00 AM
The thing with that is that, unlike Double Fantasy, I don't think there's a lot of acoustic or non-synthesised sound on BB's 85. All the drums sound like machines, synths carry a lot of the action, not too many guitars....

That said, if they did a remix of 'It's Gettin' Late', I'd be on it like sonic.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 05, 2012, 04:28:04 AM
More organic mixes of something like "Getcha Back"? Sounds good to me. I know it's total blasphemy, but I wouldn't mind such remixes at all.

An acapella mix or stripped down version of Getcha Back would be awesome.  Virtually any remix that stripped away the 80's production of BB85 and later material would be awesome.

That project would be amazing.
Look at double fantasy!


I'd have more confidence in the ability of anyone in The Beach Boys organisation to do a good job of this, had I not just heard their idea of a radio friendly version of 'Isn't it Time', because that's straight up worse than any BB production from the eightes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 05, 2012, 02:45:08 PM
The thing with that is that, unlike Double Fantasy, I don't think there's a lot of acoustic or non-synthesised sound on BB's 85. All the drums sound like machines, synths carry a lot of the action, not too many guitars....

That said, if they did a remix of 'It's Gettin' Late', I'd be on it like sonic.

Sonic. That's my childhood right there.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 05, 2012, 03:31:14 PM
More organic mixes of something like "Getcha Back"? Sounds good to me. I know it's total blasphemy, but I wouldn't mind such remixes at all.

An acapella mix or stripped down version of Getcha Back would be awesome.  Virtually any remix that stripped away the 80's production of BB85 and later material would be awesome.

That project would be amazing.
Look at double fantasy!


I'd have more confidence in the ability of anyone in The Beach Boys organisation to do a good job of this, had I not just heard their idea of a radio friendly version of 'Isn't it Time', because that's straight up worse than any BB production from the eightes.
Completely agreed.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Summertime Blooz on September 05, 2012, 04:09:24 PM
Well heck, maybe the Beach Boys should just do an Unplugged album of only stuff that was recorded post- Holland. How's that sound?


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 05, 2012, 04:10:25 PM
I'd pay for the session time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on September 05, 2012, 08:54:13 PM
All this talk of wanting stripped down versions of TBBs '85 confuses me.  Yes, the production is dated, but in some ways it's the only thing interesting about the album.  There isn't very much artistic merit in the songs themselves, but the clash between definitively '80s style production and the band's attempts to recreate their former sound is at least an interesting historical document if not a musical masterpiece.  But there's so little substance that if you stripped the songs down there would be nothing left.  The problem is lack of good songwriting much more than anything else.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 05, 2012, 09:43:15 PM
True, but a fresh reworking of something from the album that's actually decent (i.e. "Getcha Back") with a simpler arrangement that aims to be a little more timeless wouldn't be the worst listening experience. I mean yeah, you'll still have Mike's "Maybeh treat u like a MOOOVIE STAR" sh*t, but it could be a cool listen. If it doesn't, hay, that's cool, too.

But keep Brian's '85 falsetto recording. Don't you dare give that to Jeff >: (


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 05, 2012, 09:50:06 PM
True, but a fresh reworking of something from the album that's actually decent (i.e. "Getcha Back") with a simpler arrangement that aims to be a little more timeless wouldn't be the worst listening experience. I mean yeah, you'll still have Mike's "Maybeh treat u like a MOOOVIE STAR" sh*t, but it could be a cool listen. If it doesn't, hay, that's cool, too.

But keep Brian's '85 falsetto recording. Don't you dare give that to Jeff >: (
Brian's 1985 falsetto is one of his last classic vocals. 8)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 05, 2012, 09:52:24 PM
Getcha Back is the worst song on that album! you guys probably  just like it because of its attempts to sound like a classic song. you fell for the nostalgia formula hook, line and sinker!


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 05, 2012, 09:55:05 PM
you fell for the nostalgia formula hook, line and sinker!

AH FUCK


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 05, 2012, 10:07:00 PM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 05, 2012, 10:12:35 PM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 05, 2012, 11:53:22 PM
Come on, "maybe I don't know" is fantastic  :-\


Title: Re: \
Post by: Alex on September 05, 2012, 11:56:27 PM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

Umm...  Where I Belong?????!!!!!  ??? ??? ??? ??? ???


Title: Re: \
Post by: MBE on September 06, 2012, 12:16:15 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.
I agree I only play the 45 of Getcha Back/Male Ego.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 06, 2012, 02:00:55 AM
www.amazon.co.uk/Made-California-Limited-Bo/dp/B008XZKSRY/


Wonder what this is?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 06, 2012, 02:30:22 AM
Placeholder listing?


Just announce it already!


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 06, 2012, 04:56:22 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 06, 2012, 05:22:24 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

What? No way. 15 Big Ones have 'It's OK', 'Had to Phone Ya', 'That Same Song', 'Susie Cincinnati', 'Just Once in My Life', and 'Back Home' - all pretty good songs. BB85 has got 'Getcha' Back'. Enough said.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 06, 2012, 06:12:07 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

What? No way. 15 Big Ones have 'It's OK', 'Had to Phone Ya', 'That Same Song', 'Susie Cincinnati', 'Just Once in My Life', and 'Back Home' - all pretty good songs. BB85 has got 'Getcha' Back'. Enough said.
Replace Had to Phone Ya with A Casual Look & Just Once in My Life with TM Song, add R&R Music, Blueberry Hill & Chapel of Love and you've got rather a good collection of songs IMO.

Taste is certainly subjective ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 06, 2012, 06:35:43 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)


Ooh no...15 Big Ones has plenty of uninhibited, odd Brian at his best. MIU, Keepin' the Summer and '85 are barely listenable to me because the production is too sanitised. It's like, post Love You they all decided THAT was never going to happen again, and it hasn't.

With Dennis gone they lost any kind of soul (and hipness) in the music, no more 'wacky Brian' productions. Those were the things that kept them artistically interesting during the late sixties and seventies, imo.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 06, 2012, 06:46:50 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)


Ooh no...15 Big Ones has plenty of uninhibited, odd Brian at his best. MIU, Keepin' the Summer and '85 are barely listenable to me because the production is too sanitised. It's like, post Love You they all decided THAT was never going to happen again, and it hasn't.

With Dennis gone they lost any kind of soul (and hipness) in the music, no more 'wacky Brian' productions. Those were the things that kept them artistically interesting during the late sixties and seventies, imo.



fully agree.

by the late 70's Carl and Dennis were the only cool guys left. Brian had his eccentric/great moments, but Mike/Al/Bruce were about as lame as one could get. After LA Dennis slipped away and Carl gave up. The result being the utter trash KTSA (it's sh*t, whether one enjoys it or not, its just total sh*t...with an equally sh*t cover and production). 85' is not much improvement on KTSA (meaning it too is generally sh*t, the few good songs are rammed by sh*t production).

PS: I do like Goin' On, but if that is the best they can make then God help them (he didn't, because he thought it was sh*t too)!


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 06, 2012, 07:03:38 AM
Best song on Beach Boys 85: Karma Chameleon. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 06, 2012, 07:44:18 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

What? No way. 15 Big Ones have 'It's OK', 'Had to Phone Ya', 'That Same Song', 'Susie Cincinnati', 'Just Once in My Life', and 'Back Home' - all pretty good songs. BB85 has got 'Getcha' Back'. Enough said.
Replace Had to Phone Ya with A Casual Look & Just Once in My Life with TM Song, add R&R Music, Blueberry Hill & Chapel of Love and you've got rather a good collection of songs IMO.


There is absolutely no way this post can be serious.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 06, 2012, 08:03:17 AM
And the Amazon.de listing was removed.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 06, 2012, 08:40:15 AM
I think Ian's just died.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 06, 2012, 08:44:32 AM
After LA Dennis slipped away and Carl gave up.

I don't know if this is true. Dennis didn't slip away so much as get booted out. I'm sure, if asked, he would have happily contributed material to KTSA and a follow up if he was still around. And with Carl, I think he was still trying, but his tastes were just becoming a lot less "hip". It looks like he was honestly trying with stuff like "Keepin' The Summer Alive" and "Livin' With A Heartache", but that it was just more predictable and not as artistic sounding as stuff like "Feel Flows" "Angel Come Home". Same thing with his stuff on the self-titled album. He was trying to make the band contemporary, but instead of leading like they used to, it sounded more like he was following the sounds of the times.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 06, 2012, 09:12:04 AM
I think Ian's just died.

No, just wounded a bit from beating my head against the wall. But it's cool.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 06, 2012, 09:22:06 AM
I think Ian's just died.
I am about to as well. TM song is like one of the worst BB material ever released.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 06, 2012, 10:02:56 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

I like 15 Big Ones.  It's OK, Back Home, Just Once in My Life, Had to Phone Ya, Susie Cincinnati, That Same Song,  those are some good songs.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on September 06, 2012, 10:12:49 AM
"Made In California" (5 important songs on a 6 disc set,for the first time ever you will get every recording,demos,and alt takes  known for five historical songs we also include a rare live performance of each song as well)  :o
Disc #1 -"Surfin,what the beach boys are all about" -for the first time ever you get 78 minutes of the very first song ever recorded by the beach boys,including the rare out of print version from the now out of print "Summer in paradise" and a live "lip Synch" version an early tv appearance.
Disc #2-"The Problem Child Sessions"-for the first time ever we are releasing the complete sessions for what most fans call the last  great beach boys song,this disc contains not only the outtakes but a couple new remixes and a newly discovered live performance and piano demo with mike love on the piano. In Honor of the late John Ritter the song has been remixed with a syphony orchestra to pay tribute to a great comedian.
Disc#3-"Hey Little Tomboy,Listen to this disc"-Hey all you tomboys out there check out this disc dedicated just for you,for the first time ever you get to hear a pristine remaster of the lost tomboy sessions as well as a new duet,it also includes a piano demo with Brian and Dennis.
Disc #4-"Duets"- for the first time ever we are releasing every duet they ever did,including the now rare out of print "Stars and straipes" cd in it's entirety.
Disc#5-"Forever-The John Stamos sessions"-for the first time ever we are releasing the complete "John Stamos Forever sessions",we also found 5 live performances which will be included on here,as well as a "duet" between he and the late Dennis Wilson using todays best technology we took out certain parts of Johns voice and carefully placed it on the original Dennis Wilson version,we think Dennis  would be proud.
Disc#6-"Unreleased gems"for the first time ever the last disc is saved for the best,their greatest unreleased songs,including the long lost "Cocain Sessions",some of the songs slated for release are "Drip Drop","The battle hymn of the republic", and outtakes of "TM song",A demo of "Dennys drum" and live performances of "Ding Dang" and "Summer of Love"


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 06, 2012, 10:12:59 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

I like 15 Big Ones.  It's OK, Back Home, Just Once in My Life, Had to Phone Ya, Susie Cincinnati, those are some good songs.

I like the originals on 15 Big Ones (except TM) - but I find the covers to be pretty terrible. Glad you dig it, though.
All of you who have heard the BB version of "Just Once...", have you heard the original Righteous Brothers version? So powerful.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 06, 2012, 10:44:49 AM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.
I agree I only play the 45 of Getcha Back/Male Ego.

Nonsense. Where I Belong is hands down THE best Beach Boys song of the eighties!! (Also It's Gettin Late and I Do Love You also good songs. Getcha Back is the 5th or 6th best song on BB '85 - not my opinion, but a proven scientific fact).


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on September 06, 2012, 10:47:19 AM
I like "Where I Belong"..it's one of Carls best songs and blows away most of his solo stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 06, 2012, 10:58:30 AM
Like I said before, I like just about the whole album but I don't get the praise for Where I Belong. I think it's good but certainly nothing special....


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 06, 2012, 11:04:07 AM
I think Ian's just died.
I am about to as well. TM song is like one of the worst BB material ever released.

Thirded, I hate that piece of sh*t song and cannot seriously believe that RangeRoverA1 thinks this is the best song on 15BO. But then again, she does hate The Everly Brothers and Koalas so who knows?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 06, 2012, 11:06:44 AM
Does anyone else cut the Beach Boys much more slack than they would other groups? I mean I have most of 15 Big Ones, MIU, KTSA BB85 on my mp3 and DO listen to them from time to time, but when it comes to other groups I like that have put out albums of a similar mediocre quality as the ones mentioned above they never even get a lookin on my playlist. It seems I'm much more willing to forgive the BB's than I am other bands.


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on September 06, 2012, 11:12:18 AM
I'm sure we all do compared to the average person -- liking Love You is probably one of the better examples of this sort of thing -- but even I don't listen to any albums after 1977. There's just no point for me -- there are some good songs, sure, but they're few and far (far!) between that the GV box set has almost all you seriously need (except "Love Surrounds Me" and "My Diane").


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 06, 2012, 11:23:47 AM
I think Ian's just died.
I am about to as well. TM song is like one of the worst BB material ever released.

Thirded, I hate that piece of sh*t song and cannot seriously believe that RangeRoverA1 thinks this is the best song on 15BO. But then again, she does hate The Everly Brothers and Koalas so who knows?

I'm almost getting to the point where I think her iconoclastic tastes are so odd that they go all the way through crazy and into cool. Maybe she is the "clue to the new direction".


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 06, 2012, 11:40:43 AM
yeah, at first I thought her strange opinions were annoying but now I find them very amusing.

As immodest as it may sound, from all the usernames I like my own. It begins with "R" and ends with "r". And in the middle is also the same letter. Besides, I like difficult-sounding names, some roughness in them. And the last: once seeing this car model on TV, I immediately liked its design, type etc. But mind that I don't know anything about the automobiles, neither their characteristics nor the titles of details and various car-related terms.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rn57 on September 06, 2012, 11:49:37 AM
RRA1 is probably the one person on the board who's a bigger NRBQ fan than me...so she's A1 with me...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 06, 2012, 12:05:28 PM
RangeRover is a chick? I didn't even know...


Title: Re:
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 06, 2012, 12:09:23 PM
I'm sure we all do compared to the average person -- liking Love You is probably one of the better examples of this sort of thing -- but even I don't listen to any albums after 1977. There's just no point for me -- there are some good songs, sure, but they're few and far (far!) between that the GV box set has almost all you seriously need (except "Love Surrounds Me" and "My Diane").

Hang on, I like to compile my imaginative L.A Light! It's got the mature songs and only the single version of HCTN!  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 06, 2012, 03:04:00 PM
Getcha Back is the only good song on that album.

I agree.  Even if it's not that good a song, it's the best song on the album.  I hate that album.  It's hands down the worst album the boys made with Brian.

Sir, that would be 15 Big Ones.

(for some odd reason, I am drawn to '85 - the only song I really don't care for is "It's Just A Matter of Time". Loves me some "Passing Friend", all five minutes.)

I like 15 Big Ones.  It's OK, Back Home, Just Once in My Life, Had to Phone Ya, Susie Cincinnati, those are some good songs.

You basically just re-posted my post ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on September 06, 2012, 04:37:29 PM
I love 'TM Song'. 2nd only to 'Had to Phone Ya' on 15 Big Ones.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 06, 2012, 05:13:10 PM
I love 'TM Song'. 2nd only to 'Had to Phone Ya' on 15 Big Ones.

I do too. It's a song I often forget even exists, but when it comes on I always enjoy listening to it. It's just such an odd little song, and I'm pretty sure it's the only new song he wrote for 15 Big Ones besides "That Same Song", since "Back Home" was from the '60s, "It's OK" was from 1974, and "Had To Phone Ya" was a Spring song.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on September 06, 2012, 05:57:49 PM
I've recently began to look at TM Song differently because of some of yous guys. It IS a lot of fun. The quirky backing track is endearing (in a Loop de Loop kinda way).

Who says what in the beginning? Dennis and Mike aren't hard to pick out, but...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 06, 2012, 07:01:14 PM
I like "TM Song", too.  Always thought if Brian eliminated the "argument" part which is annoying, and developed the song a little more, maybe expand on that opening verse, it coulda been a contender. I once saw Al sing this song on I believe The Mike Douglas Show, and he added an additional opening line or two.

I also enjoy 15 Big Ones....Brian Wilson Rechannels Spector.


Title: Re: \
Post by: ohthosegirls on September 06, 2012, 07:21:02 PM
I like "TM Song", too.  Always thought if Brian eliminated the "argument" part which is annoying, and developed the song a little more, maybe expand on that opening verse, it coulda been a contender. I once saw Al sing this song on I believe The Mike Douglas Show, and he added an additional opening line or two.

I also enjoy 15 Big Ones....Brian Wilson Rechannels Spector.

Now that I'd love to see!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 07, 2012, 12:31:24 AM
I like "TM Song", too.  Always thought if Brian eliminated the "argument" part which is annoying, and developed the song a little more, maybe expand on that opening verse, it coulda been a contender. I once saw Al sing this song on I believe The Mike Douglas Show, and he added an additional opening line or two.

I also enjoy 15 Big Ones....Brian Wilson Rechannels Spector.

The argument is the best bit! Who says 'Ahhh shup up!!'?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dunderhead on September 07, 2012, 12:42:25 AM
Glad to see TM Song getting some love, that one always brings a smile to my face. The argument at the start is indeed great, taste be damned.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Camus on September 07, 2012, 12:45:43 AM
Isn't it Brian who is the 'owner' who is having the argument with the rest?  I love how "what are you doing" is said.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on September 07, 2012, 12:49:28 AM
The part about the car being on the lawn always makes me laugh my ass off.


Title: Re: \
Post by: monicker on September 07, 2012, 01:01:09 AM
I love 'TM Song'. 2nd only to 'Had to Phone Ya' on 15 Big Ones.

Same with me. TM Song is awesome. I will never ever understand most hardcore Beach Boys fans.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 07, 2012, 01:33:07 AM
I love 'TM Song'. 2nd only to 'Had to Phone Ya' on 15 Big Ones.

Same with me. TM Song is awesome. I will never ever understand most hardcore Beach Boys fans.

TM Song reminds me a little bit about H.E.L.P. Is On The Way - which isn't a bad thing at all!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 07, 2012, 01:56:14 AM
TM Song is a pure novelty. funny in context, but from a musical perspective:  :ahh


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on September 07, 2012, 04:42:08 AM
"TM Song" sucks. Sorry guys.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 07, 2012, 07:29:15 AM
"TM Song" sucks. Sorry guys.

So does this tangent. We need some real news about this release.  :police:


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 07, 2012, 09:07:41 AM
Hold up, Joe Pesci, I think you're getting offended for no reason. I didn't mean to imply that I found you annoying, and I don't think Ian (Spaceman) has a problem with you either.

and in your first paragraph you defend that your taste is different than others', and then in the second you call me out for doing the same thing. I posted the quote of you liking your own username because I thought it was funny! that's not a bad thing, I'm not trying to mock you.

I'm sorry if it came off that way.


Title: Re: \
Post by: blank on September 07, 2012, 09:14:41 AM
RangeRoverA1, I'm pretty sure I would not be alone to say that I appreciate your presence here and your posts.  I think it's also fun to have a laugh at our idiosyncrasies!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 07, 2012, 09:45:52 AM
C'mon Capitol, share some news… good people are getting ansty…


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 07, 2012, 10:03:15 AM
Is it Carl who does the "YOU KEEP OUTTA THIS!!!" line? That part cracks me up.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 07, 2012, 10:19:47 AM
C'mon Capitol, share some news… good people are getting ansty…

Agree. Given that a November release is likely, which is a mere 2 months away, a press release would be the normal thing to do now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 07, 2012, 11:23:52 AM
I find nothing "iconoclastic", as you said, in my TM Song comment & other tastes. 

Oh, I'm quite sure you don't. Actually, I wasn't being sarcastic in my post at all. But if you take the time to read what EVERY OTHER PERSON ON EARTH who is into the Beach Boys generally thinks about music, and then consider your own, which are generally DIAMETRICALLY OPPOSED in every possible way, you might expect a bit of at least gentle chiding about it.
And honestly, your good mood means absolutely nothing to me, although I am sure you are an alright person and I'd probably buy you a beer if we were in a bar at the same time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: ohthosegirls on September 07, 2012, 12:05:29 PM
Is it Carl who does the "YOU KEEP OUTTA THIS!!!" line? That part cracks me up.

That's The Lovester.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Don Malcolm on September 07, 2012, 12:13:10 PM
I like RR's posts, and while it's true that her perspectives on the BBs are not "mainstream," I find them to be fascinating. She's one of the posters here that I consistently enjoy reading--so please let's not drive her away, OK??


Title: Re:
Post by: Shady on September 07, 2012, 12:16:02 PM
C'mon Capitol, share some news… good people are getting ansty…

Agree. Given that a November release is likely, which is a mere 2 months away, a press release would be the normal thing to do now.

Yeah. Capitol really love leaving it down to the wire

I like RR's posts, and while it's true that her perspectives on the BBs are not "mainstream," I find them to be fascinating. She's one of the posters here that I consistently enjoy reading--so please let's not drive her away, OK??

This..

So many people get driven away from this board because some of the "older" posters have a hard time accepting other people opinions.

RR is a great poster, very interesting. I hope she sticks around


Title: Re:
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 07, 2012, 12:28:55 PM
C'mon Capitol, share some news… good people are getting ansty…

Agree. Given that a November release is likely, which is a mere 2 months away, a press release would be the normal thing to do now.

Yeah. Capitol really love leaving it down to the wire

I like RR's posts, and while it's true that her perspectives on the BBs are not "mainstream," I find them to be fascinating. She's one of the posters here that I consistently enjoy reading--so please let's not drive her away, OK??

This..

So many people get driven away from this board because some of the "older" posters have a hard time accepting other people opinions.

RR is a great poster, very interesting. I hope she sticks around

Ditto. Although i don't believe that photo is really her...


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on September 07, 2012, 12:52:59 PM
C'mon Capitol, share some news… good people are getting ansty…

Agree. Given that a November release is likely, which is a mere 2 months away, a press release would be the normal thing to do now.

Yeah. Capitol really love leaving it down to the wire

I like RR's posts, and while it's true that her perspectives on the BBs are not "mainstream," I find them to be fascinating. She's one of the posters here that I consistently enjoy reading--so please let's not drive her away, OK??

This..

So many people get driven away from this board because some of the "older" posters have a hard time accepting other people opinions.

RR is a great poster, very interesting. I hope she sticks around

Ditto. Although i don't believe that photo is really her...

It's not. That's Jenny Boyd - inspiration to Donovan's 'Jennifer Juniper', not to mention Mick Fleetwood's ex-wife.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 07, 2012, 01:49:29 PM
I wasn't trying to drive anyone away at all, I was just offering my own honest opinions, which is more honorable than treating someone with kid gloves because of their gender (in my opinion). Newguy562 got plenty more stick for having less "controversial" opinions than this person has, and that isn't really fair, in retrospect.
Like I said, I'm sure "RangeRover" is a fine person.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on September 07, 2012, 02:54:18 PM
"TM Song" is a highlight for me too, especially the "sometimesitgoesrealfast and other times it goes reeaalll slllooowww" part. It's a heck of a lot better than "Transcendental Meditation" on Friends which sounds like the jazz combo in hell led my Minnie Mouse.

I have no idea what younger (under 30) hardcore Beach Boys fans consider greatness nowadays. I. Spaceman talks about "EVERY OTHER PERSON ON EARTH" and such, but remember those perspectives constantly change. They're never set in stone. From my own experience, in the 80's hardcore Beach Boys fans were all about SMiLE and hardcore fans I knew didn't care for much after the Surf's Up album. In the 90's, everybody rediscovered Sunflower and Holland and then in the 00's it was Love You that became the big deal. I know quite a few fans here are kids in their 20's so it's always interesting for me to read what they're into, but you can be sure the next generation will come along and claim "MIU" is the undiscovered masterpiece or something like that, etc. It's one of the joys of a rather large Beach Boys catalog. 

Arguing about it is just useless.   


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 07, 2012, 03:12:49 PM
Newguy got sh*t for more than just his strange opinions.

imo.

I love him and miss him, however.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 07, 2012, 03:34:14 PM
Newguy got sh*t for more than just his strange opinions.

imo.

I love him and miss him, however.

He left?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 07, 2012, 03:36:32 PM
Newguy got sh*t for more than just his strange opinions.

imo.

I love him and miss him, however.

He left?

He just doesn't post nearly as often as he used to, and rarely in this section of the boards.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 07, 2012, 04:02:05 PM
"TM Song" is a highlight for me too, especially the "sometimesitgoesrealfast and other times it goes reeaalll slllooowww" part. It's a heck of a lot better than "Transcendental Meditation" on Friends which sounds like the jazz combo in hell led my Minnie Mouse.

I have no idea what younger (under 30) hardcore Beach Boys fans consider greatness nowadays. I. Spaceman talks about "EVERY OTHER PERSON ON EARTH" and such, but remember those perspectives constantly change. They're never set in stone. From my own experience, in the 80's hardcore Beach Boys fans were all about SMiLE and hardcore fans I knew didn't care for much after the Surf's Up album. In the 90's, everybody rediscovered Sunflower and Holland and then in the 00's it was Love You that became the big deal. I know quite a few fans here are kids in their 20's so it's always interesting for me to read what they're into, but you can be sure the next generation will come along and claim "MIU" is the undiscovered masterpiece or something like that, etc. It's one of the joys of a rather large Beach Boys catalog. 

Arguing about it is just useless.   

MIU will forever be garbage. I'm under 30, so that's my opinion on it.

As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been? Even 15BO can have some merit one day, tbh I don't hate it anymore. KTSA, MIU, and everything else after will be in the bin. This includes TWGMTR which is great considering it came out against all odds now. But it is from too distant a period from their heyday in the 60's and 70's to be remembered. It will always remain with me a fun listen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 07, 2012, 04:19:55 PM
Well I'm 15, And my top 5 albums are

1. Pet Sounds
2. Smile
3. Friends
4. Love You
5. Sunflower


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 07, 2012, 04:31:05 PM


MIU will forever be garbage. I'm under 30, so that's my opinion on it.


I like MIU. It's not nearly as dull as LA, just about even with KTSA. It has some good songs, nice melodies, Brian sounds good on it. It's a little cheezy, but it doesn't rely too much on covers and the sound is pretty organic. I'm under 30, so that's my opinion on it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: veryape on September 07, 2012, 04:33:49 PM
I love M.I.U .., i think its one of their best from the 70's....  im 28  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 07, 2012, 04:40:11 PM
I like Skatetown USA.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 07, 2012, 04:48:18 PM
Yeah.............................we need a track list


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 07, 2012, 04:53:40 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Title: Re: \
Post by: GhostyTMRS on September 07, 2012, 04:57:47 PM
Well I'm 15, And my top 5 albums are

1. Pet Sounds
2. Smile
3. Friends
4. Love You
5. Sunflower

That's cool. When I was 15, only your #1 was available (on cassette). I had to borrow vinyl from an older fan and make tapes of #3, 4 and 5. I have to say that, in nosing around here, I'm a little surprised that "Today" doesn't rate higher with everybody. The worst part about Capitol cassettes in the 80's was that Capitol had a nasty habit of deleting songs and then collecting them onto new compilation like "Be True To Your School". The pre-Pet Sounds albums were short enough as it is, now I had to fork over extra $$ to get a fictitious album so I could have the complete catalog.

Back to the box set talk, seeing as how nothing has been officially announced I'm doing what I always do when it comes to Beach Boys archival releases...expecting the worst (no box set at all) but hoping for the best.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 07, 2012, 05:10:21 PM
Today is an interesting album for me, I really really dislike all the current CD mixes, so I bought it on vinyl. It's one of my favorite albums... but only half.

If that album took side 2 of SD and side 2 of today, you have an amazing precursor to Pet Sounds.

I LOVE Today! But it isn't as consistently good as the albums I picked.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 07, 2012, 06:09:21 PM
Today is an interesting album for me, I really really dislike all the current CD mixes, so I bought it on vinyl. It's one of my favorite albums... but only half.

If that album took side 2 of SD and side 2 of today, you have an amazing precursor to Pet Sounds.

I LOVE Today! But it isn't as consistently good as the albums I picked.

Interesting..

Which songs do you think are the pitfalls?


Title: Re: \
Post by: ohthosegirls on September 07, 2012, 06:17:39 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 07, 2012, 06:41:29 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 07, 2012, 06:42:21 PM
Today is an interesting album for me, I really really dislike all the current CD mixes, so I bought it on vinyl. It's one of my favorite albums... but only half.

If that album took side 2 of SD and side 2 of today, you have an amazing precursor to Pet Sounds.

I LOVE Today! But it isn't as consistently good as the albums I picked.

Interesting..

Which songs do you think are the pitfalls?

Don't Hurt My Little Sister, and Bull Sessions on each side, now that I look... it's not quite as bad as I thought...


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 07, 2012, 06:43:53 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.

I want.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 07, 2012, 06:49:23 PM
Today is an interesting album for me, I really really dislike all the current CD mixes, so I bought it on vinyl. It's one of my favorite albums... but only half.

If that album took side 2 of SD and side 2 of today, you have an amazing precursor to Pet Sounds.

I LOVE Today! But it isn't as consistently good as the albums I picked.

Interesting..

Which songs do you think are the pitfalls?

Don't Hurt My Little Sister, and Bull Sessions on each side, now that I look... it's not quite as bad as I thought...

I contend that sequencing that album differently would make it a cooler listen - not many agree with that. The ballads are all knockouts for sure, but there isn't enough variety on the first side to keep a smooth flow. All good songs, though (give or take Ronda).


Title: Re: \
Post by: ohthosegirls on September 07, 2012, 07:00:56 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.

Interesting...this kind of sounds similar to the (I think?) KTSA doc. It has Brian saying something and the whole band erupts into laughter. But I remember them working out "Goin' to the Beach" at the piano on that one.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 07, 2012, 07:03:54 PM
This is from the Our Team doc:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jkhqbwrYwi4


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 07, 2012, 07:07:13 PM
I contend that sequencing that album differently would make it a cooler listen - not many agree with that. The ballads are all knockouts for sure, but there isn't enough variety on the first side to keep a smooth flow. All good songs, though (give or take Ronda).

Oh, I agree with you. Almost any of those ballads would've made awesome side closers. But, damn, it's hard to criticize Today isn't it? Not that it ever stopped me before. :-D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on September 07, 2012, 07:08:47 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.

Interesting...this kind of sounds similar to the (I think?) KTSA doc. It has Brian saying something and the whole band erupts into laughter. But I remember them working out "Goin' to the Beach" at the piano on that one.

Yes, now that you mention it there are similarities.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 07, 2012, 09:12:30 PM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.

I've really always wanted to see this "Mike Come Back To L.A." sequence. I can't believe it's never popped up online. Nobody could put it up??

Honestly, I think it would be interesting if the group released some kind of DVD collection with the Our Team special, Goin' Plantium, 1989 Endless Summer stuff, and any other applicable stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 08, 2012, 12:00:31 AM
Today is an interesting album for me, I really really dislike all the current CD mixes, so I bought it on vinyl. It's one of my favorite albums... but only half.

If that album took side 2 of SD and side 2 of today, you have an amazing precursor to Pet Sounds.

I LOVE Today! But it isn't as consistently good as the albums I picked.

Interesting..

Which songs do you think are the pitfalls?

Don't Hurt My Little Sister, and Bull Sessions on each side, now that I look... it's not quite as bad as I thought...

I contend that sequencing that album differently would make it a cooler listen - not many agree with that. The ballads are all knockouts for sure, but there isn't enough variety on the first side to keep a smooth flow. All good songs, though (give or take Ronda).

Today! is a perfect album. Ronda isn't as good as the single version but it's still  great song (surely those uncommercial fading in and out vocals were designed specifically to annoy Murry after his interference during the session, which only makes them even more fun...); Bull Sessions... is a throwaway album closer designed to take off some the heaviness the casual young BB fan was no doubt experiencing after the ballads, and it works perfectly in this respect - just press stop after In The Back Of My Mind if it bothers you, but personally i think it was a very clever move by Brian to include it; and as for Don't Hurt... How anyone can not love this song is beyond me! Each to their own i suppose.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on September 08, 2012, 12:10:53 AM

Ronda isn't as good as the single version but it's still  great song (surely those uncommercial fading in and out vocals were designed specifically to annoy Murry after his interference during the session, which only makes them even more fun...)

The session with Murry took place at the vocal recording session for the "Rhonda" single version...not the "Ronda" album version.  AFAIK there's never really been an explanation as to why the volume was played with like that during the mixdown.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 08, 2012, 12:16:54 AM
Maybe it's me being born in the CD age, but these "filler" tracks like "Bull Session" never bothered me in the least. That's especially true of that track considering it comes at the very end of the album and, in a sense, reminds me of these odd spoken word recordings etc. that everyone and their mother started including as hidden tracks in the 90s. To me, "In The Back Of My Mind" closes the album, "Bull Session" is just a little something extra that, as Disney Boy said, you can easily hit stop before.

Either way, I'd rather they saw release than not. "'Cassius Love' vs. 'Sonny' Wilson" and "Our Favorite Recording Sessions" are amusing listens, too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on September 08, 2012, 12:26:01 AM
As more archive material shows up, perhaps ppl will wonder how great SU, Caribou or LA Light coulda been?

This message board is notorious (in a good way, IMO....it's fun) for constantly adding and subtracting from original albums to improve them. MIU is no different from the ones you listed, as far as potential for improving that is.

15 Big Ones had 15 tracks and Love You had 14. By the time they got done with MIU, it was 12 tracks. You add "Winter Symphony", "Mike Come Back To L.A.", and close the album with "Our Team" and MIU is improved by a full grade.  



Is this circulating??

About ten years later of being a hardcore fan, I have finally just started getting into the '85 album and beyond BB-wise. I never thought I'd be able to enjoy it when I first heard it. I'm also getting heavily into the bootleg shows available. I liked pretty much everything else either right away or within a couple years of listening.

For some reason, that "Our Team" mini-documentary hasn't been on YouTube for a long time. I have a not-so-good copy on a VHS tape somewhere.

The "Mike Come Back To L.A." segment is the highlight of the documentary - or ANY documentary IMO. It's actually fairly long. It shows Brian and Mike working out the song in the studio; Brian is at the piano showing Mike the parts. Then they have footage of the recording session with a lot of people around; Brian is briefly shown handing out the harmony parts. Then they play a pretty long segment of the song; it's obviously not complete, you can hear that parts are missing.

But the absolute best moment is when they show the most "up", laughing, and lucid Brian I have ever seen - post 1975. He's playing the piano and making funny faces and trying to crack up Mike. You can feel the power others have talked about regarding Brian in the studio when he's on.

Anyway, I really liked the song, "Mike Come Back To L.A.", which became "Some Of Your Love", which I also like.

I've really always wanted to see this "Mike Come Back To L.A." sequence. I can't believe it's never popped up online. Nobody could put it up??

Honestly, I think it would be interesting if the group released some kind of DVD collection with the Our Team special, Goin' Plantium, 1989 Endless Summer stuff, and any other applicable stuff.

I find it a little disturbing.  Brian is certainly up, but there's a manic, almost frantic edge to the jam session footage.  It is kind of surreal to watch Mike playing along on keyboards.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on September 08, 2012, 02:50:51 AM
If you really listen to the arrangements on KTSA, you'll realize that it was the last time Brian was really in charge of most of the harmonies on a BBs record until, well... That's Why God Made the Radio. Say what you want to about "Some Of Your Love" being cheesy, but listen to the vocals in the tag - to quote Kanye West, "that sh*t cray!" That's some vintage BW genius at work. Who else could arrange vocals that way? The tag on "Oh Darlin'" has Brian throwing out some crazy counterpoint like it's child play.

"Goin' On", with those ascending harmonies during the chorus, also never fails to inspire me. What a display of raw emotion. And here I thought this BW guy had burned out a long time ago! Bruce said in an interview that a lot of effort was put into having everything done the way Brian wanted it done, and it shows.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on September 08, 2012, 03:04:59 AM
Also, just because I'm on the topic, listen to Mike's part near the end of "Santa Ana Winds", when he repeats "Santa Ana winds keep blowin'". What a brilliant, pastoral melody. It sounds almost western, and really captures the feel of a mighty gale.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 08, 2012, 03:20:36 AM
Does anyone have a divx/xvix/etc of the Our Team special?


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on September 08, 2012, 06:52:45 AM
I love KTSA. In my opinion, it kicks the pants off of MIU, and I definitely prefer it to LA. I also dig BB85, the production would bother me if it it was an album by any other artist. But coming from the boys, it is yet another fascinating iteration of my favorite band. And I think they pull it off.

I'm 28.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 08, 2012, 07:12:01 AM
If you really listen to the arrangements on KTSA, you'll realize that it was the last time Brian was really in charge of most of the harmonies on a BBs record until, well... That's Why God Made the Radio. Say what you want to about "Some Of Your Love" being cheesy, but listen to the vocals in the tag - to quote Kanye West, "that sh*t cray!" That's some vintage BW genius at work. Who else could arrange vocals that way? The tag on "Oh Darlin'" has Brian throwing out some crazy counterpoint like it's child play.

"Goin' On", with those ascending harmonies during the chorus, also never fails to inspire me. What a display of raw emotion. And here I thought this BW guy had burned out a long time ago! Bruce said in an interview that a lot of effort was put into having everything done the way Brian wanted it done, and it shows.

Goin' On has got some good music goin' on. All the music generally did even at this stage, but they failed with concieving any lyric which made any sense. Even 'Some Of Your Love' has a good track, but the lyrics are appalling.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on September 08, 2012, 10:26:26 AM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California.  Didn't someone say there was a release date posted on a now-deleted page somewhere?  Was it an early Amazon pre-order page?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dutchie on September 08, 2012, 10:28:48 AM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California.  Didn't someone say there was a release date posted on a now-deleted page somewhere?  Was it an early Amazon pre-order page?

I only have this link for european fans: http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/SESSIONID/196d1014f13263da4d8d26de0491358e/poprock/detail/-/art/Beach-Boys-Made-In-California-Limited/hnum/3084686


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 08, 2012, 11:38:23 AM
If you really listen to the arrangements on KTSA, you'll realize that it was the last time Brian was really in charge of most of the harmonies on a BBs record until, well... That's Why God Made the Radio. Say what you want to about "Some Of Your Love" being cheesy, but listen to the vocals in the tag - to quote Kanye West, "that sh*t cray!" That's some vintage BW genius at work. Who else could arrange vocals that way? The tag on "Oh Darlin'" has Brian throwing out some crazy counterpoint like it's child play.

"Goin' On", with those ascending harmonies during the chorus, also never fails to inspire me. What a display of raw emotion. And here I thought this BW guy had burned out a long time ago! Bruce said in an interview that a lot of effort was put into having everything done the way Brian wanted it done, and it shows.

Goin' On has got some good music goin' on. All the music generally did even at this stage, but they failed with concieving any lyric which made any sense. Even 'Some Of Your Love' has a good track, but the lyrics are appalling.

Those ascending harmonies are a straight copy from an unused (at that time) Heroes & Villains 'snippet'. It's on TSS, now.
I love "Oh Darlin'" - Bruce said he was going for a Brian vibe and he generally got that. I've never been able to find the version with Brian on lead vocals, unfortunately, but I like Carl's vocal, too.
Don't care for his vocal on the title track at all, though - sounds like he's sauced! (he might have well been).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 08, 2012, 12:02:56 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California

Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol

[* denotes statement that may or may not be true]


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 08, 2012, 12:10:14 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California

Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol


By not giving us the information, you won't be killing us...that means you're letting us live. Therefore, concrete evidence "Wouldn't It Be Nice (To Live Again)" will be on the box. Thanks AGD!  :thumbsup


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 08, 2012, 12:52:22 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California.  Didn't someone say there was a release date posted on a now-deleted page somewhere?  Was it an early Amazon pre-order page?

I only have this link for european fans: http://www.jpc.de/jpcng/SESSIONID/196d1014f13263da4d8d26de0491358e/poprock/detail/-/art/Beach-Boys-Made-In-California-Limited/hnum/3084686

EMI release schedule for Czech Republic:

http://www.emimusic.cz/cz/titles.php?filter=date&order=desc

There are now several European online retailers with holder pages for the set.

Google "5099923234529" for an idea.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on September 08, 2012, 12:52:41 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California

Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol

[* denotes statement that may or may not be true]

;)  Thanks, Andrew.  I guess I'll just have to try to be a little more patient.



Oh, and thanks, Dutchie, that must have been it.

So if that link is accurate and folks in Europe can expect a November 16 release, would that leave the U.S. with the 13th or 20th, I wonder?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 08, 2012, 01:04:29 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California

Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol


By not giving us the information, you won't be killing us...that means you're letting us live. Therefore, concrete evidence "Wouldn't It Be Nice (To Live Again)" will be on the box. Thanks AGD!  :thumbsup

Mad as a box of seriously insane frogs.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 08, 2012, 01:08:41 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California

Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol


By not giving us the information, you won't be killing us...that means you're letting us live. Therefore, concrete evidence "Wouldn't It Be Nice (To Live Again)" will be on the box. Thanks AGD!  :thumbsup

Mad as a box of seriously insane frogs.

Swedish Frogs?


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 08, 2012, 01:32:23 PM
It's official. Swedish Frog (Live) will be on the box set!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 09, 2012, 01:06:29 AM
So if that link is accurate and folks in Europe can expect a November 16 release, would that leave the U.S. with the 13th or 20th, I wonder?

19th for Europe, 20th for US is my guess. 16th is probably delivery day to stores.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Gertie J. on September 09, 2012, 10:12:47 PM
omg, what the friggin' crap it was reading the last 2 or something pages. Guess RR is one of those childish attention seekers that can be met on the interwebs. I could be wrong but it's ridiculously obvious.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 09, 2012, 10:39:09 PM
omg, what the friggin' crap it was reading the last 2 or something pages. Guess RR is one of those childish attention seekers that can be met on the interwebs. I could be wrong but it's ridiculously obvious.

Nah, she's not..

Just an interesting girl with an interesting taste


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 09, 2012, 10:44:19 PM
omg, what the friggin' crap it was reading the last 2 or something pages. Guess RR is one of those childish attention seekers that can be met on the interwebs. I could be wrong but it's ridiculously obvious.

lawl, I believe it was more her saying "Hey, I like that song" and then a handful of people saying "What?" and "Well, this isn't the first time you've liked something that most of us don't." several times and her responding with "Yeah, well, I like what I like."


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on September 10, 2012, 04:00:50 AM
In other words, a complete derailment of the topic at hand. :)

But hey, it's not as though we're swimming in box set talking points at the moment, I guess.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 10, 2012, 05:35:16 AM
In other words, a complete derailment of the topic at hand. :)

But hey, it's not as though we're swimming in box set talking points at the moment, I guess.

Wasn't really her fault, though - that's what I meant. And yeah, purty slow (which doesn't help), but I'm sure we'll see some kind of news or tidbits talked about soon.

Hopefully ;(


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 10, 2012, 09:09:21 AM
I think when more info arrives it will gain a new thread and this one will die. So people should feel free to rant on this thread, which they haven't hesitated to ;]


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 14, 2012, 04:20:56 PM
Bad news....

I'm pretty sure it looks as though this thing isn't coming out until 2013 now. To be exact, January 18, 2013.

So yeah that's kind of a bummer. I was really hoping that it was gonna happen in November. Oh well. Hopefully we at least get a track list soon.

http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach-Boys/Made-in-california--ltd-/6CD/5099923234529/p=gm/


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 14, 2012, 08:51:41 PM
Bad news....

I'm pretty sure it looks as though this thing isn't coming out until 2013 now. To be exact, January 18, 2013.

So yeah that's kind of a bummer. I was really hoping that it was gonna happen in November. Oh well. Hopefully we at least get a track list soon.

http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach-Boys/Made-in-california--ltd-/6CD/5099923234529/p=gm/

Ahhh, Only a two month bump, was expecting much worse.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 15, 2012, 12:38:45 AM
Bad news....

I'm pretty sure it looks as though this thing isn't coming out until 2013 now. To be exact, January 18, 2013.

So yeah that's kind of a bummer. I was really hoping that it was gonna happen in November. Oh well. Hopefully we at least get a track list soon.

http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach-Boys/Made-in-california--ltd-/6CD/5099923234529/p=gm/

Ahhh, Only a two month bump, was expecting much worse.

Seems abit unlogical though - surely they'd want it out for christmas?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 15, 2012, 02:06:35 AM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joe_blow on September 15, 2012, 11:28:33 AM
Bad news....

I'm pretty sure it looks as though this thing isn't coming out until 2013 now. To be exact, January 18, 2013.

So yeah that's kind of a bummer. I was really hoping that it was gonna happen in November. Oh well. Hopefully we at least get a track list soon.

http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach-Boys/Made-in-california--ltd-/6CD/5099923234529/p=gm/

They also list the most interesting title that I do not have in the collection, "15 Big Boys"


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ram4 on September 15, 2012, 12:05:28 PM
I would definitely not cling to any release date until the official announcement.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 15, 2012, 12:12:38 PM
I would definitely not cling to any release date until the official announcement.

Especially a site listing 15 Big Boys...  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on September 15, 2012, 01:25:55 PM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Speak for yourself, I enjoy when Phil takes to the microphone and expresses himself.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 15, 2012, 02:14:19 PM
Phil's fine, but his insistence that Capitol and the Beach Boys are the only people to ever change release dates and the repeated "The date was pushed back, it's never coming out" posts (always stated in the form of multi-paragraph posts) always feel a little silly. No offense, Mr.Cohen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GoodToMyBaby on September 15, 2012, 02:26:39 PM
We should wait for a press realease before we get attached to a release date.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 15, 2012, 03:04:12 PM
http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach%20Boys/15%20big%20boys_love%20you/CD/0724352794522

"15 big boys / love you"

what the actual f***?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Billgoodman on September 17, 2012, 02:58:45 AM
Not be like Phil, and it's probably nothing but the date for Made in California is pushed back in my distribution program:

18 january 2013!




Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 17, 2012, 03:09:20 AM
Not be like Phil, and it's probably nothing but the date for Made in California is pushed back in my distribution program:

18 january 2013!

Hrm, further confirmation :( Hopefully this means they've uncovered something totally awesome and need a bit more time to mix it and/or make it presentable. Probably not, though. Ah well, I can wait.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 17, 2012, 05:58:52 AM
More time to save our pennies and save our dimes!


Title: Re: \
Post by: TV Forces on September 17, 2012, 06:43:11 AM
Odd..  you think they'd want those Christmas sales.  Who releases box sets in January?

On the other hand, I remember the SMiLE box was also said to be pushed to early 2012 right before we got all the 11/1/11 news.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 17, 2012, 07:10:41 AM
This discorder.com page doesn't look very professional or trust-worthy anyhow.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 17, 2012, 07:42:37 AM
This discorder.com page doesn't look very professional or trust-worthy anyhow.

Neither does Brian Wilson (and when he does it looks creepy and very unnatural), but God bless him, he comes through for us every time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bicyclerider on September 17, 2012, 08:38:02 AM
It's not surprising the date has been pushed back- the clearances for the DVD always take a while.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 17, 2012, 08:48:24 AM
It's not surprising the date has been pushed back- the clearances for the DVD always take a while.

I think we should all bitch about it endlessly and say that they should have released the DVD separately even though it results in an inferior product and it would cost us more.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 17, 2012, 08:59:25 AM
EMI Czech Republic date is still 2012/11/19
http://www.emimusic.cz/cz/titles.php?filter=date&order=desc


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 17, 2012, 12:20:28 PM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing". Funny, I thought that all people who collect the music of The Beach Boys were "winners" when The Beach Boys & Capitol Records finally announced the release of "The Smile Sessions", then they followed through and actually released it. Under Mr.Doe's winner/loser system, I just won this round. The record company who(earlier this year) promised a Beach Boys career-spanning box set "Later this year" have failed to deliver the goods. I may have "won" this round, but, in fact, all of the people who collect the music of The Beach Boys now "lose". My victory is nothing to smile or gloat about.
                               As a collector of recorded music for more than 46 years, obviously, there are other groups that I collect avidly, including hard rock, early British beat groups and even progressive rock. Today, I am reeling from multiple bummers from the music industry which have hit me like a ton of bricks.

1. The Small Faces box set(from Universal Music/UK) has met the same fate as The Beach Boys "Made in California" box. Though mastered earlier this summer, the Small Faces box set was going to be a 5-CD box in a large box filled with memorabilia(not unlike the Pink Floyd "Immersion" boxes), and the compiler & creators of the Small Faces box got in over their heads.

2. Another group that I've been collecting for many years(since 1970) is the group and solo/spinoff recordings of the British hard rock group "Deep Purple". Though it was unknown to fans until a week ago, Purple compiler, fanzine operator and (later) website operator Simon Robinson had, since 1995, been the custodian & caretaker of all of the group's 1968-76 multitracks and masters, at an industrial park in Sheffield, England, and he would let EMI & Warner Brothers "borrow" tapes from this archive as needed for projects. The wills of original Purple managers Tony Edwards & John Coletta specified that after they had both died, that Robinson's posession of the tapes would end, and that Robinson would surrender/deliver the tapes to EMI's Abbey Road Studios, and so Robinson complied. But worse yet, litigation has now erupted between various surviving Purple members and the Edwards/Coletta estates, and possibly involving EMI. And the result? Robinson's 35 year tenure as compiler of Deep Purple's music will likely end, and, subsequent to an October/November 2012 pointless EMI/UK "Machine Head" box set(with not one note of previously unreleased music), there will be no further Deep Purple archival CD product for years to come, due to the litigation. As for Robinson, he has done a consistently superb job of compiling for 35 years, and been guardian of the tapes for 27 years. That there may be no further Deep Purple archival CD product may, in reality, be a moot point, since Robinson compiled expanded editions of every 1968-76 Purple studio & live album, and the archives have been 98% strip-mined of outtakes & unreleased songs.

3. There has still been no confirmed release date for Paul McCartney's "Rockshow" DVD & Blu-Ray release from Eagle Rock Entertainment or a confirmed release date for the "Wings Over America" CD box set from Concord Music.

Oh well, I'll have more money available to buy holiday presents for relatives this Christmastime. But I am still hopeful that scheduled DVD & Blu-Ray discs from The Rolling Stones & The Beatles will be released with no hang-ups.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 17, 2012, 12:24:35 PM
Mods, please ban this asshole already! He doesn't want any BBs material to be released for the sake of his sick obsession of taking on AGD.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 17, 2012, 12:25:46 PM
He only speaks truth. Leave him alone for now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: STE on September 17, 2012, 12:29:42 PM
Mods, please ban this asshole already! He doesn't want any BBs material to be released for the sake of his sick obsession of taking on AGD.


Why ban him?? Why what he wrote above would make him an asshole??
What's with the attitude of some people here?



Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 17, 2012, 12:31:39 PM
He always provides proof with his opinions, so sorry If you dislike the truth sometimes, even if it is exaggerated.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 17, 2012, 12:36:36 PM
I can't believe we're going over this again.


He spends 99% of his time here whinging about how sh*t is never going to be released. He barely contributes to the myriad of other threads on the board, spending his time playing the worlds smallest violin in threads like these and the remaster threads. And TSS thread last year.


He has nary a trace of optimism or patience in his body.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 17, 2012, 12:46:24 PM
I actually thought it was an interesting post...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 17, 2012, 12:48:25 PM
it's so annoying having to read people complaining about other posters. and I realize that's what I'm doing now. but just ignore it. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dunderhead on September 17, 2012, 12:52:15 PM
Again and Again, month after month I've asked for a suicide emoticon. Where is my suicide emoticon? It needs to be posted in this thread right now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 17, 2012, 12:54:43 PM
Phil's a riot, let him be..

He's probably the only person in the world counting the days for a Paul McCartney "rockshow" dvd release, he obviously going to be a bit of a nut


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 17, 2012, 12:56:15 PM
Again and Again, month after month I've asked for a suicide emoticon. Where is my suicide emoticon? It needs to be posted in this thread right now.

(http://www.footballforums.net/forums/images/smilies/suicide.gif)


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 17, 2012, 12:57:33 PM
Phil's a riot, let him be..

He probably the only person in the world counting the days for a Paul McCartney "rockshow" dvd release, he obviously going to be a bit of a nut

Well, no previous VHS or Laserdisc release of "Rockshow" had the complete concert. The new DVD & Blu-Ray releases will have 7 songs more than any previous home video release.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 17, 2012, 01:00:27 PM
Bottom Line: Beach Boys Bummer: No box set. To get scorched on overpriced Japanese CD 's, and now this.  :(


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 17, 2012, 01:02:24 PM
Bottom Line: Beach Boys Bummer: No box set. To get scorched on overpriced Japanese CD 's, and now this.  :(
:violin


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 17, 2012, 01:05:02 PM
Bottom Line: Beach Boys Bummer: No box set. To get scorched on overpriced Japanese CD 's, and now this.  :(

Look at this way, Phil - if it wasn't for you buying some CDs, the suits at EMI/Capitol USA wouldn't have got the idea to release them worldwide. It was solely EMI Japan's game until suddenly everyone was interested. Small comfort, I know.


Also, the EMI distributor hasn't changed its date from 16/11/2012, which other sites back up. One sketchy website no-one has ever heard of claims an arbitrary date. Infer from that what you will.

Cheer up!


Title: Re: \
Post by: GoodToMyBaby on September 17, 2012, 02:04:20 PM
Why do we bet on the dates we hear about before the press release?


Title: Re: \
Post by: doinnothin on September 17, 2012, 02:14:02 PM
Can we all agree that a two-month delay (if the delay is even happening) wouldn't be that big of a deal?


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 17, 2012, 02:20:25 PM
This discorder.com page doesn't look very professional or trust-worthy anyhow.

Neither does Brian Wilson (and when he does it looks creepy and very unnatural), but God bless him, he comes through for us every time.

Oh, I'm just saying I think it will come out sooner then what that site claims ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 17, 2012, 02:50:26 PM
Again and Again, month after month I've asked for a suicide emoticon. Where is my suicide emoticon? It needs to be posted in this thread right now.

Here's a quote from the rock group "Queen"(on their album "The Game"):

Don't Try Suicide, Nobody Cares
Don't Try Suicide, You're Just Gonna Hate It
Don't Try Suicide, Nobody Gives a Damn


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 17, 2012, 03:28:09 PM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing".

Wrong - I've invariably seen it as you talking depressive yet complete bollocks without having the first idea what's really going on and me pointing out the latter fact for the sake of anyone who might be misguided enough to believe you.

Here's the bottom line - everything, but EVERYTHING you've claimed would never be released, has been. This winning streak will continue for the forseeable future. Fact.  ;D

Also, if the box is bounced to 2013, it's nothing new: there was a box supposed to be released in 1966 that was over a year late, and as I recall the delay didn't hurt it at all. Can't speak for Mr.Piss-on-everyone's-parade, but life will go on for me, and I'm sure the delay will be worth the wait. Took 44 years to get the Smile sessions out...


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 18, 2012, 12:08:29 AM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing".

Wrong - I've invariably seen it as you talking depressive yet complete bollocks without having the first idea what's really going on and me pointing out the latter fact for the sake of anyone who might be misguided enough to believe you.

Here's the bottom line - everything, but EVERYTHING you've claimed would never be released, has been. This winning streak will continue for the forseeable future. Fact.  ;D

Also, if the box is bounced to 2013, it's nothing new: there was a box supposed to be released in 1966 that was over a year late, and as I recall the delay didn't hurt it at all. Can't speak for Mr.Piss-on-everyone's-parade, but life will go on for me, and I'm sure the delay will be worth the wait. Took 44 years to get the Smile sessions out...

I take it you meant 1996 instead of 1966?

correcting AGD is a pleasurable thing...


Title: Re: \
Post by: monicker on September 18, 2012, 12:30:38 AM
Mods, please ban this asshole already! He doesn't want any BBs material to be released for the sake of his sick obsession of taking on AGD.

I'd hazard that you're probably the bigger asshole.  :afro


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jeff on September 18, 2012, 12:34:24 AM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing".

Wrong - I've invariably seen it as you talking depressive yet complete bollocks without having the first idea what's really going on and me pointing out the latter fact for the sake of anyone who might be misguided enough to believe you.

Here's the bottom line - everything, but EVERYTHING you've claimed would never be released, has been. This winning streak will continue for the forseeable future. Fact.  ;D

Also, if the box is bounced to 2013, it's nothing new: there was a box supposed to be released in 1966 that was over a year late, and as I recall the delay didn't hurt it at all. Can't speak for Mr.Piss-on-everyone's-parade, but life will go on for me, and I'm sure the delay will be worth the wait. Took 44 years to get the Smile sessions out...

I take it you meant 1996 instead of 1966?

correcting AGD is a pleasurable thing...

Yeah, Andrew seems to be wrong on this one.  Wasn't Neil Young's Decade supposed to be the first box set, more than 10 years after this supposed 1966 set Andrew mentions?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 18, 2012, 12:59:33 AM
AGD IS A PHONEY! A BIG PHONEY!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 01:30:12 AM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing".

Wrong - I've invariably seen it as you talking depressive yet complete bollocks without having the first idea what's really going on and me pointing out the latter fact for the sake of anyone who might be misguided enough to believe you.

Here's the bottom line - everything, but EVERYTHING you've claimed would never be released, has been. This winning streak will continue for the forseeable future. Fact.  ;D

Also, if the box is bounced to 2013, it's nothing new: there was a box supposed to be released in 1966 that was over a year late, and as I recall the delay didn't hurt it at all. Can't speak for Mr.Piss-on-everyone's-parade, but life will go on for me, and I'm sure the delay will be worth the wait. Took 44 years to get the Smile sessions out...

I take it you meant 1996 instead of 1966?

correcting AGD is a pleasurable thing...

No. it's a well-known fact that the original release format for Pet Sounds was going to be a 13-disc box comprising single sided 78s of each track for the best possible fidelity. It was finally released in fall 1967. I have the only known copy.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 18, 2012, 02:08:00 AM
The worse thing about this is that Phil will now post a long-winded diatribe against Capitol, The Beach Boys and Andrew.

Well, then, here it goes. Mr.Doe has always seen our disputes in terms of one person "winning" & another person "losing".

Wrong - I've invariably seen it as you talking depressive yet complete bollocks without having the first idea what's really going on and me pointing out the latter fact for the sake of anyone who might be misguided enough to believe you.

Here's the bottom line - everything, but EVERYTHING you've claimed would never be released, has been. This winning streak will continue for the forseeable future. Fact.  ;D

Also, if the box is bounced to 2013, it's nothing new: there was a box supposed to be released in 1966 that was over a year late, and as I recall the delay didn't hurt it at all. Can't speak for Mr.Piss-on-everyone's-parade, but life will go on for me, and I'm sure the delay will be worth the wait. Took 44 years to get the Smile sessions out...

I take it you meant 1996 instead of 1966?

correcting AGD is a pleasurable thing...

No. it's a well-known fact that the original release format for Pet Sounds was going to be a 13-disc box comprising single sided 78s of each track for the best possible fidelity. It was finally released in fall 1967. I have the only known copy.

 :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 03:41:53 AM
The deletion of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box set(now bringing big money on the collectors market), the (possible) non-arrival of the "Made in California" box, coupled with the possible deletion of the "Two-Fer" series would put more than half of The Beach Boys recorded works out of print. After all, there is no indication that the one album per CD reissue series will continue with further albums beyond the 12 that were released in Japan back in July.

Perhaps the best idea, would be for the availability of the 12 one album per disc reissues to be for a limited time, for the "twofer" discs to stay in print, and for the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box set to be reissued. Having more than half of The Beach Boys recordings disappear from the market is not a good idea. The 2012 reissue campaign seems to have been poorly coordinated.

I suppose that all the recordings that will disappear from the market will be kept in circulation through homemade copies or illegal downloads, but does that situation really benefit The Beach Boys or Capitol? Obviously, it doesn't.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 05:43:04 AM
It's possible that tomorrow morning Karen Allen will knock on my door and beg me to be her sex slave.

Somehow, I doubt that will happen... but you can't deny, it's possible.  However, I strongly suspect the (possible) non-release of the new box would give Cohen far greater pleasure.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 18, 2012, 05:53:12 AM
Mods, please ban this asshole already! He doesn't want any BBs material to be released for the sake of his sick obsession of taking on AGD.

I'd hazard that you're probably the bigger asshole.  :afro
Foda off, your a whiney little girl who complains about random "defects" on BBs releases.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on September 18, 2012, 06:01:57 AM
It's possible that tomorrow morning Karen Allen will knock on my door and beg me to be her sex slave.

Somehow, I doubt that will happen... but you can't deny, it's possible.  However, I strongly suspect the (possible) non-release of the new box would give Cohen far greater pleasure.
A fellow Karen Allen drooler!  :) :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 06:06:37 AM
It's possible that tomorrow morning Karen Allen will knock on my door and beg me to be her sex slave.

Somehow, I doubt that will happen... but you can't deny, it's possible.  However, I strongly suspect the (possible) non-release of the new box would give Cohen far greater pleasure.
A fellow Karen Allen drooler!  :) :)

And proud so to be.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 07:29:02 AM
This situation with the proposed box set, and the attitudes of many people on this board, make me not want to listen to any Beach Boys music for a long,long time. It's early morning here, and I'll shortly ride my exercise bike. I always play some music during my 30 minute "ride". This morning I'll be playing Jazz-Rock fusion music.

I'm sure that I'm not the only person unhappy about the non-release of the box set, but now many of you want to unleash your frustrations on me.
                             


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on September 18, 2012, 07:39:33 AM
This situation with the proposed box set, and the attitudes of many people on this board, make me not want to listen to any Beach Boys music for a long,long time. It's early morning here, and I'll shortly ride my exercise bike. I always play some music during my 30 minute "ride". This morning I'll be playing Jazz-Rock fusion music.

I'm sure that I'm not the only person unhappy about the non-release of the box set, but now many of you want to unleash your frustrations on me.
                             
Phil, you are one wacked dude! How you would allow a release, or lack thereof to affect your listening pleasure is beyond normal.

Plus, there has been no firm confirmation from Capitol that the Box is delayed, has there?


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 18, 2012, 07:45:55 AM
If anonymous person behind a shiny screen has enough power over you to make you feel down and wanna stop listening to the BB then perhaps a break from the internet is what you really need.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ram4 on September 18, 2012, 08:42:54 AM
This situation with the proposed box set, and the attitudes of many people on this board, make me not want to listen to any Beach Boys music for a long,long time. It's early morning here, and I'll shortly ride my exercise bike. I always play some music during my 30 minute "ride". This morning I'll be playing Jazz-Rock fusion music.

I'm sure that I'm not the only person unhappy about the non-release of the box set, but now many of you want to unleash your frustrations on me.
                             
Phil - You have got to be the biggest drama queen and attention whore I have ever seen on the whole internet.  There has been no announcement by Capitol of a release date, just some random sites and distributors coming up with some possible dates.  So technically, nothing has been delayed because no date has been officially announced.  You just want it NOW NOW NOW.  All I read from you last year, month after month, was how The SMiLE Sessions was NOT coming out.  Are you mentally ill or something?  You must feed off angering people to gratify yourself or you are so unstable that the slightest bad news pushes you over the edge.  If the box is truly delayed until next year, then it's a shame we won't get to enjoy it sooner.  But it is coming.  Have some optimism.  How about that for your New Year's Resolution?  Thinking positive!

As far as things going out of print, they will still be available for years to come.  Even a 10 year old will figure out a way to "get" these two-fers one way or the other.  They even carry most of the two-fers, plus the GV and Pet Sounds box at my local library.  Life goes on even when things go out of print.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 18, 2012, 08:48:28 AM
I'm thinking these things were taken out of print as they will likely re-appear in remastered form soon. Not specifically the GV box set remastered, but seeing a lot of the rarities from it in remastered form on the Made In California box set or something similar.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Smilin Ed H on September 18, 2012, 09:23:46 AM
"It's possible that tomorrow morning Karen Allen will knock on my door and beg me to be her sex slave."

I'll send her around when she's finished. Might be some time.  My fault: not hers. But neither of us are complaining...  :p


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 18, 2012, 09:52:46 AM
AGD digs sloppy seconds.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 09:58:42 AM
If anonymous person behind a shiny screen has enough power over you to make you feel down and wanna stop listening to the BB then perhaps a break from the internet is what you really need.

Actually, some friends & one family member have, in recent years suggested that I should find a new hobby; not as an alternative to computer use, but rather, as an alternative to music collecting. I've been at it(with music collecting) since a time when The Beatles' latest album was "Revolver". It's been a long time.....since 1966.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 10:01:28 AM
Delete 'hobby', replace with 'obsession'.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on September 18, 2012, 10:13:35 AM
Actually, some friends & one family member have, in recent years suggested that I should find a new hobby; not as an alternative to computer use, but rather, as an alternative to music collecting. I've been at it(with music collecting) since a time when The Beatles' latest album was "Revolver". It's been a long time.....since 1966.

replace 'hobby' with 'outlook on life' and I think you'll be good to go.


Title: Re: \
Post by: LostArt on September 18, 2012, 10:20:36 AM
I'm sure that I'm not the only person unhappy about the non-release of the box set, but now many of you want to unleash your frustrations on me.                

I think you are the only person here unhappy about the non-release of the box set.  Some here seem frustrated because the box may have been pushed out a couple of months.  Me, no frustrations here.  Just as with The Smile Sessions box, I will patiently sit and wait for the official announcement of the release date and package details.  Heck, I don't even need a tracklist...I'm going to buy the thing anyway.  

You know, the weatherman said it was supposed to be sunny here this morning, and it's not.  It's cloudy.  I can't see the sun.  I don't think the sun is ever going to shine again, which is, you know, a shame.  Try to have a good day anyway, Phil.  I know I will.  

 


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 18, 2012, 10:34:12 AM
If anonymous person behind a shiny screen has enough power over you to make you feel down and wanna stop listening to the BB then perhaps a break from the internet is what you really need.

Actually, some friends & one family member have, in recent years suggested that I should find a new hobby; not as an alternative to computer use, but rather, as an alternative to music collecting. I've been at it(with music collecting) since a time when The Beatles' latest album was "Revolver". It's been a long time.....since 1966.

Maybe just dig a bit deeper? Could it be that you're jaded with the mainstream bands and need to fully check out the bottomless pit of brilliant sixties and seventies music rather than focusing so much on the mainstream. I dunno, maybe you do already.

There is so much cool stuff out there. There's a reason you'll never find me obsessing about the minutiae of the different pressings/masterings of Beach Boys albums, it's because there is some screaming mid sixties Polish garage band I'm digging at the moment, or whatever.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 11:05:47 AM
Delete 'hobby', replace with 'obsession'.


Mr.Doe, most people who are collectors, especially completest collectors (whether they collect comic books, baseball cards, records etc.) are, by definition obsessive.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 18, 2012, 11:14:30 AM
Some of Phil's complaints are 100% valid. Some are a little silly (i.e. "the release date has been pushed back, it's obviously never coming out"). I feel like the distinction should be made because most people just peg him as a hysteric who only speaks irrationally when that's not true, and they go further to discredit said valid complaints based on something he said elsewhere or they use him to discredit people who have the same stance as him. Not cool.

JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT. Phil's okay. Carry on.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 11:24:44 AM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 18, 2012, 11:31:20 AM
The wizard of Farnham looked into his crystal ball and saw otherwise....


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 18, 2012, 11:33:24 AM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

The box set can't be in limbo, the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed so your argument is invalid.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 18, 2012, 11:36:58 AM
the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed

WHAT NOW, POPE?

(http://www.fun-shop.com/show_image.php?im=/img/03/31096.jpg)

f*** YOU POPE I LIMBO WHEN I WANT AND I DO SO AT THE INTERNATIONAL FUN-SHOP I'M THE REAL REBEL EVERY DAMN DAY


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 18, 2012, 11:41:26 AM
the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed

WHAT NOW, POPE?

(http://www.fun-shop.com/show_image.php?im=/img/03/31096.jpg)

f*** YOU POPE I LIMBO WHEN I WANT AND I DO SO AT THE INTERNATIONAL FUN-SHOP I'M THE REAL REBEL EVERY DAMN DAY

It would seem that Pope Benedict lied to us, just like Capitol!


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 18, 2012, 11:42:37 AM
Runnersdialzero is a comic genius. :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 11:44:23 AM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

The box set can't be in limbo, the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed so your argument is invalid.

The type of limbo you refer to is the one where two guys are "Waiting for Godot", right? Well, as we all know, Godot never shows up.

I, on the other hand, am refering to a CD release limbo; release at some yet to be decided date.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 18, 2012, 11:52:23 AM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

The box set can't be in limbo, the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed so your argument is invalid.

The type of limbo you refer to is the one where two guys are "Waiting for Godot", right? Well, as we all know, Godot never shows up.

I, on the other hand, am refering to a CD release limbo; release at some yet to be decided date.

It's been delayed WITH A RELEASE DATE (Jan 2013).

I'll give you a secret in all caps, maybe you have trouble reading lower case letters?

NEW BOX NOT CANCELLED. NEW BOX DELAYED.

SMILE BOX NEVER CANCELLED. SMILE BOX DELAYED. SMILE BOX CAME OUT.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 18, 2012, 11:54:23 AM
Is Leonardo DiCaprio stuck in limbo?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 18, 2012, 11:58:27 AM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

The box set can't be in limbo, the Pope decided a few years ago that limbo no longer existed so your argument is invalid.

The type of limbo you refer to is the one where two guys are "Waiting for Godot", right? Well, as we all know, Godot never shows up.

I, on the other hand, am refering to a CD release limbo; release at some yet to be decided date.

I am well aware of what you were referring to Philip, I was trying to make light of your post which seems to have gone over your head by a large margin.

Here is a picture of the Pope to keep you occupied while you are waiting for the box-set of that band you don't listen anymore.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcRG1yCAF2OpzqZkhBMDg-gbISHELXE-AydyC9noSZhptXLTGGb5IQ)


Title: Re: \
Post by: LostArt on September 18, 2012, 12:09:32 PM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

See, I'm with you until the last few sentences.  Capitol has seemingly (to you) decided that the market can't absorb the multiple packages.  It may be true, it may not.  As we all should know, the delay (if there is one) could be for any number of reasons. 

You resent Capitol?  Really?  It's just a box set, man.  So a 2012 release date was initially announced, and now there are rumors that the date has been pushed back to mid-January.  If the January rumor is true, you really resent Capitol for missing the mark on thier original announcement by a few days?  Phil.  Listen.  The sun will come out again.   


Title: Re: \
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on September 18, 2012, 12:28:40 PM
My Mystic from the East and spiritual adviser, Carnac the Magnificent, divines to me that the outcry from fans
for "WIBNTLA" (which wasn't originally slated for the box set) has forced Capitol Records to find the track and remaster it.

Thus the delay.

Carnac is now on a spiritual retreat in India with Andrew G. Doe in order to divine the eventual release date of the box set.
These messages from the "netherworld" can be slow in coming so Carnac advices all to meditate daily and be patient.

(http://procureinsights.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/carnac.jpg?w=594)



Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 12:49:00 PM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.

1 & 3, broadly correct. 2, totally wrong. All the 2fers, 1962-1985, are still on catalog and easy enough to pick up on amazon, ebay or download.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

You might not know (in fact, by virtue of what you're saying, you patently don't), but a lot of folk do. Additionally, you don't have to be Sherlock holmes to work out the probable truth.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

Love the use of the word "obviously" without the least shred of supporting evidence... especially coming from someone who had demonstrated time after time over the past year and more that he has no greater grasp of what's actually happeining here than Sarah Palin has of foreign relations.

The mono/stereo reissues are a niche product, as is the box, ergo there is, in truth, no real overlap as the dedicated fan will purchase both. Or some. Or one. Whatever, no real conflict. The big bucks are in the GH collections - which btw the hard-core will also buy becuase...

1 - it's what we do...

2 - there are some first time stereo remixes.

Lest we forget, Cohen's entire edifice of sackcloth and ashes is built on the exceedingly shaky foundation of one website of dubious provenence and origin saying the box is delayed. Capitol hasn't said word one about any delay, a circumstance which previously invariably reduced Cohen to near-orgasmic fits of indignation. Except when it suits, of course.  ;D And if the box is delayed for a few months ? BFD. So what ? Can't speak for anyone else here, but it's not at the top of my Top 10 life priorities right now. Not even close.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 01:17:14 PM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.




1 & 3, broadly correct. 2, totally wrong. All the 2fers, 1962-1985, are still on catalog and easy enough to pick up on amazon, ebay or download.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

You might not know (in fact, by virtue of what you're saying, you patently don't), but a lot of folk do. Additionally, you don't have to be Sherlock holmes to work out the probable truth.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

Love the use of the word "obviously" without the least shred of supporting evidence... especially coming from someone who had demonstrated time after time over the past year and more that he has no greater grasp of what's actually happeining here than Sarah Palin has of foreign relations.

The mono/stereo reissues are a niche product, as is the box, ergo there is, in truth, no real overlap as the dedicated fan will purchase both. Or some. Or one. Whatever, no real conflict. The big bucks are in the GH collections - which btw the hard-core will also buy becuase...

1 - it's what we do...

2 - there are some first time stereo remixes.

Lest we forget, Cohen's entire edifice of sackcloth and ashes is built on the exceedingly shaky foundation of one website of dubious provenence and origin saying the box is delayed. Capitol hasn't said word one about any delay, a circumstance which previously invariably reduced Cohen to near-orgasmic fits of indignation. Except when it suits, of course.  ;D And if the box is delayed for a few months ? BFD. So what ? Can't speak for anyone else here, but it's not at the top of my Top 10 life priorities right now. Not even close.

But YOU were the one who insisted that the box set would be released in November, and you belittled those people who doubted your statement.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bubba Ho-Tep on September 18, 2012, 01:31:45 PM
(http://procureinsights.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/carnac.jpg?w=594)

"Carnac: “WIBNTLA”

Ed: “WIBNTLA”

Carnac: “May Jeff Foskett make a second home in your Smile Sessions box.”

Ed: “HIYOOOO! HO HO HO HO!”

Carnac: “WIBNTLA”

Ed: “WIBNTLA”

Carnac: “What’s the abbreviation for ‘Worrywort Imbeciles Bemoaning Non-Existant Tracklists Like Assholes’?”

Ed: "HIYOOOO! HO HO HO HO!"


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 18, 2012, 01:33:47 PM
Carnac: “What’s the abbreviation for ‘Worrywort Imbeciles Bemoaning Non-Existant Tracklists Like Assholes’?”


Holy sh-


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 18, 2012, 01:36:24 PM
(http://procureinsights.files.wordpress.com/2011/06/carnac.jpg?w=594)

"Carnac: “WIBNTLA”

Ed: “WIBNTLA”

Carnac: “May Jeff Foskett make a second home in your Smile Sessions box.”

Ed: “HIYOOOO! HO HO HO HO!”

Carnac: “WIBNTLA”

Ed: “WIBNTLA”

Carnac: “What’s the abbreviation for ‘Worrywort Imbeciles Bemoaning Non-Existant Tracklists Like Assholes’?”

Ed: "HIYOOOO! HO HO HO HO!"


Love ya.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 18, 2012, 01:54:37 PM
Originally, until the box set apparently fell into limbo, this 50th anniversary Compact Disc campaign had three parts. They were:

1. 1-CD & 2-CD greatest hits sets aimed at casual consumers; people who might see these 1-CD & 2-CD compilations in the racks at their local record shop or department store, and say to themselves, "I heard that The Beach Boys have recently reunited. I don't have much of their music in my collection, and these greatest hits packages have all or most of the Beach Boys hits that I remember. I think I'll buy this."

2. Twelve reissues of original albums. People who already have a greatest hits CD in their collection, and are seeking to delve deeper into the group's music may pick up some of the Beach Boys albums that they remember best, or may have once owned on vinyl or cassette. In addition, the CD debut of the mono mixes of 5 albums, and the first time in stereo release of 4 albums mean that at least 9 of these reissues will also be purchased by Beach Boys completests; hard-core fans.

3. A box set which is a collectors product that will only be purchased by completest, hard-core fans.




1 & 3, broadly correct. 2, totally wrong. All the 2fers, 1962-1985, are still on catalog and easy enough to pick up on amazon, ebay or download.

Obviously, after it was decided to release the 12 back catalogue discs internationally(I.E. outside Japan), there were manufacturing delays, forcing the September to October postponement. Were the 12 discs newly mastered for the international release? We don't know yet.

You might not know (in fact, by virtue of what you're saying, you patently don't), but a lot of folk do. Additionally, you don't have to be Sherlock holmes to work out the probable truth.

But the dilemma that Capitol's marketing people have is this: because the market for the 12 catalogue CD's partly overlaps with the market for a box set, would releasing the box set within the same season as the 12 catalogue CD's hurt sales on the 12 catalogue CD's? Perhaps, but the avid fans have already decided whether to buy the box set, and whether they will buy some or all of the 12 catalogue CD's.

Capitol has obviously decided that the market can't absorb (I.E. afford) having the 12 catalogue CD's & the box set released within the same season.

Do I resent Capitol? Yes. They were the ones who, earlier in 2012 promised a career-spanning box set "later this year".

Love the use of the word "obviously" without the least shred of supporting evidence... especially coming from someone who had demonstrated time after time over the past year and more that he has no greater grasp of what's actually happeining here than Sarah Palin has of foreign relations.

The mono/stereo reissues are a niche product, as is the box, ergo there is, in truth, no real overlap as the dedicated fan will purchase both. Or some. Or one. Whatever, no real conflict. The big bucks are in the GH collections - which btw the hard-core will also buy becuase...

1 - it's what we do...

2 - there are some first time stereo remixes.

Lest we forget, Cohen's entire edifice of sackcloth and ashes is built on the exceedingly shaky foundation of one website of dubious provenence and origin saying the box is delayed. Capitol hasn't said word one about any delay, a circumstance which previously invariably reduced Cohen to near-orgasmic fits of indignation. Except when it suits, of course.  ;D And if the box is delayed for a few months ? BFD. So what ? Can't speak for anyone else here, but it's not at the top of my Top 10 life priorities right now. Not even close.

But YOU were the one who insisted that the box set would be released in November, and you belittled those people who doubted your statement.

 :deadhorse


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 01:55:58 PM
But YOU were the one who insisted that the box set would be released in November, and you belittled those people who doubted your statement.

Let's wait until 23.59.59 on 11/30/12, shall we ?

Oh, and YOU are the one who insisted that The Smile Sessions would never be released.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 18, 2012, 02:17:17 PM
* tEh sMiLe sEsSiOnS~~~


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on September 18, 2012, 03:23:23 PM
Do we actually know for a fact that the box set has been delayed or are we just going by that website that gave it a January 2013 release date?


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 18, 2012, 03:53:09 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on September 18, 2012, 04:07:47 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California
Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol


By not giving us the information, you won't be killing us...that means you're letting us live. Therefore, concrete evidence "Wouldn't It Be Nice (To Live Again)" will be on the box. Thanks AGD!  :thumbsup
Mad as a box of seriously insane frogs.

Swedish Frogs?

Hey, whatever happened to that Swedish Frog guy, anyway?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on September 18, 2012, 04:14:06 PM

I don't care about the delay.

I will use the extra time to study up on the stereo/mono mixes and then go back to re-appreciate In the Key of Disney, which has gotten totally lost in all the excitement.....


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 18, 2012, 05:03:08 PM
Mr.Doe, you've done a fabulous, unfailing job in keeping secrets for your insider pals (who created the Wall of Secrecy). Now we'll see how loyal they are to you. Perhaps, if they really ARE loyal to you, they'll have a change of heart, and release the "Made in California" box set  this year, hence sparing you from humiliation.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 18, 2012, 05:14:08 PM
Mr.Doe, you've done a fabulous, unfailing job in keeping secrets for your insider pals (who created the Wall of Secrecy). Now we'll see how loyal they are to you. Perhaps, if they really ARE loyal to you, they'll have a change of heart, and release the "Made in California" box set  this year, hence sparing you from humiliation.

If Andrew does have so-called "insider pals," I don't think the release date of a box set should affect their friendship.  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 18, 2012, 05:20:29 PM
Mr.Doe, you've done a fabulous, unfailing job in keeping secrets for your insider pals (who created the Wall of Secrecy). Now we'll see how loyal they are to you. Perhaps, if they really ARE loyal to you, they'll have a change of heart, and release the "Made in California" box set  this year, hence sparing you from humiliation.
What the hell are you talking about? The wall of secrecy and the "delays/cancelations" are all in your head until a Capitol announcement.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 18, 2012, 05:28:54 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:

That was a good fart, I presume you've eaten a large helping of red meat recently?


Title: Re: \
Post by: 18thofMay on September 18, 2012, 05:57:54 PM
Mr.Doe, you've done a fabulous, unfailing job in keeping secrets for your insider pals (who created the Wall of Secrecy). Now we'll see how loyal they are to you. Perhaps, if they really ARE loyal to you, they'll have a change of heart, and release the "Made in California" box set  this year, hence sparing you from humiliation.
Please get some help mate

Seriously


Title: Re:
Post by: Magic Transistor Radio on September 18, 2012, 06:25:12 PM
I was spying on the insiders and what I gathered:

Disc 1: 15 Big Ones sessions
Disc 2: MIU sessions
Disc 3: BB85 sessions
Disc 4: Summer in Paradise sessions
Bonus disc includes Bruce 2012 cover of Wouldn't it Be Nice to Live Again
            and an interview of John Stamos discussing his years with the Beach Boys


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 18, 2012, 08:22:38 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:

That was a good fart, I presume you've eaten a large helping of red meat recently?

Thank you very much. I recently checked out the fact that no fewer than 19 people on this forum have downloaded (and most likely listened to) my fart. Way to go, gang! Here's an encore that really has some "shred" to it:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6 (http://[url)[/url]

I call it "Flappin' The 'Roid".


Title: Re: \
Post by: 18thofMay on September 18, 2012, 08:24:44 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:

That was a good fart, I presume you've eaten a large helping of red meat recently?

Thank you very much. I recently checked out the fact that no fewer than 19 people on this forum have downloaded (and most likely listened to) my fart. Way to go, gang! Here's an encore that really has some "shred" to it:

[url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6 (http://[url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6)[/url]

I call it "Flappin' The 'Roid".

What John Stebbins said in another thread.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Gertie J. on September 18, 2012, 09:04:26 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:

That was a good fart, I presume you've eaten a large helping of red meat recently?

Thank you very much. I recently checked out the fact that no fewer than 19 people on this forum have downloaded (and most likely listened to) my fart. Way to go, gang! Here's an encore that really has some "shred" to it:

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6 (http://[url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6)[/url]

I call it "Flappin' The 'Roid".

What John Stebbins said in another thread.

you mean the topic about Brian PS hairdo?


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 18, 2012, 09:26:55 PM
Interesting. Every time I see my copy of Beach Boys FAQ I keep thinking it says Beach Boys Fuh Q. Great book nonetheless.


Title: Re: \
Post by: 18thofMay on September 18, 2012, 09:29:56 PM
I hate to bring this up on another thread, but I feel it is needed here. Again, my fart:

http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q (http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?mzk6ja36h9r5h1q)

Now if everybody would just shut the f*** up and listen to my fart then we would have world peace.

:police:

That was a good fart, I presume you've eaten a large helping of red meat recently?

Thank you very much. I recently checked out the fact that no fewer than 19 people on this forum have downloaded (and most likely listened to) my fart. Way to go, gang! Here's an encore that really has some "shred" to it:

[url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6][url]http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6 (http://[url=http://www.mediafire.com/download.php?k6ng35sglz247e6)[/url]

I call it "Flappin' The 'Roid".

What John Stebbins said in another thread.

you mean the topic about Brian PS hairdo?

Yes


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on September 18, 2012, 10:07:34 PM
Interesting. Every time I see my copy of Beach Boys FAQ I keep thinking it says Beach Boys Fuh Q. Great book nonetheless.

:lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 18, 2012, 10:29:34 PM
Mr.Doe, you've done a fabulous, unfailing job in keeping secrets for your insider pals (who created the Wall of Secrecy). Now we'll see how loyal they are to you. Perhaps, if they really ARE loyal to you, they'll have a change of heart, and release the "Made in California" box set  this year, hence sparing you from humiliation.

The words "confidence" and "trust" mean nothing to you, do they ?  Will I be humiliated if the box isn't released this year, or even at all ? Of course not: my ego isn't that big nor is my skin that thin.

Terrible thing, paranoia. You really should see someone about that, it's eating you up. No-one's out to get you: you're not that important, rather a figure of fun and derision amongst my friends, and most posters here. A release may be delayed: hardly news in the music industry. Outside of this forum, and maybe a few others, no-one's interested.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 18, 2012, 10:34:41 PM
Phil is a paranoid, living in his paranoid world with his WALL OF SECRECY.
Man, I can't read WALL OF SECRECY anymore!

And let's talk about music again.
I heard 4th of July today and I tought why they didn't released WIBNTLA too at the same time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 18, 2012, 10:54:31 PM
I'm really looking forward to some new info on Made in California
Well, I could give you some*... but then I'd have to kill you, of course.  :lol


By not giving us the information, you won't be killing us...that means you're letting us live. Therefore, concrete evidence "Wouldn't It Be Nice (To Live Again)" will be on the box. Thanks AGD!  :thumbsup
Mad as a box of seriously insane frogs.

Swedish Frogs?

Hey, whatever happened to that Swedish Frog guy, anyway?


Who, me? I've been busy reading LLVS, but keep up with whats here.

Side note, if this box doesn't get announced soon, the money I'm saving up will be ridiculous (orders more remasters)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 19, 2012, 12:05:43 AM
Look people, Phil Cohen is not paranoid or mad or any of those things, he is quite clearly just deliberately saying things to get a rise out of people and cause a reaction. Pathetic? Yes. Paranoid and/or mad? No. So please stop rising to it and let's just all from this moment on just COMPLETELY IGNORE HIS POSTS!

Please, do not reply to him or remark on him from this moment on, otherwise he'll never go away. Stop playing his game. It's a blatant wind up.


Title: Re: \
Post by: 18thofMay on September 19, 2012, 12:11:34 AM
Look people, Phil Cohen is not paranoid or mad or any of those things, he is quite clearly just deliberately saying things to get a rise out of people and cause a reaction. Pathetic? Yes. Paranoid and/or mad? No. So please stop rising to it and let's just all from this moment on just COMPLETELY IGNORE HIS POSTS!

Please, do not reply to him or remark on him from this moment on, otherwise he'll never go away. Stop playing his game. It's a blatant wind up.

You were not here during the Smile sessions drama


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on September 19, 2012, 12:34:09 AM
Look people, Phil Cohen is not paranoid or mad or any of those things, he is quite clearly just deliberately saying things to get a rise out of people and cause a reaction. Pathetic? Yes. Paranoid and/or mad? No. So please stop rising to it and let's just all from this moment on just COMPLETELY IGNORE HIS POSTS!

Please, do not reply to him or remark on him from this moment on, otherwise he'll never go away. Stop playing his game. It's a blatant wind up.

I too at one stage thought he was just trying to get a rise out of people. I've since come to the conclusion that he really is paranoid and mad, truly does think capitol records and evil and most likely logs onto smiley smile while wearing a tinfoil hat


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 19, 2012, 01:06:20 AM
Do we actually know for a fact that the box set has been delayed or are we just going by that website that gave it a January 2013 release date?

Just the one website. I don't buy it, personally.


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on September 19, 2012, 03:00:28 AM
In terms of the composition and release date of the box set, keep in mind that anything that comes out, the Beach Boys will have to sign off on...and they've been very busy up until recently.  And I'm sure various members/parties will have their opinions on the shape the box set will take, and the balance of tracks therein. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on September 19, 2012, 07:56:01 AM
Phil Cohen = The Master Puppeteer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 19, 2012, 08:16:41 AM
I hope southbay doesn't mind, but I thought this would be an interesting post from the Grammy thread to post in here as it quite relevant:

Had the chance to meet Mark London who was very nice and gave some great insight into the box set (it IS coming out, never fear). Mark is in charge of the entire Booklet, approx 80 pages.  Will be filled with NUMEROUS unreleased and unseen photos. Said he was given access to a box of photos that had been stored in Brian's garage for years. ASked him iof the boys themselves had any input in the tracklist--"oh absolutely!" As for a release date, he still says November is possibile, but may indeed be pushed back because they "just f*cked with the tracklist" . There will be a lot of unrealeased material, but he didn't go into specifics.


Title: Re:
Post by: southbay on September 19, 2012, 08:24:53 AM
I hope southbay doesn't mind, but I thought this would be an interesting post from the Grammy thread to post in here as it quite relevant:

Had the chance to meet Mark London who was very nice and gave some great insight into the box set (it IS coming out, never fear). Mark is in charge of the entire Booklet, approx 80 pages.  Will be filled with NUMEROUS unreleased and unseen photos. Said he was given access to a box of photos that had been stored in Brian's garage for years. ASked him iof the boys themselves had any input in the tracklist--"oh absolutely!" As for a release date, he still says November is possibile, but may indeed be pushed back because they "just f*cked with the tracklist" . There will be a lot of unrealeased material, but he didn't go into specifics.

NO problema, my posts are not copyrighted


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 19, 2012, 09:34:25 AM
They can delay it all they want if it's to compile a better tracklist. Good things come to those who wait.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 19, 2012, 10:00:59 AM
They can delay it all they want if it's to compile a better tracklist. Good things come to those who wait.

It could go either way. A positive spin is that they are adding more rarities, better sources, or new mixes.
On the downside, Mike Love could be demanding that "Slow Summer Dancin'" be included in place of Wouldn't It Be Nice To Love Again.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 19, 2012, 11:34:49 AM
True but the box is being targeted towards the more hardcore fan - if they've done their homework then they'll know what kind of stuff we want on it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 19, 2012, 12:29:47 PM
True but the box is being targeted towards the more hardcore fan - if they've done their homework then they'll know what kind of stuff we want on it.

There is no fan more hardcore than he who can actually enjoy "Slow Summer Dancin'."


Title: Re:
Post by: punkinhead on September 19, 2012, 01:28:22 PM
I was spying on the insiders and what I gathered:

Disc 1: 15 Big Ones sessions
Disc 2: MIU sessions
Disc 3: BB85 sessions
Disc 4: Summer in Paradise sessions
Bonus disc includes Bruce 2012 cover of Wouldn't it Be Nice to Live Again
            and an interview of John Stamos discussing his years with the Beach Boys
I'd buy that for a dollar!


nah, all kidding aside and Robocop quotes....I would put some definite money into buying that product right there!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on September 19, 2012, 01:40:05 PM
Better to wait for a perfect track listing than to have it reissued three times to fix mistakes like with the Endless Harmony soundtrack.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 19, 2012, 01:42:00 PM
True but the box is being targeted towards the more hardcore fan - if they've done their homework then they'll know what kind of stuff we want on it.

There is no fan more hardcore than he who can actually enjoy "Slow Summer Dancin'."

I really like that song!

even though it's a big ripoff of : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT4LJxBBaF0


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 19, 2012, 01:53:45 PM
True but the box is being targeted towards the more hardcore fan - if they've done their homework then they'll know what kind of stuff we want on it.

There is no fan more hardcore than he who can actually enjoy "Slow Summer Dancin'."

I really like that song!

even though it's a big ripoff of : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QT4LJxBBaF0

Not a rip off. It's actually a cover of that song, with a new part thrown in.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 19, 2012, 01:55:15 PM
same diff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 19, 2012, 01:59:05 PM
Good things come to those who wait.

Death by old age, for instance.


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on September 19, 2012, 02:02:29 PM
Better to wait for a perfect track listing than to have it reissued three times to fix mistakes like with the Endless Harmony soundtrack.
I thought it was just twice released with two different covers


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 19, 2012, 02:16:17 PM
Better to wait for a perfect track listing than to have it reissued three times to fix mistakes like with the Endless Harmony soundtrack.
I thought it was just twice released with two different covers

There's a promo version with a slightly different ten second bit of talking...one of the radio promos or something.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on September 19, 2012, 02:19:08 PM
Better to wait for a perfect track listing than to have it reissued three times to fix mistakes like with the Endless Harmony soundtrack.
I thought it was just twice released with two different covers

There's a promo version with a slightly different ten second bit of talking...one of the radio promos or something.


I believe the second version (with the white cover) has an all acapella Surfer Girl instead of the binaural version, and a different radio promo spot. I have the original release (orange) and never heard the acapella Surfer Girl.


EDIT: Or whatever, check this out:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,17.msg59765.html#msg59765


BTW if anyone happens to have the acapella Surfer Girl version, I'd love to take a listen


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on September 19, 2012, 02:56:21 PM
They can delay it all they want if it's to compile a better tracklist. Good things come to those who wait.

It could go either way. A positive spin is that they are adding more rarities, better sources, or new mixes.
On the downside, Mike Love could be demanding that "Slow Summer Dancin'" be included in place of Wouldn't It Be Nice To Love Again.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 19, 2012, 04:21:15 PM
Good things come to those who wait.

Death by old age, for instance.

Nah if I could choose I'd like to go out like John Entwhistle did.


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on September 19, 2012, 04:35:23 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Wah Wah Wah Ooooo on September 19, 2012, 04:37:05 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.

What is Surf's Up '98?  I've not heard of that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 19, 2012, 04:47:06 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.

?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 19, 2012, 04:51:45 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.

?

Now keep in mind I am not kidding. But Brian actually recorded a version with Carnie or Wendy (can't remember), with Joe Thomas co-producing in 1998. I would be interested to hear it. But I'm surely not expecting it to replace the 1971 version or the 1967 solo take as my favorites.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 19, 2012, 05:15:46 PM
Better to wait for a perfect track listing than to have it reissued three times to fix mistakes like with the Endless Harmony soundtrack.
I thought it was just twice released with two different covers

When the artwork changed, "California Girls" & "Kiss Me Baby" changed from the superb Andrew Sandoval stereo remixes, to the narrower, shriller Mark Linett stereo remixes, apparently at The Beach Boys' request.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 19, 2012, 05:28:13 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.

?

Now keep in mind I am not kidding. But Brian actually recorded a version with Carnie or Wendy (can't remember), with Joe Thomas co-producing in 1998. I would be interested to hear it. But I'm surely not expecting it to replace the 1971 version or the 1971 solo take as my favorites.

Oh I heard about that!!! I'd love to hear it, Imagine if... it's more then we think?


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on September 19, 2012, 05:39:46 PM
I'm hoping we hear Surf's Up '98 on the box. Though it probably wouldn't fit within the context of a Beach Boys' box set. Maybe on a future BW-solo anthology type of thing.

?

Now keep in mind I am not kidding. But Brian actually recorded a version with Carnie or Wendy (can't remember), with Joe Thomas co-producing in 1998. I would be interested to hear it. But I'm surely not expecting it to replace the 1971 version or the 1971 solo take as my favorites.

Oh I heard about that!!! I'd love to hear it, Imagine if... it's more then we think?

Yeah, you never know. One thing's for sure, the vocal arrangements BW / JT were doing in '98 were top notch.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 19, 2012, 05:48:37 PM
agreed, YI has some of BW's best vocal arrangements


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on September 19, 2012, 05:52:56 PM
I hope southbay doesn't mind, but I thought this would be an interesting post from the Grammy thread to post in here as it quite relevant:

Had the chance to meet Mark London who was very nice and gave some great insight into the box set (it IS coming out, never fear). Mark is in charge of the entire Booklet, approx 80 pages.  Will be filled with NUMEROUS unreleased and unseen photos. Said he was given access to a box of photos that had been stored in Brian's garage for years. ASked him iof the boys themselves had any input in the tracklist--"oh absolutely!" As for a release date, he still says November is possibile, but may indeed be pushed back because they "just f*cked with the tracklist" . There will be a lot of unrealeased material, but he didn't go into specifics.

Sounds promising.  They'd be foolhardy in my opinion not to release it in time for the Christmas market.  Box sets from what I understand aren't the easiest sell in this digital marketplace and while they will always make coin off the diehards, I'm sure that Capitol would just love to have to impulse holiday baby boomer bucks in their coffers.  But then again, their plan is their plan.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 20, 2012, 12:21:11 AM
Look people, Phil Cohen is not paranoid or mad or any of those things, he is quite clearly just deliberately saying things to get a rise out of people and cause a reaction. Pathetic? Yes. Paranoid and/or mad? No. So please stop rising to it and let's just all from this moment on just COMPLETELY IGNORE HIS POSTS!

Please, do not reply to him or remark on him from this moment on, otherwise he'll never go away. Stop playing his game. It's a blatant wind up.

You were not here during the Smile sessions drama

No, but i've read it. It's a wind up folks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 20, 2012, 01:23:22 AM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 20, 2012, 03:44:28 AM
I doubt it would be released, however it probably exists, and was probably considered for the Smile sessions


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on September 20, 2012, 08:17:38 AM
Do we actually know for a fact that the box set has been delayed or are we just going by that website that gave it a January 2013 release date?

There's a good chance, IMHO, that it'll be January. Just found this on the web site of my eminently trustworthy and serious retailer (fact: he never gets it wrong in these matters, if there's any doubt he puts in '2099' as the year of release; and he never just copies info from other, e.g. Czech, sites, he gets it from the distributor).

Go to: http://www.kroese-online.nl/artikel/3018996/Beach_Boys/Made_In_California_-ltd-


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 20, 2012, 09:50:37 AM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.

Do want.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 20, 2012, 10:33:12 AM
Do we actually know for a fact that the box set has been delayed or are we just going by that website that gave it a January 2013 release date?

There's a good chance, IMHO, that it'll be January. Just found this on the web site of my eminently trustworthy and serious retailer (fact: he never gets it wrong in these matters, if there's any doubt he puts in '2099' as the year of release; and he never just copies info from other, e.g. Czech, sites, he gets it from the distributor).

Go to: http://www.kroese-online.nl/artikel/3018996/Beach_Boys/Made_In_California_-ltd-

OH. MY. GOD.  Delayed a whole two months. I'm SO HUMILIATED.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on September 20, 2012, 10:38:36 AM
Phil's gonna have a field day with this......


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 20, 2012, 10:41:48 AM
'Don't feed the troll' seems woefully inadequate on a site where they are fed, clothed, housed and set up with incredibly easy jobs with great salaries. Just sayin'  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on September 20, 2012, 10:49:18 AM
well the world IS suppsed to end Dec 21st,so i guess we'll NEVER get to hear the boxset if the date has been change to Jan...oh well.. :'( :'(


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 20, 2012, 11:49:21 AM
Any guesses as to why it's been put back?

Only the release of all the Beatles albums on vinyl, in newly remastered ANALOGUE stereo, shipping November 13.

Individually or in a box set with booklet.

According to Music Direct.



Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 20, 2012, 11:50:58 AM
Phil's gonna have a field day with this......

Yeah, yeah… I have an image of Phil kicking AGD's frayed, bloodied corpse around the streets of London, laughing hysterically and…

Oh hang on, no I haven't.


Title: Re:
Post by: LetHimRun on September 20, 2012, 12:11:26 PM
Any guesses as to why it's been put back?

Only the release of all the Beatles albums on vinyl, in newly remastered ANALOGUE stereo, shipping November 13.

Individually or in a box set with booklet.

According to Music Direct.


OMG, I'm going to have no money left.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 20, 2012, 12:20:40 PM
well the world IS suppsed to end Dec 21st,so i guess we'll NEVER get to hear the boxset if the date has been change to Jan...oh well.. :'( :'(

Actually, the ending of the world has been pushed back to sometime early spring 2013 according to my (imaginary) sources.


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on September 20, 2012, 12:24:10 PM
Any guesses as to why it's been put back?

Only the release of all the Beatles albums on vinyl, in newly remastered ANALOGUE stereo, shipping November 13.

Individually or in a box set with booklet.

According to Music Direct.



If they were only REMIXED..


Title: Re: Nude photos of Marilyn Wilson surface after 40 years
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 20, 2012, 12:25:15 PM

ANALOGUE

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

... Oh my God.


(http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg) (http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg) (http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg) (http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg) (http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg) (http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: jeffcdo on September 20, 2012, 12:31:41 PM
If it's copied to digital and then back to analog, is is really still "analog"?  All of the restoration was done in the digital realm.

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-100303-the-beatles-the-beatles-stereo-box-set-limited-edition-16lp-box-set-43-book.aspx?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=9-20-12&utm_content=&utm_campaign=soundbytes&

"At the start of the restoration process, engineers conducted extensive tests before copying the analog master tapes into the digital realm using 24-bit/192 kHz resolution and a Prism A-D converter. "


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 20, 2012, 12:37:41 PM
If it's copied to digital and then back to analog, is is really still "analog"?  All of the restoration was done in the digital realm.

(http://spectrumculture.com/files/import/1745-john-lennon-toronto-1969.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 20, 2012, 01:08:39 PM
If it's copied to digital and then back to analog, is is really still "analog"?  All of the restoration was done in the digital realm.

http://www.musicdirect.com/p-100303-the-beatles-the-beatles-stereo-box-set-limited-edition-16lp-box-set-43-book.aspx?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_term=9-20-12&utm_content=&utm_campaign=soundbytes&

"At the start of the restoration process, engineers conducted extensive tests before copying the analog master tapes into the digital realm using 24-bit/192 kHz resolution and a Prism A-D converter. "

I wasn't gonna say anything, but yeah, you're right. I'm happy with my CD's and the bundle of vinyl I already have.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on September 20, 2012, 01:15:38 PM
The way vinyl lathes are set up these days, there is no such thing as a true analogue cut. The audio is digitally delayed, to give the cutting head advance notice of loud bits etc, so it can move at exactly the right moment.

I guess they could have set up to do the delay via a tape machine, but being as most laymen don't know how a cutting lathe works, they may well have not bothered.

Still, the world isn't exactly wanting for original Beatles vinyl. I've got three copies of the White Album, and I don't even like them! They sold millions and millions of copies...


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 20, 2012, 01:17:38 PM
For it to be a true sound, it'd have to be done entirely through analog, stick with the originals.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 20, 2012, 03:06:24 PM
With the "reunion" Beach Boys coming to an end, do you think that Capitol will see any reason to release any more Beach Boys archival CD product after the two greatest hits sets and the 12 back catalogue reissues? If the reunited group did sign a 3-album contract, do you think that Capitol will still want a 2nd & 3rd album from a defunct group, and if so, what would the group supply to Capitol? A live album? The outtakes from "That's Why God Made The Radio"?


Title: Re:
Post by: JohnMill on September 20, 2012, 03:13:09 PM
Any guesses as to why it's been put back?

Someone mentioned above that Mark Linett (I believe it was Linett) mentioned that they recently reconfigured the box set itself so as of just recently the box set was/is still a work in progress.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on September 20, 2012, 03:16:55 PM
Mark London...was close though!


Title: Re: \
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on September 20, 2012, 03:21:36 PM
With the "reunion" Beach Boys coming to an end, do you think that Capitol will see any reason to release any more Beach Boys archival CD product after the two greatest hits sets and the 12 back catalogue reissues?

Yes, and one reason can be summarized in a simple character: $.

In any case, Endless Harmony was released after the band splintered following Carl Wilson's death, and Hawthorne, CA was released several years after that.  The fact that the reunion tour will not be going on into January is thus not a reason to suspect a non-release of this box.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 20, 2012, 11:15:37 PM
Any guesses as to why it's been put back?

Someone mentioned above that Mark Linett (I believe it was Linett) mentioned that they recently reconfigured the box set itself so as of just recently the box set was/is still a work in progress.

I subsequently answered my own question:

Quote
Only the release of all the Beatles albums on vinyl, in newly remastered ANALOGUE stereo, shipping November 13.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jay on September 21, 2012, 01:30:20 AM
Runnersdialzero, you're getting weirder every day.  :brow


Title: Re: \
Post by: Yorick on September 21, 2012, 11:14:13 AM
well the world IS suppsed to end Dec 21st,so i guess we'll NEVER get to hear the boxset if the date has been change to Jan...oh well.. :'( :'(
But, wouldn't it be nice to live again?  ^-^


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on September 24, 2012, 03:30:57 PM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.
What is this you describe?


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on September 24, 2012, 03:34:03 PM
I'm really curious as to what will be on the box set for the last disc (not bonus disc) but the one basically ends the Beach Boys recording career (ending with TWGMTR). Like what songs will be on there from the 90s? the proposed "reunion" tracks? what tracks from Stars and Stripes? What from SIP, if included? What from Still Cruisin (besides Kokomo).


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 25, 2012, 01:32:43 AM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.
What is this you describe?

During press for TSS, Alan and Mark (I think) mentioned that the original plan for Surf's Up in 1971 was to sync up Brian's demo to the original instrumental track. But as the tracks don't sync up and the technology wasn't there to sync them up like you can now, they made a replica backing track using many of the same musicians for the purpose. I presume that didn't work either, so they just got Carl to sing over the original.

(For the life of me I can't remember whether they said that session still existed in the vaults, but they did mention it)


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 25, 2012, 03:34:32 AM
I don't think it does, I remember hearing otherwise...


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on September 25, 2012, 11:20:21 AM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.
What is this you describe?

During press for TSS, Alan and Mark (I think) mentioned that the original plan for Surf's Up in 1971 was to sync up Brian's demo to the original instrumental track. But as the tracks don't sync up and the technology wasn't there to sync them up like you can now, they made a replica backing track using many of the same musicians for the purpose. I presume that didn't work either, so they just got Carl to sing over the original.

(For the life of me I can't remember whether they said that session still existed in the vaults, but they did mention it)
Really? I don't remember hearing about this. Was it in the Smile book (from the TSS box?) or some other source?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 25, 2012, 11:29:42 AM
I think the '71 attempt at re-recording the first part was known about prior to TSS. I'm not sure why it wouldn't exist anymore, I don't recall anyone saying it didn't.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 25, 2012, 12:08:30 PM
I don't think it does, I remember hearing otherwise...

I think the '71 attempt at re-recording the first part was known about prior to TSS. I'm not sure why it wouldn't exist anymore, I don't recall anyone saying it didn't.

c-man to thread, I guess!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bicyclerider on September 25, 2012, 06:57:17 PM
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.
What is this you describe?

During press for TSS, Alan and Mark (I think) mentioned that the original plan for Surf's Up in 1971 was to sync up Brian's demo to the original instrumental track. But as the tracks don't sync up and the technology wasn't there to sync them up like you can now, they made a replica backing track using many of the same musicians for the purpose. I presume that didn't work either, so they just got Carl to sing over the original.

(For the life of me I can't remember whether they said that session still existed in the vaults, but they did mention it)

This makes no sense.  If they couldn't sync the Brian vocal with the track, just have Brian sing a new vocal over the old track.  If you record a new part 1 track, you'd still need Brian or Carl to sing over it - you're not gaining anything, just use the original track.  I recall the story was Brian did attempt a new vocal over the original track, but couldn't or wouldn't do it satisfactorily so Carl stepped in.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 25, 2012, 07:03:20 PM
Perhaps the '71 backing track put overdubs on Brian's '66 demo?

Also, I believe it was said recently that it wasn't Carl stepping up to do the vocal, but Brian actually asking Carl to do it after the couple failed attempts? amirite?


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 27, 2012, 04:40:28 PM
Let's hope that the recent falling out between the Brian/Al/David faction and the Mike/Bruce faction doesn't doom the box set. Presumably, both factions have to approve the contents.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 27, 2012, 04:51:02 PM
Except... there is no falling out.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on September 27, 2012, 05:02:57 PM
Except... there is no falling out.

Exactly.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 27, 2012, 05:53:34 PM
The only "falling" out are the tears from my eyes because of this thread being needlessly bumped.  :-[


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 27, 2012, 06:34:23 PM
Except... there is no falling out.

Oh Yeah? You haven't been reading Brian Wilson's comments on how disappointed he is that Mike Love has opted to "fire" Brian, David & Al from the touring group.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 27, 2012, 06:40:09 PM
Except... there is no falling out.

Oh Yeah? You haven't been reading Brian Wilson's comments on how disappointed he is that Mike Love has opted to "fire" Brian, David & Al from the touring group.
c
Read some other threads around here for once for the truth of what is going on.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 27, 2012, 08:31:04 PM
Except... there is no falling out.

Oh Yeah? You haven't been reading Brian Wilson's comments on how disappointed he is that Mike Love has opted to "fire" Brian, David & Al from the touring group.

No one was fired. I wish people would stay saying it like this, as it's entirely inaccurate ("fired" isn't much better, if at all).


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on September 28, 2012, 02:39:36 AM
Quote
More rampant Surf's Up speculation here: Does the copycat backing track they cut in '71 for the album still survive? And is it just the first half? That would be cool, I'd love to hear that.
What is this you describe?

During press for TSS, Alan and Mark (I think) mentioned that the original plan for Surf's Up in 1971 was to sync up Brian's demo to the original instrumental track. But as the tracks don't sync up and the technology wasn't there to sync them up like you can now, they made a replica backing track using many of the same musicians for the purpose. I presume that didn't work either, so they just got Carl to sing over the original.

(For the life of me I can't remember whether they said that session still existed in the vaults, but they did mention it)

This makes no sense.  If they couldn't sync the Brian vocal with the track, just have Brian sing a new vocal over the old track.  If you record a new part 1 track, you'd still need Brian or Carl to sing over it - you're not gaining anything, just use the original track.  I recall the story was Brian did attempt a new vocal over the original track, but couldn't or wouldn't do it satisfactorily so Carl stepped in.

Brian did try, but not very hard iirc. He was very against it coming out.

The piano demo isn't formless or all over the place in terms of time/rhythm, it's just different to the '66 track. So, they would have been cutting the new track to the demo. They just really wanted Brian singing lead on it, sense be damned, I guess.

The chronology for that would be,

Surf's Up proposed for new record,
Brian says no or 'I don't wanna work on it'
Carl/Desper/Whoever remembers piano demo, solves problem of Brian leads on new record too.
Attempt to sync up demo and backing track fails.
Cut new backing track to demo,
Somehow unsatisfactory, back to original track.
Attempt to get Brian singing fails (either sh*te performance or he just doesn't bother)
Carl does it.

Then of course, Brian bursts in at the session for the final bit and tells them how to do it.

Perhaps the '71 backing track put overdubs on Brian's '66 demo?

Also, I believe it was said recently that it wasn't Carl stepping up to do the vocal, but Brian actually asking Carl to do it after the couple failed attempts? amirite?

Or indeed, this. They overdubbed bass & stuff to Brian's demo at the end after all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: NatureShowInStereo on September 28, 2012, 04:23:24 AM
So what all do we know about this box so far?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Wah Wah Wah Ooooo on September 28, 2012, 04:33:33 AM
Most of us know very little about it. There are those among us who probably know quite a bit, but aren't at liberty to divulge.

We know it's called "Made in California" and that it's 6 discs. We know it was supposed to be released in November, but is likely pushed back from that, possibly to January.

We know that some people care nothing about it other than that it includes the Dennis track "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again."

We know that the delay is because some people, according to someone at the grammy museum show, are "f***ing with the tracklist."


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 28, 2012, 04:52:40 AM
Most of us know very little about it. There are those among us who probably know quite a bit, but aren't at liberty to divulge.

We know it's called "Made in California" and that it's 6 discs. We know it was supposed to be released in November, but is likely pushed back from that, possibly to January.

We know that some people care nothing about it other than that it includes the Dennis track "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again."

We know that the delay is because some people, according to someone at the grammy museum show, are "f***ing with the tracklist."

An admirably concise and entirely accurate summation of the status quo.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Steve Mayo on September 28, 2012, 05:09:19 AM
about surf's up.....in part 6 of the 6 part bbc bob harris the beach boys story special, jack tells of brian telling mo at a meeting that he was going to put the song on the lp. jack then says brian helped (whatever that is). he also says they re-recorded "the first part of the track" but it wasn't up to par so they "scrapped" it. but he doesn't say if it was thrown away.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 05:20:18 AM
With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

The games being played with the fans over this (mythical?) "Made in California" box set typify why I increasingly despise the music industry. And, on top of that, the "Small Faces" box and the "Paul McCartney-Wings Over America" box & the "Wings-Rockshow" DVD & Blu-ray releases also bit the dust, going to long-term(possibly permanent) limbo.


Title: Re: \
Post by: D409 on September 28, 2012, 05:26:32 AM
Here we go again....

One point though, will any future releases be delayed by Universal's takeover of EMI, or will all scheduled releases go ahead as planned ? The Beatles vinyl remasters will be ok, and I'm sure the proximity to Christmas will be a major sales opportunity for Made In California. Having raised the question, I have every faith that this set will be out within the next couple of months...


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 05:42:00 AM
Here we go again....

One point though, will any future releases be delayed by Universal's takeover of EMI, or will all scheduled releases go ahead as planned ? The Beatles vinyl remasters will be ok, and I'm sure the proximity to Christmas will be a major sales opportunity for Made In California. Having raised the question, I have every faith that this set will be out within the next couple of months...

Universal will be permitted to take over Capitol intact, so it will probably have no effect on future Beach Boys CD releases. But the long-term interpersonal hatreds between the now-elderly Beach Boys WILL be a factor.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 28, 2012, 06:43:13 AM
With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

The games being played with the fans over this (mythical?) "Made in California" box set typify why I increasingly despise the music industry. And, on top of that, the "Small Faces" box and the "Paul McCartney-Wings Over America" box & the "Wings-Rockshow" DVD & Blu-ray releases also bit the dust, going to long-term(possibly permanent) limbo.

With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

The games being played with the fans over this (mythical?) "Made in California" box set typify why I increasingly despise the music industry. And, on top of that, the "Small Faces" box and the "Paul McCartney-Wings Over America" box & the "Wings-Rockshow" DVD & Blu-ray releases also bit the dust, going to long-term(possibly permanent) limbo.

You're probably the biggest fucking idiot there is. Since you are so sure that Made In California won't come out, we should make a deal that you will possibly leave the board if it is indeed released. Or even better, we could have a thread where you publicly apologize to all of us for your sky is falling garbage.

And now onto more pressing issues. Who cares about the Small Faces box? And Wings Over America? Really? I could think of many other McCartney things I'm more looking forward to: deluxe versions of Red Rose Speedway, London Town, or Tug of War. Who cares about reissuing a live album?


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 28, 2012, 08:07:23 AM
With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

The games being played with the fans over this (mythical?) "Made in California" box set typify why I increasingly despise the music industry. And, on top of that, the "Small Faces" box and the "Paul McCartney-Wings Over America" box & the "Wings-Rockshow" DVD & Blu-ray releases also bit the dust, going to long-term(possibly permanent) limbo.

With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

The games being played with the fans over this (mythical?) "Made in California" box set typify why I increasingly despise the music industry. And, on top of that, the "Small Faces" box and the "Paul McCartney-Wings Over America" box & the "Wings-Rockshow" DVD & Blu-ray releases also bit the dust, going to long-term(possibly permanent) limbo.

And now onto more pressing issues. Who cares about the Small Faces box?

Uh, really? I care as much as I care about the Beach Boys box set - and many others do too. Small Faces is among my favourite bands for sure.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on September 28, 2012, 08:14:55 AM
Wings Over America is my favorite Paul McCartney live album.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on September 28, 2012, 08:38:29 AM
Wow. Sweetdudejim ain't really sweet, is he.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 08:57:30 AM

And now onto more pressing issues. Who cares about the Small Faces box? And Wings Over America? Really? I could think of many other McCartney things I'm more looking forward to: deluxe versions of Red Rose Speedway, London Town, or Tug of War. Who cares about reissuing a live album?

I do, very much. If you don't like the Small Faces, one of the greatest rock and roll bands ever, that's no one else's problem and you shouldn't assume others share the same opinion. I am very excited about the Wings Over America/Rockshow project, I am extremely fond of both album and film. A live album isn't immediately a lesser artistic achievement, you know. I'm glad folks didn't have that attitude when Live At Leeds was about to be given a deluxe edition.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 10:01:01 AM

And now onto more pressing issues. Who cares about the Small Faces box? And Wings Over America? Really? I could think of many other McCartney things I'm more looking forward to: deluxe versions of Red Rose Speedway, London Town, or Tug of War. Who cares about reissuing a live album?

I do, very much. If you don't like the Small Faces, one of the greatest rock and roll bands ever, that's no one else's problem and you shouldn't assume others share the same opinion. I am very excited about the Wings Over America/Rockshow project, I am extremely fond of both album and film. A live album isn't immediately a lesser artistic achievement, you know. I'm glad folks didn't have that attitude when Live At Leeds was about to be given a deluxe edition.

By the way, it's the requirement(from EU regulators who approved Universal's takeover of EMI) that Universal must sell off "Sanctuary Music" within 6 months, which may mean a long-term halt on future archival products by Sanctuary's best known back catalogue artists, The Kinks & Small Faces.

In the case of the McCartney/Wings CD box set & DVD/Bluray projects, despite the fact that McCartney's manager Scott Rodger offered them for 2012 release, the motive behind putting the projects in limbo is to avoid competing against The Beatles vinyl reissues and the "Magical Mystery Tour" DVD & Blu-Ray reissues.

But, back to The Beach Boys. It's seems that Mike Love is unaware (or oblivious to) the idea that he will go down in history as a villain of The Beach Boys' story.

First, he was the guy who caused the 1966/67 "Smile" sessions to collapse, causing cousin Brian to descend into two decades of mental illness.(In reality, Love's bad attitude was one of several reasons behind the collapse of "Smile")

Then, in Brian's absence, Love was the guy who caused the group to abandon its attempts at contemporary music, turning The Beach Boys into a nostagia act at a time when the group members ranged from 27 to 34(Love being 34 at the time)

And finally, Mike Love destroys the 2012 Beach Boys reunion, supposedly because touring with his tribute band is more profitable for Mike Love. Has Love ever heard of the expression "You Can't Take It With You When You Go"?

You'd think that at age 71 that Mike Love would be mature enough to learn from his past mistakes, but Mike Love will always be Mike Love.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on September 28, 2012, 10:24:20 AM
Phil, you are so full of sh*t. Even when the truth is laid in front of you, you persist in prolonging the myth. What a swell guy!

Now, get out there and debunk those myths.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 28, 2012, 10:28:43 AM
This "posting" by Phil has to end at some point. He doesn't like the BBs, only posts here because he was banned everywhere else on the Internet.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on September 28, 2012, 10:54:27 AM
First, he was the guy who caused the 1966/67 "Smile" sessions to collapse, causing cousin Brian to descend into two decades of mental illness.(In reality, Love's bad attitude was one of several reasons behind the collapse of "Smile")

Irony.

You're going to cause this board to collapse with your monotonous depressive comments that will have us all descend into fits of mental illness.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 11:02:09 AM
I was speaking about the 3 things that people typically blame Mike Love for. Whether he was single-handedly to blame for each of those things is debatable.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 28, 2012, 11:31:13 AM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 11:38:49 AM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

Hi Hi Hi is glam-rock era McCartney. WOA is disco-era McCartney.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 28, 2012, 11:45:41 AM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

I'm wondering if you've actually listened to The Small Faces. I find it hard to believe that someone being into sixties music _cannot_ like them. ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 11:58:15 AM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

I'm wondering if you've actually listened to The Small Faces. I find it hard to believe that someone being into sixties music _cannot_ like them. ;)

He may also possibly be confusing the Faces with the Small Faces.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 28, 2012, 12:01:29 PM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

Hi Hi Hi is glam-rock era McCartney. WOA is disco-era McCartney.

I guess if you wanna get down to it, it's arguable to say you're right there. I guess the Speed Of Sound//Wings Over America is more disco, sound-wise. I would say Paul was at his most c*ck-rock in this era however. I know Wings wasn't as well-oiled of a machine in the early '70s, but I wish there was a live album from then, when there was more Ram, Wild Life, and Red Rose Speedway in the setlist.

Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

I'm wondering if you've actually listened to The Small Faces. I find it hard to believe that someone being into sixties music _cannot_ like them. ;)

He may also possibly be confusing the Faces with the Small Faces.

Or he could just not care for either the Faces or the Small Faces. I have very idiosyncratic music tastes. And it is what it is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 12:03:59 PM

Or he could just not care for either the Faces or the Small Faces. I have very idiosyncratic music tastes. And it is what it is.

It's cool to not like them, man. Your initial post seemed to question the idea of anyone liking them, that's the only thing I objected to.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 12:07:54 PM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

Hi Hi Hi is glam-rock era McCartney. WOA is disco-era McCartney.

At The time of "Wings Over America", Paul McCartney had exactly ONE disco song in his entire discography("Silly Love Songs"). That does not make "Wings Over America" a disco album or McCartney a disco artist.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 28, 2012, 12:13:03 PM

Or he could just not care for either the Faces or the Small Faces. I have very idiosyncratic music tastes. And it is what it is.

It's cool to not like them, man. Your initial post seemed to question the idea of anyone liking them, that's the only thing I objected to.

For sure! Of course, it's wrong, but cool. ;D
Seriously though, all though I do like the Faces (yes, with Rod and company), I could see why someone wouldn't like them.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 12:46:43 PM
Didn't know it would make everybody so pissy that I don't like glam-rock-era McCartney or the Small Faces!

Hi Hi Hi is glam-rock era McCartney. WOA is disco-era McCartney.

At The time of "Wings Over America", Paul McCartney had exactly ONE disco song in his entire discography("Silly Love Songs"). That does not make "Wings Over America" a disco album or McCartney a disco artist.

I wasn't saying it was, mate. Any more than he did any real glam rock material. Trust me, I know as much about his solo career as you do.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on September 28, 2012, 01:06:31 PM
If you don't like Venus and Mars, you're crazy. Ram is almost 2nd to that IMO.

THEN MACCA 2, THEN BOTR, THEN MAF


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 28, 2012, 03:55:25 PM
Here we go again....

One point though, will any future releases be delayed by Universal's takeover of EMI, or will all scheduled releases go ahead as planned ? The Beatles vinyl remasters will be ok, and I'm sure the proximity to Christmas will be a major sales opportunity for Made In California. Having raised the question, I have every faith that this set will be out within the next couple of months...

Universal will be permitted to take over Capitol intact, so it will probably have no effect on future Beach Boys CD releases. But the long-term interpersonal hatreds between the now-elderly Beach Boys WILL be a factor.

C'mon Phil, even you don't believe that tripe.


Title: Re:
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 04:18:28 PM
Here we go again....

One point though, will any future releases be delayed by Universal's takeover of EMI, or will all scheduled releases go ahead as planned ? The Beatles vinyl remasters will be ok, and I'm sure the proximity to Christmas will be a major sales opportunity for Made In California. Having raised the question, I have every faith that this set will be out within the next couple of months...

Universal will be permitted to take over Capitol intact, so it will probably have no effect on future Beach Boys CD releases. But the long-term interpersonal hatreds between the now-elderly Beach Boys WILL be a factor.

If Mike Love doesn't agree to the proposed box set track listing, then there's no box set.

C'mon Phil, even you don't believe that tripe.


Title: Re: \
Post by: adamghost on September 28, 2012, 05:32:29 PM
Most of us know very little about it. There are those among us who probably know quite a bit, but aren't at liberty to divulge.

We know it's called "Made in California" and that it's 6 discs. We know it was supposed to be released in November, but is likely pushed back from that, possibly to January.

We know that some people care nothing about it other than that it includes the Dennis track "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again."

We know that the delay is because some people, according to someone at the grammy museum show, are "f***ing with the tracklist."

An admirably concise and entirely accurate summation of the status quo.


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on September 28, 2012, 06:23:59 PM
Most of us know very little about it. There are those among us who probably know quite a bit, but aren't at liberty to divulge.

We know it's called "Made in California" and that it's 6 discs. We know it was supposed to be released in November, but is likely pushed back from that, possibly to January.

We know that some people care nothing about it other than that it includes the Dennis track "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again."

We know that the delay is because some people, according to someone at the grammy museum show, are "f***ing with the tracklist."

An admirably concise and entirely accurate summation of the status quo.

Why can't Mike just fucking go out on his mediocre solo tour and leave his hands off the tracklist; he doesn't need to remove WIBNTLA for more of his lesser material


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on September 28, 2012, 06:48:23 PM
Why the f*** do you think it is Mike? Brian struck Let Him Run Wild off the GV box, Al struck Loop De Loop, Carl struck Soulful Old Man Sunshine. I doubt Mike even cares.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 28, 2012, 07:21:24 PM

Or he could just not care for either the Faces or the Small Faces. I have very idiosyncratic music tastes. And it is what it is.

It's cool to not like them, man. Your initial post seemed to question the idea of anyone liking them, that's the only thing I objected to.

Fair enough. I honestly can't stand it when people write-off a band just because they don't like them, and I guess it looks like I did that too. I don't know why the Small Faces/Faces never drew me in, but then again I don't care for Jimi Hendrix (although I'm trying to get into his stuff), most of the Stones stuff, and a lot of other legendary '60s artists, despite trying.


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on September 28, 2012, 08:22:37 PM

Or he could just not care for either the Faces or the Small Faces. I have very idiosyncratic music tastes. And it is what it is.

It's cool to not like them, man. Your initial post seemed to question the idea of anyone liking them, that's the only thing I objected to.

Fair enough. I honestly can't stand it when people write-off a band just because they don't like them, and I guess it looks like I did that too. I don't know why the Small Faces/Faces never drew me in, but then again I don't care for Jimi Hendrix (although I'm trying to get into his stuff), most of the Stones stuff, and a lot of other legendary '60s artists, despite trying.

I don't care for either of the Faces or McCartney offerings mentioned above, but I respect that there are a lot of people that do.  I just wish Phil would stop bringing them up to prove his pointless point!


Title: Re: \
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on September 28, 2012, 08:35:09 PM
With each passing month & season, fewer & fewer people are going to care whether Capitol ever releases this box set. If The Beach Boys can't stop arguing amongst themselves and permit the box set to be released, then it may be much simpler for Capitol to resume production of the "Good Vibrations:30 Years of The Beach Boys" box.

What exactly would Capitol Records have to gain from building up anticipation for a box-set and then not releasing it?  Try to think about this logically.  Like other businesses, Capitol's main goal is to make money.  The new Beach Boys album far outsold what anyone could have reasonably anticipated, and they've done fairly well on tour as well.  It stands to reason that Capitol Records would try to take advantage of this moment to try to make as much money as possible with more Beach Boys releases.  They might decide not to release a box-set if the sales of Beach Boys albums and tickets were poor enough to indicate that there were no interest in one, but in the past year they have pretty overwhelmingly indicated the opposite.

Try to imagine the following scenario:

Capitol Records Suit #1: Beach Boys records are hot!  Let's release a career-spanning box-set.
Capitol Records Suit #2: Great idea!
Capitol Records Suit #3: I have a better idea.  Let's make everyone anticipate there's a box-set coming, and then not release anything!  That'll keep those idiots guessing!

Doesn't seem very likely, as Capitol Records will not want to pass an opportunity to make more money off of us.  Their motives are no more or less diabolical than that.

(I should note that I will be very happy to separate with my money for this box-set, when the time comes).

As for the business about Mike Love agreeing or not to the track-list: whatever he may or may not have done in the past, the two shows in the UK have proven two things

1) The reported acrimony between band members is, at the very least, very overblown in reporting
2) Mike Love is apparently willing to allow songs he doesn't particularly care for into the set-list, as he reportedly didn't like "Summer's Gone" (at least initially) but it managed to get played anyway.  If he had really wanted to, he could have thrown a fit during the recording of That's Why God Made the Radio and insisted that he wouldn't participate if they included the final three songs that he supposedly didn't like, but that didn't happen.  Why would he call off the box-set?


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 28, 2012, 09:35:31 PM
I'm sure that Capitol Records would love to release a Beach Boys box set. Whether they can get permission remains to be seen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 28, 2012, 09:40:51 PM
I'm sure that Capitol Records would love to release a Beach Boys box set. Whether they can get permission remains to be seen.

You still never answered my offer Phil. Will you apologize to all of us, or agree to leave the board if the box set is out by January 18 in the United States? I'm serious. Because, unlike you, I am excited for the set to be released and can't wait to hear the new, previously unreleased material they will be putting on there. And if a few extra months was what it took to increase the quality of the box set, then it is worth it. Wouldn't you agree?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dunderhead on September 28, 2012, 11:09:56 PM
I'm sure that Capitol Records would love to release a Beach Boys box set. Whether they can get permission remains to be seen.

You still never answered my offer Phil. Will you apologize to all of us, or agree to leave the board if the box set is out by January 18 in the United States? I'm serious. Because, unlike you, I am excited for the set to be released and can't wait to hear the new, previously unreleased material they will be putting on there. And if a few extra months was what it took to increase the quality of the box set, then it is worth it. Wouldn't you agree?

 ::)


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on September 29, 2012, 01:30:04 AM
I'm sure that Capitol Records would love to release a Beach Boys box set. Whether they can get permission remains to be seen.

You still never answered my offer Phil. Will you apologize to all of us, or agree to leave the board if the box set is out by January 18 in the United States? I'm serious. Because, unlike you, I am excited for the set to be released and can't wait to hear the new, previously unreleased material they will be putting on there. And if a few extra months was what it took to increase the quality of the box set, then it is worth it. Wouldn't you agree?

Better gauge of his confidence:

Phil, if you're so c*ck-sure it's not coming out, how about you promise to buy every board member a copy of the box? Shouldn't cost you one thin dime!


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 29, 2012, 07:37:10 AM
What I'm saying is that Capitol's promise to release the box set "Later This Year"(I.E. 2012) and Mr.Doe's promise that it would be released in Nov.2012.........are apparently not to be.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Steve Mayo on September 29, 2012, 07:40:17 AM
bfd....what difference does is make when it does finally come out. meanwhile, the sun will rise each day.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on September 29, 2012, 09:37:13 AM
What I'm saying is that Capitol's promise to release the box set "Later This Year"(I.E. 2012) and Mr.Doe's promise that it would be released in Nov.2012.........are apparently not to be.

Indeed, and never were.  Better watch your syntax, there.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 29, 2012, 09:56:01 AM
What I'm saying is that Capitol's promise to release the box set "Later This Year"(I.E. 2012) and Mr.Doe's promise that it would be released in Nov.2012.........are apparently not to be.

I'm guessing this is the first time a record company ever released a project later than originally promised. As for my own, statement, it was made before certain parties took to dicking around with the track-listing. I've been wrong before. It's life. It happens and I have yet to be humiliated. Salient point is, as with The Smile Sessions, that the box will be released... and that the only person here wailing, weeping rending garments and rolling in ashes is the lamentably inept Cohen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 29, 2012, 10:00:08 AM
What is the deal with the tracklist changes? This is actually a valid subtopic about the box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 29, 2012, 10:03:44 AM
I really hope the Lovester didn't requested WIBNTLA to be dropped of the box instead of...original version of Daybreak?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 29, 2012, 10:06:26 AM
No. "(WIBNT)LA" has been replaced by "Wrinkles".


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 29, 2012, 10:28:45 AM
No. "(WIBNT)LA" has been replaced by "Wrinkles".

Haha! Made me choke on my Crunchy Nut Cornflakes that one...

Seriously though Andrew, please use whatever influence you have to make it as abundantly clear to the powers that be at Boxset HQ that a decent amount of unreleased Dennis material would really, really, really please a hell of a lot of the BB fanbase!

The thought of Mike or anyone else blocking the inclusion of Dennis tracks for whatever long-in-the-past grudges is disheartening to say the least...

Please let it not be so. Thanks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 29, 2012, 10:58:01 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on September 29, 2012, 11:01:05 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.

Orrrrrrrr they didn't want the release to run concurrent with the Beatles box set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on September 29, 2012, 11:07:02 AM
Capitol Records has never let me down.  They've been great!

'Cept when they deleted the Beach Boys catalogue in 1969 and I had to pay around 20 bucks apiece (or more) for the original albums.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 29, 2012, 11:22:33 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.

Not so: until the box is officially cancelled, no-one has let down anyone.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 29, 2012, 11:35:22 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.

This guy is really weird.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 29, 2012, 11:40:08 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.

Orrrrrrrr they didn't want the release to run concurrent with the Beatles box set.

We're comparing Apples & Oranges. The Beatles box is vinyl, aimed at participants in the vinyl revival fad. The Beach Boys box(if it is released) will be a compact disc product. These two products don't compete with each other. They are aimed at different markets.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 29, 2012, 11:55:03 AM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.
Its september, no record company would release a giant box set before the holiday season. Why do you want to see releases canceled so badly?


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on September 29, 2012, 11:56:09 AM
bfd....what difference does is make when it does finally come out. meanwhile, the sun will rise each day.

well... yes....  until the day that would have been known as December 22nd


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on September 29, 2012, 12:09:41 PM
Exactly bgas. See, the reason why Phil is so upset is because if the box set is in fact postponed to January, nobody's gonna have the chance to listen to it due to the Mayan calendar and the world going under in December and all.

Right. It wouldn't surprise me if Phil actually believed in that too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 29, 2012, 12:44:57 PM
The bottom line:Capitol Records and The Beach Boys have let down the fans. As for the proposed box set, they failed to deliver the goods.

Orrrrrrrr they didn't want the release to run concurrent with the Beatles box set.

We're comparing Apples & Oranges. The Beatles box is vinyl, aimed at participants in the vinyl revival fad. The Beach Boys box(if it is released) will be a compact disc product. These two products don't compete with each other. They are aimed at different markets.

Phil, why do you keep declining to respond to the posters asking you to agree to buy us all a copy of the boxset when it's released, which presumably wont be a problem as it's, you know, never going to be released and all.
Your comments are really annoying (deliberately in my opinion), so if you are going to post on here at least reply and respond to questions, especially when they're being asked to you directly.


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 29, 2012, 01:34:21 PM
Will the box set be released someday...possibly in 2013? Will Mike Love have a change of heart in 2013 and again record & tour with Brian, David & Al ? We don't know yet. But because each week brings us closer to the 2012 Christmas shopping season, it is appearing likely that there will be no Beach Boys "Commemorative CD box set" in 2012. How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on September 29, 2012, 01:38:04 PM
Will the box set be released someday...possibly in 2013? Will Mike Love have a change of heart in 2013 and again record & tour with Brian, David & Al ? We don't know yet. But because each week brings us closer to the 2012 Christmas shopping season, it is appearing likely that there will be no Beach Boys "Commemorative CD box set" in 2012. How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?
Oh, I stopped believing in Santa Claus many, many years ago. I can wait until January and beyond, if necessary.


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on September 29, 2012, 01:40:54 PM
Will the box set be released someday...possibly in 2013? Will Mike Love have a change of heart in 2013 and again record & tour with Brian, David & Al ? We don't know yet. But because each week brings us closer to the 2012 Christmas shopping season, it is appearing likely that there will be no Beach Boys "Commemorative CD box set" in 2012. How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?

That's it in a nutshell.  "you fans".  I know it's been asked before, but, as you've shown by this statement, you're not a BBs fan, so why do you even bother to post here?

I'm more upset about the Not scheduled/non-release of the BBs Love You Box Set, than a set that is temporarily delayed.
Oh , hey, join the family and show me some PROOF that it's not being released at all; then I can break down....


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 29, 2012, 01:45:12 PM
Will the box set be released someday...possibly in 2013? Will Mike Love have a change of heart in 2013 and again record & tour with Brian, David & Al ? We don't know yet. But because each week brings us closer to the 2012 Christmas shopping season, it is appearing likely that there will be no Beach Boys "Commemorative CD box set" in 2012. How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?

Can you read or what? Here it is again, underlined, in bold, coloured lettering. See if you can answer a question, yes, rather than replying to direct questioning with evasive posturing.

Please answer the question: are you going to buy us all a copy of the boxset when it's released, as you're so personally confident it never will be released? Failing that, will you leave the board as and when it's released as a penalty for all this nonsense?


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 29, 2012, 01:47:14 PM
How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?

Because, Phillipe, there are other things in life besides this Beach Boys box set. And, we know that there has been no definite cancellation, so it's just a situation of being patient. Capitol doesn't owe us anything. The Beach Boys don't really owe us anything further. We should be grateful to them for giving us so much product. We can only hope that we get more because we are greedy little bastards. :)

Think about it, kiddo, in the past year we've had the SMiLE Sessions, a world wide reunion tour of all original members, a new album (which came out on CD, digital download, and vinyl), two new greatest hits packages - three if you count the WalMart one, a documentary (with DVD release), plenty of online-exclusive footage of the band, and reissues of twelve(!) of their albums in mono AND stereo when possible. And I'm probably missing some stuff. That's a hell of a lot for one band in one year. Especially one that has been around for 50 years.

Give it a rest.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 29, 2012, 03:41:09 PM
Phil, I would love to engage in rough intimate gay sex with you. In a form of role playing, I could be the pitcher (Capitol records) and you could be the catcher (be yourself, Phil Cohen) and I can f*** you for hours or weeks or days or months or years. Meet me tomorrow at 5:00 PM PST. I'll be the one at the corner of Hollywood and Vine wearing the assless chaps and leather cap.

I'm looking forward to it,
"Capitol"


Title: Re: \
Post by: PhilCohen on September 29, 2012, 04:57:02 PM
I've decided that I'm tired of this B.S.

There are plenty of other artists & record companies putting out excellent CD box sets in the next 60 days(or CD/Blu-Ray/DVD box sets), and those artists and record companies aren't playing games with the consumer. They've set release dates for the product, and revealed some or all the information concerning what the contents are. There's more than enough of those products to strain my budget, and so, you know what I'm going to do? I'm going to take the path of least resistance, the path of least hassle & agony......I'm going to buy the box sets by those artists.

Why go through any more agony over this proposed Beach Boys box set? It's been 10 months of "The Wall of Secrecy". The creators of this wall can take their Wall of Secrecy.....and shove it!


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 29, 2012, 05:06:07 PM
He's winding us up. Dude deliberately doesn't respond to anyone else's posts that address his issues/comments.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 29, 2012, 05:06:39 PM
He's winding us up. Dude deliberately doesn't respond to anyone else's posts that address his issues/comments.
Thats what I keep saying! ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: jeffcdo on September 29, 2012, 05:09:31 PM
There's such a fine line between "troll" and "petulant child"


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 29, 2012, 06:46:15 PM
Will the box set be released someday...possibly in 2013? Will Mike Love have a change of heart in 2013 and again record & tour with Brian, David & Al ? We don't know yet. But because each week brings us closer to the 2012 Christmas shopping season, it is appearing likely that there will be no Beach Boys "Commemorative CD box set" in 2012. How can you fans not feel disappointed by the non-release of the box set?

Because I have my wife, family, 2 cats and friends to care. I really want the box set, but I have people that I love, and it's more important to me.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on September 29, 2012, 07:46:02 PM
What's interesting is that Phil has never shown any evidence that he/she likes music at all.  It's always dollars and cents, record labels, product moving, shopping seasons, etc.  Phil, I think if you showed some emotional attachment to the music, rather than the collector's fancy, we'd have more sympathy.  So, like, what's your favorite Beach Boys song, and why?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dunderhead on September 29, 2012, 08:10:36 PM
This continues to be the worst thread


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jeff on September 29, 2012, 08:37:43 PM
This continues to be the worst thread

This continues to be one of the worst moderated sites on the web.  The attitude seems to be that there should be no moderation of these threads whatsoever - just let everyone say whatever they want, even if it derails the topic, threatens other posters, etc.  One of the mods did or does have a Noam Chomsky quote in his sig to the effect that any "censorship" is inherently evil.

It really is a shame.  All it takes is (1) a persistent troll; (2) some naive posters who don't understand the concept of "don't feed the troll"; and (3) mods who are unwilling to lift a finger to keep the discussion on track.  And voila, we have yet another thread that has virtually nothing to do with the intended subject.


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on September 29, 2012, 08:50:37 PM
This continues to be the worst thread

Too bad because this should be the most exciting thread on here, but somebody keeps dragging it down.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on September 29, 2012, 08:53:20 PM
This continues to be the worst thread

This continues to be one of the worst moderated sites on the web. 

This is one of the most hyperbolic comments on the web.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jeff on September 29, 2012, 09:13:26 PM
This continues to be the worst thread

This continues to be one of the worst moderated sites on the web. 

This is one of the most hyperbolic comments on the web.

Perhaps.  Admittedly, I have not seen the vast majority of message boards out there.  But really, how long must this disfunction continue?  Clearly, the intent of this board is not to give a forum to persistent conspiracy theorists and the misguided posters who respond to every new bit of insanity.

An analogy would be a thread that is supposed to be devoted to a debate on the candidates for U.S. president, but which is derailed by a single "birther" (someone who insists, despite all evidence to the contrary, that President Obama was not born in the U.S.).  Numerous posters respond to the birther's crazy theories, but it is impossible for them to convince him or conclusively prove him wrong, so on an on the derailment goes.  That's what we've had here for well more than a year.  It's very unfortunate.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 29, 2012, 10:59:36 PM
What's interesting is that Phil has never shown any evidence that he/she likes music at all.  It's always dollars and cents, record labels, product moving, shopping seasons, etc.  Phil, I think if you showed some emotional attachment to the music, rather than the collector's fancy, we'd have more sympathy.  So, like, what's your favorite Beach Boys song, and why?

That is SUCH a great point. I don't think he likes music. It's all like "archival CD product" or release dates or whatever. I don't think he has EVER contributed to a thread which actually talked about the songs! Prove us wrong Philly boy! Prove you like The Beach Boys.

Now that I think of it, maybe Phil works for Capitol. By pretending to "hate" Capitol so much, he's actual pushing up demand for new releases.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on September 29, 2012, 11:56:44 PM
 
What's interesting is that Phil has never shown any evidence that he/she likes music at all.  It's always dollars and cents, record labels, product moving, shopping seasons, etc.  Phil, I think if you showed some emotional attachment to the music, rather than the collector's fancy, we'd have more sympathy.  So, like, what's your favorite Beach Boys song, and why?

That is SUCH a great point. I don't think he likes music. It's all like "archival CD product" or release dates or whatever. I don't think he has EVER contributed to a thread which actually talked about the songs! Prove us wrong Philly boy! Prove you like The Beach Boys.

Now that I think of it, maybe Phil works for Capitol. By pretending to "hate" Capitol so much, he's actual pushing up demand for new releases.

Phil isn't even a Beach Boys fan, merely a wind-up merchant. It's all a deliberately annoying routine on his part. I did write a while back that he was taking us for a ride and we should all just ignore him and refuse to reply, respond or acknowledge his posts, but people (myself included, sadly) kept rising to the bait. I guess he writes such petty, weird, inexplicable stuff that one just can't help but question him. But come on, please, from here on in, let's just IGNORE HIM! Is it even worth starting a thread/petition to gain attention for us all to agree on, i.e. 'I VOW NOT TO REPLY OR RESPOND TO PHIL COHEN'S POSTS FROM NOW ON'?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 30, 2012, 12:20:34 AM
Shut up, you guys.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dunderhead on September 30, 2012, 12:31:17 AM
Shut up, you guys.

wonder twin powers activate. me and you runners gotta clean out the riff raff of this thread, and I believe one of the tools that we really need is a suicide emoticon.


Title: Re: \
Post by: monicker on September 30, 2012, 02:19:42 AM
My favorite thing about these sort of threads is Fishmonk's persistent request for a suicide emoticon.

Really, there should be one.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 30, 2012, 03:01:53 AM
Shut up, you guys.

Which guys, Phil and The Member Formerly Known As Fishmonk?



Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on September 30, 2012, 03:03:26 AM
The attitude seems to be that there should be no moderation of these threads whatsoever - just let everyone say whatever they want

Yeah.  And I hope it never changes.  

I'm on several messageboards and I quite enjoy how this one isn't as "regime" like as it could be.  You don't know how good we have it.  It's only until the freedom is taken away from you when you realize how great it was.  I'm on boards that are heavily moderated and it's no fun.  Threads missing with no explanation, comments removed for no good reason.  It makes for a very confusing not to mention untrusting environment to share thoughts.  You don't like someone's thread?  You think something is spam?  Ignore it.  We're all adults here, yes?  We all have developed a sense of rational thinking, haven't we?  Don't like a thread?  Don't read it.  Don't like a poster?  Skip their posts.  Don't like it here?  Don't visit.  Work around your "issues" and you should be fine.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 30, 2012, 03:20:24 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on September 30, 2012, 03:56:36 AM
What's interesting is that Phil has never shown any evidence that he/she likes music at all.  It's always dollars and cents, record labels, product moving, shopping seasons, etc.  Phil, I think if you showed some emotional attachment to the music, rather than the collector's fancy, we'd have more sympathy.  So, like, what's your favorite Beach Boys song, and why?

That is SUCH a great point. I don't think he likes music. It's all like "archival CD product" or release dates or whatever. I don't think he has EVER contributed to a thread which actually talked about the songs! Prove us wrong Philly boy! Prove you like The Beach Boys.

Now that I think of it, maybe Phil works for Capitol. By pretending to "hate" Capitol so much, he's actual pushing up demand for new releases.

Phil isn't even a Beach Boys fan, merely a wind-up merchant.

And a bootlegger, having supplied tapes and liner notes to a well-known site where you can download material (not exclusively Beach Boys) not officially released.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on September 30, 2012, 04:04:14 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE


Title: Re: \
Post by: Paulos on September 30, 2012, 04:10:05 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE

Your desire to see Phil's penis should perhaps be confined to a PM.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on September 30, 2012, 04:40:06 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE

Your desire to see Phil's penis should perhaps be confined to a PM.

These 2 posts just made my day ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on September 30, 2012, 09:33:09 AM
What's interesting is that Phil has never shown any evidence that he/she likes music at all.  It's always dollars and cents, record labels, product moving, shopping seasons, etc.  Phil, I think if you showed some emotional attachment to the music, rather than the collector's fancy, we'd have more sympathy.  So, like, what's your favorite Beach Boys song, and why?

That is SUCH a great point. I don't think he likes music. It's all like "archival CD product" or release dates or whatever. I don't think he has EVER contributed to a thread which actually talked about the songs!

I can't recall him talking about song per se, but he has contributed some thoughts about specific mixes I believe.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SamMcK on September 30, 2012, 09:59:03 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE

Somehow I get the feeling you not going to get a reply. :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 30, 2012, 10:26:49 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE

Don't be silly. He only want something with his box-sets.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on September 30, 2012, 10:38:12 AM
how long has 'Phil' been trolling this site?


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on September 30, 2012, 11:04:01 AM
COME ON, PHIL, SHOW US YOUR DICK SO WE CAN ALL COMPARE

I thought we hadn't determined Phil's gender. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jeff on September 30, 2012, 12:46:00 PM
The attitude seems to be that there should be no moderation of these threads whatsoever - just let everyone say whatever they want

Yeah.  And I hope it never changes.  

I'm on several messageboards and I quite enjoy how this one isn't as "regime" like as it could be.  You don't know how good we have it.  It's only until the freedom is taken away from you when you realize how great it was.  I'm on boards that are heavily moderated and it's no fun.  Threads missing with no explanation, comments removed for no good reason.  It makes for a very confusing not to mention untrusting environment to share thoughts.  You don't like someone's thread?  You think something is spam?  Ignore it.  We're all adults here, yes?  We all have developed a sense of rational thinking, haven't we?  Don't like a thread?  Don't read it.  Don't like a poster?  Skip their posts.  Don't like it here?  Don't visit.  Work around your "issues" and you should be fine.

A true believer, eh?  I understand your position, but I think it's shallow and counterproductive.

Look, I'm not suggesting that a hammer be used when a fly swatter will do, but ignoring the problem altogether is not the answer.  There are a number of approaches that could be used.  Among other things, all of Phil's posts and those responding to them could be moved to a single thread.  That would leave the box set thread to actual discussion of the box set, and people who want to argue with Phil could do so separately.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Gertie J. on September 30, 2012, 12:54:53 PM
There's already a thread about Phil in Sandbox.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on September 30, 2012, 01:03:50 PM
Let's make a petition or something like this to request the ban of this paranoid freak  >:D


Title: Re: \
Post by: monicker on September 30, 2012, 01:05:37 PM
So i've been thinking about the boxxx set and the career-spanning aspect of it. Inevitably, there will be a section for Smile stuff, which is really exciting and something i hadn't really considered until recently. Does anyone have any guesses what this part will entail? It's an odd situation because the Smile box just came out so recently. Will they just use stuff that's already on the Smile box, or do you think they will take this (very good) opportunity to use something from all the extra material that had to be cut because there wasn't enough room? If it's the latter, i wonder what they'd use. It would be amazing if something Smile related has recently been discovered since TSS was put out, though i really doubt it.  

I was also thinking about how the GV and PS boxes made any attempt to be as faithful to the original recordings/mixes as possible (and was explicitly stated in the liner notes) but that obviously wasn't the approach at all on TSS (with reason). So, i wonder if this new box will take the same approach as GV and PS, thus use "untampered" Smile material, or if they'd stick some revisionist piece on there. Either way, i think it's going to be interesting to see how Smile era stuff gets handled for this new box set.  


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on September 30, 2012, 01:37:44 PM
What I'm saying is that Capitol's promise to release the box set "Later This Year"(I.E. 2012) and Mr.Doe's promise that it would be released in Nov.2012.........are apparently not to be.

I know it's hard to understand posts in the "land of delusion" but AGD never, ever PROMISED  a Nov 2012 release date.  He gets inside information and sometimes gives us a little.  As to a specific release date, no one is more aware of how in flux these things can be than AGD.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 30, 2012, 01:44:41 PM
So i've been thinking about the boxxx set and the career-spanning aspect of it. Inevitably, there will be a section for Smile stuff, which is really exciting and something i hadn't really considered until recently. Does anyone have any guesses what this part will entail? It's an odd situation because the Smile box just came out so recently. Will they just use stuff that's already on the Smile box, or do you think they will take this (very good) opportunity to use something from all the extra material that had to be cut because there wasn't enough room? If it's the latter, i wonder what they'd use. It would be amazing if something Smile related has recently been discovered since TSS was put out, though i really doubt it.  

I was also thinking about how the GV and PS boxes made any attempt to be as faithful to the original recordings/mixes as possible (and was explicitly stated in the liner notes) but that obviously wasn't the approach at all on TSS (with reason). So, i wonder if this new box will take the same approach as GV and PS, thus use "untampered" Smile material, or if they'd stick some revisionist piece on there. Either way, i think it's going to be interesting to see how Smile era stuff gets handled for this new box set.  

Well my hope is that, as far as SMiLE stuff, we'd at least "Barnyard" with the backing vocals but no pasted over lead, along with that 3 minute plus version of "Child Is Father Of The Man". Beyond that, I really have no idea what they could do, as far as "unreleased" material from that era.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chris Brown on September 30, 2012, 03:06:03 PM
So i've been thinking about the boxxx set and the career-spanning aspect of it. Inevitably, there will be a section for Smile stuff, which is really exciting and something i hadn't really considered until recently. Does anyone have any guesses what this part will entail? It's an odd situation because the Smile box just came out so recently. Will they just use stuff that's already on the Smile box, or do you think they will take this (very good) opportunity to use something from all the extra material that had to be cut because there wasn't enough room? If it's the latter, i wonder what they'd use. It would be amazing if something Smile related has recently been discovered since TSS was put out, though i really doubt it.  

I was also thinking about how the GV and PS boxes made any attempt to be as faithful to the original recordings/mixes as possible (and was explicitly stated in the liner notes) but that obviously wasn't the approach at all on TSS (with reason). So, i wonder if this new box will take the same approach as GV and PS, thus use "untampered" Smile material, or if they'd stick some revisionist piece on there. Either way, i think it's going to be interesting to see how Smile era stuff gets handled for this new box set.  

Well my hope is that, as far as SMiLE stuff, we'd at least "Barnyard" with the backing vocals but no pasted over lead, along with that 3 minute plus version of "Child Is Father Of The Man". Beyond that, I really have no idea what they could do, as far as "unreleased" material from that era.

Yeah I can't imagine them leaving off Brian's vintage "Child" mix - when it was left off the Smile box,  the only explanation I could think of was that they were saving it for this box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rogerlancelot on September 30, 2012, 05:01:41 PM
To be honest I think that TSS has been covered enough (unless something new has been discovered) and the same goes for Pet Sound Sessions. I am way more interested in hearing material from 1970 - 1983 which either hasn't leaked out on bootleg as of yet or appears here in pristine quality. "Stevie" anybody?


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 30, 2012, 05:22:39 PM
To be honest I think that TSS has been covered enough (unless something new has been discovered) and the same goes for Pet Sound Sessions. I am way more interested in hearing material from 1970 - 1983 which either hasn't leaked out on bootleg as of yet or appears here in pristine quality. "Stevie" anybody?

Totally. For it to be a career-spanning box, of course those two albums have to be represented - any Beach Boys box should have most of Pet Sounds - but I hope they don't get carried away with too much of the SMiLE stuff. I'd hope for a little less than what's on the GV box. And hell yes, I really hope Stevie is on there in the best quality possible!


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 30, 2012, 05:37:14 PM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 30, 2012, 05:39:24 PM
If this is true, Mike is still as jealous of Brian as ever. I wish Brian would stand up for his legacy more and tell Mike to shove it on matters like this.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on September 30, 2012, 05:43:10 PM
Thanks for sharing.

But I don't particularly believe what that guy's source says.  Predictable stuff there with Mike being the villian.  Yawn.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on September 30, 2012, 05:46:59 PM
I'm just hoping it isn't true. There's no proof to back it up so don't wanna jump to any conclusions. But really, time is running out for this stuff. I highly doubt there will be demand for unreleased Beach Boys tracks to be released in say, 20 years time. Although many really cool and unique oddities have escaped the archives officially - I bet for every two or three unreleaed tracks that Capitol/EMI/The Beach Boys have let out, there's probably one that lays in the vaults that would be commercially viable in the context of a package and interesting to fans.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on September 30, 2012, 05:51:10 PM
The "reason" for Mike axing the unreleased songs because they're mostly written by Brian is ridiculously petty.  So petty that it sounds exactly like something a fan (or Brianista) would make up just to add more gas to the flame especially at this moment when everyone has a word or two to say about Mike. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on September 30, 2012, 06:21:08 PM
Petty, but totally in character. Of course he'd want to the career-spanning box set to be favorable to him, it's not outlandish to imagine him having some qualms with "too much" unreleased stuff being a Brian and Dennis-a-thon. He'd have his reasons which would be completely understandable!

And of course, completely aggravating.

 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on September 30, 2012, 06:27:18 PM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...

I wouldn't think too much of this seeing as the poster on the Hoff board (a guy name fifthbeatle or something) is the guy we all remember from these parts as "vintagemusic". I don't think the guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground, and I highly doubt he has an "inside sources" with information about the box set. So I'd breathe a bit easier if I were all you guys.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on September 30, 2012, 06:29:40 PM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...

I wouldn't think too much of this seeing as the poster on the Hoff board (a guy name fifthbeatle or something) is the guy we all remember from these parts as "vintagemusic". I don't think the guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground, and I highly doubt he has an "inside sources" with information about the box set. So I'd breathe a bit easier if I were all you guys.
That is a relief, somebody ask him about the mob. ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 01, 2012, 12:54:46 AM
This continues to be the worst thread

This continues to be one of the worst moderated sites on the web.  The attitude seems to be that there should be no moderation of these threads whatsoever - just let everyone say whatever they want, even if it derails the topic, threatens other posters, etc.  One of the mods did or does have a Noam Chomsky quote in his sig to the effect that any "censorship" is inherently evil.

It really is a shame.  All it takes is (1) a persistent troll; (2) some naive posters who don't understand the concept of "don't feed the troll"; and (3) mods who are unwilling to lift a finger to keep the discussion on track.  And voila, we have yet another thread that has virtually nothing to do with the intended subject.

For the record, I'm the one who used to have the Chomsky quote.

As far as "no moderation of these threads", we're HERE and reading them, so obviously there IS moderating going on. We just don't think every little thing that the more overly sensitive folks on here lose their sh*t over is really worth the effort. In this respect, we're actually half-decent at "not feeding the trolls". Maybe we should start banning those who DO feed the trolls. But, yeahhhhhh, that's all well and good until we start nitpicking at every little thing and then you guys will be begging for us to go away. The best response to someone like Phil is to just ignore him. Nothing he says or does is worthy of a ban, even if he speaks 99% bollocks and 1% reality. If we banned people simply because they were the odd men out in whatever topic, by the end of the day the mods will probably have banned 99% of the membership as well as ourselves because at one point or another EVERYONE on here has been that guy or girl. I'm sorry, but disagreeing with someone's viewpoint is NOT worthy of a ban.

And as far as keeping the discussions on track, how do you propose we do it? Threatening bans to those who keep derailing the thread? I mean, even that's a bit draconian. I already tried once to suggest to folks here to stop posting new threads about the same old stuff and find older threads to add it to...and, that doesn't seem to work too well, does it? Just like off of the interwebs, discussions on here will derail every so often. That's the way it works. If such diversions are troubling on here, I might suggest avoiding all conversation altogether.

Besides, for what continues to be one of the "worst moderated sites on the web"...I mean, seriously. We mods here aren't THAT unapproachable - yes, even I'm not that unapproachable. If anyone here has a problem they're more than welcome to PM any of us. I've received plenty of PMs from folks with their concerns. Contrary to popular belief we DO take the feedback from you guys seriously. Have we slipped up? Sure. We could have possibly dealt with that alleged "threatening email" thing a little better. I think inviting that one dude with all of his gore pictures back was a mistake. We could have taken care of nobody better and earlier than we did, but hey. We just can't go around banning people unless there's a legitimately GOOD reason for it.

I once suggested the idea of a banhammer challenge. For anyone who thinks such and such member has committed something worthy of a ban on the board, PM one of the mods or report the post. If the mods agree that nothing in the post is worthy of ban, the person who reported the post will be banned. Maybe then people will learn to live and let live and stop sweating the small stuff.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 01, 2012, 01:07:33 AM
Several months ago Id have agreed with those calling for a Phil ban but I've grown to appreciate his own brand of twaddle and the team of facts he has at his fingertips. He's hot on facts as he is on fantasy.

Mods have to tread a thin line constantly and be aware that if they ban someone there's an implication that they believe their own behaviour to be better than that of the person they've judged to be worthy of a ban. Ain't easy. On the whole they do a fine job.

Only call I'd make is for folk - mods included - to use their own names instead of monikers, then at least some might think before posting what they post. But hen I went around by the name of Wee Helper for umpteen years, so who am I…


Title: Re:
Post by: Alan Smith on October 01, 2012, 02:21:08 AM
Several months ago Id have agreed with those calling for a Phil ban but I've grown to appreciate his own brand of twaddle and the team of facts he has at his fingertips. He's hot on facts as he is on fantasy.

Mods have to tread a thin line constantly and be aware that if they ban someone there's an implication that they believe their own behaviour to be better than that of the person they've judged to be worthy of a ban. Ain't easy. On the whole they do a fine job.


+ 1.

I think the mods here are awesome and respect that most posters here are intelligent adults, and recognise that there is a high level of self regulation in most threads - with occasional need for intervention.

Their decisions are usually proven long sighted - I would hate to see diversity of opinion and character suffer should people be banned for one-off, occasional or infrequent lapses in judgement (repeat aberrant behaviour is obviously another matter).


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 02:31:55 AM
Suppose the box set has all the major hits, some attention to rarities (as in: three or four of interesting ones), and some time for the PS Sessions and TSS...

...would I chip out 100+ Euros for that? I am not a nerd enough to do that for a few samples of clearer sound quality through better mastering.

Having the 1993 box set, PS Sessions, TSS, and all the original albums (no SIP though), I'd find a little odd to do that.

And knowing that there must be really more interesting rarities would make me pretty irritated, I tells' ya.

PS: there is a very interesting section on the soul of the true collector in Simon Reynolds' Retromania (2011). A real eye opener of a book, with many ideas that elicit controversion and heated debate. Read it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 01, 2012, 02:59:47 AM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...

I wouldn't think too much of this seeing as the poster on the Hoff board (a guy name fifthbeatle or something) is the guy we all remember from these parts as "vintagemusic". I don't think the guy knows his ass from a hole in the ground, and I highly doubt he has an "inside sources" with information about the box set. So I'd breathe a bit easier if I were all you guys.
That is a relief, somebody ask him about the mob. ;)

Yeah, thank God it's him. The voices in his head do not count as reliable sources iirc.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 01, 2012, 03:16:30 AM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...

I'd question that claim.

Take that for what you will...  :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 03:27:51 AM
A user posted this on the Steve Hoffman forum in regards to the BB's box:

Quote
A little bird told me the box set has a lot of unreleased material nixed from the final running order per instructions from Mike Love. There was more unreleased stuff going to be released on the box but Love put the kabosh on it. I wonder why? I was told the reason Love vetoed the songs, was because the songwriting of the unreleased material was too heavily dominated by Brian Wilson. I heard this from a good source.

Take that for what you will...

I'd question that claim.

Take that for what you will...  :)

If you don't mind, I take that for what I want it to mean...


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 01, 2012, 03:31:19 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 01, 2012, 03:32:13 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 03:48:03 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 01, 2012, 04:05:55 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 04:31:53 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 01, 2012, 04:38:27 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Ah yes, the 'Keep it Clean' sessions from 1975. Spoke with 'someone who would know' and it would appear that the mastertapes are still in possession of Al, who plays them every so often whilst throwing darts at copies of Endless Summer and Help Me Rhonda 45's. Whilst he appreciates the historical value of the tapes, actually releasing them would be an admission of guilt from the man the LAPD have been trying to arrest since that second term at dental school, for 63 charges of gross malpractice, GBH and the abuse and trafficking of laughing gas.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 01, 2012, 04:41:48 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Ah yes, the 'Keep it Clean' sessions from 1975. Spoke with 'someone who would know' and it would appear that the mastertapes are still in possession of Al, who plays them every so often whilst throwing darts at copies of Endless Summer and Help Me Rhonda 45's. Whilst he appreciates the historical value of the tapes, actually releasing them would be an admission of guilt from the man the LAPD have been trying to arrest since that second term at dental school, for 63 charges of gross malpractice, GBH and the abuse and trafficking of laughing gas.

Exactly. And do remember he dropped out from dental school, so the maliciousness came easy ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 04:44:19 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Ah yes, the 'Keep it Clean' sessions from 1975. Spoke with 'someone who would know' and it would appear that the mastertapes are still in possession of Al, who plays them every so often whilst throwing darts at copies of Endless Summer and Help Me Rhonda 45's. Whilst he appreciates the historical value of the tapes, actually releasing them would be an admission of guilt from the man the LAPD have been trying to arrest since that second term at dental school, for 63 charges of gross malpractice, GBH and the abuse and trafficking of laughing gas.

He could actually face jail for the rest of his life. In the same row as Phil Spector.

Or better still, Charlie Manson.

Oh, the irony of history.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 01, 2012, 05:37:18 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Ah yes, the 'Keep it Clean' sessions from 1975. Spoke with 'someone who would know' and it would appear that the mastertapes are still in possession of Al, who plays them every so often whilst throwing darts at copies of Endless Summer and Help Me Rhonda 45's. Whilst he appreciates the historical value of the tapes, actually releasing them would be an admission of guilt from the man the LAPD have been trying to arrest since that second term at dental school, for 63 charges of gross malpractice, GBH and the abuse and trafficking of laughing gas.

He could actually face jail for the rest of his life. In the same row as Phil Spector.

Or better still, Charlie Manson.

Oh, the irony of history.

And they say Mike is the bad guy! ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 01, 2012, 06:38:25 AM
Once again guys...fucking VintageMusic wrote that
a little birdy told him that Mike Love is changing the tracklist.

I wouldn't be surprised if it literally was a bird that he thought told him about
The Beach Boys
boxset.

This being the same VintageMusic that got banned from here for being
a total
moron.

Not to mention his horribly
formatted
posts.

Therefore, I wouldn't be too much credence into anything the guy says.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on October 01, 2012, 06:41:02 AM
Any delay in the release of Made in California should arise thanks to efforts in securing more rare and unreleased music, not less.  This is the main draw of a box set - it's what they are made for.

"Best of's" and "Greatest Hits" offerings are meant to showcase the hits and we've a nice package coming for that.  A box set is an opportunity for a band to realize a profit from tapes otherwise left sitting in a vault (or on a hard drive, nowadays).  Represent the more well-known numbers with alternate takes, mixes or rare/outstanding live performances and construct the rest of the release around unheard compositions.  Offering more of your rare and previously unreleased material makes the product more appealing to the consumer and will translate into more sales.  Just don't ask us to wait an extra couple of months (I realize no release date was ever announced) and reward us with fewer unheard tracks.  Maximize your profit and our enjoyment.  It can be win/win!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 01, 2012, 07:02:23 AM
Given that Alan & Mark successfully lobbied for the Smile box set to be enlarged and given its high profile success, I'm sure Capitol will be looking favourably upon Beach Boys archive product

I've no worries about the box's contents and no doubts that it will appear.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bicyclerider on October 01, 2012, 08:52:16 AM
Once again guys...f***ing VintageMusic wrote that
a little birdy told him that Mike Love is changing the tracklist.

I wouldn't be surprised if it literally was a bird that he thought told him about
The Beach Boys
boxset.

This being the same VintageMusic that got banned from here for being
a total
moron.

Not to mention his horribly
formatted
posts.

Therefore, I wouldn't be too much credence into anything the guy says.

But it wouldn't surprise any of us if M Love was holding up the set, would it?

They should just add an extra disc to the set of Mike's unreleased first two solo albums so he can reap the royalties and be done with it!


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 01, 2012, 09:02:05 AM
Once again guys...f***ing VintageMusic wrote that
a little birdy told him that Mike Love is changing the tracklist.

I wouldn't be surprised if it literally was a bird that he thought told him about
The Beach Boys
boxset.

This being the same VintageMusic that got banned from here for being
a total
moron.

Not to mention his horribly
formatted
posts.

Therefore, I wouldn't be too much credence into anything the guy says.

But it wouldn't surprise any of us if M Love was holding up the set, would it?

They should just add an extra disc to the set of Mike's unreleased first two solo albums so he can reap the royalties and be done with it!

They should just glue that Mike disk to the back side of the box, with Sell-O-Tape, and not print the tracks on the box and in the accompanying booklets.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on October 01, 2012, 09:06:39 AM
Once again guys...f***ing VintageMusic wrote that
a little birdy told him that Mike Love is changing the tracklist.

I wouldn't be surprised if it literally was a bird that he thought told him about
The Beach Boys
boxset.

This being the same VintageMusic that got banned from here for being
a total
moron.

Not to mention his horribly
formatted
posts.

Therefore, I wouldn't be too much credence into anything the guy says.
Lets all remember, http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,12601.msg258875.html#msg258875


Title: Re: \
Post by: Tord on October 01, 2012, 09:08:22 AM
Once again guys...f***ing VintageMusic wrote that
a little birdy told him that Mike Love is changing the tracklist.

I wouldn't be surprised if it literally was a bird that he thought told him about
The Beach Boys
boxset.

This being the same VintageMusic that got banned from here for being
a total
moron.

Not to mention his horribly
formatted
posts.

Therefore, I wouldn't be too much credence into anything the guy says.

Someone else on that thread claims to have heard the same thing, though.

JoeRockhead: I have heard the same thing from a very reliable source. You can not believe it if you want but it is true

http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=8118625&postcount=492 (http://stevehoffman.tv/forums/showpost.php?p=8118625&postcount=492)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on October 01, 2012, 09:23:05 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

Murry.

Perhaps it'll be a hybrid box set by the Beach Boys and the Sunrays. Highlight: one full hour of 'Bull Session' with Murry on a lot of liquor.

I might buy a that.

Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Is it safe?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on October 01, 2012, 09:28:45 AM
Who else would've written the majority of unreleased tracks on a Beach Boys box set? Ricky Fataar?

More Ricky, less Brian please. And a bonus disk of Mike solo stuff. This box set is looking better by the minute.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 01, 2012, 09:38:31 AM

Quote
Lets all remember, http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,12601.msg258875.html#msg258875


Oh My God...THIS...

Quote
I've actually been in a room with the mobsters I spoke of, and some of the Beach Boys
whom I consider decent folks, and I was saddened, from personal experience I know some of those people mentored by the Scotti brothers
are the dregs of the earth, and I lamented the fact, and pointed it out to those who might be interested... I also dislike those barf bags for any
part they played in harming the career and life of my pal Leif Garrett from school, who was a nice kid before he got involved with the Scotti's

Maybe I am boring, and long winded, I thought I had some worthwhile interesting things to contribute here, but there are quite a few of you
younger, know nothing about music guys, who always attack with the knife and fork, like you can only get your sustenance at the expense of
putting someone like me down.  I misspoke your name because I was trying to tell you to shove it, drop dead, go back to pulling the wings off
butterflies, don't speak for the entire membership about me, and don't demean me in some cowardly English backhanded way, like you belong
to the upper crust and just insulted the janitor at your squash club, go watch a film about all the English royalty that wanted to side with Hitler
or go read Neville Chamberlains speech about the Sudetenland, go meet your boyfriend for tea, but don't tell me you weren't insulting me


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on October 01, 2012, 09:39:25 AM



Bonus Disc: Al tries out his dentist skills on the boys (74 mins). :¢)

In true Doctor Szell fashion? Imagin the drone of the drill, for 74 mins., interspersed with cries of pain and begging for mercy... sort of avantgarde post-punk.

Is it safe?

Well, we know it's 'clean.'


Title: Re:
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 01, 2012, 11:00:31 AM

Oh My God...THIS...

Quote

Maybe I am boring, and long winded, I thought I had some worthwhile interesting things to contribute here, but there are quite a few of you
younger, know nothing about music guys, who always attack with the knife and fork, like you can only get your sustenance at the expense of
putting someone like me down.  I misspoke your name because I was trying to tell you to shove it, drop dead, go back to pulling the wings off
butterflies, don't speak for the entire membership about me, and don't demean me in some cowardly English backhanded way, like you belong
to the upper crust and just insulted the janitor at your squash club, go watch a film about all the English royalty that wanted to side with Hitler
or go read Neville Chamberlains speech about the Sudetenland, go meet your boyfriend for tea, but don't tell me you weren't insulting me

I just imagined Eminem rapping that part you quoted, and it was quite amusing.


Title: Re:
Post by: Paulos on October 01, 2012, 11:05:48 AM

Quote
Lets all remember, http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,12601.msg258875.html#msg258875


Oh My God...THIS...

Quote
I've actually been in a room with the mobsters I spoke of, and some of the Beach Boys
whom I consider decent folks, and I was saddened, from personal experience I know some of those people mentored by the Scotti brothers
are the dregs of the earth, and I lamented the fact, and pointed it out to those who might be interested... I also dislike those barf bags for any
part they played in harming the career and life of my pal Leif Garrett from school, who was a nice kid before he got involved with the Scotti's

Maybe I am boring, and long winded, I thought I had some worthwhile interesting things to contribute here, but there are quite a few of you
younger, know nothing about music guys, who always attack with the knife and fork, like you can only get your sustenance at the expense of
putting someone like me down.  I misspoke your name because I was trying to tell you to shove it, drop dead, go back to pulling the wings off
butterflies, don't speak for the entire membership about me, and don't demean me in some cowardly English backhanded way, like you belong
to the upper crust and just insulted the janitor at your squash club, go watch a film about all the English royalty that wanted to side with Hitler
or go read Neville Chamberlains speech about the Sudetenland, go meet your boyfriend for tea, but don't tell me you weren't insulting me

Ah, my old buddy JC, wonder how the old freakshow is doing nowadays?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on October 01, 2012, 11:25:40 AM
Well, I don't give too much about the Mike Love-rumour. Somebody posted a few weeks ago that Mark London told him someone f*cked up the tracklist but that doesn't sound like Mike wanted it to be changed to me.
Besides, what unreleased Mike material could replace Brian's? There's not enough interesting material even in his released stuff that could fill a disc. Mike knows that a Beach Boys release with Brian Wilson's name on it will sell like crazy.
He's not very keen on releasing archive material but I don't think he would do what is claimed he did.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on October 01, 2012, 12:56:13 PM
I would guess that, IF Mike is the one changing the track order (note the big "if") it is because he wants less of his own unreleased material. Or less of Dennis' stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 01, 2012, 01:15:07 PM
I would guess that, IF Mike is the one changing the track order (note the big "if") it is because he wants less of his own unreleased material. Or less of Dennis' stuff.

Surely Mike must be over the whole Dennis thing by now? The poor guy's been dead three decades. POB sold really well didn't it? I just don't see the justification in Mike pulling Denny tracks. I really hope it doesn't turn out to be true.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on October 01, 2012, 02:38:09 PM
I would guess that, IF Mike is the one changing the track order (note the big "if") it is because he wants less of his own unreleased material. Or less of Dennis' stuff.

Surely Mike must be over the whole Dennis thing by now? The poor guy's been dead three decades. POB sold really well didn't it? I just don't see the justification in Mike pulling Denny tracks. I really hope it doesn't turn out to be true.

I'd like to believe that as well. But I get the impression that Dennis' own bad behavior overshadows his artistic accomplishments... At least in Mike's mind.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 01, 2012, 02:50:11 PM
We need to stop speculating - folks are just getting wound up - and either start searching for facts, or simply await the box before judging its contents.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 01, 2012, 03:48:37 PM
Well, I don't give too much about the Mike Love-rumour. Somebody posted a few weeks ago that Mark London told him someone f*cked up the tracklist but that doesn't sound like Mike wanted it to be changed to me.
Besides, what unreleased Mike material could replace Brian's? There's not enough interesting material even in his released stuff that could fill a disc. Mike knows that a Beach Boys release with Brian Wilson's name on it will sell like crazy.
He's not very keen on releasing archive material but I don't think he would do what is claimed he did.

Perhaps Myke had a problem with what Brian's singing on 'Drip Drop' would do to the bands (and his) image  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 02, 2012, 04:14:17 PM
well, I don't need to hear that song in any better quality at the expensive of a song I haven't heard at all.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Yorick on October 03, 2012, 12:51:26 AM
So what's the status on the Mike Love nixing tracks from the box story? On stevehoffman.tv the thread were some supposed insider told about how Mike nixed various amazing 70s demos from the box has been closed. Where there's smoke there's fire?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 03, 2012, 01:14:52 AM
So what's the status on the Mike Love nixing tracks from the box story? On stevehoffman.tv the thread were some supposed insider told about how Mike nixed various amazing 70s demos from the box has been closed. Where there's smoke there's fire?

Simply put, one of the sources for that story is a person who was banned here for being fucking crazy and I wouldn't trust him as far as I could throw him, and the other is an unknown quantity.

As it's another story of how Mike Love is being a twat, in the current climate, I'd say it wasn't the fire we're looking for.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on October 03, 2012, 01:54:01 AM
If Mike doesn't want something on the box, there's a darn good reason behind it and we should respect his wishes. Mike has spent his entire career protecting the BBs legacy. He only has the band's best interests in mind, and you'd be a fool to doubt. Maybe you think Brian losing it in the studio and recording "Teardrops on my Bed" makes for good listening, but forgive Mike for wanting to protect Brian from harsh scrutiny of the broader public!  >:(


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 03, 2012, 02:20:05 AM
If Mike doesn't want something on the box, there's a darn good reason behind it and we should respect his wishes. Mike has spent his entire career protecting the BBs legacy. He only has the band's best interests in mind, and you'd be a fool to doubt. Maybe you think Brian losing it in the studio and recording "Teardrops on my Bed" makes for good listening, but forgive Mike for wanting to protect Brian from harsh scrutiny of the broader public!  >:(


I don't know where to start with this.

First off - are you joking?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 03, 2012, 02:26:03 AM
clearly trolling, he's posted similar things in a few different threads now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 03, 2012, 02:26:18 AM
.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 03, 2012, 02:31:03 AM
clearing trolling, he's posted similar things in a few different threads now.

yeah, this was just the first one I read and I'm bored in the office. An argument about Mike Love is a guaranteed time killer, I find.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko on October 03, 2012, 02:48:24 AM


I'd like to believe that as well. But I get the impression that Dennis' own bad behavior overshadows his artistic accomplishments... At least in Mike's mind.

The evidence doesn't back that up though does it.

Dennis 's songs were included on the previous box set, Hawthorne, Endless Harmony, Summer Love Songs etc. without a problem. No reason there should be one now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MarcellaHasDirtyFeet on October 03, 2012, 04:20:33 AM


I'd like to believe that as well. But I get the impression that Dennis' own bad behavior overshadows his artistic accomplishments... At least in Mike's mind.

The evidence doesn't back that up though does it.

Dennis 's songs were included on the previous box set, Hawthorne, Endless Harmony, Summer Love Songs etc. without a problem. No reason there should be one now.

Annnnd that's a good point. I suppose I was thinking about Mike's attitude toward DW in interviews. But yah, the songs do seem to trickle out.


Title: Re: \
Post by: MBE on October 03, 2012, 04:36:10 AM
Mike in the early seventies was vocal about liking songs like Cuddle Up and I've Got A Friend even calling the latter a favorite song of his period. The problems Dennis had in the last six years of his life probably do color some of what Mike feels, but to be fair I think he has more recently been more apt to  bring up some good qualites in Dennis. I don't agree that Dennis' work is subjective as Mike once put it, personal yes, but unlike some of Lennon's post Beatles work for instance I feel Dennis touched on universal feelings most of the time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko on October 03, 2012, 06:51:38 AM
It would be slightly surprising if Mike did have issues with the tracklisting as many songs that he has a writing credit on ought to be certs for the set. Obviously the classic songs with Brian but also rarish tracks like It's a Beautiful Day, Rock n Roll to the Rescue, Somewhere Near Japan (45 mix), Summer in Paradise( UK version) etc that weren't included on the previous box. As he allowed the first box to be released then there shouldn't be an issue now.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 03, 2012, 08:24:13 AM
It would be slightly surprising if Mike did have issues with the tracklisting as many songs that he has a writing credit on ought to be certs for the set. Obviously the classic songs with Brian but also rarish tracks like It's a Beautiful Day, Rock n Roll to the Rescue, Somewhere Near Japan (45 mix), Summer in Paradise( UK version) etc that weren't included on the previous box. As he allowed the first box to be released then there shouldn't be an issue now.

There really should be two box sets: One containing already released rarities and out of print stuff such as "It's A Beautiful Day", "Sea Cruise", all the twofer tracks, all the single edits and mixes, the erroneous '76 "Come And Go With Me", etc. etc. etc. etc. (there's a lot of this sh*t) and then a second containing new unreleased tracks and, if you must, the hits (it's happening regardless of if you like it or not, sadly).

Unfortunately, we'll likely see a combination of both, and I'm expecting a lot or possibly even all the previously release twofer tracks comprising most of it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 03, 2012, 09:48:46 AM
It would be slightly surprising if Mike did have issues with the tracklisting as many songs that he has a writing credit on ought to be certs for the set. Obviously the classic songs with Brian but also rarish tracks like It's a Beautiful Day, Rock n Roll to the Rescue, Somewhere Near Japan (45 mix), Summer in Paradise( UK version) etc that weren't included on the previous box. As he allowed the first box to be released then there shouldn't be an issue now.

There really should be two box sets: One containing already released rarities and out of print stuff such as "It's A Beautiful Day", "Sea Cruise", all the twofer tracks, all the single edits and mixes, the erroneous '76 "Come And Go With Me", etc. etc. etc. etc. (there's a lot of this sh*t) and then a second containing new unreleased tracks and, if you must, the hits (it's happening regardless of if you like it or not, sadly).

Unfortunately, we'll likely see a combination of both, and I'm expecting a lot or possibly even all the previously release twofer tracks comprising most of it.

You've been hanging out with the Cohen of Silence for too long. Chill.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on October 03, 2012, 10:01:45 AM
There should be plenty of room on the new box - 2 more disks than the GV set and half a disk will not be taken up with Smile material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 03, 2012, 10:03:57 AM
I wish they would just release the track list already.  >:(


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 03, 2012, 10:08:23 AM
It would be slightly surprising if Mike did have issues with the tracklisting as many songs that he has a writing credit on ought to be certs for the set. Obviously the classic songs with Brian but also rarish tracks like It's a Beautiful Day, Rock n Roll to the Rescue, Somewhere Near Japan (45 mix), Summer in Paradise( UK version) etc that weren't included on the previous box. As he allowed the first box to be released then there shouldn't be an issue now.

There really should be two box sets: One containing already released rarities and out of print stuff such as "It's A Beautiful Day", "Sea Cruise", all the twofer tracks, all the single edits and mixes, the erroneous '76 "Come And Go With Me", etc. etc. etc. etc. (there's a lot of this sh*t) and then a second containing new unreleased tracks and, if you must, the hits (it's happening regardless of if you like it or not, sadly).

Unfortunately, we'll likely see a combination of both, and I'm expecting a lot or possibly even all the previously release twofer tracks comprising most of it.

You've been hanging out with the Cohen of Silence for too long. Chill.

lawl, I knew someone would accuse me of being Cohenesque in that post. Really, though, I want to see those tracks (as well as the stuff from the now out of print 1993 box set) remain in circulation somehow, thus I'd have mixed feelings if they all appeared on this box set.

Still. I'll take your word for it.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 03, 2012, 10:45:48 AM
Andrew, I'm not sure that you know or are at liberty to say, but has the track list changes all been addressed now?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Menace Wilson on October 03, 2012, 10:46:46 AM
To those in the know (and I know there are a lot of you on this board):

What are the odds that "You're Still A Mystery" could make it onto this box?  To me, it's one of if not THE very best unreleased tunes the BBs ever recorded.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 03, 2012, 11:00:55 AM
I'd be very dubious: it's originally a BW solo track, and I think the ownership of the BB version is still unclear.

Andrew, I'm not sure that you know or are at liberty to say, but has the track list changes all been addressed now?

Correct.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Menace Wilson on October 03, 2012, 11:05:41 AM
 :'(

Thanks AGD.


Title: Re: \
Post by: JohnMill on October 03, 2012, 11:20:01 AM
To those in the know (and I know there are a lot of you on this board):

What are the odds that "You're Still A Mystery" could make it onto this box?  To me, it's one of if not THE very best unreleased tunes the BBs ever recorded.

I hope it makes the cut, although what AGD noted is correct.  I love that song though and personally I can't see how a BW remake of it could sound any better than the BB version.  Release The BB VERSION


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on October 03, 2012, 11:34:29 AM
Maybe I am boring, and long winded......

Well, at least he had that part right.

Did VM ever find the button that would allow him to stop posting here?

 :hat


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on October 03, 2012, 11:47:47 AM

This continues to be one of the worst moderated sites on the web.  The attitude seems to be that there should be no moderation of these threads whatsoever - just let everyone say whatever they want, even if it derails the topic, threatens other posters, etc.  One of the mods did or does have a Noam Chomsky quote in his sig to the effect that any "censorship" is inherently evil.

NO!
I respectfully disagree.  Smiley Smile Net is not only the best "fan site" on the web.  It is the best moderated!!!!  The Mods are wise enough, and even patient enough, to not over-moderate.  Believe me, the "over moderating" gets really tiresome.  You all know the over moderated sites I am talking about -- they aren't fun.

Maybe sometimes threads get "a little nuts", but overall it's worth it because the level of information and EXPERT ADVICE here is unparalled!

I love Smiley Smile Net BECAUSE of its mix of REAL SCHOLARSHIP with zany, freewheeling fun.  On rare occasions a Mod will step in, but to my mind, they always strike the right balance.  MODS ROCK!  Kodos to them!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 03, 2012, 01:21:02 PM
If Mike doesn't want something on the box, there's a darn good reason behind it and we should respect his wishes. Mike has spent his entire career protecting the BBs legacy. He only has the band's best interests in mind, and you'd be a fool to doubt. Maybe you think Brian losing it in the studio and recording "Teardrops on my Bed" makes for good listening, but forgive Mike for wanting to protect Brian from harsh scrutiny of the broader public!  >:(


I don't know where to start with this.

First off - are you joking?

It's Murry. What did you expect?  ::)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on October 03, 2012, 01:59:43 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 03, 2012, 02:05:35 PM
Ho Ho Ho.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on October 03, 2012, 02:17:16 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.

I don't know who you are but...keep posting! :police:


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 03, 2012, 02:36:53 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.

I don't know who you are but...keep posting! :police:

Sure , keep trolling. You're the best there is right now


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 03, 2012, 02:37:16 PM


The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.

Get what over it?


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 03, 2012, 02:39:33 PM

Andrew, I'm not sure that you know or are at liberty to say, but has the track list changes all been addressed now?

Correct.

But since you can't tell us what we want to know under your own name, can't you simply start posting as Andrew's Fern again?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 03, 2012, 03:11:55 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.


....I think it actually is Murry. They must have finally sorted out the internet in hell. Mods, give him his own Honoured Guest thread?


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on October 03, 2012, 03:14:53 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.


....I think it actually is Murry. They must have finally sorted out the internet in hell. Mods, give him his own Honoured Guest thread?
Time to set the record straight on the 2x4 story.....


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 03, 2012, 04:16:49 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.

So your grandson is gonna buy his grandmother the new Beach Boys box set, and they are gonna listen to it together? Riiiiiiight. That's gonna happen. And Mike believes in family values, therefore he sings (raps?) lyrics about doing it in swimming pools and how "doing it with you would be so very cool"? But we can't hear "Burlesque". Right.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 03, 2012, 04:21:51 PM
Quote
trolling

I'm not trolling! After reading Jon Stebbins' articulate, impassioned, and emotionally tender dissection of Mike Love (cleverly titled "A Hate Love Relationship), I've fully come around to finding the man as a sympathetic character. He is the BBs #1 cheerleader, and is therefore by proxy Brian's #1 cheerleader. He defended the BBs legacy when a drug-addled Brian wanted nothing more than to ruin it with tawdry songs and slapdash productions. Sure, maybe one of you would like to hear "Burlesque", but what happens my grandson buys the box for his grandma and they settle in to listen to it together?

The BBs are a family group. Get it over it.

And Mike believes in family values, therefore he sings (raps?) lyrics about doing it in swimming pools and how "doing it with you would be so very cool"? ]


Well, how else are you going to start a 'family group'?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Yorick on October 03, 2012, 05:11:28 PM
Has anybody given a thought to the possibllity of them using original Brian SMiLE mono mixes from 1966 that didn't end op on the SMiLE Sessions, but could represent SMiLE here?


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 03, 2012, 05:21:07 PM

Andrew, I'm not sure that you know or are at liberty to say, but has the track list changes all been addressed now?

Correct.

But since you can't tell us what we want to know under your own name, can't you simply start posting as Andrew's Fern again?

Gosh, there is some funny stuff being posted these days.  Enjoying the humour!  Good one bgas!


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 03, 2012, 07:19:15 PM
Has anybody given a thought to the possibllity of them using original Brian SMiLE mono mixes from 1966 that didn't end op on the SMiLE Sessions, but could represent SMiLE here?

that's a really cool idea.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 03, 2012, 10:18:18 PM
Has anybody given a thought to the possibllity of them using original Brian SMiLE mono mixes from 1966 that didn't end op on the SMiLE Sessions, but could represent SMiLE here?

That'd be cool, and let's hope so, although aren't there only a few complete vintage Brian mixes/edits of the material?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on October 04, 2012, 01:18:10 AM
Quote
Get what over it?
The fact that the BBs are a family group. I understand many of you out there like that spooky SMiLE stuff, but you are out of step with the larger public and would likely even acknowledge so proudly if I asked. Brian was always melancholy and something of an outsider. Luckily, he had Mike to balance that out, bringing Brian incredible commercial success. However, Brian then chose to distort the image Mike and others had worked just as hard as Brian to establish for his own selfish private gain. Maybe you love Johnny-come-latelys like Van Dyke Parks, whom fed Brian drugs and felt he had the right to use the Beach Boys image in ironic ways to disseminate his dissident thoughts towards this fine country, but I prefer to take a more skeptical approach.

With hard work, Mike and the others were eventually able to overcome the disaster Brian personally engineered. All these attempts to champion SMiLE and other subversive material underminds everything Mike has done. You can all boohoo when Mike nixes a 4 minute mix of "Child Is Father of the Man", but the instrumental take of "Ballad of Ole Betsy" that takes its place will be much more suitable to the ears of your average, Beach Boys loving American.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ebb and Flow on October 04, 2012, 02:02:34 AM
You can all boohoo when Mike nixes a 4 minute mix of "Child Is Father of the Man", but the instrumental take of "Ballad of Ole Betsy" that takes its place will be much more suitable to the ears of your average, Beach Boys loving American.

I'd actually like to hear both of those things, but only one of those actually exists in the vaults.  And only one of them is connected to the most infamous unreleased album of all time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 04, 2012, 03:18:03 AM
Quote
Get what over it?
The fact that the BBs are a family group. I understand many of you out there like that spooky SMiLE stuff, but you are out of step with the larger public and would likely even acknowledge so proudly if I asked. Brian was always melancholy and something of an outsider. Luckily, he had Mike to balance that out, bringing Brian incredible commercial success. However, Brian then chose to distort the image Mike and others had worked just as hard as Brian to establish for his own selfish private gain. Maybe you love Johnny-come-latelys like Van Dyke Parks, whom fed Brian drugs and felt he had the right to use the Beach Boys image in ironic ways to disseminate his dissident thoughts towards this fine country, but I prefer to take a more skeptical approach.

With hard work, Mike and the others were eventually able to overcome the disaster Brian personally engineered. All these attempts to champion SMiLE and other subversive material underminds everything Mike has done. You can all boohoo when Mike nixes a 4 minute mix of "Child Is Father of the Man", but the instrumental take of "Ballad of Ole Betsy" that takes its place will be much more suitable to the ears of your average, Beach Boys loving American.

But Murry, what could be a more family oriented song than Child is the Father of the Man?


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on October 04, 2012, 03:39:35 AM
I think people need to stop with that "Family Band" sh*t.

The Boys have a connection to Manson, Mike Love has a connection to thousands of women, and Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 04, 2012, 03:48:51 AM
Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"

wait, wat?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ted on October 04, 2012, 03:51:59 AM
Quote
Get what over it?
The fact that the BBs are a family group. I understand many of you out there like that spooky SMiLE stuff, but you are out of step with the larger public and would likely even acknowledge so proudly if I asked.
Tell that to the general public who went apeshit for I Just Wasn't Made For These Times and Heroes And Villains but couldn't care less about Little Honda and Don't Back Down at the Royal Albert Hall and Wembley.


Title: Re: \
Post by: AndrewHickey on October 04, 2012, 04:07:46 AM
Quote
Get what over it?
The fact that the BBs are a family group. I understand many of you out there like that spooky SMiLE stuff, but you are out of step with the larger public and would likely even acknowledge so proudly if I asked.
Tell that to the general public who went apesh*t for I Just Wasn't Made For These Times and Heroes And Villains but couldn't care less about Little Honda and Don't Back Down at the Royal Albert Hall and Wembley.

I'm pretty sure "Murry" is joking.

(That said, the audiences in the US are very different from the audiences in the UK. In the US the band's peak popularity was in 1964-65, in the UK it was 1966-68. Relatively few people in the US know Breakaway, while it was a massive hit over here, while most people in a US audience will know Little Honda, which British people are mostly unaware of.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 04, 2012, 04:38:50 AM
Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"

wait, wat?

I don't have the slightest clue as to what that means, but I love it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 04, 2012, 08:29:40 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 04, 2012, 09:07:11 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.
While some of what you say is true, the pre-1966 stuff has plenty of jazz influences on it, as well. Quite a bit of the guitar work on the post 1963 music is very jazz influenced.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on October 04, 2012, 09:33:28 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.

I would strongly disagree.  What do you mean by "higher quality"?  Not to mention "good."  Lay out your objective criteria.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko on October 04, 2012, 09:39:37 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.

Sounds like guff to me. And rather pretentious guff at that.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 04, 2012, 09:42:20 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.

Sounds like guff to me. And rather pretentious guff at that.
Well, if you follow his postings on here, he definitely has a bias for the PS & Smile era music.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 04, 2012, 09:49:17 AM
I think he means that the more music you listen, particularly often complex music genres such as jazz and classical, the more your taste develops. Like he says, it doesn't mean that you can't enjoy early hits and more "easier-to-like" songs, but that it might make you require more of the material you listen to.

One of the reasons why I think a lot of modern music suck, is because it seems like the artists haven't taken the time to listen and analyze 'older' (being that 'Surfin U.S.A. or Pet Sounds) material, and thus creating 4th and even 5th generation bleak copies of music that have already been done.

The way I see it, the perception of music is a learning curve, and each subsequent genre/artist/etc you listen to, will inform your taste some how. Your preference may vary, though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko on October 04, 2012, 09:57:35 AM
I think he means that the more music you listen, particularly often complex music genres such as jazz and classical, the more your taste develops. Like he says, it doesn't mean that you can't enjoy early hits and more "easier-to-like" songs, but that it might make you require more of the material you listen to.

One of the reasons why I think a lot of modern music suck, is because it seems like the artists haven't taken the time to listen and analyze 'older' (being that 'Surfin U.S.A. or Pet Sounds) material, and thus creating 4th and even 5th generation bleak copies of music that have already been done.

The way I see it, the perception of music is a learning curve, and each subsequent genre/artist/etc you listen to, will inform your taste some how. Your preference may vary, though.

A person's taste changes over the years obviously. But that can be for better or worse.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 10:06:13 AM
Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.

Disagree 100% ...

the thing is, I would not put Pet Sounds and Smile in the same category in terms of composition, arrangement, or production. Most of the Smile songs are relatively straightforward compared to Pet Sounds. Many tracks on Today and Summer Days have more in common with Pet Sounds than Smile. Earlier tracks like 'Catch a Wave', 'I Get Around' and 'Don't Back Down' have striking twists and turns in terms of arrangement. And plenty of the '67-'72 era stuff is pretty basic. Not that the complexity of the song has anything to do with it's merit anyway.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 04, 2012, 10:06:49 AM
It's a shame this isn't coming out for Christmas it would have made an incredible Christmas gift


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 04, 2012, 10:09:51 AM
It all goes back to personal preference. My Beach Boys listening is predominantly the 1967-73 era since it's my favorite, but it doesn't mean I enjoy the other periods any less (well, Keepin' the Summer Alive is still junk regardless of period).

I don't think it's a level of "education" that makes people favor the Pet Sounds/Smile era. Some rather simpleminded people refer to Pet Sounds and Smile like they were the only things the Beach Boys did that were of any merit (including many of these so-called educated "fans"). But other than vocal harmonies and arrangements, there's nothing really intricate behind the Smile music. Most of the songs are two or three chords or variations on other songs.

Besides, the true work of genius in their oeuvre isn't Pet Sounds or Smile or even Sunflower...it's Smiley Smile.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on October 04, 2012, 12:18:51 PM
"Who Ran the Iron Horse?" might only be two chords, but it's at least as complex as anything on Pet Sounds.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on October 04, 2012, 12:46:06 PM
Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"

wait, wat?

I don't have the slightest clue as to what that means, but I love it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIVGkPKlhbs&feature=youtu.be


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on October 04, 2012, 12:50:16 PM
"Who Ran the Iron Horse?" might only be two chords, but it's at least as complex as anything on Pet Sounds.

Define complexity.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 04, 2012, 12:52:21 PM
As I said: I mean no offense to anyone. It was only my personal opinion (which I believe many people here hold) that people who have (for lack of better words) a more 'cultured' approach to music, in that maybe they play an instrument themselves, enjoyed classical music as a child or engage in singing, will appreciate the depth that the post-1965 music will give. We all know Brian did many songs in a very simple chord pattern, but there were many different instruments doing different 'stuff' all while, For example 'Who Ran The Iron Horse' is 2 chords repeating, but the cello has many notes, and the real texture is the harmonies which are very highly accomplished.

Even the Smiley Smile album is easier for many to graps than others. The Surfin USA crowd would (and did) frown upon it. More accomplished audiences and many notable musicians glorify it for it's daringness. It is a very unique piece of music, where 'less is more' and many people really appreciate such a touch. Even SS is very intricate on many lvls, take 'Whisperin Winds' or 'Fall Breaks'.

I do realise that what I'm trying to say is hard to grap given my limited ability to convey my ideas through this message alone. I'm not saying that the Surfin' USA crowd is dumb or anything. As I said in my other post, it's about preference. not a white/black - like/dislike of any of the two sides of the Beach Boys.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on October 04, 2012, 01:04:54 PM
As I said: I mean no offense to anyone. It was only my personal opinion (which I believe many people here hold) that people who have (for lack of better words) a more 'cultured' approach to music, in that maybe they play an instrument themselves, enjoyed classical music as a child or engage in singing, will appreciate the depth that the post-1965 music will give. We all know Brian did many songs in a very simple chord pattern, but there were many different instruments doing different 'stuff' all while, For example 'Who Ran The Iron Horse' is 2 chords repeating, but the cello has many notes, and the real texture is the harmonies which are very highly accomplished.

Even the Smiley Smile album is easier for many to graps than others. The Surfin USA crowd would (and did) frown upon it. More accomplished audiences and many notable musicians glorify it for it's daringness. It is a very unique piece of music, where 'less is more' and many people really appreciate such a touch. Even SS is very intricate on many lvls, take 'Whisperin Winds' or 'Fall Breaks'.

I do realise that what I'm trying to say is hard to grap given my limited ability to convey my ideas through this message alone. I'm not saying that the Surfin' USA crowd is dumb or anything. As I said in my other post, it's about preference. not a white/black - like/dislike of any of the two sides of the Beach Boys.

Nobody's taking offense, we just think you're wrong.  It's not hard to grasp what you're saying either, but you're begging the question.

Using myself as an example, I play several instruments, have since I was a child, some on a near professional level, have sung in very accomplished choirs, and enjoyed as a child and enjoy classical music now; in fact, the Beach Boys are about the only popular music that I listen to on a regular basis.  I'm mostly an opera queen, I have way more opera recordings than pop recordings, I can read music, I've studied composition formally at the college level, etc, etc.

The point here being, if I had to listen to either only pre Pet Sounds Beach Boys or only Pet Sounds and after Beach Boys for the rest of my life, it's not even close--the earlier stuff gets the nod without even thinking about it.

I expect I'm not alone.  I could not be more cultured when it comes to music and I choose pre-1966 Beach Boys.  How does that square with your thesis?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 04, 2012, 01:15:11 PM
As I said: I mean no offense to anyone. It was only my personal opinion (which I believe many people here hold) that people who have (for lack of better words) a more 'cultured' approach to music, in that maybe they play an instrument themselves, enjoyed classical music as a child or engage in singing, will appreciate the depth that the post-1965 music will give. We all know Brian did many songs in a very simple chord pattern, but there were many different instruments doing different 'stuff' all while, For example 'Who Ran The Iron Horse' is 2 chords repeating, but the cello has many notes, and the real texture is the harmonies which are very highly accomplished.

Even the Smiley Smile album is easier for many to graps than others. The Surfin USA crowd would (and did) frown upon it. More accomplished audiences and many notable musicians glorify it for it's daringness. It is a very unique piece of music, where 'less is more' and many people really appreciate such a touch. Even SS is very intricate on many lvls, take 'Whisperin Winds' or 'Fall Breaks'.

I do realise that what I'm trying to say is hard to grap given my limited ability to convey my ideas through this message alone. I'm not saying that the Surfin' USA crowd is dumb or anything. As I said in my other post, it's about preference. not a white/black - like/dislike of any of the two sides of the Beach Boys.

Nobody's taking offense, we just think you're wrong.  It's not hard to grasp what you're saying either, but you're begging the question.

Using myself as an example, I play several instruments, have since I was a child, some on a near professional level, have sung in very accomplished choirs, and enjoyed as a child and enjoy classical music now; in fact, the Beach Boys are about the only popular music that I listen to on a regular basis.  I'm mostly an opera queen, I have way more opera recordings than pop recordings, I can read music, I've studied composition formally at the college level, etc, etc.

The point here being, if I had to listen to either only pre Pet Sounds Beach Boys or only Pet Sounds and after Beach Boys for the rest of my life, it's not even close--the earlier stuff gets the nod without even thinking about it.

I expect I'm not alone.  I could not be more cultured when it comes to music and I choose pre-1966 Beach Boys.  How does that square with your thesis?

As you say I can't argue against that. It's just that whenever I hear any mention of them from recognised critics or musicians, the focus goes on PS, Smile and after (btw I said 1964-65 as a limit, since much of what one would find on PS one could also hear on Beach Boys Today!). What perhaps influences the perception of their music would be if one grew up back then and dreamed of the California life throught their music. For newer generations, they might not feel the same vibrant connection. Also they had the latter output to compare the early with from the beginning. That might not be the case anymore given that much has changed since then. Especially in regards to the car culture. Don't get me wrong, I dig the early period, but for me the thing that drew me into the BB fold was PS and after.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 01:30:59 PM
As I said: I mean no offense to anyone. It was only my personal opinion (which I believe many people here hold) that people who have (for lack of better words) a more 'cultured' approach to music, in that maybe they play an instrument themselves, enjoyed classical music as a child or engage in singing, will appreciate the depth that the post-1965 music will give. We all know Brian did many songs in a very simple chord pattern, but there were many different instruments doing different 'stuff' all while, For example 'Who Ran The Iron Horse' is 2 chords repeating, but the cello has many notes, and the real texture is the harmonies which are very highly accomplished.

Even the Smiley Smile album is easier for many to graps than others. The Surfin USA crowd would (and did) frown upon it. More accomplished audiences and many notable musicians glorify it for it's daringness. It is a very unique piece of music, where 'less is more' and many people really appreciate such a touch. Even SS is very intricate on many lvls, take 'Whisperin Winds' or 'Fall Breaks'.

I do realise that what I'm trying to say is hard to grap given my limited ability to convey my ideas through this message alone. I'm not saying that the Surfin' USA crowd is dumb or anything. As I said in my other post, it's about preference. not a white/black - like/dislike of any of the two sides of the Beach Boys.


I don't think it's about agreeing or disagreeing with your opinion (I personally disagree). It's the idea that some are more musically 'cultured' than others; the implication being that they are able to appreciate the finer aspects of these albums, whereas the common folk can't. That's really just kind of an offensive concept. Particularly absurd considering the primary creator would not necessarily even fall into this 'educated'/'cultured' category.

(prefacing an offensive statement with 'no offense ...' does not negate the offensiveness of the comment!)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on October 04, 2012, 01:48:18 PM
As I said: I mean no offense to anyone. It was only my personal opinion (which I believe many people here hold) that people who have (for lack of better words) a more 'cultured' approach to music, in that maybe they play an instrument themselves, enjoyed classical music as a child or engage in singing, will appreciate the depth that the post-1965 music will give. We all know Brian did many songs in a very simple chord pattern, but there were many different instruments doing different 'stuff' all while, For example 'Who Ran The Iron Horse' is 2 chords repeating, but the cello has many notes, and the real texture is the harmonies which are very highly accomplished.

Even the Smiley Smile album is easier for many to graps than others. The Surfin USA crowd would (and did) frown upon it. More accomplished audiences and many notable musicians glorify it for it's daringness. It is a very unique piece of music, where 'less is more' and many people really appreciate such a touch. Even SS is very intricate on many lvls, take 'Whisperin Winds' or 'Fall Breaks'.

I do realise that what I'm trying to say is hard to grap given my limited ability to convey my ideas through this message alone. I'm not saying that the Surfin' USA crowd is dumb or anything. As I said in my other post, it's about preference. not a white/black - like/dislike of any of the two sides of the Beach Boys.


I don't think it's about agreeing or disagreeing with your opinion (I personally disagree). It's the idea that some are more musically 'cultured' than others; the implication being that they are able to appreciate the finer aspects of these albums, whereas the common folk can't. That's really just kind of an offensive concept. Particularly absurd considering the primary creator would not necessarily even fall into this 'educated'/'cultured' category.

(prefacing an offensive statement with 'no offense ...' does not negate the offensiveness of the comment!)


Yeah, that's well put.  It's kind of an elitist way to look at music, and while that's a whole 'nother can of worms (Like Fat Mike says, "It's my job to keep punk rock elite...") there is no reason to assume that there is any sort of culturing required to enjoy certain types of music.

I would argue that either music hits you on some level or it doesn't, and then you go back afterwards and figure it out.  There is music that grows on you, but that, I believe is the effect of the music, intrinsic to itself, that works on the mind, rather than any sort of intellectual adaptation.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 04, 2012, 01:53:14 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 04, 2012, 01:59:57 PM
"There are two kinds of music. Good music, and the other kind."
Duke Ellington.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 02:10:00 PM

As you say I can't argue against that. It's just that whenever I hear any mention of them from recognised critics or musicians, the focus goes on PS, Smile and after (btw I said 1964-65 as a limit, since much of what one would find on PS one could also hear on Beach Boys Today!). What perhaps influences the perception of their music would be if one grew up back then and dreamed of the California life throught their music. For newer generations, they might not feel the same vibrant connection. Also they had the latter output to compare the early with from the beginning. That might not be the case anymore given that much has changed since then. Especially in regards to the car culture. Don't get me wrong, I dig the early period, but for me the thing that drew me into the BB fold was PS and after.


In my opinion, this is because critics and musicians are often listening to music for reasons other than enjoyment and emotional impact, and generally have more hang-ups about music than the average listener. Pet Sounds and Smile are perceived as more 'artistic' and subtle than say, All Summer Long. But at least part of this is a cultural bias ... you could call it 'cultured' or 'educated', but you could just as easily call it 'brainwashed'.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 02:10:59 PM

Yeah, that's well put.  It's kind of an elitist way to look at music, and while that's a whole 'nother can of worms (Like Fat Mike says, "It's my job to keep punk rock elite...") there is no reason to assume that there is any sort of culturing required to enjoy certain types of music.

I would argue that either music hits you on some level or it doesn't, and then you go back afterwards and figure it out.  There is music that grows on you, but that, I believe is the effect of the music, intrinsic to itself, that works on the mind, rather than any sort of intellectual adaptation.

yeh, that's it in my opinion.

to me, the brilliance of a track like 'I Get Around' is that I never tire of it, yet it is instantly accessible. That, beyond anything else, is where BW's genius lies -- the ability to stir up something multi-layered and fairly involved that has immediate appeal.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 02:15:11 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 04, 2012, 02:30:00 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.

Quite right. But my point is that someone with a higher education in music is better equipped to appreciate why something is "good". I'm not saying anyone's opinions are more or less valid than anyone else.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 02:49:38 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.

Quite right. But my point is that someone with a higher education in music is better equipped to appreciate why something is "good". I'm not saying anyone's opinions are more or less valid than anyone else.

maybe ... i fear that we 'music people' tend to understate the capabilities of the maligned 'average listener' though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Heysaboda on October 04, 2012, 02:58:17 PM
I think people need to stop with that "Family Band" sh*t.

The Boys have a connection to Manson, Mike Love has a connection to thousands of women, and Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"

where can I get such a shirt?

Teh Internets?   >:D


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 04, 2012, 03:05:04 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.

Quite right. But my point is that someone with a higher education in music is better equipped to appreciate why something is "good". I'm not saying anyone's opinions are more or less valid than anyone else.

Exactly. That is what I was trying to say too. You could exchange the word 'education' with 'understanding', but those words might very well be correlated. Whether it's better or worse being musically educated and to have a higher understanding of music is debatable, but I think it's a valid assessment. And yeah, music is subjective, but there is a reason why certain albums reach number one in the Top 100/10/X polls every time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 04, 2012, 03:13:49 PM
Al is able to wear a shirt basically telling everyone "Hey, almost everyone here is high right now"

wait, wat?

I don't have the slightest clue as to what that means, but I love it.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AIVGkPKlhbs&feature=youtu.be

I still don't get it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: DonnyL on October 04, 2012, 04:20:11 PM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.

Quite right. But my point is that someone with a higher education in music is better equipped to appreciate why something is "good". I'm not saying anyone's opinions are more or less valid than anyone else.

Exactly. That is what I was trying to say too. You could exchange the word 'education' with 'understanding', but those words might very well be correlated. Whether it's better or worse being musically educated and to have a higher understanding of music is debatable, but I think it's a valid assessment. And yeah, music is subjective, but there is a reason why certain albums reach number one in the Top 100/10/X polls every time.

The difficulty comes in qualifying those who 'understand' vs. those who don't.

And the main reason any album appears on any poll or list is mostly related to what you might call 'popular critical opinion'. There are certain albums that have not yet made any general rock top 200 list (something like Pearls Before Swine's "These Things Too" or Del Shannon's "Further Adventures of Charles Westover" are good examples of records every bit as good as any inflated Rolling Stone-deemed 'masterpiece') because they were simply not popular enough. Which is why you will never see Nick Drake listed on any major rock critic 'Best Of' list that was made prior to the appearance of one of his songs on a VW commercial. Why is it that 'Forever Changes' was ignored for so long, and now occasionally tops these lists? Did the record become better over time? Did people become more educated? Or did popular critical opinion simply change?



Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 04, 2012, 04:27:39 PM
Anyone wanna hazard some guesses as to what rarities could be potentially on this thing (besides the obvious one...)? I wonder what the over and under on things like "I'm A Man" and "Where Is She?" are. There are so many titles that have never even come close to circulating, but apparently do exist. Makes the mind boggle.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Camus on October 04, 2012, 05:43:45 PM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)
Everyone Wants to Live
Lines
Life is for the Living
Baseball
Stevie
My Solution (original version, not the remake)
Back Home (original and sunflower version)
You've Lost That Loving Feeling
California Feelin' (74 demo and 78 Beach Boys recording)
Big Sur (4/4 original)
WIBNTLA
Soul Searchin' (full Carl lead with BB backing)
You're Still A Mystery
Airplane (if a decent live recording exists)
Love You demos


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on October 04, 2012, 05:48:12 PM
Anyone wanna hazard some guesses as to what rarities could be potentially on this thing (besides the obvious one...)? I wonder what the over and under on things like "I'm A Man" and "Where Is She?" are. There are so many titles that have never even come close to circulating, but apparently do exist. Makes the mind boggle.

I'd suspect we'll get some more Adult Child stuff. Out In The Country would be an obvious choice, that's a really cool snippet. I'm actually interested in seeing what they dig up from the early years. It seems like they keep finding new demos / outtakes every time an archival release comes out (Little Deuce Coupe demo, Surfin USA demo, etc).


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on October 04, 2012, 06:51:18 PM
I don't want Brian's 1975 demo of "In The Back Of My Mind"...............................................I NEED IT!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 04, 2012, 07:44:38 PM
Anyone wanna hazard some guesses as to what rarities could be potentially on this thing (besides the obvious one...)? I wonder what the over and under on things like "I'm A Man" and "Where Is She?" are. There are so many titles that have never even come close to circulating, but apparently do exist. Makes the mind boggle.

I'd suspect we'll get some more Adult Child stuff. Out In The Country would be an obvious choice, that's a really cool snippet. I'm actually interested in seeing what they dig up from the early years. It seems like they keep finding new demos / outtakes every time an archival release comes out (Little Deuce Coupe demo, Surfin USA demo, etc).

It would be cool to hear circulating things in better quality, for sure. I'm pining for things that have never made the rounds!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 04, 2012, 10:13:53 PM
I could really go for a tracklisting. The wait would be much more bearable if they announce the official release date and what's on it. If it is coming out in January, as I suspect it will, I'd think probably either later this month or next month we should hear something. I seriously can't wait until the day where I scan the tracklist and see titles of songs that I've waited so long to hear.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 05, 2012, 12:26:55 AM
In defense of Cabinessenceking -

he makes a statement about the appreciation of art, and I do not have the slightest fear that he meant to belittle a class of listeners in the process. I will try to explain my own view on things, and then you're free to flame away at your heart's content:

it is a trivial fact that someone without any training in the arts may appreciate both a polka and Beethoven's Fifth. No need to dispute this. So it is also a trivial fact that another, similar person can enjoy 'This Car Of Mine' and 'I Just Wasn't Made For These Times'. Especially in the case of Brian Wilson; his music speaks always on the level of direct feelings, no matter the level of complexity of the music at hand.

Thing is: one can learn to listen, to get more out of music. For me that's the crucial point. In all probability, I would never have entered the field of classical music, had I not encountered a broadcast on Dutch public TV, some twenty years ago, of Leonard Bernstein's educational programme series, in nice b/w, with the famous director smoking to his heart's content and freely talking about Beethoven as well as the Beatles - and conversely, I am certain that one can get more out of the Fab Four's work after having read Ian McDonald's fine book on their stuff.

Analogy: had I not had friends in the fields of the art of painting, I would still think: what do all those skulls do, for heaven's sake, on those mediaeval still life paintings? After hearing that they were meant as a metaphor, standing for vanitas, vanity, and were referring to the fact that all things must pass, including we ourselves, they made eminent sense. Fresh fruit, a bottle of wine, and a skull: wonderful stuff, although making one melancholy at the same time.

Returning to music: Bernstein explained, for instance, the importance of the diabolus in musica, a certain interval that once was prohibited by the Church (it appears in the famous ‘Maria’, from West Side Story). Once you know these things, new worlds open themselves.

I take Cabinessenceking to have meant: one can absolutely enjoy Pet Sounds and Smile without any formal education, and without much listening experience at all. But there is extra value to be gotten from the latter two, when one has formed a habit of paying attention to detail, to the way Brian expresses difficult, often ambivalent emotions through compositional skills. The book of Philip Lambert is hugely instructive here.

It’s a bit like literature: one can get much out of Moby-Dick, without too much reading experience. But the thing is: a lot of the treasures therein will remain hidden, and the upshot is that it’ll be more like seeing the famous movie after that book, with Gregory Peck as Captain Ahab.

So, by way of resumé: Cabinessenceking’s statement, and the criticisms levelled at him, are not mutually exclusive, and therefore we are dealing with a false contradiction, IMHO.

I just want to say that in my own experience, by way of learning about art (which often is painstaking, and requires a certain investment of time), one can ‘dig a bit deeper’ – but the first and most primal enjoyment is always open to everyone.

(Final note: I am not very egalitarian, and I mean by that: I don’t think any dime store novel can compare with the works of your country’s greatest in my view: Melville, Twain, Hawthorne, and Poe.)

Thank you for reading, sorry for rambling, and I am open to any type of criticism.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 01:26:30 AM
I think it depends on who is on the receiving end. A heart surgeon is probably better placed to appreciate the intricacies of the human heart. That doesn't negate anyone else's appreciation but it does give the surgeon's appreciation a bit more weight.

With heart surgery, yes ... heart surgery is not a matter of opinion; there are explicit, measurable results. Musical validity is always a matter of opinion.

Quite right. But my point is that someone with a higher education in music is better equipped to appreciate why something is "good". I'm not saying anyone's opinions are more or less valid than anyone else.

Exactly. That is what I was trying to say too. You could exchange the word 'education' with 'understanding', but those words might very well be correlated. Whether it's better or worse being musically educated and to have a higher understanding of music is debatable, but I think it's a valid assessment. And yeah, music is subjective, but there is a reason why certain albums reach number one in the Top 100/10/X polls every time.

The difficulty comes in qualifying those who 'understand' vs. those who don't.

And the main reason any album appears on any poll or list is mostly related to what you might call 'popular critical opinion'. There are certain albums that have not yet made any general rock top 200 list (something like Pearls Before Swine's "These Things Too" or Del Shannon's "Further Adventures of Charles Westover" are good examples of records every bit as good as any inflated Rolling Stone-deemed 'masterpiece') because they were simply not popular enough. Which is why you will never see Nick Drake listed on any major rock critic 'Best Of' list that was made prior to the appearance of one of his songs on a VW commercial. Why is it that 'Forever Changes' was ignored for so long, and now occasionally tops these lists? Did the record become better over time? Did people become more educated? Or did popular critical opinion simply change?



You've absolutely have got good points regarding the 'Best of' lists (I miss a whole deal of albums there myself), but what I am trying to convey is that while music will always inevitably be subjective, there will always be some kind of objectiveness when analyzing it (or at the very least it should be IMO).

Very nice post, Don. I agree wholeheartedly.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Too Much Sugar on October 05, 2012, 01:27:02 AM
In defense of Cabinessenceking -

he makes a statement about the appreciation of art, and I do not have the slightest fear that he meant to belittle a class of listeners in the process. I will try to explain my own view on things, and then you're free to flame away at your heart's content:

it is a trivial fact that someone without any training in the arts may appreciate both a polka and Beethoven's Fifth. No need to dispute this. So it is also a trivial fact that another, similar person can enjoy 'This Car Of Mine' and 'I Just Wasn't Made For These Times'. Especially in the case of Brian Wilson; his music speaks always on the level of direct feelings, no matter the level of complexity of the music at hand.

Thing is: one can learn to listen, to get more out of music. For me that's the crucial point. In all probability, I would never have entered the field of classical music, had I not encountered a broadcast on Dutch public TV, some twenty years ago, of Leonard Bernstein's educational programme series, in nice b/w, with the famous director smoking to his heart's content and freely talking about Beethoven as well as the Beatles - and conversely, I am certain that one can get more out of the Fab Four's work after having read Ian McDonald's fine book on their stuff.

Analogy: had I not had friends in the fields of the art of painting, I would still think: what do all those skulls do, for heaven's sake, on those mediaeval still life paintings? After hearing that they were meant as a metaphor, standing for vanitas, vanity, and were referring to the fact that all things must pass, including we ourselves, they made eminent sense. Fresh fruit, a bottle of wine, and a skull: wonderful stuff, although making one melancholy at the same time.

Returning to music: Bernstein explained, for instance, the importance of the diabolus in musica, a certain interval that once was prohibited by the Church (it appears in the famous ‘Maria’, from West Side Story). Once you know these things, new worlds open themselves.

I take Cabinessenceking to have meant: one can absolutely enjoy Pet Sounds and Smile without any formal education, and without much listening experience at all. But there is extra value to be gotten from the latter two, when one has formed a habit of paying attention to detail, to the way Brian expresses difficult, often ambivalent emotions through compositional skills. The book of Philip Lambert is hugely instructive here.

It’s a bit like literature: one can get much out of Moby-Dick, without too much reading experience. But the thing is: a lot of the treasures therein will remain hidden, and the upshot is that it’ll be more like seeing the famous movie after that book, with Gregory Peck as Captain Ahab.

So, by way of resumé: Cabinessenceking’s statement, and the criticisms levelled at him, are not mutually exclusive, and therefore we are dealing with a false contradiction, IMHO.

I just want to say that in my own experience, by way of learning about art (which often is painstaking, and requires a certain investment of time), one can ‘dig a bit deeper’ – but the first and most primal enjoyment is always open to everyone.

(Final note: I am not very egalitarian, and I mean by that: I don’t think any dime store novel can compare with the works of your country’s greatest in my vies: Melville, Twain, Hawthorne, and Poe.)

Thank you for reading, sorry for rambling, and I am open to any type of criticism.


Well said, Don!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Too Much Sugar on October 05, 2012, 01:28:24 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)
Everyone Wants to Live
Lines
Life is for the Living
Baseball
Stevie
My Solution (original version, not the remake)
Back Home (original and sunflower version)
You've Lost That Loving Feeling
California Feelin' (74 demo and 78 Beach Boys recording)
Big Sur (4/4 original)
WIBNTLA
Soul Searchin' (full Carl lead with BB backing)
You're Still A Mystery
Airplane (if a decent live recording exists)
Love You demos

All great picks.  The one track I'd KILL to see on there, and I notice it's no longer to be found on YouTube, is Brian's "Thank Him".  I doubt that'd make it, but it's one of the most beautiful things I think he's written.  It would be incredible to hear that in the best sound quality possible.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 05, 2012, 01:41:17 AM
The Don is right, as I have come to expect.


But claiming some music is better than other purely because it's more sophisticated is juvenile. Does that automatically make The Ramones shitter than Yes because they used basic chords and didn't write suites? Is La Monte Young crap because he uses drones? I guess The Beatles weren't talented because they couldn't read music. Porgy & Bess is Gershwin's greatest work purely for the fact it's an opera and not 'pop music'. You could make the greatest music of all time by that logic by playing as many notes without rhyme or reason on a piano and make the most catastrophic chord, but it's got all these notes in it. Etc.

The heart surgery analogy is crappy. As DonnyL says, it's a clear and physical thing with obvious outcomes. You change the rules, you have a dead person. You change the rules in music, you make new music. Don is right that knowing how music works gives you a different appreciation, but to jump from that to saying that more is more is false.  

RE: the average listener - DonnyL is also right. Just because you think pop music is dumb (and you'd be wrong, if you actually attempted to listen to it) does not make the people who listen to it dumb.

TL;DR - get dumb.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GuyOnTheBeach on October 05, 2012, 01:42:50 AM
The BB85 track for either (or both, please) "Oh, Lord" and "And I Always Will" would be very much appreciated.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 05, 2012, 01:57:16 AM
And I Always Will is from the BB85 sessions? God, is there one new song on Postcard?


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 05, 2012, 02:07:19 AM
The Don is right, as I have come to expect.


But claiming some music is better than other purely because it's more sophisticated is juvenile. Does that automatically make The Ramones sh*tter than Yes because they used basic chords and didn't write suites? Is La Monte Young crap because he uses drones? I guess The Beatles weren't talented because they couldn't read music. Porgy & Bess is Gershwin's greatest work purely for the fact it's an opera and not 'pop music'. You could make the greatest music of all time by that logic by playing as many notes without rhyme or reason on a piano and make the most catastrophic chord, but it's got all these notes in it. Etc.

The heart surgery analogy is crappy. As DonnyL says, it's a clear and physical thing with obvious outcomes. You change the rules, you have a dead person. You change the rules in music, you make new music. Don is right that knowing how music works gives you a different appreciation, but to jump from that to saying that more is more is false.  

RE: the average listener - DonnyL is also right. Just because you think pop music is dumb (and you'd be wrong, if you actually attempted to listen to it) does not make the people who listen to it dumb.

TL;DR - get dumb.

You raise a good point: sophistication/complexity does not equal quality in art. A most welcome addition to my post, cheers for that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 05, 2012, 03:27:56 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)
Everyone Wants to Live
Lines
Life is for the Living
Baseball
Stevie
My Solution (original version, not the remake)
Back Home (original and sunflower version)
You've Lost That Loving Feeling
California Feelin' (74 demo and 78 Beach Boys recording)
Big Sur (4/4 original)
WIBNTLA
Soul Searchin' (full Carl lead with BB backing)
You're Still A Mystery
Airplane (if a decent live recording exists)
Love You demos

Big cosine on 15 Big Ones leftovers...I love all that stuff. You've lost that loving feeling is amazing. I'd so buy a rhino handmade type box with every single note of those sessions on it. Also I'd add carry me home and i'm going your way to your list.

Not fussed about 'Back Home' or 'California Feeling'...the former is just a crap song, and I've never heard a version of the latter that wasn't too boring/tasteful to love.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 05, 2012, 03:35:00 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 05, 2012, 03:39:24 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Cripes, I remember opting for sax lessons when I was at school cos I was so inspired by the wall of sax in Sea Cruise (I got about as far as Mike Love did with his sax!). I left school 30 years ago so…


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 03:53:42 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)
Everyone Wants to Live
Lines
Life is for the Living
Baseball
Stevie
My Solution (original version, not the remake)
Back Home (original and sunflower version)
You've Lost That Loving Feeling
California Feelin' (74 demo and 78 Beach Boys recording)
Big Sur (4/4 original)
WIBNTLA
Soul Searchin' (full Carl lead with BB backing)
You're Still A Mystery
Airplane (if a decent live recording exists)
Love You demos

Not fussed about 'Back Home' or 'California Feeling'...the former is just a crap song, and I've never heard a version of the latter that wasn't too boring/tasteful to love.



Lol, what? You must be high! (or not high enough) ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 03:57:01 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Over 50 years ago, really ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 05, 2012, 03:59:21 AM
Really ? The BB version was only recorded in 1976 - that's some trick !


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 05, 2012, 04:04:03 AM
Lol, what? You must be high! (or not high enough) ;D

Hahah...It's weird- most of the time when people slate Beach Boys songs up to LA Light, I'm like NOOO- Love em all. 'TM Song', Sumahama but those two genuinely leave me cold. Back Home is easily the worst track on 15 Big Ones imo.



Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 04:06:19 AM
Really ? The BB version was only recorded in 1976 - that's some trick !

Duh. Huey "Piano" Smith/Frankie Ford. Read between the lines, mon ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 04:09:24 AM
Lol, what? You must be high! (or not high enough) ;D

Hahah...It's weird- most of the time when people slate Beach Boys songs up to LA Light, I'm like NOOO- Love em all. 'TM Song', Sumahama but those two genuinely leave me cold. Back Home is easily the worst track on 15 Big Ones imo.



Haha, yah. Taste/preference is a matter of opinion for sure. To me 'Rock and Roll Music' is actually one of the worst songs on 15 BO (Beatles on the other hand did a fantastic version IMO) - I'm sure many will disagree :D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 05, 2012, 04:42:56 AM
Really ? The BB version was only recorded in 1976 - that's some trick !

Duh. Huey "Piano" Smith/Frankie Ford. Read between the lines, mon ;D

Original post I was responding to:

"and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc.."

Duh yourself.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 05, 2012, 04:46:08 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Was that on the double CD collection on Epic? 20 Years Of Harmony, or something?


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 05, 2012, 04:47:10 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Was that on the double CD collection on Epic? 20 Years Of Harmony, or something?

Nearly

double lp, 10 years of harmony, caribou ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 04:48:35 AM
Really ? The BB version was only recorded in 1976 - that's some trick !

Duh. Huey "Piano" Smith/Frankie Ford. Read between the lines, mon ;D

Original post I was responding to:

"and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc.."

Duh yourself.  ;D

Welllll, true, but your statement taken out of context is both right and wrong - and so is mine (hence reading between the lines) :p


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 04:52:35 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Was that on the double CD collection on Epic? 20 Years Of Harmony, or something?

Nearly

double lp, 10 years of harmony, caribou ;)

Also on Double CD, 1981 (Caribou Z2K 37445)


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 05, 2012, 05:13:14 AM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Was that on the double CD collection on Epic? 20 Years Of Harmony, or something?

Nearly

double lp, 10 years of harmony, caribou ;)

Also on Double CD, 1981 (Caribou Z2K 37445)

Tks. That one  I have.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 05, 2012, 05:42:37 AM

Also on Double CD, 1981 (Caribou Z2K 37445)

When did that come out? 1990? Bearing in mind CDs weren't commercially available at the time of the collections release.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 05, 2012, 05:57:02 AM
Original 2xLP was 81, CD I think was '91.

"Ten Years of Harmony" coming out in '81 – in reality their 20th anniversary– and the "Good Vibrations – 30 Years of the Beach Boys" box set coming out in 1993 – their 32nd anniversary – makes you realise how lucky we are today that they're only a year late celebrating their 50th anniversary!

In fact, if anything they're getting closing to marking actual anniversaries – expect a 60-year career spanning box set in 2020… hmm, somehow appropriate!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 05, 2012, 05:58:50 AM
Original 2xLP was 81, CD I think was '91.

"Ten Years of Harmony" coming out in '81 – in reality their 20th anniversary– and the "Good Vibrations – 30 Years of the Beach Boys" box set coming out in 1993 – their 32nd anniversary – makes you realise how lucky we are today that they're only a year late celebrating their 50th anniversary!

In fact, if anything they're getting closing to marking actual anniversaries – expect a 60-year career spanning box set in 2020… hmm, somehow appropriate!

I wonder what significant stuff they'll record between their 70th and 80th birthdays  ::)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 05, 2012, 06:56:22 AM
I'm finding all the speculation in this thread most entertaining.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 05, 2012, 07:00:11 AM
I'm finding all the speculation in this thread most entertaining.

you bastard! ;D

AGD is the biggest troll on this board, forget Phil, this guy is all over the place!


Title: Re:
Post by: tansen on October 05, 2012, 07:01:35 AM
Original 2xLP was 81, CD I think was '91.


You're right, John. I checked the CD now, it's 1991.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on October 05, 2012, 07:04:21 AM
I'm finding all the speculation in this thread most entertaining.
:lol Expect Mr. Cohen to have a rant tonight.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 05, 2012, 07:35:40 AM
Phil will never convince the 47% of this board that the box set is never coming out..

They will vote for AGD no matter what


Title: Re: \
Post by: sea of tunes on October 05, 2012, 01:50:27 PM
Deleted


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on October 05, 2012, 03:59:55 PM
Will any Adult Child stuff be on the box?


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 05, 2012, 06:27:48 PM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Yes, roll your eyes at people for forgetting about an inclusion on a long out of print compilation possibly released before they were born in an already huge sea of Beach Boys compilations.

ROLL THEM I SEZ.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SloopJohnnyB on October 05, 2012, 10:06:40 PM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)

Yes, roll your eyes at people for forgetting about an inclusion on a long out of print compilation possibly released before they were born in an already huge sea of Beach Boys compilations.


ROLL THEM I SEZ.

Absolutely one of the 'Deepest' Beach Boy compilations ever (next to Hawthorne and the box sets). I'm surprised it doesn't get more conversation here on the board. Essential listening. Track it down.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 05, 2012, 11:37:32 PM
You've lost that Lovin Feeling won't be on the box

Were this so, that would be a crying shame.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 05, 2012, 11:48:10 PM
You've lost that Lovin Feeling won't be on the box

Were this so, that would be a crying shame.

It most certainly would. I'd go so far as to say that it's Brian's greatest production from the entire mid/late-'70's period. It's stunning, and it'd be daft not to include it merely because none of the other BB's sang or played on it. After all, the same could be said for quite a few other songs, and not just ones by Brian (any other Beach Boys besides Dennis on All Alone or A Time To Live In Dreams, both released on official Beach Boys compilations?)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on October 05, 2012, 11:58:49 PM
Phil will never convince the 47% of this board that the box set is never coming out..

They will vote for AGD no matter what

I just hope AGD brings that up in the debate.   ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Gertie J. on October 06, 2012, 12:24:52 AM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 06, 2012, 12:29:20 AM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s)


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 06, 2012, 06:36:55 AM
Was this only Brian's vocals, recorded Karoake style, over the Spector backing tracks?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 06, 2012, 07:03:16 AM
I don't think Phil Spector used farting synthesizers in 1965.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 06, 2012, 07:05:32 AM
Yeah, he used real farts


Title: Re:
Post by: Jason on October 06, 2012, 07:13:46 AM
Yeah, he used real farts

Heavily reverbed for that Wall of Sound effect. :)


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 06, 2012, 07:32:09 AM
Yeah, he used real farts

Heavily reverbed for that Wall of Sound effect. :)

You should smell what comes out of me speakers during 'He Hit Me (And It Felt Like A Kiss)'


Title: Re:
Post by: Jason on October 06, 2012, 09:24:40 AM
Yeah, he used real farts

Heavily reverbed for that Wall of Sound effect. :)

You should smell what comes out of me speakers during 'He Hit Me (And It Felt Like A Kiss)'

 :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Thread over. There is nothing funnier to be said here.


Title: Re:
Post by: bgas on October 06, 2012, 09:37:01 AM
Yeah, he used real farts

Heavily reverbed for that Wall of Sound effect. :)

You should smell what comes out of me speakers during 'He Hit Me (And It Felt Like A Kiss)'

 :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol :lol

Thread over. There is nothing funnier to be said here.

Let's vote on it


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 06, 2012, 11:17:39 AM
I'm so f***ing excited for the track list..

How awesome is this box set going to be


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on October 06, 2012, 12:20:27 PM
I hope the sixth disc is a complete mixdown session for "Bluebirds Over the Mountain"!


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on October 06, 2012, 03:47:10 PM
I'm hoping the single edit of Isn't it Time is on the box, I can't really buy the other one that's on Itunes


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 06, 2012, 04:40:15 PM
Mike is ultimately the one who says yay or nay for the tracks on the boxset. He said he wants it to be more Beach Boys than just an anthology of BW products. So maybe we'll get Country Pie? Or some others from First Love?

People don't listen to The Beach Boys to hear Myke's stuff. People recognize Brian as the only true creative force in the band, along with significant contributions from Dennis, some from Carl and Al. Hardly anything from Bruce, but slightly more from Mike (I'm not considering pre-65 lyric writing). As Dennis said himself: We are his messagers.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 06, 2012, 05:12:41 PM
We ARE his messagers...we only talk ad nauseam about the music!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 06, 2012, 05:44:40 PM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s)

Well I guess we don't need it on the box set now.  It's on Youtube.  And it's pretty awful.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 06, 2012, 05:50:10 PM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s)

Well I guess we don't need it on the box set now.  It's on Youtube.  And it's pretty awful.

Youtube is no substitute for cd quality!!!
But, yeah, I don't think it's any great shakes. Especially compared to the, um, righteousness of the original version.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 06, 2012, 05:55:13 PM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s)

Well I guess we don't need it on the box set now.  It's on Youtube.  And it's pretty awful.

Youtube is no substitute for cd quality!!!
But, yeah, I don't think it's any great shakes. Especially compared to the, um, righteousness of the original version.

Really guys? I'm kinda surprised. I think Brian's version of "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'" is one of the best unreleased things I've heard from The Beach Boys vault. It's a great performance by Brian, and crazy as it sounds, I might even prefer his version to the Righteous Brothers, as wonderful as their version is.

In other news, we need a tracklist!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on October 06, 2012, 06:05:36 PM
we need a tracklist!!!

They might still be in the process of confirming tracks imo.
Here's my theory - Brian listens to his 1975 piano demo of In The Back Of My Mind and says "NO!, my voice sounds horrible on that!" and boom, we never get to hear it and its lost in the vaults forever.  :(


Title: Re: \
Post by: Camus on October 06, 2012, 08:47:08 PM
Some of the unreleased stuff I'd like to see on it are:

Mony Mony (and the other 15 big one out takes like Sea Cruise etc..)

Think you'll find "Sea Cruise" was released over 30 years ago.  ::)
I knew as soon as I typed that you'd pull me up on it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dead Parrot on October 06, 2012, 10:27:40 PM
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that "Carry Me Home" makes the final tracklist. Which means it almost certainly won't.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 07, 2012, 01:07:18 AM
Has Mike really said he wants it to be a Beach Boys boxset, not a Brian boxset? Has he honestly said that? If so, he's even worse than i'd imagined. God, does this mean we're going to get a load of average Mike/Al/Bruce stuff in place of quality Wilson product? Please say it aint so. I'd rather no boxset at all than an incredibly annoying frustrating one.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 01:16:33 AM
Mike is ultimately the one who says yay or nay for the tracks on the boxset. He said he wants it to be more Beach Boys than just an anthology of BW products. So maybe we'll get Country Pie? Or some others from First Love?

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 01:51:22 AM

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).

Which songs were vetoed?

Soulful Old Man Sunshine?
Let Him Run Wild?
Loop de Loop?

What did Mike veto?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 01:55:41 AM
Personally I hope that the number of cover versions is kept to a minimum.

From the 15BO and KTSA eras alone you could have Rock and Roll Music, Sea Cruise, Mony Mony, On Broadway, You`ve Lost That Lovin` Feelin`, Running Bear, Back in the USSR, Da Doo Ron Ron, I Will Always Love You etc. Too much and I would much prefer to hear originals.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 07, 2012, 06:23:59 AM

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).

Which songs were vetoed?

Soulful Old Man Sunshine?
Let Him Run Wild?
Loop de Loop?

What did Mike veto?

He vetoed WIBNTLA from WOTS, the moron.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 07, 2012, 06:26:01 AM

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).

Which songs were vetoed?

Soulful Old Man Sunshine?
Let Him Run Wild?
Loop de Loop?

What did Mike veto?

He vetoed WIBNTLA from WOTS, the moron.

I would have done the same thing. It's far less appropriate in that setting than on a box set largely consisting of unreleased material


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on October 07, 2012, 07:27:20 AM
I can't wait to see what's on this box set


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 08:24:50 AM
Well, that's not what I heard. I heard from a very very reliable source it was Mike this time around on this box.

That doesn`t mean he is the only one who is allowed to though does it which is what AGD was saying. If Al or Brian or whoever wanted to veto one of their own or Mike`s songs then they could.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 07, 2012, 08:33:21 AM
Mike is ultimately the one who says yay or nay for the tracks on the boxset. He said he wants it to be more Beach Boys than just an anthology of BW products. So maybe we'll get Country Pie? Or some others from First Love?

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).
Well, that's not what I heard. I heard from a very very reliable source it was Mike this time around on this box.
Did Alan or someone involved tell you that, or did you hear it from a friend of a friend of a friend, like over at the Hoffman board?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 08:59:07 AM

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).

Which songs were vetoed?

Soulful Old Man Sunshine?
Let Him Run Wild?
Loop de Loop?

What did Mike veto?

He vetoed WIBNTLA from WOTS, the moron.

I would have done the same thing. It's far less appropriate in that setting than on a box set largely consisting of unreleased material

And, pray tell, who told you that more than half the tracks on a 6CD box will be previously unreleased ?  Allow me to answer for you - no-one did. Because it's not the case.


Title: Re: \
Post by: onkster on October 07, 2012, 09:00:16 AM
"Let Him Run Wild" was nixed by Brian himself, no?

I still think he's way wrong on that one. Something tells me Mike told him it was too girly, and made fun of him for it. (Unless of course it was Murry.)

What a friggin' fantastic, perfect vocal, though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 09:04:56 AM
"Let Him Run Wild" was nixed by Brian himself, no?

I still think he's way wrong on that one. Something tells me Mike told him it was too girly, and made fun of him for it. (Unless of course it was Murry.)

What a friggin' fantastic, perfect vocal, though.

Yeah, that goddam Mike Love - everything that the band ever did wrong, or went amiss, is his doing, and his alone. His fault Dennis drowned... hell, I'll bet he even gave Carl cancer and caused Murry's heart attack. Is there no limit to his evil ? I'll wager the Bloo was really his idea too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 07, 2012, 09:05:54 AM

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).

Which songs were vetoed?

Soulful Old Man Sunshine?
Let Him Run Wild?
Loop de Loop?

What did Mike veto?

He vetoed WIBNTLA from WOTS, the moron.

I would have done the same thing. It's far less appropriate in that setting than on a box set largely consisting of unreleased material

And, pray tell, who told you that more than half the tracks on a 6CD box will be previously unreleased ?  Allow me to answer for you - no-one did. Because it's not the case.

Not the case? So that means we're either going to get a) less than 3 CDs worth of previously unreleased material (i.e. not more than half), otherwise it's b) the entire box will be previously unreleased material (nice, but unlikely).


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 07, 2012, 09:09:06 AM

And, pray tell, who told you that more than half the tracks on a 6CD box will be previously unreleased ?  Allow me to answer for you - no-one did. Because it's not the case.

Don't talk to me like that you rude little man. It's totally uncalled for.

I didn't even SAY I know that's what the box is going to be like...just said it would be better than sticking it on some random comp.

The smile you send out returns to you. Or whatever.




Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 09:12:48 AM
Look at it logically (hard for some, I grant, but try...): the 1993 box was, essentially, 4 CDs. Did the unreleased material on those four amount to two CDs worth ? No.

My guess - and it's no more than that, before anyone jumps to conclusions - is that the new box will consist of the Top 40 hits, the classics, more deep catalog cuts than before, tracks representative of the period 1988-2012 and some new archive cuts, hopefully including the ones we've been banging on about for, oh, years. Maybe a solo track or two apiece. More Smile material.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 07, 2012, 09:17:26 AM
That dreaded phrase: ''tracks representative of the period 1988-2012''


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 09:18:33 AM

And, pray tell, who told you that more than half the tracks on a 6CD box will be previously unreleased ?  Allow me to answer for you - no-one did. Because it's not the case.

Don't talk to me like that you rude little man. It's totally uncalled for.

I didn't even SAY I know that's what the box is going to be like...just said it would be better than sticking it on some random comp.

The smile you send out returns to you. Or whatever.




You checked the title of this thread recently ?  It's concerned with the upcoming new box set. I assumed, naively, that this was the box you were referring to. I apologise for granting you the facility of logical thought.


Title: Re: \
Post by: onkster on October 07, 2012, 09:24:09 AM
"Let Him Run Wild" was nixed by Brian himself, no?

I still think he's way wrong on that one. Something tells me Mike told him it was too girly, and made fun of him for it. (Unless of course it was Murry.)

What a friggin' fantastic, perfect vocal, though.

Yeah, that goddam Mike Love - everything that the band ever did wrong, or went amiss, is his doing, and his alone. His fault Dennis drowned... hell, I'll bet he even gave Carl cancer and caused Murry's heart attack. Is there no limit to his evil ? I'll wager the Bloo was really his idea too.


OK, OK, maybe Mike didn't say that. Maybe it was Murry. Maybe it was just Brian, unbidden by outside castigation. I just have a hard time thinking that a guy could deliberately record a vocal that beautiful, then years later start getting down on himself for being too girly or too unmanly without having somebody bug him to prompt that. There are bunches of interviews in the 70s where he seems to have become worried and revisionist about his wonderful falsetto/soprano singing in the past.

I'm not a person who says Mike Love is evil incarnate and responsible for all the world's ills--but hey: it's undeniably true that he has put his foot in his own mouth rather poorly a number of times. (His LA Times article this week being a MAJOR exception.) Once again, it could've been Murry. Maybe it was the Surfer Nazi, who knows.

Jesus, AGD, I'm merely suggesting the possibility. Don't start putting words in my mouth.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 09:25:26 AM
You checked the title of this thread recently ?  It's concerned with the upcoming new box set. I assumed, naively, that this was the box you were referring to. I apologise for granting you the facility of logical thought.

Are you experimenting with the dosage or something?


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 07, 2012, 09:27:58 AM
Doe,

You can't understand the difference between hopeful speculation and making a claim regarding the actual contents of a box set that hasn't even been released yet?

You're the guy who has a problem with logical thought.  :lol

If hanging out on Beach Boys forums makes you unhappy/grumpy/unpleasant, perhaps you should try some other pursuits.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 07, 2012, 09:42:45 AM
All of you either take it to PMs or you're all going to be banned.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 09:55:02 AM
Getting back on topic...

I too am glad that WIBNTLA wasn`t included on the WOTS compilation. Compilations shouldn`t include just 1 unreleased track imo as it is taking the proverbial out of the fans (not that I`m saying that was Mike`s reasoning).

For the upcoming box-set I would hope that they wouldn`t include much solo material (if any at all). I suppose though that there could be some huge gaps in the 1988-2012 period if they didn`t. So maybe things like Cool Head, Warm Heart and one or two Brian things might appear. Along with Don`t Fight the Sea from Al`s album I guess.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 10:02:03 AM
"Let Him Run Wild" was nixed by Brian himself, no?

I still think he's way wrong on that one. Something tells me Mike told him it was too girly, and made fun of him for it. (Unless of course it was Murry.)

What a friggin' fantastic, perfect vocal, though.

Yeah, that goddam Mike Love - everything that the band ever did wrong, or went amiss, is his doing, and his alone. His fault Dennis drowned... hell, I'll bet he even gave Carl cancer and caused Murry's heart attack. Is there no limit to his evil ? I'll wager the Bloo was really his idea too.


OK, OK, maybe Mike didn't say that. Maybe it was Murry. Maybe it was just Brian, unbidden by outside castigation. I just have a hard time thinking that a guy could deliberately record a vocal that beautiful, then years later start getting down on himself for being too girly or too unmanly without having somebody bug him to prompt that. There are bunches of interviews in the 70s where he seems to have become worried and revisionist about his wonderful falsetto/soprano singing in the past.

I'm not a person who says Mike Love is evil incarnate and responsible for all the world's ills--but hey: it's undeniably true that he has put his foot in his own mouth rather poorly a number of times. (His LA Times article this week being a MAJOR exception.) Once again, it could've been Murry. Maybe it was the Surfer Nazi, who knows.

Jesus, AGD, I'm merely suggesting the possibility. Don't start putting words in my mouth.

Brian's on record as saying he hates the vocal because he rushed it and he thinks sounds like a girl.


Title: Re: \
Post by: onkster on October 07, 2012, 10:02:16 AM
If it's a good mixture of released/unreleased/remixed like the GV set, I'll be happy.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on October 07, 2012, 10:02:29 AM
Funny because it's amazing  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: onkster on October 07, 2012, 10:05:16 AM

Jesus, AGD, I'm merely suggesting the possibility. Don't start putting words in my mouth.
[/quote]

Brian's on record as saying he hates the vocal because he rushed it and he thinks sounds like a girl.
[/quote]

I've heard the "girl" comment, but not the "rushed" comment. Is the "rushed" thing a really obscure quote? I haven't read it. But I haven't read absolutely everything, so my bad.

I was lumping the "girl" thing ("petulant" was used also in that quote, yes?) in with that spate of comments about his falsetto/soprano in general. I was drawing a speculative conclusion about all that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 07, 2012, 10:12:15 AM
Interview for the 1993 box set, I think. Can't quote exactly but he said something like "I rushed my vocal on that, maybe I was late for a bowling date or something".


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 07, 2012, 11:10:38 AM
All of you either take it to PMs or you're all going to be banned.

Agreed.

It seems like we're all on edge lately. Too much negativity, too much hostility. It stops now. I don't care *who* it is, it ends here.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 07, 2012, 11:36:18 AM
Interview for the 1993 box set, I think. Can't quote exactly but he said something like "I rushed my vocal on that, maybe I was late for a bowling date or something".

Realise i'm in the minority here, but i agree with Brian on this, always have - his vocal is too shrill. Great song, but his vocal stops it being a favourite for me - and i'm someone who otherwise adores Brian's early singing voice.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Menace Wilson on October 07, 2012, 11:49:33 AM
"Let Him Run Wild" is one of my absolute favorite pre-Pet Sounds BBs tunes, and I think B-Dub's voice sounds amazing on it.  I've never understood his dislike for his vocal.

If it's a good mixture of released/unreleased/remixed like the GV set, I'll be happy.
 

Me too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocker on October 07, 2012, 12:02:59 PM
wait what? are you all saying there exists BW version of You've lost that lovin' feeling? in addition to our beloved BB cover of Just once in my life?  :thud :o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oeMhUNd439s)

Well I guess we don't need it on the box set now.  It's on Youtube.  And it's pretty awful.

Youtube is no substitute for cd quality!!!
But, yeah, I don't think it's any great shakes. Especially compared to the, um, righteousness of the original version.

Really guys? I'm kinda surprised. I think Brian's version of "You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin'" is one of the best unreleased things I've heard from The Beach Boys vault. It's a great performance by Brian, and crazy as it sounds, I might even prefer his version to the Righteous Brothers, as wonderful as their version is.




i think Brian's version is good but not very much more. I like the piano sound. Presley's version of that song beats any I've ever heard, though.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 07, 2012, 12:10:02 PM
I freakin' LOVE Brian's version of that cut. I too prefer it to the original, and to me is one of Brian's last otherwordly vocals.


Title: Re:
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 07, 2012, 12:32:42 PM
I freakin' LOVE Brian's version of that cut. I too prefer it to the original, and to me is one of Brian's last otherwordly vocals.

Yeah me too...it's a really terrific vocal. It's a much better performance than a lot of his other seventies vocals...really putting something into it, and the 'gone, gone gone's' are lovely. He sounds very Carl like on these bits.

Backing kicks ass too. Massive fan of the synth bass years :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 07, 2012, 12:39:50 PM
just wish the copy didn't have the warble on it - I slowed down the track on this upload from the rarities CD since it sounded sped up on the disc.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on October 07, 2012, 12:42:42 PM
AGD mentions the possibility of more Smile material for the box, and it seems Alan Boyd has revealed that more Smile material has been unearthed since last year's box set.

Imagine we get something as gorgeous as Surf's Up (1967).  :brian

--

On another note, it is interesting that WIBNTLA was vetoed for WOTS, but Lady (obscure, albeit previously released) was included on SLS in 2009.  I'm sure Mike wanted to save it for the 50th releases... :dennis


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 07, 2012, 01:07:54 PM
AGD mentions the possibility of more Smile material for the box, and it seems Alan Boyd has revealed that more Smile material has been unearthed since last year's box set.

Imagine we get something as gorgeous as Surf's Up (1967).  :brian

--

On another note, it is interesting that WIBNTLA was vetoed for WOTS, but Lady (obscure, albeit previously released) was included on SLS in 2009.  I'm sure Mike wanted to save it for the 50th releases... :dennis

Mike is so good to us  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on October 07, 2012, 01:28:07 PM
...it seems Alan Boyd has revealed that more Smile material has been unearthed since last year's box set.

I missed that. Can you fill me in?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on October 07, 2012, 02:30:03 PM
He said it at the recent lecture he gave apparently  :)

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14354.msg326462.html#msg326462

I guess we should assume at this stage that it is not of any great consequence, but very interesting in any case I'd say.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 07, 2012, 02:35:35 PM
He said it at the recent lecture he gave apparently  :)

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14354.msg326462.html#msg326462

I guess we should assume at this stage that it is not of any great consequence, but very interesting in any case I'd say.

...he says, only to be surprised to have a version of 'Holidays' on the box set with Mike doing the pirate rap ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on October 07, 2012, 06:02:06 PM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 07, 2012, 06:58:18 PM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

6 discs is a heck of a lot of space though. Especially if they weren`t to include any more a capella, track only or live versions. It will be very interesting to see how this disk is split up...

Personally I wouldn`t mind if there was a live disc containing genuine rarities like the covers that they`ve never included on albums and rare/unusual performances.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ziggy Stardust on October 07, 2012, 06:59:53 PM
The bigger the wait is, the higher my hope is getting... i just have totally no idea what the tracklist could look like.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on October 07, 2012, 08:57:56 PM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

I can agree to this too.  I'd welcome Smile stuff on the box obviously but if they didn't include it...I probably wouldn't blink an eye.  I'm quite satisfied with the Smile box and its contents.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 07, 2012, 09:17:32 PM
Geeze, would you have thought even a year ago that people would be saying things like that?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on October 08, 2012, 12:06:57 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

You're not the actual Mike Love are you?

Anyone who's heard the unsurprassed masters Smile sessions will know there's a fair amount of still unreleased Smile material, especially Vegetables stuff.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 08, 2012, 12:09:18 AM
Geeze, would you have thought even a year ago that people would be saying things like that?

Totally am with you. Good to put things in perspective every now and then. This here board sometimes looks like some Brazilian river full of pirañhas, all vying for the next single drop of blood.

(The analogy fails, but I liked it anyway...  ;D)


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 08, 2012, 12:20:38 AM
The bigger the wait is, the higher my hope is getting... i just have totally no idea what the tracklist could look like.

Agree but it could be an acetate of a mix we haven't heard.  I doubt they'd put it on the box if it wasn't significant.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jay on October 08, 2012, 12:38:01 AM
I know it's probably not "commercially viable", but I would love it if they included the drums, percussion and organ overdub of It's About Time.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 08, 2012, 02:04:37 AM
AGD mentions the possibility of more Smile material for the box...

Hello ? I said nothing of the sort. Here's what I actually posted, with emphasis for the hard of comprehending:

"Look at it logically (hard for some, I grant, but try...): the 1993 box was, essentially, 4 CDs. Did the unreleased material on those four amount to two CDs worth ? No.

My guess - and it's no more than that, before anyone jumps to conclusions - is that the new box will consist of the Top 40 hits, the classics, more deep catalog cuts than before, tracks representative of the period 1988-2012 and some new archive cuts, hopefully including the ones we've been banging on about for, oh, years. Maybe a solo track or two apiece. More Smile material."

My guess. Even assuming I do have any inkling of what might be on the box, you really think I'd give that broad a hint in an open forum like this one ?  I've built my contacts and sources up over some 35 years and I'd like to hang on to then for a bit longer, thanks very much.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on October 08, 2012, 02:52:08 AM
Good morning Andrew,

I didn't say you were dropping a hint.  As basically none of us know what the content will be at this stage,  the inclusion of more Smile material is of course possible as far as we know.  You guessed of said inclusion; to me that is raising this possibility of Smile material being included.  I didn't say that you were making any guarantees.

It obviously goes without saying that most of the time your posts are quite sensible and I thought it was a sensible possibilty for us to consider and highlight in light of Mr Boyd's recent revelation.

Happy listening.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 08, 2012, 03:03:46 AM
AGD mentions the possibility of more Smile material for the box...

Hello ? I said nothing of the sort. Here's what I actually posted, with emphasis for the hard of comprehending:

"Look at it logically (hard for some, I grant, but try...): the 1993 box was, essentially, 4 CDs. Did the unreleased material on those four amount to two CDs worth ? No.

My guess - and it's no more than that, before anyone jumps to conclusions - is that the new box will consist of the Top 40 hits, the classics, more deep catalog cuts than before, tracks representative of the period 1988-2012 and some new archive cuts, hopefully including the ones we've been banging on about for, oh, years. Maybe a solo track or two apiece. More Smile material."

My guess. Even assuming I do have any inkling of what might be on the box, you really think I'd give that broad a hint in an open forum like this one ?  I've built my contacts and sources up over some 35 years and I'd like to hang on to then for a bit longer, thanks very much.

So which SMiLE tracks are gonna be included, Andrew? Do they sound good?







:lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 08, 2012, 03:24:39 AM
The remixed and remastered "Winkles" is killer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 08, 2012, 03:33:18 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

what about both, and cutting California Girls (stereo mix) ?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Steve Mayo on October 08, 2012, 05:02:56 AM
The remixed and remastered "Winkles" is killer.

totally agree...... to the ears, stomach and soul of the listener    ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 06:38:59 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

what about both, and cutting California Girls (stereo mix) ?
I understand people have different wants and needs etc, but what I don't understand are all of these unrealistic expectations regarding the box set. This is a retrospective set, not a bootleggers deluxe set. Good Vibrations set did not disappoint in 1993 and I highly doubt that we will be unhappy with the new box set upon it's release, as well.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 08, 2012, 07:02:05 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

what about both, and cutting California Girls (stereo mix) ?
I understand people have different wants and needs etc, but what I don't understand are all of these unrealistic expectations regarding the box set. This is a retrospective set, not a bootleggers deluxe set. Good Vibrations set did not disappoint in 1993 and I highly doubt that we will be unhappy with the new box set upon it's release, as well.

Sound thinking, doctor. But if the core is the material from the GV set, and it's enriched with deep catalogue material, and there are a couple of solo tracks by Carl, Denny, and perhaps Brian, and there are two rarities to attract collectors, then I think I will pass it up. I can spend those 100+ Euros only once.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 08, 2012, 07:05:12 AM
I would sincerely hope that, given it's a 6CD set, there will be somewhat more than "two rarities to attract collectors".

Four at least. ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 07:08:33 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

what about both, and cutting California Girls (stereo mix) ?
I understand people have different wants and needs etc, but what I don't understand are all of these unrealistic expectations regarding the box set. This is a retrospective set, not a bootleggers deluxe set. Good Vibrations set did not disappoint in 1993 and I highly doubt that we will be unhappy with the new box set upon it's release, as well.

Sound thinking, doctor. But if the core is the material from the GV set, and it's enriched with deep catalogue material, and there are a couple of solo tracks by Carl, Denny, and perhaps Brian, and there are two rarities to attract collectors, then I think I will pass it up. I can spend those 100+ Euros only once.
Shoot, I say that all time, as my wife will attest, but I still always find something on everything that tickles my fancy, and I end up buying all of it. Just the fan in me, I suppose.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 08, 2012, 07:11:28 AM

Sound thinking, doctor. But if the core is the material from the GV set, and it's enriched with deep catalogue material, and there are a couple of solo tracks by Carl, Denny, and perhaps Brian, and there are two rarities to attract collectors, then I think I will pass it up. I can spend those 100+ Euros only once.

Aren`t the Carl and Dennis solo recordings from different record labels? If I were Capitol then I wouldn`t include any of those songs. The same goes for most of Brian`s albums.

Lucky Old Sun was done for Capitol I think so perhaps a couple of songs could be included and some of Al`s and Mike`s stuff might be essentially label-less. If any of Pacific Ocean Blue`s songs are available in early demo form then they might belong to Brother I guess.


Title: Re: \
Post by: sea of tunes on October 08, 2012, 08:03:10 AM
I would sincerely hope that, given it's a 6CD set, there will be somewhat more than "two rarities to attract collectors".

Four at least. ;D

Do we think that tracks like "H.E.L.P" and "4th of July", along with the "Adult Child" stuff will be held over from the Good Vibrations box?


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 08, 2012, 08:36:01 AM
I would sincerely hope that, given it's a 6CD set, there will be somewhat more than "two rarities to attract collectors".

Four at least. ;D

 ;D

Well, I think that the box must have considerable appeal for collectors... or else: who's going to purchase it? People in general (so: normal, as opposed to us ruminators and obsessive thinkers) will be content with the double 50 hits set at the max. Others will be happy with the 1993 box. I have some trouble imagining that there will be those who are willing to lay down so much money for what is essentially an extended Greatest Hits set. Interest in '80s and '90s BBs material will be small.

But I stick with my previous statement, in case the novelty value is very low.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 08, 2012, 09:10:25 AM
I think... I think we should all be grateful that the box was even considered and is in fact happening (yes, Phil, it is, so deal with it - in fact I told my friends in the Tower to delay it purely to annoy you: I have that power*). We're somewhat beyond casual fans and of course when the track listing is released, we'll bitch about it, but fact is, we'll buy it and we'll be happy so to do.


(* denotes statement that is very likely a complete lie... but you never know...)


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 08, 2012, 09:24:58 AM
I think... I think we should all be grateful that the box was even considered and is in fact happening (yes, Phil, it is, so deal with it - in fact I told my friends in the Tower to delay it purely to annoy you: I have that power*). We're somewhat beyond casual fans and of course when the track listing is released, we'll bitch about it, but fact is, we'll buy it and we'll be happy so to do.


(* denotes statement that is very likely a complete lie... but you never know...)

Hm. This statement is on the surface info-free, and yet it speaks to my feelings... as if there's considerably more that the two rarities I speculated upon not so long ago...  ::)


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 09:28:13 AM
That Andrew, he's a subtle stinker. He always keeps us thinking, wishing, hoping and praying.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on October 08, 2012, 09:39:21 AM
I know I'm in the minority here but.... Dear God no more Smile stuff. If disk space was infinite, no problem but as it isn't I'd much rather have as much unreleased 70's era stuff as they can fit over more barnyard noises or yet another variation on the "Bicycle Rider" riff.

You're not the actual Mike Love are you?

Anyone who's heard the unsurprassed masters Smile sessions will know there's a fair amount of still unreleased Smile material, especially Vegetables stuff.

True but 4 disks already dedicated to 1 album is quite sufficant as far as I'm concerned. In fact I only bought the 2 disk edtion and a few mp3 downloads from the larger set and unless someone stumbles onto a full second movement of Surf's Up I'm pretty much done with Smile.


Title: Re:
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 08, 2012, 09:56:11 AM
That Andrew, he's a subtle stinker. He always keeps us thinking, wishing, hoping and praying.

Ya think ?  Sometimes I'm so goddam subtle even I don't realise what I'm actually saying.  :brow


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 10:11:39 AM
That Andrew, he's a subtle stinker. He always keeps us thinking, wishing, hoping and praying.

Ya think ?  Sometimes I'm so goddam subtle even I don't realise what I'm actually saying.  :brow
You are when you can't let the cat out of the bag. ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on October 08, 2012, 10:56:41 AM
maybe it will ONLY be "country love" outtakes and that's it... ;D ;D :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on October 08, 2012, 11:35:51 AM
I understand people have different wants and needs etc, but what I don't understand are all of these unrealistic expectations regarding the box set. This is a retrospective set, not a bootleggers deluxe set. Good Vibrations set did not disappoint in 1993 and I highly doubt that we will be unhappy with the new box set upon it's release, as well.

Actually, that has always been my wish, and, while it might be unrealistic, SHOULDN'T have been. I wanted a boxed set (5 CDs?) of all previously released material - hits and key album tracks - from ALL the official studio/live albums. This box would be for those fans who like that kind of career-spanning "safe" songs, packaged together.

Then I would have a boxed set compiled of rarities (released material including obscure singles), UNRELEASED songs, and some outstanding live tracks. No solo stuff. This is for the diehards. Over time, don't you think a box like this would accumulate in sales.

There aren't many artists with the history or legacy of The Beach Boys. What's wrong with 2 boxed sets. Look at all the compilations (especially bootlegs) that Bob Dylan has put out. Even Bruce Springsteen is getting up there with comps.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 08, 2012, 11:45:07 AM
I'd love for "where we are" to make the cut.

That songs underrated with even hardcore fans


Title: Re:
Post by: punkinhead on October 08, 2012, 11:48:27 AM
What tracks from BB85/Still Cruisin'/mid 80s/SIP is acceptable material to put on the box, besides the usual Getcha Back/Kokomo?


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on October 08, 2012, 11:50:38 AM
Will all the tracks be the regular mix that we've all heard or the new tracks that are on the remastered albums?


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 11:52:39 AM
Mike is ultimately the one who says yay or nay for the tracks on the boxset. He said he wants it to be more Beach Boys than just an anthology of BW products. So maybe we'll get Country Pie? Or some others from First Love?

No, he's not. Any voting member of BRI can veto any suggested track, just as they did with the 1993 box (Where Carl, Alan & Brian all nixed material) and WOTS (Mike).
Well, that's not what I heard. I heard from a very very reliable source it was Mike this time around on this box.
Did Alan or someone involved tell you that, or did you hear it from a friend of a friend of a friend, like over at the Hoffman board?
I wish I could say
Well, your answer most likely rules out a friend of a friend of a friend. ;)


Title: Re:
Post by: Bicyclerider on October 08, 2012, 01:04:02 PM
I understand people have different wants and needs etc, but what I don't understand are all of these unrealistic expectations regarding the box set. This is a retrospective set, not a bootleggers deluxe set. Good Vibrations set did not disappoint in 1993 and I highly doubt that we will be unhappy with the new box set upon it's release, as well.

Actually, that has always been my wish, and, while it might be unrealistic, SHOULDN'T have been. I wanted a boxed set (5 CDs?) of all previously released material - hits and key album tracks - from ALL the official studio/live albums. This box would be for those fans who like that kind of career-spanning "safe" songs, packaged together.

Then I would have a boxed set compiled of rarities (released material including obscure singles), UNRELEASED songs, and some outstanding live tracks. No solo stuff. This is for the diehards. Over time, don't you think a box like this would accumulate in sales.

There aren't many artists with the history or legacy of The Beach Boys. What's wrong with 2 boxed sets. Look at all the compilations (especially bootlegs) that Bob Dylan has put out. Even Bruce Springsteen is getting up there with comps.

If this box repeats the contents of 50 Hits, adds in the bonus tracks of the GV box and the 2fers, adds "deep cuts" from the albums - no one is going to buy it.  The fans have all that and will resent paying big bucks for a few new "rarities."  The casual buyer will have bought 50 Hits and be content with that, and not want to buy those songs over again.  If this isn't at least 50% unreleased material I suspect it will be a very hard sell.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 01:38:34 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.


Title: Re:
Post by: sea of tunes on October 08, 2012, 02:45:38 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.

Not to be a downer but, in 1993 people were buying CD's at a much higher clip.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 08, 2012, 02:49:15 PM
If it has the full Wild Honey album in Stereo it will sell a million units in January


Title: Re: \
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on October 08, 2012, 03:51:55 PM
If it has the full Wild Honey album in Stereo it will sell a million units in January

If it has the full Wild Honey album in stereo, I personally will buy a million units in January.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 03:54:52 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.

Not to be a downer but, in 1993 people were buying CD's at a much higher clip.
I bet that has been taken into account and the units adjusted. Most diehard fans will make the purchase.


Title: Re:
Post by: Camus on October 08, 2012, 06:27:38 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.

Not to be a downer but, in 1993 people were buying CD's at a much higher clip.
I bet that has been taken into account and the units adjusted. Most diehard fans will make the purchase.

I'm not convinced by that.  If the box is mostly released stuff with a smattering of new rarities, I would think the majority of fans would simply download the tracks they don't have, either legitimately or not rather than buying the full boxset.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 06:37:38 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.

Not to be a downer but, in 1993 people were buying CD's at a much higher clip.
I bet that has been taken into account and the units adjusted. Most diehard fans will make the purchase.

I'm not convinced by that.  If the box is mostly released stuff with a smattering of new rarities, I would think the majority of fans would simply download the tracks they don't have, either legitimately or not rather than buying the full boxset.
If no profit is to be made, then why is Capitol comitting to it? Just to be nice guys? You don't think they know what needs to be sold to make a profit? Do you really think they would release it if they know it will lose money?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 08, 2012, 07:11:51 PM
I think all you guys are crazy. You reaaaaaaaaaaally don't think they are gonna come up with the goods? That despite coming through big time with the release The SMiLE Sessions, and the remasters of 12 albums, they are gonna screw this up? I highly doubt it. There are quite a few things of The Beach Boys I'd never thought that I'd hear, but I feel extremely confident that in January 2013, I'll be hearing most of those things, and more! They are not just gonna put out a box set with just previously released material. And I highly doubt there are just gonna put like two unreleased songs on this thing. It will be done well. And every day we are getting closer to an announcement regarding the track listing.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 07:18:55 PM
Everybody is in a panic because someone told someone that Mike Love is cutting out tracks and fucking up the box set. It's what we do here. ;)


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 08, 2012, 07:22:26 PM
Haha. Well, you're probably right. I'm sure we'll be delighted with the box (or gripe about it. one of those...) come January or whenever it's released. It's just that with this band there's always an element of uncertainty. You know things exist that we want to hear, we just have to hope that a good chunk magically makes it's way into our grubby little hands.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 08, 2012, 07:28:47 PM
I think all you guys are crazy. You reaaaaaaaaaaally don't think they are gonna come up with the goods? That despite coming through big time with the release The SMiLE Sessions, and the remasters of 12 albums, they are gonna screw this up? I highly doubt it. There are quite a few things of The Beach Boys I'd never thought that I'd hear, but I feel extremely confident that in January 2013, I'll be hearing most of those things, and more! They are not just gonna put out a box set with just previously released material. And I highly doubt there are just gonna put like two unreleased songs on this thing. It will be done well. And every day we are getting closer to an announcement regarding the track listing.

Exactly. I have a *real* good feeling about this...


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 08, 2012, 07:34:56 PM
I think all you guys are crazy. You reaaaaaaaaaaally don't think they are gonna come up with the goods? That despite coming through big time with the release The SMiLE Sessions, and the remasters of 12 albums, they are gonna screw this up? I highly doubt it. There are quite a few things of The Beach Boys I'd never thought that I'd hear, but I feel extremely confident that in January 2013, I'll be hearing most of those things, and more! They are not just gonna put out a box set with just previously released material. And I highly doubt there are just gonna put like two unreleased songs on this thing. It will be done well. And every day we are getting closer to an announcement regarding the track listing.

Exactly. I have a *real* good feeling about this...
I do too, and I will be buying it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 09, 2012, 12:30:04 AM
It may be a rather dull box set, coming with a personal statement from the Lovester, titled:

"For our true fans, here is a list of tracks that I myself nixed:"

...and then follows an enumeration of 30 track titles that we've all been drooling over during the last decade.

Mark my words, fellows. It could happen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 09, 2012, 12:46:58 AM
This thread amuses me more and more each day.  ;D

37 pages and all we have is a title and the number of discs, yet folk are still bitching because of what they think might be on it.  Beach Boys fans - gotta love 'em.  :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 09, 2012, 01:03:28 AM
Al Jardine told me they were recording new songs for the box.  Also wondering if the some of the rejects ffrom TWGMTR will be included.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 09, 2012, 01:17:28 AM
Just played the new stereo mix of Wild Honey from 50BOs… JEEEEEZ the vocals are other-worldly! Astonishing leap forward.  If there's more of this on the box, I'm ecstatically died-n'-gone-to-Heaven happy.






Even if we don't get to know what's on it in advance, I'll be buying it to find out!

It's a fan thing.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 09, 2012, 01:20:47 AM
Al Jardine told me they were recording new songs for the box.  Also wondering if the some of the rejects ffrom TWGMTR will be included.

Not sure about the word "rejects"; rather implies sub-standard which might well not be the case. From what I've discerned from various posts, plenty of material wasn't actually completed, only the stuff BW deemed suitable for this album. Is Good Vibrations a "reject" just because BW decided not to complete it for inclusion on Pet Sounds? Is Surf's Up a "reject" because it was passed on for Smiley Smile and Wild Honey?

Not complaining, by the way, just being semantic-pedantic.


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 09, 2012, 01:25:13 AM
Just played the new stereo mix of Wild Honey from 50BOs… JEEEEEZ the vocals are other-worldly! Astonishing leap forward.  If there's more of this on the box, I'm ecstatically died-n'-gone-to-Heaven happy.






Even if we don't get to know what's on it in advance, I'll be buying it to find out!

It's a fan thing.
Hope we get the WHOLE album in stereo!!!!!!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 09, 2012, 01:40:41 AM
Just played the new stereo mix of Wild Honey from 50BOs… JEEEEEZ the vocals are other-worldly! Astonishing leap forward.  If there's more of this on the box, I'm ecstatically died-n'-gone-to-Heaven happy.






Even if we don't get to know what's on it in advance, I'll be buying it to find out!

It's a fan thing.
Hope we get the WHOLE album in stereo!!!!!!

Suppose the whole of stereo WH is the big X-factor on the box. Then I will buy it. Absolutely.


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 09, 2012, 01:45:13 AM
Al Jardine told me they were recording new songs for the box.  Also wondering if the some of the rejects ffrom TWGMTR will be included.

Not sure about the word "rejects"; rather implies sub-standard which might well not be the case. From what I've discerned from various posts, plenty of material wasn't actually completed, only the stuff BW deemed suitable for this album. Is Good Vibrations a "reject" just because BW decided not to complete it for inclusion on Pet Sounds? Is Surf's Up a "reject" because it was passed on for Smiley Smile and Wild Honey?

Not complaining, by the way, just being semantic-pedantic.
Oh John, don't be silly. If you think Capital decided to keep a new song in the can on par with "Surf's Up" or "Good Vibrations", I have some swamp land in Florida to sell ya. Heck, how many entire albums have the Beach Boys had rejected in their career? 2? 4? 6????

From Bellagio 10452
"The story of The Beach Boys first release for Warner-Reprise is one that has undergone changes over the years before the diligent research of Brad Elliott finally nailed down the true facts. Concisely, the accepted view was that the original version of Sunflower (above) was submitted to Reprise, rejected, reworked and resubmitted as Add Some Music, rejected again, revised once more and finally accepted as the released Sunflower. "

I've read numerous times that a bunch of tracks(25?) were submitted to Capital and they picked the songs. (Course, this is what I read so it's speculation - AGD hasn't confirmed it.)  They, for the album, rejected Bruce's song.  It was finished. "Waves of Love" wasn't finished from what I hear. Seemingly, Brian rejected it by not working on it though Al told me they were recording it for the box.

Course, we wouldn't reject them, we want to hear everything!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Loaf on October 09, 2012, 03:08:23 AM
Still all speculation at this stage, but coming back to the proportion of unreleased material on the 1993 GV Box.

Disc 4 (1973-present) had, what one unreleased track on it? I would certainly hope the new set has more than one unreleased track per disc. Having said that, Disc 5 was all (basically) unreleased, and the box had 20 minutes of Smile material. So, on average, what, almost 2 discs worth out of 5 was unreleased? I'd be very happy with a 30% unreleased-released ratio.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 09, 2012, 03:15:33 AM
Loaf, it actually has a few - Fairy Tale Music, It's Over Now,  Still I Dream Of It and Our Team. Which, considering it was throwing a decade into 25 tracks, isn't so bad.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 09, 2012, 03:36:09 AM
Oh John, don't be silly. If you think Capital decided to keep a new song in the can on par with "Surf's Up" or "Good Vibrations", I have some swamp land in Florida to sell ya.
:lol
I've read numerous times that a bunch of tracks(25?) were submitted to Capital and they picked the songs. (Course, this is what I read so it's speculation - AGD hasn't confirmed it.)  They, for the album, rejected Bruce's song.  It was finished. "Waves of Love" wasn't finished from what I hear. Seemingly, Brian rejected it by not working on it though Al told me they were recording it for the box.

Al might argue that there are three versions of WoL simply awaiting fresh vocal overdubs!

Course, we wouldn't reject them, we want to hear everything!

I don't envy anyone compiling this box… I'd be happy hearing every song in demo & finished stages and all points in-between.

Wasn't aware that the pitched TWGMTR tracks "rejected" by Capitol were all fully completed and not just demos, though. There's so much more to this story that I'd love to know.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 09, 2012, 09:48:28 AM
Still all speculation at this stage, but coming back to the proportion of unreleased material on the 1993 GV Box.

Disc 4 (1973-present) had, what one unreleased track on it? I would certainly hope the new set has more than one unreleased track per disc. Having said that, Disc 5 was all (basically) unreleased, and the box had 20 minutes of Smile material. So, on average, what, almost 2 discs worth out of 5 was unreleased? I'd be very happy with a 30% unreleased-released ratio.

I remember counting, track wise, it was exactly a 1/3


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 09, 2012, 10:34:01 AM
This thread amuses me more and more each day.  ;D

37 pages and all we have is a title and the number of discs, yet folk are still bitching because of what they think might be on it.  Beach Boys fans - gotta love 'em.  :lol

I think that we operate in the footsteps of philosopher Martin Heidegger, who could write whole chapters on the topic of nothing. In German it reads like: 'Das Nichts nichtet...' = 'The Nothing nothings...'.

Either that, or Ludwig Wittgenstein, that is also an option. Wittgenstein is one of the greatest philosophers of language that ever existed.

'Alles, worüber wir sprechen können, das sind ein Titel, und eine bestimmte Anzahl von Platten. Über den Rest sollen wir vorläufig schweigen, da wir nur erraten können, waß sich letztendlich auf den Platten befindet. Eine Vergleichung mit der Katze Schrödingers läßt sich machen. Ungeöffnet bietet die Box eine unendliche Zahl von Möglichkeiten, in Prinzip könnten alle Lieder bis jetzt unveröffentliche Werke der Gruppe sein. Met dem Akt des Öffnens aber begrenzen wir selbst die Möglichkeiten bis zu nur eine - die faktische Liste der Nummern. Die analogie mit der Limitierung der Anzahl von elementaren Seinszuständen im Ramen des radioaktiven Zerfalls ist perfekt".

We're brilliant, that's what.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 09, 2012, 10:38:04 AM
I would LOVE Chasin' The Sky to be on the box

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI-Lway3bdM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI-Lway3bdM)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 09, 2012, 11:01:08 AM
I would LOVE Chasin' The Sky to be on the box

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI-Lway3bdM (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DI-Lway3bdM)

That should be included but maybe Capitol don`t have the rights?


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 09, 2012, 11:13:13 AM
I'd pay an extra 5 dollars if the master tape to Chasin' The Sky was burned.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 09, 2012, 11:15:39 AM
I'd pay an extra 5 dollars if the master tape to Chasin' The Sky was burned.

Too much honour to rank that track with the SMiLE stuff.

Just sayin'.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on October 09, 2012, 11:39:16 AM
I'd pay an extra 5 dollars if the master tape to Chasin' The Sky was burned.
The song itself is just OK, but it is the last of the intricate background vocals done by the band. Well worth a listen just to hear them.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 09, 2012, 06:35:00 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 09, 2012, 06:40:10 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

Well....

I...

Am...

Devastated....


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 09, 2012, 06:52:08 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

A Thing Or Two and Here Comes The Night are definitely two of those, from the evidence of the Unsurpassed Masters volume with Honey sessions.


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on October 09, 2012, 06:56:09 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

A Thing Or Two and Here Comes The Night are definitely two of those, from the evidence of the Unsurpassed Masters volume with Honey sessions.

Hmm. I'd think that those would be available, being that they were able to put rough stereo mixes of all of the verse vocal overdubs on SOT.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Quzi on October 09, 2012, 06:59:12 PM
Please, in the name of all things holy, let Mama Says be exempt from this problem!!!!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: KokoNO on October 09, 2012, 08:55:27 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

Well....

I...

Am...

Devastated....


Well, this clears up a lot of things, actually. Linett and company did say that they went through the archives recently to see what still exists and such....I guess we might not be seeing some of these albums in part of the latest remastered crop because an alternate mix version simply can't exist.

That said, there's still no reason to not have mono-only reissues of Surfin' Safari, Wild Honey, etc.


Title: Re:
Post by: Camus on October 09, 2012, 09:16:16 PM
In 1993, we had the original 2-fers, Sony/Epic albums, Endless Summer, Spirit of America, Made In USA, and maybe the Absolute Best series available by the time the Good Vibrations Box Set appeared. It sold pretty well despite having all of those other releases out there.

Not to be a downer but, in 1993 people were buying CD's at a much higher clip.
I bet that has been taken into account and the units adjusted. Most diehard fans will make the purchase.

I'm not convinced by that.  If the box is mostly released stuff with a smattering of new rarities, I would think the majority of fans would simply download the tracks they don't have, either legitimately or not rather than buying the full boxset.
If no profit is to be made, then why is Capitol comitting to it? Just to be nice guys? You don't think they know what needs to be sold to make a profit? Do you really think they would release it if they know it will lose money?

I think Capitol know exactly what they are doing and I believe there will most likely be a lot of previously unreleased material.  I was responding to the post that die hard fans will buy it regardless of what's on it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jeff on October 10, 2012, 12:11:16 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

So what does this ultimately mean?  He says that "some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo."  But of course, not all of the stereo versions on the new remasters are "in true remixed stereo."  So do they give us something that approximates true stereo, and if so, will it sound better than the mono?


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on October 10, 2012, 12:11:32 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

I'll be drinking a lot tonight


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on October 10, 2012, 01:11:52 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

Link to FB thread please?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 10, 2012, 01:14:28 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

So what does this ultimately mean?  He says that "some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo."  But of course, not all of the stereo versions on the new remasters are "in true remixed stereo."  So do they give us something that approximates true stereo, and if so, will it sound better than the mono?

It really depends on your mileage. Most of the 'fake' stereo mixes on the remasters are limited to one or two songs per album. They are also limited in sound quality. So, Mark might be uneasy with presenting a finished stereo mix of an album that, for the most part (and bear in mind this album is only 25 minutes long, so a third is quite a lot relatively) would be inferior or of lesser quality than he would like to present as a professional. That's nothing against his mixing skills, but just the reality of presenting extraction mixes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on October 10, 2012, 01:28:12 AM
Please, in the name of all things holy, let Mama Says be exempt from this problem!!!!!!

There are no lead vocals on Mama Says.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Joshilyn Hoisington on October 10, 2012, 03:29:24 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

This is not really new information, I mean, wasn't it in Preiss's book where Jim Lockert describes this mixing process?  The only question was for which tracks is this true.  The only problem would be if, as it seems might be the case, the powers-that-be cling to some desire for absolute uniformity in these releases.  You know, like, they all have to perfect mono then perfect stereo.  Oh no, you know, like, Bull Session with Big Daddy can't be remixed to stereo, cancel the Today! remix.

So here's what you do for the Wild Honey reissue:  put out a great mono remaster followed by a presentation of every song that it's possible to do a decent stereo remix of.  On the songs where it's not, do a stereo remix of the parts you can and either just let the track play out without vocals, or go back to mono.

I've never understood the selective perfectionism keeping these things from coming out.


Title: Re: \
Post by: BergenWhitesMoustache on October 10, 2012, 03:49:03 AM
So do they give us something that approximates true stereo, and if so, will it sound better than the mono?

I find it weird that mono is seen as a 'problem'

All of the new stereo mixes are interesting, don't get me wrong, but none of them will ever replace the original versions. It'd be like repainting the mona lisa because there was a new type of paint that didn't crack, and calling it an improvement.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Ted on October 10, 2012, 04:17:32 AM
So do they give us something that approximates true stereo, and if so, will it sound better than the mono?

I find it weird that mono is seen as a 'problem'

All of the new stereo mixes are interesting, don't get me wrong, but none of them will ever replace the original versions. It'd be like repainting the mona lisa because there was a new type of paint that didn't crack, and calling it an improvement.
No. Repainting the Mona Lisa would be equivalent to re-recording the songs. Try again.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Dave Modny on October 10, 2012, 04:37:54 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

This is not really new information, I mean, wasn't it in Preiss's book where Jim Lockert describes this mixing process?  The only question was for which tracks is this true.  The only problem would be if, as it seems might be the case, the powers-that-be cling to some desire for absolute uniformity in these releases.  You know, like, they all have to perfect mono then perfect stereo.  Oh no, you know, like, Bull Session with Big Daddy can't be remixed to stereo, cancel the Today! remix.

So here's what you do for the Wild Honey reissue:  put out a great mono remaster followed by a presentation of every song that it's possible to do a decent stereo remix of.  On the songs where it's not, do a stereo remix of the parts you can and either just let the track play out without vocals, or go back to mono.

I've never understood the selective perfectionism keeping these things from coming out.


Exactly. Simple solution: Present a full mono remaster, and then simply tag on the tracks that are capable of being mixed to true stereo at the end. That is, if one truly is uncomfortable with doing extraction mixes or full-track sync-ups where, and if applicable.

I mean, who says there's a law that *each* track has to be presented, respectively, in mono and stereo on these remasters, and that the limitations above should somehow preclude a remaster from coming out? Assuming that they would continue on with the rest of the albums, it's a moot point anyway, in terms of uniformity, starting with the subsequent album.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bicyclerider on October 10, 2012, 02:48:31 PM
They didn't hesitate to do an extraction mix or two on other albums, why stop with Wild Honey?

Tracks that could be mixed into stereo, based on the Sea of Tunes boots:
I Was Made To Love Her
Thing or Two
Here Comes the Night

it's possible that some of these would be centered vocals with a stereo instrumental track, but so what?  That's still stereo.

Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 10, 2012, 02:50:35 PM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

This is not really new information, I mean, wasn't it in Preiss's book where Jim Lockert describes this mixing process?  The only question was for which tracks is this true.  The only problem would be if, as it seems might be the case, the powers-that-be cling to some desire for absolute uniformity in these releases.  You know, like, they all have to perfect mono then perfect stereo.  Oh no, you know, like, Bull Session with Big Daddy can't be remixed to stereo, cancel the Today! remix.

So here's what you do for the Wild Honey reissue:  put out a great mono remaster followed by a presentation of every song that it's possible to do a decent stereo remix of.  On the songs where it's not, do a stereo remix of the parts you can and either just let the track play out without vocals, or go back to mono.

I've never understood the selective perfectionism keeping these things from coming out.


EXACTLY!!

For fucks sake just make the album sound better


Title: Re: \
Post by: KokoNO on October 10, 2012, 04:19:05 PM
You know what would make this boxed set rule? If it only featured non-album tracks and unreleased tracks. That would make it a great companion piece to the recent reissues. I mean, there's nobody that really wants to here "Surfer Girl" followed by an obscurity. It doesn't satisfy the die-hards who know the album tracks oh-so-well, nor does it satisfy the novices that simply want the hits.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on October 10, 2012, 04:20:41 PM
Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Is there an official stereo mix of Country Air?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Wrightfan on October 10, 2012, 06:24:58 PM
Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Is there an official stereo mix of Country Air?

Not official. It is (was?) up on youtube albeit in crappy quality.

One of our members also created a kick ass extraction of "A Thing or Two"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR8ByKF5UR0


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 10, 2012, 06:50:34 PM
I'd pay an extra 5 dollars if the master tape to Chasin' The Sky was burned.

Too much honour to rank that track with the SMiLE stuff.

Just sayin'.

Considering the massive SMiLE release of last year, I'm not sure what else they could include from that album on the box set.  Honestly, I've got my SMiLE fix and would prefer the box set focuses on the Boys' entire career, and not just the Pet Sounds/SMiLE stuff.

That all being said, I'd like to hear a proper release of "Chasin' The Sky".  The song is nothing special, but Carl really delivers a great lead vocal and, as already mentioned, the group produces some good backing vocals.  

And now with all the "commemorative releases" out of the way, think it would be a good time to start getting some real details on that box set.  Anyone agree?


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on October 11, 2012, 12:28:14 AM
Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Is there an official stereo mix of Country Air?

One of our members also created a kick ass extraction of "A Thing or Two"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR8ByKF5UR0

Damm good job!


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Real Barnyard on October 12, 2012, 08:06:34 AM
It's on Amazon UK:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Made-California-Limited-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1PZ220A193YY4&coliid=I1Z8NYC2MTENT3

Don't know if it had been posted before.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 12, 2012, 08:27:11 AM
Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Is there an official stereo mix of Country Air?

It's "official" but has not been released except for bootlegs. The fact that it begins with the count-off should be proof positive, since there are no circulating Country Air session tapes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: alanjames on October 12, 2012, 09:00:01 AM
AGD, do you have an idea when the tracklist will be revealed? November or December?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 12, 2012, 09:12:02 AM
It's on Amazon UK:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Made-California-Limited-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1PZ220A193YY4&coliid=I1Z8NYC2MTENT3

Don't know if it had been posted before.

Hmm..

We might be hearing some news soon


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 12, 2012, 09:40:37 AM
It's on Amazon UK:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Made-California-Limited-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1PZ220A193YY4&coliid=I1Z8NYC2MTENT3

Don't know if it had been posted before.

Hmm..

We might be hearing some news soon

£116 pounds.... hm.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 12, 2012, 10:29:15 AM
I think it`s fair to say that price will change. They`d be lucky to sell 5 copies if it didn`t.


Title: Re: Nearly 20 quid a disc... Hmmmm
Post by: davywheatdyke on October 12, 2012, 10:32:49 AM
Anyone else thinking that there needs to be some serious goodies included with this set to justify the price tag? Compared to the SMiLE set with all its vinyl etc that price, if it proves even roughly correct would mean, a: substantially more than 6 discs b:some vinyl and a big hard back book included or c: a total rip off. Discs are cheap as chips- you can pick up a box set of Leonard Cohen's studio albums for less than 50 quid and it has 11 discs (admittedly it is hardly deluxe). An extra 60 quid for half as many discs and a wee book would not stack up. Or I may just be jibbering p!sh.


Title: Re:
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on October 12, 2012, 10:33:25 AM
Previously done:
Wild Honey
Darlin'
Let the Wind Blow
Country Air

That leaves 4 out of 11 tracks that would have to have "extraction" mixes or a mono vocal extraction synched into a stereo track - Aren't You Glad, Love Just Once to See You, Boogalooed It and Mama Says.



Is there an official stereo mix of Country Air?

One of our members also created a kick ass extraction of "A Thing or Two"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qR8ByKF5UR0

Damm good job!

thank u!


Title: Re: Nearly 20 quid a disc... Hmmmm
Post by: hypehat on October 12, 2012, 10:38:18 AM
Anyone else thinking that there needs to be some serious goodies included with this set to justify the price tag? Compared to the SMiLE set with all its vinyl etc that price, if it proves even roughly correct would mean, a: substantially more than 6 discs b:some vinyl and a big hard back book included or c: a total rip off. Discs are cheap as chips- you can pick up a box set of Leonard Cohen's studio albums for less than 50 quid and it has 11 discs (admittedly it is hardly deluxe). An extra 60 quid for half as many discs and a wee book would not stack up. Or I may just be jibbering p!sh.


I'd be very surprised if that was the final price, it's just what it says. But it'd definitely come with a book and some goodies, if TSS is an indication.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 12, 2012, 11:33:45 AM
I can't wait to place this box set right next to my Smile and Good Vibrations box sets


Title: Re: \
Post by: CarlTheVoice on October 12, 2012, 11:46:33 AM
I am sure the price will reflect the content. They might add a few £/$/€ on but essentially they won't put out something worth £30 for that price. I'd like to see more promotion of this box set though, I think there will probably be a few webisodes too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 12, 2012, 12:55:03 PM
Those "webisodes" are pretty annoying.

I'd love to see all that footage as one massive documentary


Title: Re: \
Post by: KokoNO on October 12, 2012, 05:11:03 PM
If the set is going to lump in the classics with the obscurities, it would be great if four discs were dedicated to a run through of the band's history in the most comprehensive manner yet. That wouldn't be asking for much, especially since you can run through every album post-Holland (except Love You), by providing just a single track.

The other two discs could then be the brand new rarities in chronological order. This would then be a truly great package for fans and super-fans alike.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 12, 2012, 07:11:54 PM
A package of the band's history seen through only alternate takes/mixes/live versions of the usual tunes, as well as a smattering of unreleased tunes, a la The Beatles' Anthology and Elvis' Today Tomorrow And Forever sets, sure woulda been great.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on October 12, 2012, 07:17:22 PM
A package of the band's history seen through only alternate takes/mixes/live versions of the usual tunes, as well as a smattering of unreleased tunes, a la The Beatles' Anthology and Elvis' Today Tomorrow And Forever sets, sure woulda been great.

That would be kind of cool, but I think they're going for a more definitive type market, and with alternates instead of the hit takes/mixes, the audience gets shrunk even further.


Title: Re: \
Post by: lee on October 12, 2012, 07:18:46 PM
A package of the band's history seen through only alternate takes/mixes/live versions of the usual tunes, as well as a smattering of unreleased tunes, a la The Beatles' Anthology and Elvis' Today Tomorrow And Forever sets, sure woulda been great.

I agree completely. With the previous box set and multiple greatest hits packages, they really should have gone with alternate takes/mixes/etc. of the usual tunes we all have on numerous different compilations.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on October 12, 2012, 07:33:38 PM
A package of the band's history seen through only alternate takes/mixes/live versions of the usual tunes, as well as a smattering of unreleased tunes, a la The Beatles' Anthology and Elvis' Today Tomorrow And Forever sets, sure woulda been great.

That would be kind of cool, but I think they're going for a more definitive type market, and with alternates instead of the hit takes/mixes, the audience gets shrunk even further.

I suggested this four days and three pages ago. There should/could be two boxes for two different audiences. One like the above mentioned one, and another encompassing the hits and key album tracks. The Beach Boys deserve two boxed sets.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 12, 2012, 07:39:12 PM
They're going for a larger audience, but the audience that buys box sets these days would be into the unreleased stuff, and the casuals would just buy the double CD hits collection. But hey, if this new set turns out to be an upgrade of the GV box, ala The Monkees' Listen To The Band/Music Box sets, that's cool.


Title: Re: \
Post by: lee on October 12, 2012, 07:45:34 PM
I agree with Spaceman again on this.

Any newcomer who is interested in hearing the Beach Boys is going to either download or purchase something like 50 Big Ones to give them a chance. See if they like anything on it and if they do, start checking out albums based on the songs they dig. Those people aren't going to walk in to a store and spend $100+ on a box set to see what the fuss is about. The only people that are going to go out and spend $100+ on a box set are fans who already own the hits and most/all of their albums.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 13, 2012, 02:58:50 AM
I agree with Spaceman again on this.

Any newcomer who is interested in hearing the Beach Boys is going to either download or purchase something like 50 Big Ones to give them a chance. See if they like anything on it and if they do, start checking out albums based on the songs they dig. Those people aren't going to walk in to a store and spend $100+ on a box set to see what the fuss is about. The only people that are going to go out and spend $100+ on a box set are fans who already own the hits and most/all of their albums.

Well said that man.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Billgoodman on October 13, 2012, 07:35:59 AM
It's still 76 euro in my distribution system at work. That's without taxes.
Should be close to a 100 dollars if it doesn't change (just like the release date)


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 13, 2012, 08:52:56 AM
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Nicko1234 on October 13, 2012, 09:20:58 AM
One of the big selling points of the previous box set was obviously the first official release of Smile.

This box is going to be a tougher sell as At the Hop and I`ll Bet He`s Nice (demo version) are unlikely to have the same pull.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on October 13, 2012, 09:28:15 AM
One of the big selling points of the previous box set was obviously the first official release of Smile.

This box is going to be a tougher sell as At the Hop and I`ll Bet He`s Nice (demo version) are unlikely to have the same pull.

This is certainly true, however as long as it is available in some format these otherwise useless demo's and excerpts might gain the band and label some profit rather than none at all. This I think is the reason why Capitol is pushing for a release of all available material. This was perhaps the last high profile year The Beach Boys will ever enjoy, putting out everything now is a good call by Capitol imo. Over the coming years these new releases will have a low, yet steady selling rate and will be a good source of income over time. They don't need to chart in order to do that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 13, 2012, 09:28:32 AM
Then make it a limited edition deal just for the fans, the million other comps are more than enough for the causal listeners


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 13, 2012, 11:25:34 AM
I love how we've already decided that this box set will fail. We don't even know what's going to be on the thing yet!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 13, 2012, 11:27:28 AM
We are all Phil Cohen.

Mr. Doe, tear down this wall (of secrecy).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 13, 2012, 12:38:30 PM
We are all Phil Cohen.

He seems to have dissipated recently - maybe we've sub-consciously been trying to fill in for him...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 13, 2012, 01:34:43 PM
This is actually the perfect time for Phil to be around.

Even I'm surprised we've hit mid October with no news


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on October 13, 2012, 01:46:12 PM
We are all Phil Cohen.

Mr. Doe, tear down this wall (of secrecy).

Who are you, Ronnie Raygun?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Loaf on October 13, 2012, 01:55:13 PM
i've looked into my crystal ball and i've foreseen that there will be enough rarities for the hardcore fans to buy it, but not enough to feel that they got value for money.

Record labels are run by accountants. The sales of the box set won't differ noticeably whether they put 1 hour's worth of unreleased material or 3 hours' worth on the box. But putting 3 hours' worth reduces the chances of future earnings.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jason on October 13, 2012, 01:58:26 PM
We are all Phil Cohen.

Mr. Doe, tear down this wall (of secrecy).

Who are you, Ronnie Raygun?

I felt that a little Star Wars logic from Ronald, 1st Baron of Raygun with regards to our current box set predicament was necessary. Pretty logical for a guy of a hundred and three! If you have any other questions, fire away! Just like I said to the fleet today!

Sorry...had to go all Spitting Image there.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on October 13, 2012, 02:03:16 PM
Hey.  I gotcher spitting image right here...... 


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 13, 2012, 02:33:28 PM
I don't think the box set will fail, I think it'll be great.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on October 13, 2012, 03:40:55 PM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans


Title: Re:
Post by: Sheriff John Stone on October 13, 2012, 04:11:32 PM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There's more than you think.

Obviously, Capitol will never do it, simply because of the sales. But, it would be nice to have it (a box of hits/album cuts) out there, just to have it available. There's holidays, spikes in the group's popularity, record company promotions, special boxed set sales, budget pricing, etc. It would be a steady grower.

But, most of all, it would allow the second box to concentrate fully on rarities. I want that separation of boxes, no compromising. And, again, after 52 years and dozens of albums (released and unreleased), they warrant two boxes.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 13, 2012, 04:14:49 PM
It's on Amazon UK:

http://www.amazon.co.uk/Made-California-Limited-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=wl_it_dp_o_pC_nS_nC?ie=UTF8&colid=1PZ220A193YY4&coliid=I1Z8NYC2MTENT3

Don't know if it had been posted before.

Hmm..

We might be hearing some news soon

£116 pounds.... hm.

Think I've had this bookmarked for a month or more now.


Title: Re:
Post by: I. Spaceman on October 13, 2012, 08:38:22 PM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 22, 2012, 09:22:59 AM
Noticed this thread found its way off the first page of discussions. Thought I'd bump it up the list.

Soooo...when the hell are we going to get any news on this damn thing?


Title: Re:
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 22, 2012, 09:33:56 AM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.

Who the hell buys a box set as an impulse buy? Did such things really happen that often without prior interest in the group? Doesn't seem like a wise move. I've only bought box sets when I loved the band prior as there was no way in hell I could afford to spend 50+ dollars on a gamble and only see about half of that back if I opted to sell it.

Also, what is it with you kids and your seemingly endless supply of money? "Box set? Well, I like a couple of their songs, let's go for it. Thirty dollar Japanese re-issues? I'm gonna buy 'em all at once." Not criticizin' at all, it just seems fairly common around here but not as much elsewhere on teh interwebz.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 22, 2012, 09:38:42 AM
Well the economy was better back then...

Hell, I used to buy box sets to use as door stops!


Title: Re:
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 22, 2012, 09:42:21 AM
Who the hell buys a box set as an impulse buy?

Me.


Title: Re:
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 22, 2012, 09:51:12 AM
Who the hell buys a box set as an impulse buy?

Me.

You're drunk again!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 22, 2012, 09:53:17 AM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Any clues on a new release date?


Title: Re: \
Post by: guitarfool2002 on October 22, 2012, 10:04:30 AM
Can't leave out BMG Music club, either. At one point, while the set was still relatively current, they were offering the '93 box set for under 25 dollars, and i know people who bought it that way too, thinking it was better than any "Greatest Hits" you could find in stores for 12-14 dollars.

A factor too was Rolling Stone giving the set 5 stars, and raving about it in a way that I'm sure influenced such an impulse buy.

I have several box sets that I bought on an impulse buy kind of thing, some worked out which I love and others not as much. But if the price is right and the contents look interesting, people will buy them. Or at least that was the case some time ago, not sure about iTunes and the like.

The booklet and other packaging of certain box sets was a major plus for my decisions to buy, of course iTunes and reading on an iPad just don't cut it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bean Bag on October 22, 2012, 10:10:19 AM
Mark Linett said this on a Facebook thread I saw - regarding Wild Honey - the album - in stereo.

"WIld Honey the song is in stereo for the first time on 50 Big Ones as is "Darlin" , but some of the songs on the album would be impossible to do in true remixed stereo because only some of the lead vocals exist on the multi-track. On several songs the group recorded the vocals for the first verse , mixed that verse down and then recorded the next verse vocals over the first ones mixed that verse down and so on. I want to say maybe a third of the album has this problem"

This is not really new information, I mean, wasn't it in Preiss's book where Jim Lockert describes this mixing process?  The only question was for which tracks is this true.  The only problem would be if, as it seems might be the case, the powers-that-be cling to some desire for absolute uniformity in these releases.  You know, like, they all have to perfect mono then perfect stereo.  Oh no, you know, like, Bull Session with Big Daddy can't be remixed to stereo, cancel the Today! remix.

So here's what you do for the Wild Honey reissue:  put out a great mono remaster followed by a presentation of every song that it's possible to do a decent stereo remix of.  On the songs where it's not, do a stereo remix of the parts you can and either just let the track play out without vocals, or go back to mono.

I've never understood the selective perfectionism keeping these things from coming out.

Exactly.

They did the right thing on the PS Box.  They didn't try to fudge Mike's bridge vocals into WIBN.  They just presented what they had.  And to your point, never was the Stereo PS scrapped because they couldn't get it all perfect.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 22, 2012, 10:20:44 AM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 22, 2012, 10:22:13 AM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.

 :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 22, 2012, 03:45:36 PM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.

 :lol :lol

Very nice


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 22, 2012, 04:57:24 PM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.

 :lol :lol

Very nice


Reminds me of that Goodies episode in which the end of the world was predicted as being "nigh". It was doubted until someone looked in that week's Radio Times to find all the pages from Wednesday onwards were blanks!


Title: Re:
Post by: Micha on October 22, 2012, 08:32:13 PM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.

 :lol :lol

Very nice


Reminds me of that Goodies episode in which the end of the world was predicted as being "nigh". It was doubted until someone looked in that week's Radio Times to find all the pages from Wednesday onwards were blanks!

Goodie Goodie yum yum! :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: smilethebeachboysloveyou on October 22, 2012, 08:57:12 PM
So 16th of November is definitely not happening

Most definitely is.

Just checked my diary and there it was, nestled between the 15th and the 17th.

Are you really willing to assume that the apocalypse won't come on the 15th of November (or before)?  Or do you have any inside info on that?


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on October 22, 2012, 09:10:04 PM
Quote
Goodie Goodie yum yum! :)

Suddenly I can't stop thinking about Graeme Garden's sideburns.

(http://trialx.com/curetalk/wp-content/blogs.dir/7/files/2011/03/gcelebrities/Graeme_Garden-3.jpg)


Title: Re:
Post by: Catbirdman on October 23, 2012, 05:44:48 PM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.

I was too. I checked it out of a public library and that's why I'm here today.


Title: Re:
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 23, 2012, 06:09:39 PM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.

I was too. I checked it out of a public library and that's why I'm here today.

That's different, though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on October 23, 2012, 06:43:34 PM
Was just thinking.. a 10-12 minute vocals only track, like the one on TSS, only spanning their entire career would be pretty incredible.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 23, 2012, 06:46:26 PM
Was just thinking.. a 10-12 minute disc vocals only track box set, like the one on TSS, only spanning their entire career would be pretty incredible.


Title: Re: \
Post by: seltaeb1012002 on October 23, 2012, 06:49:15 PM
Was just thinking.. a 10-12 minute disc vocals only track box set, like the one on TSS, only spanning their entire career would be pretty incredible.

Haha, true!


Title: Re:
Post by: Catbirdman on October 24, 2012, 07:26:19 AM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.

I was too. I checked it out of a public library and that's why I'm here today.

That's different, though.

Not really. Checking it out of the library was definitely an impulse action, as I hadn't ever heard anything but the hits. I did go on to buy it for real within a month or two.


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 24, 2012, 08:34:32 AM
I listened to BWPS and became interested in hearing the Beach Boys catalog and went to the library with the interest of finding The GV box set after hearing it had parts of the original Smile.


Title: Re:
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 24, 2012, 08:44:15 AM
Quote
In fairness, at the time of the GV box, I personally knew casual fans who became serious fans on the basis of an impulse buy of that set. But it simply isn' that way any more, sadly. The era of the mass purchase of CD boxes is long over.

I was one of those fans

There ya go.

I was too. I checked it out of a public library and that's why I'm here today.

That's different, though.

Not really. Checking it out of the library was definitely an impulse action, as I hadn't ever heard anything but the hits. I did go on to buy it for real within a month or two.

Still. You didn't say, "Hey, I like a couple songs by these guys, how much is this box set? 50 bones? Cool, let's do it," which is more along the lines of what I meant. Nothin' that crazy about checking out the box set for free at the library.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ziggy Stardust on October 29, 2012, 05:27:32 PM
http://www.amazon.fr/Career-Spanning-Box-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1351519947&sr=1-1
Quote
25 octobre 2012

huh


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 29, 2012, 05:29:12 PM
http://www.amazon.fr/Career-Spanning-Box-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1351519947&sr=1-1
Quote
25 octobre 2012

huh

It was released last week, we all have our copies


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ziggy Stardust on October 29, 2012, 05:31:00 PM
oh, okay then :) how's the SIP outtakes?


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on October 29, 2012, 05:53:39 PM
http://www.amazon.fr/Career-Spanning-Box-Beach-Boys/dp/B008XZKSRY/ref=sr_1_1?s=music&ie=UTF8&qid=1351519947&sr=1-1
Quote
25 octobre 2012

huh

It was released last week, we all have our copies

For the love of God, why am I always the last person on here to know about these things!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Waspinators on October 29, 2012, 06:30:13 PM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 29, 2012, 06:55:40 PM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Not gonna lie. I'm surprised we haven't heard anything yet. I would have to imagine we will hear something in November though. I hope.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 29, 2012, 07:23:10 PM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Not gonna lie. I'm surprised we haven't heard anything yet. I would have to imagine we will hear something in November though. I hope.

They must have seriously "f***ed up" the track list


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on October 29, 2012, 08:24:00 PM
Here's hoping this thing doesn't get canceled.


Title: Re: \ Glass half full
Post by: davywheatdyke on October 29, 2012, 11:51:28 PM
Maybe they have been persuaded that 6 discs won't cut it. I am hoping that the solution to any disagreements about track lists is to fling in more discs full of goodies.... I hope that isvwhat is going on, I am losing the will to live waiting on this...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 30, 2012, 12:31:44 AM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Uh... this is The Beach Boys - take an inspired guess.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 30, 2012, 12:42:32 AM
Maybe the box is being expanded, a la TSS.

In these days of super-delux packages, it was surprising that there was no visual content … perhaps they're shovelling a DVD or two into the deal.


Title: Re:
Post by: MBE on October 30, 2012, 01:59:21 AM
Maybe the box is being expanded, a la TSS.

In these days of super-delux packages, it was surprising that there was no visual content … perhaps they're shovelling a DVD or two into the deal.
Hopefully some vinyl too.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on October 30, 2012, 02:09:47 AM
The super limited edition Merchdirect package at the cost of $999,999.99 (plus shipping), which contains the deeds and rights to Al Jardine has apparently run into some kind of legal difficulty.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 30, 2012, 02:12:53 AM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Uh... this is The Beach Boys - take an inspired guess.

Good advice. Being historically informed by the proceedings re: TSS, I will stalk mr. Al Sardine intensely in the upcoming weeks. Google Streetview, hidden mics, and a couple of drones will follow him everywhere, and I will inform you lot here of his every utterance, CDRs played normally and in reverse. The Don has ways to find out.


Title: Re:
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 30, 2012, 02:13:29 AM
Maybe the box is being expanded, a la TSS.

In these days of super-delux packages, it was surprising that there was no visual content … perhaps they're shovelling a DVD or two into the deal.

I am in awe of your optimism, however misplaced it may possibly be.  ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 30, 2012, 05:07:26 AM
Maybe the box is being expanded, a la TSS.

In these days of super-delux packages, it was surprising that there was no visual content … perhaps they're shovelling a DVD or two into the deal.

I am in awe of your optimism, however misplaced it may possibly be.  ;D

A man has to have hope! As long as they include the Beach Boys' version of Surf City, I don't mind…   ;D

The super limited edition Merchdirect package at the cost of $999,999.99 (plus shipping), which contains the deeds and rights to Al Jardine has apparently run into some kind of legal difficulty.

:lol    Al Jardine – every home should have one!


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on October 30, 2012, 08:03:41 AM
This sad thread has made me sad.  :'(


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 30, 2012, 08:09:54 AM
This sad thread has made me sad.  :'(

That is only logical. Sad threads usually don't make people happy.

Apart from Phil Cohen, that is.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 30, 2012, 08:34:07 AM
This sad thread has made me sad.  :'(

That is only logical. Sad threads usually don't make people happy.

Apart from Phil Cohen, that is.

but that made me happy :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 30, 2012, 08:38:04 AM
This sad thread has made me sad.  :'(

That is only logical. Sad threads usually don't make people happy.

Apart from Phil Cohen, that is.

but that made me happy :lol

 :-D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 30, 2012, 10:06:32 AM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Uh... this is The Beach Boys - take an inspired guess.

Good advice. Being historically informed by the proceedings re: TSS, I will stalk mr. Al Sardine intensely in the upcoming weeks. Google Streetview, hidden mics, and a couple of drones will follow him everywhere, and I will inform you lot here of his every utterance, CDRs played normally and in reverse. The Don has ways to find out.

"A couples of drones will follow him everywhere"

Funniest thing I've ever heard  :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 30, 2012, 10:29:40 AM
It's a day til November, how do we STILL not have any real info on this thing?

Uh... this is The Beach Boys - take an inspired guess.

Good advice. Being historically informed by the proceedings re: TSS, I will stalk mr. Al Sardine intensely in the upcoming weeks. Google Streetview, hidden mics, and a couple of drones will follow him everywhere, and I will inform you lot here of his every utterance, CDRs played normally and in reverse. The Don has ways to find out.

"A couples of drones will follow him everywhere"

Funniest thing I've ever heard  :lol

*blushes*

thanks for the compliment!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junebug on October 30, 2012, 11:15:29 AM
There's not really any chance of this coming out in 2012 is there ?
We would have had firm details by now.  :(


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 30, 2012, 11:37:21 AM
There's not really any chance of this coming out in 2012 is there ?
We would have had firm details by now.  :(

I'd guess not, so that makes it the first ever album in the history of recorded music that's not been released on the date initially announced - according to our resident Eeyore with OCD. Ever ever ever ever ever ever.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on October 30, 2012, 12:54:02 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.


Title: Re: \
Post by: lee on October 30, 2012, 01:18:44 PM
Shame they couldn't get it together in time for the holiday season but such is life. I hope they do make an announcement before the new year.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on October 30, 2012, 01:32:35 PM
I hate to also sound Cohen-esque, but I am feeling genuine worry here. However, I just remind myself that the promo video for The Smile Sessions came out of nowhere when we got it, so anything could appear at any time.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 30, 2012, 01:36:51 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.

Didn't say it wasn't coming out, just that November was beginning to look unlikely.


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 30, 2012, 02:30:56 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.

Didn't say it wasn't coming out, just that November was beginning to look unlikely.

December 4th!


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 30, 2012, 02:47:43 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.

Don't be taken in by that crap about Mike not wanting to work with Brian… that was just the media peddling merde. Mike'd sell his wife to get new songs out with a Wilson/Love credit.

Reckon it's more likely to be admin or production realities that are causing delays. We'll get this box in good time or my name's not Phil Cohen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 30, 2012, 03:11:23 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.

Don't be taken in by that crap about Mike not wanting to work with Brian… that was just the media peddling merde. Mike'd sell his wife to get new songs out with a Wilson/Love credit.

Reckon it's more likely to be admin or production realities that are causing delays. We'll get this box in good time or my name's not Phil Cohen.

Now THAT's a Revelation!


Title: Re:
Post by: Jim V. on October 30, 2012, 03:18:55 PM
Wow. Andrew is not very hopeful. Not good.

I don't wanna sound Cohen-esque, but if we don't hear anything in November, I'd assume that it ain't comin' out in January either. I wonder if the delay has anything to do with Mike not wanting to continue to work with Brian and Al. I can't imagine why it would, but this is The Beach Boys.

Don't be taken in by that crap about Mike not wanting to work with Brian… that was just the media peddling merde. Mike'd sell his wife to get new songs out with a Wilson/Love credit.

Reckon it's more likely to be admin or production realities that are causing delays. We'll get this box in good time or my name's not Phil Cohen.

I don't wanna take this off topic, but I don't think an album needs to be filled with Wilson/Love credits for Mike to work with Brian. He should feel lucky enough to work with his cousin who he loves so much and be happy with a few writing credits.

But yeah, I'm still pretty confident the box will come soon enough. I don't think they would ever announce it unless they were pretty well sure that they'd be able to release it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 30, 2012, 05:21:38 PM
It would have made a lot of sense to release a career retrospective during the actual anniversary..

But then again, this is The Beach Boys


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on October 30, 2012, 06:19:53 PM
It would have made a lot of sense to release a career retrospective during the actual anniversary..

But then again, this is The Beach Boys

(http://theseconddisc.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/beach-boys-50-big-ones.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 30, 2012, 06:45:12 PM
It would have made a lot of sense to release a career retrospective during the actual anniversary..

But then again, this is The Beach Boys

(http://theseconddisc.files.wordpress.com/2012/08/beach-boys-50-big-ones.jpg)

 I know that, but a greatest hits is an easy sell..

Something like an expensive box set could have used the hype from the 50th anniversary tour


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 31, 2012, 01:44:23 AM
At the moment, I am quite hopeful for a Jan (or maybe Feb) release. IMHO the greatest problem in the matter is how to format such a project, to make it attractive to as much folks as possible (which is normal). There may have been a concept (with Nov 2012 in mind) that was ultimately not deemed effective enough, and those involved may have started to re-formatting whilst we were waiting for it. I guess a mere update of the 1993 set would potentially have bombed in several ways - but what should replace that (fantastic) retrospective?

Some folks hinted at the inclusion of video material. I think they made good, educated guesses. Almost all current deluxe box sets have a couple of DVDs/Blurays included - and hey, 50 years have produced an immense filmed archive of our band.

Also think about the chance that reformatting sets new problems to overcome. Think of the inclusion of demos, tracks, live cuts, video stuff, promos, all of which require getting proper licensing, new contracts maybe, re-negotiations, what have you.

And there is the problem of oversaturating the market. So much happened in the past 12 months... starting with the TSS bonanza, the studio remasters, the tours, the new album... there is a psychological point where people, even if they're well-heeled (and thus invested probably more than $ 1,000 in BBs related events in the past year), hear an inner voice saying: I've had enough for awhile.

Creating a bit of new longing and hunger is not a bad thing (for the market just a tad below that of us, the certified patients). And we're not exactly starved either.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Billgoodman on October 31, 2012, 02:48:05 AM
Hate to say this again:

According to my distribution system Made In Califonria is still released in January

BUT

There's also a Beach Boys 50 Live dvd and blu-ray that's coming november 16. I believe that was the original release date for the boxset. So there's still some stocking filler this year


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on October 31, 2012, 05:05:38 AM
If we don't hear anything in November at least we can be sure it's not coming January


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on October 31, 2012, 05:11:58 AM
If we don't hear anything in November at least we can be sure it's not coming January

Sounds logical.

My bet: we will hear something in November.

Watch out for unexpected Al Jardine interviews the coming weeks.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on October 31, 2012, 05:44:48 AM
I wouldn't expect anything much in the way of video footage in the box, for one overbearing reason: licensing. The beach Boys own very little of the footage of their classic-era/70s TV appearances. Malcolm Leo said as far back as 1984 that getting all the clips was a logistical and financial nightmare. I wouldn't expect it's gotten any easier in the intervening three decades.

On a less Cohen-like note, the box will happen.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on October 31, 2012, 07:24:02 AM
If we don't hear anything in November at least we can be sure it's not coming January

Sounds logical.

My bet: we will hear something in November.

Watch out for unexpected Al Jardine interviews the coming weeks.

No way. If this thing were coming out in January we would've heard Al spill the beans back in July ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on October 31, 2012, 09:03:36 AM
I wouldn't expect anything much in the way of video footage in the box, for one overbearing reason: licensing. The beach Boys own very little of the footage of their classic-era/70s TV appearances. Malcolm Leo said as far back as 1984 that getting all the clips was a logistical and financial nightmare. I wouldn't expect it's gotten any easier in the intervening three decades.

On a less Cohen-like note, the box will happen.

Take on board what you're saying Andrew. Just seems such a shame given the stuff that's surfaced in the last couple of years. One day perhaps…

That said, I'll be happy with the box's contents whatever, especially the outtakes of Mike playing Murry Wilson compositions on a Stylophone. Never knew they existed before…





;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: bgas on October 31, 2012, 02:01:56 PM
I wouldn't expect anything much in the way of video footage in the box, for one overbearing reason: licensing. The beach Boys own very little of the footage of their classic-era/70s TV appearances. Malcolm Leo said as far back as 1984 that getting all the clips was a logistical and financial nightmare. I wouldn't expect it's gotten any easier in the intervening three decades.

On a less Cohen-like note, the box will happen.

well, sure. I imagine you've had your promo copy for abpout a month now. Not that you'll let on...


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on October 31, 2012, 04:46:10 PM
If we don't hear anything in November at least we can be sure it's not coming January

Sounds logical.

My bet: we will hear something in November.

Watch out for unexpected Al Jardine interviews the coming weeks.

No way. If this thing were coming out in January we would've heard Al spill the beans back in July ;D

But... He did.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junebug on November 01, 2012, 11:12:05 AM
Stocking fillers one thing but really, it's been a massive balls up hasn't it ?
Months to get their act together and they've missed the peak commercial period when the box would be an ideal gift for many fans , with wives , kids etc at a loss for present ideas "get me the Beach Boys box set".
Guess they'll have to hold on to their gift tokens til Jan/Feb/March etc etc ..................


Title: Re: \
Post by: STE on November 01, 2012, 12:56:07 PM


I don't know what the big deal is..   it comes out when it comes out.
Few months do not make a difference for me, as long as I live long enough to see it.




Title: Re: \
Post by: Mr. Cohen on November 01, 2012, 02:12:55 PM
Oh, it's going to be released! I can tell you that on good authority. Mike just felt that the package needed to be fine-tuned a bit. The new name is Wrinkles: 100 Folds, and will include an entire CD of "Wrinkles" sessions. In addition, Mike especially recorded dozens of spoken word segments in which he describes his vital contributions to every single song on the collection. He also excised any sloppy unreleased Brian Wilson compositions that may have damaged Brian's recording legacy had they been foolishly released.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 01, 2012, 05:30:18 PM
Mark London just posted a "Made in California" button on his Facebook site. A taster?


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 01, 2012, 05:44:37 PM
Mark London just posted a "Made in California" button on his Facebook site. A taster?

Oops, he did that on October 26… was it mentioned here?


Title: Re:
Post by: Shady on November 02, 2012, 12:32:11 AM
Mark London just posted a "Made in California" button on his Facebook site. A taster?

Oops, he did that on October 26… was it mentioned here?

No. That's pretty interesting, definitely a teaser


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 02, 2012, 12:33:17 AM
Can anyone link to the image?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on November 02, 2012, 01:04:15 AM
Oh, it's going to be released! I can tell you that on good authority. Mike just felt that the package needed to be fine-tuned a bit. The new name is Wrinkles: 100 Folds, and will include an entire CD of "Wrinkles" sessions. In addition, Mike especially recorded dozens of spoken word segments in which he describes his vital contributions to every single song on the collection. He also excised any sloppy unreleased Brian Wilson compositions that may have damaged Brian's recording legacy had they been foolishly released.

Haha you know what Murry, not wanting to damage Brian's legacy is exactly the kind of excuse and bizarre reasoning that Mike actually use. I can quite easily imagine him saying that.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Real Barnyard on November 02, 2012, 02:37:56 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 02, 2012, 03:04:21 AM
Thanks! s'neat. ^_^


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jay on November 02, 2012, 03:14:05 AM
I wouldn't expect anything much in the way of video footage in the box, for one overbearing reason: licensing. The beach Boys own very little of the footage of their classic-era/70s TV appearances. Malcolm Leo said as far back as 1984 that getting all the clips was a logistical and financial nightmare. I wouldn't expect it's gotten any easier in the intervening three decades.
What do you think the chances are of seeing something like a release of the Maryland 1977 show where Brian is supposedly in great shape and performs well?


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 02, 2012, 03:31:14 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Love it!

The '70s typefont (15BO, TWGMTR) is thankfully absent. This is a bit '60s hip, I guess, but mostly timeless.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 02, 2012, 04:06:10 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Love it!

The '70s typefont (15BO, TWGMTR) is thankfully absent. This is a bit '60s hip, I guess, but mostly timeless.
I'd be suprised if the button design would be part of the final cover artwork for the box set?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Phoenix on November 02, 2012, 04:17:14 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Love it!

The '70s typefont (15BO, TWGMTR) is thankfully absent. This is a bit '60s hip, I guess, but mostly timeless.

The font is actually called Will Robinson for reasons that should be very clear, so yes, 60's  ;D



Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 02, 2012, 04:54:40 AM
Who's betting that not a single copy of the box will actually be made in California?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 02, 2012, 04:57:22 AM
Who's betting that not a single copy of the box will actually be made in California?
I'd bet that the box set is going to include stuff that wasn't even recorded in the U.S.A.!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 02, 2012, 05:01:27 AM
Who's betting that not a single copy of the box will actually be made in California?
I'd bet that the box set is going to include stuff that wasn't even recorded in the U.S.A.!
Hopefully xD


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 02, 2012, 07:25:09 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

 ;D

It's small but gives so much hope


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jim V. on November 02, 2012, 08:44:30 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

 ;D

It's small but gives so much hope

I have to imagine information is coming very very soon. I don't think London would have posted this unless it was looking like it was gonna be out soon.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Generation42 on November 02, 2012, 10:46:05 AM
Can I just say again what a great title I think Made in California is for a Beach Boys retrospective?  Fantastic.

Oh, and I like the button design and would even sport it, even though I'm actually "Made in New York."


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 02, 2012, 10:58:01 AM
Can I just say again what a great title I think Made in California is for a Beach Boys retrospective?  Fantastic.

Oh, and I like the button design and would even sport it, even though I'm actually "Made in New York."

Agree.

And I am Made In Blerick.

Hm. No sales potential there.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 02, 2012, 11:29:17 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

 ;D

It's small but gives so much hope

I have to imagine information is coming very very soon. I don't think London would have posted this unless it was looking like it was gonna be out soon.

Ya think ?  :old


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on November 02, 2012, 11:30:04 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Nice Frisbee!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Quzi on November 03, 2012, 01:04:50 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 03, 2012, 01:15:11 AM
 :lol

I might just do that


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 03, 2012, 01:52:55 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

Grand prize. ^_^


Title: Re:
Post by: SurfRiderHawaii on November 03, 2012, 02:05:12 PM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

Funny!

All I'm reallly reading on this thread is AGD.  He's the Pied Piper!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Phoenix on November 03, 2012, 09:54:43 PM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

ZING!  :drumroll  :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 04, 2012, 04:43:38 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

Funny!

All I'm reallly reading on this thread is AGD.  He's the Pied Piper!

Shall we rename the board?

Andrew's Place

Andy's Fountain Of Beachlore

Doe Or Die

The Does and Doen'ts In All Things Beach Boys

Doeisms Galore


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 04, 2012, 04:48:04 AM
:lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 04, 2012, 06:09:45 AM
Doe Or Die

 :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: Micha on November 04, 2012, 08:46:41 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

Funny!

All I'm reallly reading on this thread is AGD.  He's the Pied Piper!

Shall we rename the board?

Andrew's Place

Andy's Fountain Of Beachlore

Doe Or Die

The Does and Doen'ts In All Things Beach Boys

Doeisms Galore


D'oe!!! (H.S.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on November 04, 2012, 09:02:13 AM
(http://img546.imageshack.us/img546/5445/18122810150811523852651.jpg)

Can somebody change the title of the thread to "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA"?

Grand prize. ^_^

Yeah, I gotta admit, that was brilliant.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 04, 2012, 09:49:47 AM
Speaking of Andrew (and Inknow it's not necessarily the case that he's any more clued up than the rest of us), it occurs to me that the most bleedin' obvious reason why the box set has been delayed has been looking at in the face since July/August: the supposedly Japan-only mono/stereo remasters must have included, between them, a whole slew of tracks that had been destined for the box, to make their stereo or mono debuts there.

The hurried and unexpected release due to demand of these discs in wider markets must have deprived the box compilers of a reasonable amount of otherwise exclusive material, and forced them back to the archive to replace a considerable amount of material with other previously unreleased stuff.

Just speculating… but if any one here can confirm/deny the theory, it's Andrew.





Or Craig.


Title: Re:
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 04, 2012, 11:23:37 AM
Speaking of Andrew (and Inknow it's not necessarily the case that he's any more clued up than the rest of us), it occurs to me that the most bleedin' obvious reason why the box set has been delayed has been looking at in the face since July/August: the supposedly Japan-only mono/stereo remasters must have included, between them, a whole slew of tracks that had been destined for the box, to make their stereo or mono debuts there.

The hurried and unexpected release due to demand of these discs in wider markets must have deprived the box compilers of a reasonable amount of otherwise exclusive material, and forced them back to the archive to replace a considerable amount of material with other previously unreleased stuff.

Just speculating… but if any one here can confirm/deny the theory, it's Andrew.





Or Craig.

Sometimes the bleedin' obvious is simply too obvious.  :)

My understanding, which is far from perfect, is that the Japanese remasters were always a stand-alone project, unconnected with anything that was happening in the Tower or environs.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 04, 2012, 01:04:51 PM
Aye, understood. But I'm assuming Mark's remixes were available to both the Japanese and the US/everywhere else EMIs and that while the Japanese had the bright idea of re-issuing a trenche of albums, the US compilers might have decided, completely independently, to include some of those individual new stereo album tracks in the box. Then they gets call fro marketing to say they've decided to copy the Japanese and re-issue the albums. And the box set compilers think "damn, Fall Breaks…" (for example) was gonna be one of our exclusive jewels… we'd better rethink the track list."

Just speculating…


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 04, 2012, 01:54:46 PM
Speculation is good. Even when it's completely wide of the mark...  ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 04, 2012, 02:03:46 PM
Speculation is good. Even when it's completely wide of the mark...  ;D

:lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: lance on November 05, 2012, 01:30:50 AM
I also think it's been obvious for months that the mono/stereo releases ave something to do with the delay of the box. I just assumed not that the track listing had anything to do with it, but rather that the US releases of the mono/stereo deals were last minute decisions and the box is delayed so that the all the releases can find their market.  I mean, i'm buying these releases 3 cds per month, and I wnat the box, but if they were all released at once I wouldnt be buying the box until next year anyway. I am hankering for a track list though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 05, 2012, 01:42:49 AM
I also think it's been obvious for months that the mono/stereo releases ave something to do with the delay of the box. I just assumed not that the track listing had anything to do with it, but rather that the US releases of the mono/stereo deals were last minute decisions and the box is delayed so that the all the releases can find their market.  I mean, i'm buying these releases 3 cds per month, and I wnat the box, but if they were all released at once I wouldnt be buying the box until next year anyway. I am hankering for a track list though.

Good points, well made.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 05, 2012, 02:35:48 AM
I also think it's been obvious for months that the mono/stereo releases ave something to do with the delay of the box. I just assumed not that the track listing had anything to do with it, but rather that the US releases of the mono/stereo deals were last minute decisions and the box is delayed so that the all the releases can find their market.  I mean, i'm buying these releases 3 cds per month, and I wnat the box, but if they were all released at once I wouldnt be buying the box until next year anyway. I am hankering for a track list though.

You think wrongly.  :)  At the risk of  :deadhorse I'll repeat - the mono/stereo remasters have not in any way impacted on the status of the box set. Sometimes that which appears to be obvious... isn't.  :old


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 05, 2012, 02:45:56 AM
I stand by the opinion that, whatever we say, it'll be incorrect!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 05, 2012, 02:47:47 AM
I stand by the opinion that, whatever we say, it'll be incorrect!
So it'll be... correct?









 :-D


To be honest by now I don't really care if it comes out in 2012 or 2013. Or 2014.


Title: Re: \
Post by: lance on November 05, 2012, 02:52:46 AM
If by 'obvious' you mean 'not-really-obvious-in-the-way-obvious-means-for-most-humanbeings-fools-that-they-are' then I whole-heartedly agree.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 05, 2012, 03:58:41 AM
I stand by the opinion that, whatever we say, it'll be incorrect!

Actually you're not necessarily correct…


Title: Re:
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 05, 2012, 04:07:00 AM
I stand by the opinion that, whatever we say, it'll be incorrect!

Actually you're not necessarily correct…


But is that correct or incorrect?


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 05, 2012, 04:59:47 AM
I stand by the opinion that, whatever we say, it'll be incorrect!

Actually you're not necessarily correct…


But is that correct or incorrect?

In between. Well, not exactly, it is a 47% to 53% position.

That is what my Casio just told me.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on November 05, 2012, 06:50:40 AM
Call me Eeyore, but I have a real bad feeling about this box set. I couldn't care less whether it's released this year or next; all I care about is that it has the maximum amount of value when it does get released. To me that means unreleased tracks, plain and simple. I have this sickening gut feeling that the delays are due to one thing and one thing only:

A Beach Boy (or three) is hemming and hawing about the tracklist, throwing their weight around, causing a stink.

When that happens, I get very scared. Mike and Al scare me the most. In my nightmares I see multiple holy grails falling on the cutting room floor, destined to be unheard (until possibly 2112, when all original Beach Boys and a few generations thereafter are distant memory, and the world is hungry for history, and all is fair game in the public domain... but I'll be pushing daisies by then, so I couldn't care less...)

(Actually the most likely scenario is that all we insatiable apes will have finally overbred and depleted resources to the point where we have totally infested the planet, and we go back to hunting and gathering in a world that's nasty, brutish and short... and then Yellowstone erupts and ends life as we know it anyway.)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 05, 2012, 06:56:38 AM
(Actually the most likely scenario is that all we insatiable apes will have finally overbred and depleted resources to the point where we have totally infested the planet... and then Yellowstone erupts and ends life as we know anyway.)
Duuude..... THIS before I had my first coffee....? :P


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on November 05, 2012, 07:12:25 AM
(Actually the most likely scenario is that all we insatiable apes will have finally overbred and depleted resources to the point where we have totally infested the planet... and then Yellowstone erupts and ends life as we know anyway.)
Duuude..... THIS before I had my first coffee....? :P

:) Yeah, I've already had 5 cups so I can face anything thrown at me. The inevitable demise of our species, and eventually the planet, doesn’t trouble me in the least. Everything ends if you wait long enough.

Other random reactions:
1. I love the button, great font.
2. That "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA” comment was one of the funniest, coolest things I’ve ever read on this board, as was Micha’s “D’oe!”


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 05, 2012, 07:52:05 AM
(Actually the most likely scenario is that all we insatiable apes will have finally overbred and depleted resources to the point where we have totally infested the planet, and we go back to hunting and gathering in a world that's nasty, brutish and short... and then Yellowstone erupts and ends life as we know it anyway.)


Here is a new theory, Cohenist in its pessimism, too maudlin to get all of it the first time.

If Yellowstone goes up and your first thought is "Darn, now we'll never get to hear the box set" then I admire you immensely. Your fandom exceeds my own sir; I'll be too busy worrying about all that ash affecting the laundry hung to dry to worry about MaDeiNCaLiFoRNia.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 05, 2012, 08:24:59 AM
(Actually the most likely scenario is that all we insatiable apes will have finally overbred and depleted resources to the point where we have totally infested the planet, and we go back to hunting and gathering in a world that's nasty, brutish and short... and then Yellowstone erupts and ends life as we know it anyway.)


Here is a new theory, Cohenist in its pessimism, too maudlin to get all of it the first time.

If Yellowstone goes up and your first thought is "Darn, now we'll never get to hear the box set" then I admire you immensely. Your fandom exceeds my own sir; I'll be too busy worrying about all that ash affecting the laundry hung to dry to worry about MaDeiNCaLiFoRNia.

You got your priorities wrong, buddy. I suggest a board ban. Moderator?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Micha on November 05, 2012, 09:52:48 AM
That "MaDE iN cALiFoRNiA” comment was one of the funniest, coolest things I’ve ever read on this board, as was Micha’s “D’oe!”

Hey, wow!!! Thank you, Pete!  :spin :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ziggy Stardust on November 05, 2012, 10:44:30 AM
http://www.discorder.com/shop/artist/Beach-Boys/Made-in-california--ltd-/6CD/5099923234529/p=gm/
" Format: 6-CD
Delivery time: pre-order now
Price: € 118.49
Points worth: 118 (when buying this item)
Barcode: 5099923234529
Releasedate: January 18, 2013 "


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jukka on November 05, 2012, 11:18:08 AM
Okay, so now se have some actual information. Any guesses on when they publish the tracklist? I say it's 21.12.2012, just three minutes before the world ends.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 05, 2012, 11:39:24 AM
Would hesitate to call that actual information. Just the latest in a long line of speculative release dates from third parties. Clearly the only logical explanation is that they are re-recording every song on the box with Joe Thomas to get that full autotune sound.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 05, 2012, 12:08:14 PM
Would hesitate to call that actual information. Just the latest in a long line of speculative release dates from third parties. Clearly the only logical explanation is that they are re-recording every song on the box with Joe Thomas to get that full autotune sound.
I think they re-did BWPS as Joe Thomas Presents SMiLE as well. ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on November 05, 2012, 12:16:45 PM
We're getting info next week.


Title: Re: \
Post by: punkinhead on November 05, 2012, 12:18:05 PM
Do you suppose we'll get a great addition of 80s and 90s music that hasn't been released except on maybe a random single/soundtrack? Or songs that we're considered greatest hits but no longer are on those compilations?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on November 05, 2012, 12:23:56 PM
I can't believe I'm still checking this thread and we still don't have an official release date or a tracklisting.  The real waiting for this release hasn't even begun!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 05, 2012, 12:28:21 PM
I can't believe I'm still checking this thread and we still don't have an official release date or a tracklisting.  The real waiting for this release hasn't even begun!

What is this "waiting" you speak of ?


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 05, 2012, 12:29:48 PM
I can't believe I'm still checking this thread and we still don't have an official release date or a tracklisting.  The real waiting for this release hasn't even begun!
Yeah this is insane. Just trying to forget about it until i log in one day and this has jumped 4,000 pages because it hasn't got the UK mix of SIP on it or something.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 05, 2012, 12:42:46 PM
I can't believe I'm still checking this thread and we still don't have an official release date or a tracklisting.  The real waiting for this release hasn't even begun!

What is this "waiting" you speak of ?

The time between the official announcement of the tracklist and the official release, I assume.
_____

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 05, 2012, 12:46:48 PM
Would hesitate to call that actual information. Just the latest in a long line of speculative release dates from third parties. Clearly the only logical explanation is that they are re-recording every song on the box with Joe Thomas to get that full autotune sound.
I think they re-did BWPS as Joe Thomas Presents SMiLE as well. ;D

:lol

Jimmy Buffett rewrite the lyrics for Holidays and Roll Plymouth Rock.
Autotune vocals on Mrs. O Learys Cow will sound spectacular.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 05, 2012, 12:47:29 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Justin on November 05, 2012, 12:48:30 PM
Yeah hypehat, I'm hoping the upcoming concert DVD will distract me for a few weeks before my holiday travels.

I can't believe I'm still checking this thread and we still don't have an official release date or a tracklisting.  The real waiting for this release hasn't even begun!

What is this "waiting" you speak of ?

The time between the official announcement of the tracklist and the official release, I assume.

Correct.  I've got a few other deluxe releases (non BB related) that are coming in the next few weeks and I'm glad that the wait for those are finally coming to a close.  I wish I could say the same with this BB set but we're not even close to that point!  We're still waiting just for the official announcement----siiiiiiigh.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 05, 2012, 01:05:00 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 05, 2012, 02:06:33 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 05, 2012, 03:00:28 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.

Didn't mean no beef, mate. Upon reflection, I think I own it on CD somewhere. I used to really like Oasis. But it's a really dodgy live album, iirc, and those vinyl prices are absolutely insane. I can't see how it's so expensive! Thought you spent like £30 on it and was like 'well no records for me for a while', like most people


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 05, 2012, 10:39:32 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.

Didn't mean no beef, mate. Upon reflection, I think I own it on CD somewhere. I used to really like Oasis. But it's a really dodgy live album, iirc, and those vinyl prices are absolutely insane. I can't see how it's so expensive! Thought you spent like £30 on it and was like 'well no records for me for a while', like most people

Hey, the ones I looked up at the moment are way above what I paid - I've seen it go for alot more, and could probably make money by re-selling it if I change my mind ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 06, 2012, 04:23:55 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.

Didn't mean no beef, mate. Upon reflection, I think I own it on CD somewhere. I used to really like Oasis. But it's a really dodgy live album, iirc, and those vinyl prices are absolutely insane. I can't see how it's so expensive! Thought you spent like £30 on it and was like 'well no records for me for a while', like most people

Hey, the ones I looked up at the moment are way above what I paid - I've seen it go for alot more, and could probably make money by re-selling it if I change my mind ;D

Haha, yeah, at least it'll be a nice nest egg   ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 07, 2012, 04:38:37 AM
CAPITOL GIMME MY GODAMN BOX SET


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bean Bag on November 07, 2012, 08:30:34 AM
CAPITOL GIMME MY GODAMN BOX SET

Yeah, what's scoop on this release?  I'm not down with combing through 47 pages today to find the answer.   ;D

Maybe the OP could update his first post with the vitals?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 07, 2012, 08:35:24 AM
Except... there is no information.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 07, 2012, 08:51:12 AM
Except... there is no information.

There is always information. The trick lies in knowing how to access it.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: ontor pertawst on November 07, 2012, 08:52:16 AM
It involves Bruce's knees. Trust me, you're all better off waiting.

Shudder.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 07, 2012, 08:59:39 AM
It involves Bruce's knees. Trust me, you're all better off waiting.

Shudder.
Its definitely an HP Lovecraft level of horror.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 07, 2012, 09:00:36 AM
Except... there is no information.

There is always information. The trick lies in knowing how to access it.  ;D

I see.... knowing how to access it, eh?



hmmm...



I wonder...






Hey AGD, what's up with the boxset?  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 07, 2012, 09:31:21 AM
It's delayed. Apparently.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 07, 2012, 09:37:14 AM
It's delayed. Apparently.

WHAT! WHEN DID WE GET TOLD THIS!!!





















(I'm Joking Obviously :lol)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on November 07, 2012, 10:24:02 AM
You know that old saying "No news is good news"? What a load of bullshit!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: thetojo on November 07, 2012, 03:56:49 PM
We're getting info next week.

Hoping this is/was true !


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 07, 2012, 04:20:12 PM
CAPITOL GIMME MY GODAMN BOX SET

Yeah, what's scoop on this release?  I'm not down with combing through 47 pages today to find the answer.   ;D

Maybe the OP could update his first post with the vitals?

What's on the first page is all we got.

Yes, it has been 47 pages of nothing!


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 08, 2012, 01:03:22 AM
We're getting info next week.

Hoping this is/was true !

I'm afraid we're stuck in a 'Free Beer Tomorrow' kind of situation.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 08, 2012, 01:35:36 AM
We're getting info next week.

Hoping this is/was true !

I'm afraid we're stuck in a 'Free Beer Tomorrow' kind of situation.
So you haven't had a beer while you've been waiting?  In all this time? I find that hard to believe…


Title: Re:
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 08, 2012, 01:49:59 AM
We're getting info next week.

Hoping this is/was true !

I'm afraid we're stuck in a 'Free Beer Tomorrow' kind of situation.
So you haven't had a beer while you've been waiting?  In all this time? I find that hard to believe…

 :lol well, I paid for them.


Title: Re: \
Post by: over and over on November 08, 2012, 12:32:25 PM
BEER!!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Zander on November 08, 2012, 02:56:39 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.

Even as an Oasis fan, that is a real poor live show. Anyway, back on topic...


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 08, 2012, 05:58:53 PM
Hell, nothing is happening on this thread so I invite y'all to chat about the merits of Oasis live records as a sideline. Revisiting my yoof...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ziggy Stardust on November 08, 2012, 06:11:23 PM

I haven't really bothered thinking about this release. I'm actually hoping it comes out later on, at a time when I'm less broke ;D

Yeah, I was slowly banking up money behind other purchases, but then I went a bought Oasis's Familiar To Millions on Vinyl, and those of you who know will know my cash has just been rapidly depleted...

You FOOL. I'd rather pay £70-225 to listen to a specially recorded tape of Boris Johnson insulting and mocking me to the very inner core of my soul than that record!

Each to their own I guess. Either that or I'm an obsessive collector.

Even as an Oasis fan, that is a real poor live show. Anyway, back on topic...

Of all the outstanding and legendary live performances they have done, that is definitely not the one i would have pick the be the only live album, i don't even think i would pick one from that era.. but as for the performance itself, it's alright and enjoyable.. but i wouldn't even bother getting it on cd, so as for the vinyl...
(and don't think i'm hatin' on them, i'm a huge Oasis fan and saw them 3 times, one of them was their last show  in France, played Roll With It, My Big Mouth.. was so good, Noel actually rehearsed Gas Panic, i wish they would have play that one live, SOTSOG has some cool stuff)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on November 08, 2012, 09:47:06 PM
mad fer it.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 08, 2012, 10:49:27 PM
Hell, nothing is happening on this thread so I invite y'all to chat about the merits of Oasis live records as a sideline. Revisiting my yoof...

Big B-Side fan, especially 'Lets All Make Believe' (Mainly since it's not on The Masterplan)


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on November 09, 2012, 02:08:44 AM
Hell, nothing is happening on this thread so I invite y'all to chat about the merits of Oasis live records as a sideline. Revisiting my yoof...

Big B-Side fan, especially 'Lets All Make Believe' (Mainly since it's not on The Masterplan)

Talking about B-sides (albeit on the MP), 'Half the World Away' is great. Their Pachelbel-fueled 'Whatever' is not too shabby either.
To me, the best Oasis albums are Morning Glory and Be Here Now - I truly love those albums.


Title: Re: \
Post by: D409 on November 09, 2012, 02:18:17 AM
Hell, nothing is happening on this thread so I invite y'all to chat about the merits of Oasis live records as a sideline. Revisiting my yoof...

Big B-Side fan, especially 'Lets All Make Believe' (Mainly since it's not on The Masterplan)

Talking about B-sides (albeit on the MP), 'Half the World Away' is great. They're Pachelbel-fueled 'Whatever' is not too shabby either.
To me, the best Oasis albums are Morning Glory and Be Here Now - I truly love those albums.
"Whatever" is Pachelbel-fuelled via The Rutles' "How Sweet To Be An Idiot"  :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cliff1000uk on November 09, 2012, 04:47:51 AM
Hell, nothing is happening on this thread so I invite y'all to chat about the merits of Oasis live records as a sideline. Revisiting my yoof...

Big B-Side fan, especially 'Lets All Make Believe' (Mainly since it's not on The Masterplan)

Talking about B-sides (albeit on the MP), 'Half the World Away' is great. They're Pachelbel-fueled 'Whatever' is not too shabby either.
To me, the best Oasis albums are Morning Glory and Be Here Now - I truly love those albums.
"Whatever" is Pachelbel-fuelled via The Rutles' "How Sweet To Be An Idiot"  :)
I've only seen Oasis once in Nov 95 at Earls Ct and Liam was in top form. I queued from 11am and got down the front. There were even crowd surfers during the Bootleg Beatles support slot-had an amazing time. Then a few weeks later I went and saw Blur who made Oasis look like amateurs. My favourite Oasis song full stop is a bside-Masterplan.


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Heartical Don on November 09, 2012, 05:43:48 AM
If anyone had told me a couple of weeks ago that a thread on a potentially very exciting new BBs box set would be hijacked and mutate quickly into an Oasis thread, I would have proposed to said person that he/she would do well to get committed into a good mental clinic, and trust him/herself to warm, understanding doctors and nurses.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Catbirdman on November 09, 2012, 05:53:04 AM
I have no inside information at all, and this is just a gut feeling, but I don't think this box set is going to come out at all. I think it has crashed and burned.

I just have this feeling, like I had in the 2003 ALCS, when Grady Little came out to the mound and let Pedro Martinez stay in the game. I just knew right then that the Yankees were going to come back and win. I have that same sick feeling in my stomach about this box set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 09, 2012, 05:59:56 AM
If anyone had told me a couple of weeks ago that a thread on a potentially very exciting new BBs box set would be hijacked and mutate quickly into an Oasis thread, I would have proposed to said person that he/she would do well to get committed into a good mental clinic, and trust him/herself to warm, understanding doctors and nurses.
:lol, you should do stand up comedy.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 09, 2012, 06:30:23 AM

… the 2003 ALCS, when Grady Little came out to the mound and let Pedro Martinez stay in the game. I just knew right then that the Yankees were going to come back and win …

What language is this?

Have faith, have hope. I thought SMiLE had crashed and burned in '67 but a little faith and patience paid off.



Erm…


Title: Re:
Post by: rab2591 on November 09, 2012, 06:56:58 AM

… the 2003 ALCS, when Grady Little came out to the mound and let Pedro Martinez stay in the game. I just knew right then that the Yankees were going to come back and win …

What language is this?

Have faith, have hope. I thought SMiLE had crashed and burned in '67 but a little faith and patience paid off.



Erm…

Indeed. After the success of The Smile Sessions, no way does Capitol not release this boxset.
_____

This set had better have a high quality 'Drip Drop' on it....or I'm gonna be mad.


Title: Re:
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 09, 2012, 07:09:28 AM


This set had better have a high quality 'Drip Drop' on it....or I'm gonna be mad.

Let's go, mutha fukkas!


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 09, 2012, 07:18:47 AM
:rock


Title: Re:
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 09, 2012, 07:24:37 AM


This set had better have a high quality 'Drip Drop' on it....or I'm gonna be mad.

Let's go, mutha fukkas!
The scary thing about that session was that it was the one the BBs set up in the late 1970s at Western studios to try get the "old" Brian to return. This session had the wrecking crew and the 4-track recording technology that Brian once used so masterfully.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 09, 2012, 08:08:11 AM
It's possible that Capitol might delay the box set till next summer since it's possible the The Beach Boys might tour again next year.

Just a thought.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 09, 2012, 08:17:43 AM
Every retail site that doesn't still have the November release date has a January one instead.  I still think it's heading our way. And (fairly) soon.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 09, 2012, 08:37:36 AM
WHAAAT! Who turned the oasis thread onto a valid discussion on the new Beach boys box set? the cheek! :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 09, 2012, 09:22:07 AM


This set had better have a high quality 'Drip Drop' on it....or I'm gonna be mad.

Let's go, mutha fukkas!
The scary thing about that session was that it was the one the BBs set up in the late 1970s at Western studios to try get the "old" Brian to return. This session had the wrecking crew and the 4-track recording technology that Brian once used so masterfully.

You're confusing that with the initial summer 1979 Western sessions for KTSA. "Drip Drop" was at Western, but it was a BW solo session. No other BB involvement, I do believe (and in the middle of the renewed LA sessions - 10/19/78).


Title: Re:
Post by: Jim V. on November 09, 2012, 09:23:11 AM


This set had better have a high quality 'Drip Drop' on it....or I'm gonna be mad.

Let's go, mutha fukkas!
The scary thing about that session was that it was the one the BBs set up in the late 1970s at Western studios to try get the "old" Brian to return. This session had the wrecking crew and the 4-track recording technology that Brian once used so masterfully.

Nope. It's not. The "Drip Drop" sessiopn was in 1978, during the L.A. (Light Album) sessions, and the session(s) you are speaking of took place in 1979, during the beginning of work on what became Keepin' The Summer Alive.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 09, 2012, 10:12:14 AM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on November 09, 2012, 10:12:36 AM
the REAL reason it's taken so long is that Brians Maid wont get off her lazy behind in order to compile her favorite songs for the box set "Maid in california"


Title: Re: \
Post by: Yorick on November 09, 2012, 11:46:10 AM
Idler's Dream is also an amazing Oasis B-side, let's hope they include it on Made In California!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Junebug on November 09, 2012, 04:31:19 PM
If we really must discuss other bands on this thread, and lets face it there's nothing to discuss re: the box set so why not !, then we should make it someone decent, i mean, c'mon.Oasis ? really ?

Anyone heard "Found A Little baby" by Plush ?
Now THAT'S quality !


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on November 09, 2012, 04:33:02 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 09, 2012, 04:47:47 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)

You haven't heard it?
You are in for a treat!
If anything, you get to hear a (probably) coked up Brian curse a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS_uO7hVOn8


Title: Re: \
Post by: Awesoman on November 09, 2012, 06:00:11 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)

You haven't heard it?
You are in for a treat!
If anything, you get to hear a (probably) coked up Brian curse a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS_uO7hVOn8

Thanks for the link.  Wow, that's awful.  Here's hopin' it don't make it on the box set.  :-)


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 09, 2012, 06:08:22 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)

You haven't heard it?
You are in for a treat!
If anything, you get to hear a (probably) coked up Brian curse a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS_uO7hVOn8

Thanks for the link.  Wow, that's awful.  Here's hopin' it don't make it on the box set.  :-)

Though I completely understand how it sounds awful....I'm 100% serious when I say I want this on the boxset: that backing track, as sparse and shitty as it is, is so catchy and rhythm-y. I love Brian's vocal when nearly hitting those notes "Cried so hard, teardrops on my bed" in those 2nd and 3rd chorus'.

Idk, I can see how it is absolute shite, but I love it. In itunes it is in my top 10% most played Beach Boys songs (out of nearly 2,500 BB songs)!


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 09, 2012, 06:13:10 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)

You haven't heard it?
You are in for a treat!
If anything, you get to hear a (probably) coked up Brian curse a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS_uO7hVOn8

Thanks for the link.  Wow, that's awful.  Here's hopin' it don't make it on the box set.  :-)

Though I completely understand how it sounds awful....I'm 100% serious when I say I want this on the boxset: that backing track, as sparse and sh*tty as it is, is so catchy and rhythm-y. I love Brian's vocal when nearly hitting those notes "Cried so hard, teardrops on my bed" in those 2nd and 3rd chorus'.

Idk, I can see how it is absolute sh*te, but I love it. In itunes it is in my top 10% most played Beach Boys songs (out of nearly 2,500 BB songs)!

I don't think it's destined for official release - I think we're lucky to have it the way we do. It would have to be heavily edited - You'd lose something so essential to the track if you eliminate the crazy Brian chatter.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 09, 2012, 06:20:14 PM
Thanks for the correct information, I was thinking it was the "vintage" western session because I could see Brian pulling out an old song like drip drop with the wrecking crew.

I dunno; with a title like "Drip Drop", I can't say I'm in any rush to hear it.  :-)

You haven't heard it?
You are in for a treat!
If anything, you get to hear a (probably) coked up Brian curse a lot.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mS_uO7hVOn8

Thanks for the link.  Wow, that's awful.  Here's hopin' it don't make it on the box set.  :-)

Though I completely understand how it sounds awful....I'm 100% serious when I say I want this on the boxset: that backing track, as sparse and sh*tty as it is, is so catchy and rhythm-y. I love Brian's vocal when nearly hitting those notes "Cried so hard, teardrops on my bed" in those 2nd and 3rd chorus'.

Idk, I can see how it is absolute sh*te, but I love it. In itunes it is in my top 10% most played Beach Boys songs (out of nearly 2,500 BB songs)!

I don't think it's destined for official release - I think we're lucky to have it the way we do. It would have to be heavily edited - You'd lose something so essential to the track if you eliminate the crazy Brian chatter.

Yeah, sadly you're right. They should just put an 'explicit content' warning on the box and release 'drip-drop' in complete un-altered form ;D

Heck, it would probably sell more copies that way!


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on November 09, 2012, 06:45:18 PM
Just think: This could be the first Beach Boys release to carry one of those goshdarn parental advisory stickers -- on a career-spanning box set, no less! It'd be sure to sell a million units in January!


Title: Re: \
Post by: mikeyj on November 09, 2012, 06:55:23 PM
If they're going to include "Drip Drop" then PLEASE include "Rolling Up to Heaven"!


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 10, 2012, 02:01:04 AM
What the hell is Brian going on about at the end of "Drip Drop"? It sounds something like "Get Mike on" or something, but he could easily be saying something about a "mic".

P.S. Oasis kicks ass.

P.P.S. "Drip Drop" also kicks ass.


Title: Re:
Post by: Myk Luhv on November 10, 2012, 02:13:05 AM
I always thought he was rambling about his c*ck?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on November 10, 2012, 04:01:36 AM
It's kinda cool and more than a little ironic that info on the 50th anniversary box set is going to hit at about the same point this thread hits the 50th page mark.


Title: Re:
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 10, 2012, 04:04:44 AM
I always thought he was rambling about his c*ck?

I always thought he said: "Shhhuckhh ma c*ck!" which would be hilarious. I always interpret it like that, and get a good dose of lulz from the song

CMONN MUTHERFUCKERSSSS!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 10, 2012, 06:39:00 AM
It's kinda cool and more than a little ironic that info on the 50th anniversary box set is going to hit at about the same point this thread hits the 50th page mark.

that's pretty optimistic of you.


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on November 10, 2012, 07:00:40 AM
Is the word c*ck censored? That would be odd, because when I'm at the farm, my c*ck crows around 5 o'clock every morning. :D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 10, 2012, 07:08:56 AM
Is the word c*ck censored? That would be odd, because when I'm at the farm, my c*ck crows around 5 o'clock every morning. :D
You might wanna have that examined. Could be one of thouse rural diseases.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 10, 2012, 07:15:09 AM
Is the word c*ck censored? That would be odd, because when I'm at the farm, my c*ck crows around 5 o'clock every morning. :D

Over and over, the c*ck cries uncover the cornfield.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Lowbacca on November 10, 2012, 07:17:19 AM
Is the word c*ck censored? That would be odd, because when I'm at the farm, my c*ck crows around 5 o'clock every morning. :D
You might wanna have that examined. Could be one of thouse rural diseases.
Could have been one of those Farmer's Daughters...  :huh


Title: Re: \
Post by: Sam_BFC on November 10, 2012, 09:59:08 AM
At the risk of moving this thread further off topic:

Somebody a page or so ago mentioned being a fan of the 'SOTSOG' era of Oasis.

I'd say that this is probably my favourite Oasis era; not necessarily for the songs themselves (although my favourite Oasis song(s) may just be Roll It Over and Let's All Make Believe), but I love the eerie production they were going for at that time.  I didn't really enjoy any Oasis albums after that, despite being a huge fan of theirs in my youth (like a few others here).

Saw them live at the old Wembley stadium during that FTM tour.  It was the Saturday, July 2000 (the live album I think was taken from the Friday night if I recall correctly) - my first ever gig.  Saw them again in summer 2005 I think at Milton Keynes, which was also the same summer as my first ever BW show (in Brighton).  My interest in Oasis was beginning to wane at that point.

Haven't bought Noel or Beady Eye's albums, although I heard the latter's lead single on the radio at the time it was released and thought it was alright.  Heard a fair bit of Noel's stuff as well; it definitely sounds like classic Noel, but I'm unsure if this is a good thing or not.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 10, 2012, 11:22:15 AM
Oh... so sorry, I was under the impression this was the Beach Boys section of this site. How unobservant of me.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 10, 2012, 12:00:51 PM
Oh... so sorry, I was under the impression this was the Beach Boys section of this site. How unobservant of me.

Nah, you'll find that in The Sandbox


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on November 10, 2012, 05:02:51 PM
It's kinda cool and more than a little ironic that info on the 50th anniversary box set is going to hit at about the same point this thread hits the 50th page mark.

that's pretty optimistic of you.

Didn't someone post a page or two back that we are due an announcement within the week or did I just dream it? Of course if if people keep posting crap about Oasis of all things then the page count may be considerably higher...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Quzi on November 10, 2012, 07:19:37 PM
Is the word c*ck censored? That would be odd, because when I'm at the farm, my c*ck crows around 5 o'clock every morning. :D
You might wanna have that examined. Could be one of thouse rural diseases.
Could have been one of those Farmer's Daughters...  :huh
If he didn't use protection when ploughing the fields, he kinda asked for it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on November 10, 2012, 09:38:38 PM
At the risk of moving this thread further off topic:

Somebody a page or so ago mentioned being a fan of the 'SOTSOG' era of Oasis.

I'd say that this is probably my favourite Oasis era; not necessarily for the songs themselves (although my favourite Oasis song(s) may just be Roll It Over and Let's All Make Believe), but I love the eerie production they were going for at that time.  I didn't really enjoy any Oasis albums after that, despite being a huge fan of theirs in my youth (like a few others here).

Saw them live at the old Wembley stadium during that FTM tour.  It was the Saturday, July 2000 (the live album I think was taken from the Friday night if I recall correctly) - my first ever gig.  Saw them again in summer 2005 I think at Milton Keynes, which was also the same summer as my first ever BW show (in Brighton).  My interest in Oasis was beginning to wane at that point.

Haven't bought Noel or Beady Eye's albums, although I heard the latter's lead single on the radio at the time it was released and thought it was alright.  Heard a fair bit of Noel's stuff as well; it definitely sounds like classic Noel, but I'm unsure if this is a good thing or not.

Yeah Noel's album is classic Noel.  Though some of them, particularly "everybody's on the run" would have been absolutely killer with Liam's voice.  That song would have been a classic Oasis song.  Noel is still great on his own, and beady eye has their moments, but together it's obvious how much better it'd be.


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 10, 2012, 11:23:46 PM
Noel's voice has, to me, far surpassed Liam's. I WILL POST WHY HERE: http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14690.0.html (http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,14690.0.html)

i.e. let's take the Oasis discussion there ^_^


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on November 11, 2012, 11:01:06 AM
Yeah please do that.  This is getting very pointless.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 11, 2012, 11:59:10 AM
Yeah please do that.  This is getting very pointless.

It never gets pointless >:D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 11, 2012, 04:37:40 PM
The Gallagher brothers are perhaps the least likeable people in the business. f*** them for their personalities and let them suck Mike's c*ck over the cornfield.

Talk about Oasis in the sandbox or even better: youtube. the place where everyone insults everyone at any oppertunity. Very much like Noel and Liam. You would all fit well together and have a ball!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ted on November 11, 2012, 04:45:58 PM
Talk about Oasis in the sandbox or even better: youtube. the place where everyone insults everyone at any oppertunity. Very much like Noel and Liam. You would all fit well together and have a ball!
What's this if not an unprovoked insult?


Title: Re: \
Post by: sockittome on November 11, 2012, 05:28:46 PM
Yeah please do that.  This is getting very pointless.

It never gets pointless >:D

Um, yeah, it kinda does....especially when I keep thinking I somehow slipped over to the Hoffman board!




Have fun!  :P


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 11, 2012, 05:56:42 PM
Kinda made that thread so we could all shut the f*** up about Oasis here, but y'know, whatever.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on November 11, 2012, 06:34:36 PM
heh yeah whatever.

wait...whatever?

whatever...whatever...

I'M FREEEEEEEEE TO BE WHATEVER IIII, WHATEVER I CHOOSE AND I'LL SING THE BLUES IF II WANT


Title: Re: \
Post by: Rocky Raccoon on November 11, 2012, 07:30:40 PM
I hate to love Oasis.  They're such arrogant pricks but Noel Gallagher really is a better songwriter than he's given credit for.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on November 11, 2012, 11:56:09 PM
Kinda made that thread so we could all shut the f*** up about Oasis here, but y'know, whatever.

Ya know?! 

Please let's get this back on topic.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 12, 2012, 12:06:55 AM
Boxset.


Title: Re: \
Post by: roll plymouth rock on November 12, 2012, 05:09:08 AM
What will come out first!? A Beach Boys boxset, or an Oasis one?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Yorick on November 12, 2012, 06:43:23 AM
Will Dennis' Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again better Oasis' Live Forever?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Bean Bag on November 12, 2012, 07:54:24 AM
Except... there is no information.
Ok, but that too is information.  Helpful to know and valuable if added to the first post. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 12, 2012, 09:16:54 AM
Will Dennis' Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again better Oasis' Live Forever?

Oh sh*t yes, a thousand times yes.


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on November 12, 2012, 09:18:04 AM
quick question Andrew, I have the AMCB live album and I love it. What I ask is, how fateful to the original was it, and how much better is the Beach Boys version?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 12, 2012, 09:36:51 AM
Aside from a key change and very minor musical/vocal differences, it's very, very faithful (as they had sanctioned access to the original), and a fine, fine performance. The Beach Boys version is, IMHYEO, toweringly majestic, and Adam would be the first to agree.

That said, should it be released on the box I'm sure there will be people here and elsewhere going "don't see what the fuss was all about". Human nature, and in some cases, an urge to be a complete f*ckwit.


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on November 12, 2012, 09:59:18 AM
Thirsty......gasp...must go to oasis.....for water.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 12, 2012, 10:01:51 AM
Thirsty......gasp...must go to oasis.....for water.

Cool, Cool Water?


Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on November 12, 2012, 10:22:04 AM
Don't go near [that] water!  >:D


Title: Re: \
Post by: joshferrell on November 12, 2012, 10:27:17 AM
yes lets talk about oasis and which desert you saw it in...was it big or small? how thirsty were you? were you near death? did you hallucinate the Gallagher brothers while there? did the beach boys box set show up in the middle of the heat wave?


Title: Re: \
Post by: FatherOfTheMan Sr101 on November 12, 2012, 12:14:35 PM
Aside from a key change and very minor musical/vocal differences, it's very, very faithful (as they had sanctioned access to the original), and a fine, fine performance. The Beach Boys version is, IMHYEO, toweringly majestic, and Adam would be the first to agree.

That said, should it be released on the box I'm sure there will be people here and elsewhere going "don't see what the fuss was all about". Human nature, and in some cases, an urge to be a complete f***wit.

Thanks man, sounds like a great song! Hopefully people keep the bs on the low down if it's on the box


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 12, 2012, 01:16:31 PM
 :beer


Title: Re: \
Post by: Jay on November 12, 2012, 08:41:32 PM
If I were a mod, any and all mention of oasis in this thread from here on out would get deleted instantly, without warning.


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on November 12, 2012, 09:19:33 PM
]Well, I asked for this to get back on topic. I'm not asking anymore. It was funny for about 5 seconds; now it's older than the milk in my fridge.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on November 12, 2012, 11:49:19 PM
I know! This place used to be an oasis of Beach Boys discussion!


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 12:00:12 AM
Little experiment - try going to an Oasis forum and introducing The Beach Boys into any thread there. Somehow I doubt they'd be as polite as we've been here.

As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.


Title: Re:
Post by: MBE on November 13, 2012, 12:13:50 AM
]Well, I asked for this to get back on topic. I'm not asking anymore. It was funny for about 5 seconds; now it's older than the milk in my fridge.
Don't drink it BILLY!!! :lol


Title: Re: \
Post by: STE on November 13, 2012, 01:48:20 AM



I was promised BB boxset news at page 50!!!
Where are they?? You liars!!




Title: Re: \
Post by: GuyOnTheBeach on November 13, 2012, 02:38:34 AM
Little experiment - try going to an Oasis forum and introducing The Beach Boys into any thread there. Somehow I doubt they'd be as polite as we've been here.

As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Oasis didn't achieve anything that The Rutles hadn't done already, and I hear that Dirk was a great guy as well. :lol


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 03:54:44 AM
This is now up there with the Cohen tedium.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 03:59:54 AM
Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.


Title: Re: \
Post by: El Goodo on November 13, 2012, 04:40:49 AM
Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.

*yawn*

Stroke my ego and maybe I will impart some info from da iner cirkle !

If you know something then please do impart , I may or may not be interested.

After 50 pages of nothing concrete it seems inevitable  the thread is going to veer of into mild trolling at times.

However Oasis are just as relevent info wise to the new box set as someone thats keeps posting I might or might not know something.

Why you still need people to fawn over you Mr Doh?

*off to sleep for another 10 years*


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ted on November 13, 2012, 05:06:50 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.

Aw, but it'd be so unlike you to allude to knowing something without actually telling anyone anything.


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 05:36:04 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.

Aw, but it'd be so unlike you to allude to knowing something without actually telling anyone anything.
Can you honestly comment on the Beach Boys for once instead of insulting everybody here. ::)


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 05:48:21 AM
If I were a mod, any and all mention of oasis in this thread from here on out would get deleted instantly, without warning.
Time to play with the word filter again.... >:D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 06:13:05 AM
The degeneration continues…

I'm occasionally one of the first to call Andrew when he gets insulting; on this occasion that hasn't happened – he hasn't. A once-readable thread is being waylaid by trolls who're (to my mind) insulting AGD. I'm sure it's water off a duck's back to him but the overall  degeneration of the thread is pissing me off.

Can the Mods lock it to put a stop, then a fresh thread can kick off when there's any further news.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Ted on November 13, 2012, 06:24:05 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.

Aw, but it'd be so unlike you to allude to knowing something without actually telling anyone anything.
Can you honestly comment on the Beach Boys for once instead of insulting everybody here. ::)

The Beach Boys were good.


Title: Re:
Post by: El Goodo on November 13, 2012, 06:28:14 AM
The degeneration continues…

I'm occasionally one of the first to call Andrew when he gets insulting; on this occasion that hasn't happened – he hasn't. A once-readable thread is being waylaid by trolls who're (to my mind) insulting AGD. I'm sure it's water off a duck's back to him but the overall  degeneration of the thread is pissing me off.

Can the Mods lock it to put a stop, then a fresh thread can kick off when there's any further news.

I recognise the Wee Helper name from distant days of yore.
Threads go off topic and unfortunately Oasis are a bit of a banal tangent to go on but as for trolling I think AGD is as guilty as anyone on this thread. If you know something and can say it then say it , if you cant then don´t.


Title: Re: \
Post by: hypehat on November 13, 2012, 07:29:52 AM
When something arises, no-one's going to say 'shut up about the box, we're talking about Oasis!'


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 07:32:22 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Indeed, to the extent that I'm distinctly disinclined to impart any news I may - or may not - have about the box to people who would evidently prefer to talk about another band.

Aw, but it'd be so unlike you to allude to knowing something without actually telling anyone anything.
Can you honestly comment on the Beach Boys for once instead of insulting everybody here. ::)

The Beach Boys were good.
That is a start...  ;D


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 08:01:38 AM
If you know something and can say it then say it , if you cant then don´t.

Similarly, if you cannot put your real name to something, don't say it, surely? That's one reason I quit using the "Wee Helper" moniker – it isn't my name and somehow I kept finding myself saying stuff I wouldn't have put my name to in the real world.  Which ain't right. That was a problem back in the early days of the internet but surely we've moved on from that now that it's a part of our daily mundanity?


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 08:03:53 AM
Smile sessions thread throwdown part 2.... ::)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 08:57:03 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Is anyone going to comment upon what a homophobic statement that is?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on November 13, 2012, 09:08:45 AM
Nope.  Because AGD didn't intend it to sound "homophobic".   You did.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 09:19:48 AM
As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Is anyone going to comment upon what a homophobic statement that is?

English grammar not your strong suit, is it, sonny ? That's straight as in undiluted. It's not an original comment, I recycled it from Sir Thomas Beecham. Jesus, why am I even having to point this out ? You don't have a basic grounding in the English language, best avoid this forum. No loss to the rest of us.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 09:24:25 AM
You must not have a "basic grounding in the English language", or any language for that matter, if you don't understand the concept of homonyms.


Title: Re:
Post by: drbeachboy on November 13, 2012, 09:28:29 AM
You must not have a "basic grounding in the English language", or any language for that matter, if you don't understand the concept of homonyms.
That is not his problem if you or others misunderstand. Has sex taken over so much that people cannot use normal terms without people taking offense?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 09:29:57 AM
Oddly, there's more than one meaning of the word straight, something those who are forever crying "Homophobe !!" tend to conveniently forget. Thus:

straight  (strt)
adj. straight·er, straight·est
1. Extending continuously in the same direction without curving: a straight line.

2. Having no waves or bends: straight hair.

3.
a. Not bent or bowed; rigid or erect: a straight, strong back.
b. Sports Of or relating to a midair position in diving or gymnastics in which the body is held rigid without bending at the hips or knees.

4. Perfectly horizontal or vertical; level or even: The mirror isn't straight.

5.
a. Direct and candid: a straight answer.
b. Following a direct or correct method or approach; systematic: straight reasoning.
c. Coming from a reliable source; factual: a straight tip; straight information.

6.
a. Showing or marked by honesty or fair-mindedness: straight business dealings.
b. Right; correct: made sure the facts were straight in the report.

7. Neatly arranged; orderly: The room is straight again.

8.
a. Uninterrupted; consecutive: sick for five straight days; their fourth straight victory.
b. Having the parts or details in correct sequence.
c. Games Constituting a straight in poker.

9. Characterized by undeviating support, as of a principle or a political party: always votes a straight party line; a straight Democrat.

10.
a. Not deviating from what is considered socially normal, usual, or acceptable; conventional.
b. Conventional to an extreme degree.

11. Heterosexual.

12. Slang Not being under the influence of alcohol or drugs.

13.
a. Not deviating from the normal or strict form: straight Freudian analysis.
b. Not altered, embellished, or modified: does straight comedy.

14.
a. Concerned with serious or important matters: a straight drama without comedy or music.
b. Of or relating to a straight man.

15. Not mixed with anything else; undiluted: straight bourbon.

16. Sold without discount regardless of the amount purchased.

Aegir, I had no idea you were gay and here's something for you to consider - I don't care. Doesn't matter to me, hence I don't pussyfoot around, selecting my words carefully so as not to upset the gay community, or indeed any group. I use English to convey ideas, information and opinions, and if you feel compelled to divine meanings in my words where none exists for the express purpose of being outraged, then that's not my problem but yours, you sad, embittered individual. I have several GBL friends and they're well-adjuested normal people who don't seek offense in a simple English phrase that was being used way before Gay Lib came to be.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on November 13, 2012, 09:30:44 AM
You must not have a "basic grounding in the English language", or any language for that matter, if you don't understand the concept of homonyms.


Is anyone going to comment upon what a homophobic statement that is?

PS: Joke (parody)


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 09:36:38 AM
I'll raise a straight bourbon to that – the thread's really realigned itself (geddit???)


Title: Re: \
Post by: doc smiley on November 13, 2012, 09:36:46 AM
trying to bring things back on topic..... :o

name 5 tracks you want to see on the boxset

my 5
1. wouldn't it be nice to live again
2. Rooftop Harry
3. Runnin' Bear
4. You're Still A Mystery
5. Out In The Country

sure there will be a lot of wild guesses and likely some debunking from AGD, but its better the Oasis talking and bickering...

 :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 13, 2012, 09:38:44 AM
to all Oasis people and homonym debaters: http://hahgay.com/

I'd like a whole lotta early 70's Dennis stuff like a properly mixed Sound Of Free, 10 000 Years (wtf is this title anyway?) and anything else from that aborted solo album. 15BO outtakes yes plz! Could there be some unheard Friends outtakes?  Also Adult/Child tracks would be great. Anything unreleased with a moog on it should be released!

and top x wishes:

Surf's Up (live 1970's)
WIBNTLA
Bugged At My Ol' Man (1975?)
Cal Feelin' (1974)
Out In the Country
My Solution (1970)
A Day In The Life Of A Tree (live if it exists!)
Mess Of Help and Wild Honey  (live)
Sherry She Needs Me
Stevie
Santa Ana Winds (1978?)
Big Sur (1970)
Over The Waves (Carnival)
Looking Down The Coast


probably much more early material which would be of interest too...
Smile nuggets appreciated!




Title: Re: \
Post by: pixletwin on November 13, 2012, 09:39:33 AM
Strait from the hip, my 5 most wanted:

1. WITBNTLA
2. California Feeling (74)
3. Don't care.
4. Don't care.
5. Don't care.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 09:41:57 AM
1 (WIBNT)LA
2 You've Lost That Lovin' Feelin
3 I've Got A Friend (track)
4 Sherry, She Needs Me (1965)
5 CIFTTM (Brian's 11/66 mono edit/mix)


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 13, 2012, 09:44:19 AM
1) WIBNTLA
2) In The Back of My Mind (piano demo from the 70s)
3) In The Back of My Mind (high quality mono and stereo backing track)
4) CIFOTM (^Brian's 66 mix)
5) Drip Drop


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 13, 2012, 09:47:47 AM
WIBNTLA
Stevie
Where Is She
Just An Imitation (I've read conflicting statements here - was this ever demo'ed?)
Is Jack Reily Really Superman?


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 09:50:29 AM
1.California Feeling
2.WIBNTLA
3.Sherry She Needs Me
4.Michael Row The Boat Ashore
5. In the Back of My Mind without Vocals


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 09:51:37 AM
Serious thanks to Doc Smiley!

1) WIBNTLA
2) Cuddle Up (45 mix)
3) CITFotM (66 mix)
4) Carnegie Hall 72 audio & Blu-ray
5) Summer's Gone suite, complete


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 09:51:46 AM
Aegir, I had no idea you were gay and here's something for you to consider - I don't care. Doesn't matter to me, hence I don't p*ssyfoot around, selecting my words carefully so as not to upset the gay community, or indeed any group. I use English to convey ideas, information and opinions, and if you feel compelled to divine meanings in my words where none exists for the express purpose of being outraged, then that's not my problem but yours, you sad, embittered individual. I have several GBL friends and they're well-adjuested normal people who don't seek offense in a simple English phrase that was being used way before Gay Lib came to be.

I'm not gay, I just thought it was a stupid statement for you to make. Yes, I understand that straight also means undiluted but in the context it just seemed like you were saying "I don't like Oasis because they're queers" or something. You don't have to be gay to have a problem with someone saying that.

I supposed that as a white person I am also not allowed to take issue with racism?

I'm sorry that I misinterpreted you, though.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 09:58:41 AM
"Yes, I understand that straight also means undiluted but in the context it just seemed like you were saying "I don't like Oasis because they're queers" or something."

Wait... you expect me to believe that you've not noticed, or never heard it said, that a good proportion of Oasis' output sounds like a second rate Beatles tribute band, heavy on the 1966-67 era ?

Sir, I call bullshit on that. Further, I call you out as "Alex McDonald".


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 10:02:58 AM
No, no, I've certainly noticed that Oasis sounds like a second rate Beatles. Still, evening using "straight" to mean "heterosexual", "I like my Beatles straight" makes sense as an insult towards Oasis.

I don't even like Oasis! and again, I'm sorry I misinterpreted you. I'm not trolling, really.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on November 13, 2012, 10:05:57 AM

Wait... you expect me to believe that you've not noticed, or never heard it said, that a good proportion of Oasis' output sounds like a second rate Beatles tribute band, heavy on the 1966-67 era ?

Having listened to The Beatles all my life, and having listened to Oasis for seventeen years of my life, or nearly half, and having just about everything either band recorded, I can say with confidence that I haven't noticed that. I've heard it said, yes, but it's never been convicing.


Title: Re:
Post by: The Shift on November 13, 2012, 10:06:52 AM
… in the context it just seemed like you were saying "I don't like Oasis because they're queers" or something.

Tripe, laddie. AGD's meaning was clear from the off.

6) Surfin' Safari album in 5.1 Surround Sound
7) I Get Around in 5.I Get Around Sound
8) Disney Girls in 1957.1 Surround Sound
9) Womblin' USA in 5.1 Underground Overground Sound
10) Sound of Free in 5.1 Love Surrounds Me Sound


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 10:13:30 AM

Wait... you expect me to believe that you've not noticed, or never heard it said, that a good proportion of Oasis' output sounds like a second rate Beatles tribute band, heavy on the 1966-67 era ?

Having listened to The Beatles all my life, and having listened to Oasis for seventeen years of my life, or nearly half, and having just about everything either band recorded, I can say with confidence that I haven't noticed that. I've heard it said, yes, but it's never been convicing.

So this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl5wU9r73gI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl5wU9r73gI) - isn't even a smidgen Beatlesque ?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 10:18:54 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcOJu0g8dbw this one is the worst, this is Liam's solo project and this song sounds almost exactly like Instant Karma.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on November 13, 2012, 10:25:21 AM

Wait... you expect me to believe that you've not noticed, or never heard it said, that a good proportion of Oasis' output sounds like a second rate Beatles tribute band, heavy on the 1966-67 era ?

Having listened to The Beatles all my life, and having listened to Oasis for seventeen years of my life, or nearly half, and having just about everything either band recorded, I can say with confidence that I haven't noticed that. I've heard it said, yes, but it's never been convicing.

So this - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl5wU9r73gI (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xl5wU9r73gI) - isn't even a smidgen Beatlesque ?


I haven't entered into the Oasis thing until now because I ultimately agree with you that this thread isn't the place for it. We could have this conversation in the General Music thread below though that may not be your thing. Without going into a long discussion (and while acknowledging that I too think this is off-topic!) I will say that "a smidgen Beatlesque" is a much different thing than "a second rate Beatles tribute band." So, to be honest, no. There are other examples you could pull up (She's Electric, The Masterplan, Born on a Different Cloud) that might make your case better. But a seven minute epic with a soaring anthemic chorus that is heavy on the distortion, and guitar tricks, doesn't suggest conventional Beatles to me. This song is more Voodoo Chile meets Oh You Pretty Things meets I Wanna Be Adored.

Or are you just suggesting that song because the lyrics happen to reference Beatles songtitles?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 10:27:11 AM
No, no, I've certainly noticed that Oasis sounds like a second rate Beatles. Still, evening using "straight" to mean "heterosexual", "I like my Beatles straight" makes sense as an insult towards Oasis.

OK, you want to see me really pissed off ? Congratulations, you've just pressed all the correct buttons.

Listen you rampant f***wit, I DIDN'T USE THE WORD STRAIGHT TO MEAN HETEROSEXUAL, BUT UNDILUTED. Can your pea sized brain grasp this concept, or are you so hooked up on finding fault with everything I post that its rendered you mentally impotent ? More to the point, can you actually read, or does Mummy do it for you ?

One more time, slowly, in the (vain) hope that you'll eventually grasp this most basic of linguistic concepts -  Oasis sound like The Beatles. Got that ? Therefore I made the mildly amusing observation that, regarding them, I preferred my Beatles straight, that is, undiluted from the original, or in other words, I prefer the original to a second-rate bunch of impersonators. Got that too ? Nope, thought not, because it's from me and thus viewed through a red mist of bias.

You accuse me of being homophobic. I'll readily agree I'm irascible, short-tempered, arrogant, at times pompous, condescending and quick to pounce and trivial errors or gaps in knowledge. And those are my good qualities. But one thing I am, IRL, is tolerant, at least until it's proven to me that I'm being taken advantage of. I have no problem with anyone's sexual orientation, unless they try to ram it down my throat (inelegant phrase, and one open to jokes of a lewd nature, but you get my point...) or insist that only gays are truly creative. What I am hideously intolerant of is people who either put words in my mouth or twist what I have said. Like you just did, for whatever arcane reasons of your own. Seriously, if you're not gay, or leaning that way... why so bothered ? Wirestone hasn't said word one, and he's pretty active on that front (and rightfully so).


Title: Re: \
Post by: Chocolate Shake Man on November 13, 2012, 10:27:47 AM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcOJu0g8dbw this one is the worst, this is Liam's solo project and this song sounds almost exactly like Instant Karma.

You mean, in the same way that Instant Karma sounds almost exactly like Itchycoo Park?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 10:29:46 AM
... and breathe.


Title: Re: \
Post by: GoofyJeff on November 13, 2012, 10:31:42 AM
What the hell?  I see this thread jump at least 3 pages since the last time I checked in and expected maybe we got a bit of news or even a tracklisting.  Instead it's more Oasis bullshit and the various definitions of straight.  

No wonder why I don't participate on this board more.


Title: Re:
Post by: punkinhead on November 13, 2012, 10:33:46 AM
Serious thanks to Doc Smiley!

1) WIBNTLA
2) Cuddle Up (45 mix)
3) CITFotM (66 mix)
4) Carnegie Hall 72 audio & Blu-ray
5) Summer's Gone suite, complete

Couldn't agree more...along with Summer's Gone, I'd like the Isn't it Time single version and THat's why God Made the Radio backing track (b-side to the single)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 10:38:24 AM
For the "Summer's Gone" suite to be included, Brain & Joe would have to finish writing, arranging and recording it... and trust me, that's NOT the reason for the delay.  ;D


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mike's Beard on November 13, 2012, 10:39:32 AM
No, no, I've certainly noticed that Oasis sounds like a second rate Beatles. Still, evening using "straight" to mean "heterosexual", "I like my Beatles straight" makes sense as an insult towards Oasis.

OK, you want to see me really pissed off ? Congratulations, you've just pressed all the correct buttons.

Listen you rampant f***wit, I DIDN'T USE THE WORD STRAIGHT TO MEAN HETEROSEXUAL, BUT UNDILUTED. Can your pea sized brain grasp this concept, or are you so hooked up on finding fault with everything I post that its rendered you mentally impotent ? More to the point, can you actually read, or does Mummy do it for you ?

One more time, slowly, in the (vain) hope that you'll eventually grasp this most basic of linguistic concepts -  Oasis sound like The Beatles. Got that ? Therefore I made the mildly amusing observation that, regarding them, I preferred my Beatles straight, that is, undiluted from the original, or in other words, I prefer the original to a second-rate bunch of impersonators. Got that too ? Nope, thought not, because it's from me and thus viewed through a red mist of bias.*

*
However as a footnote to your above post I wish to add I have no doubt that if Noel or Liam were to meet Sir Macca and he were to whip his shrivelled old pecker out and tell them to go to work on it, they would do so in a heartbeat.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Shady on November 13, 2012, 10:40:02 AM
Yeah.... So I'm really excited for this box set.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 13, 2012, 10:44:01 AM
Yeah.... So I'm really excited for this box set.

Same here!

Footnote: I'd like to apologise for mentioning Oasis in ze first place, although I was just saying it was a drain on my box set fund...


Title: Re: \
Post by: Smilin Ed H on November 13, 2012, 10:47:44 AM
I think of Oasis as a bar band Slade who ripped the Beatles when they wanted to move upmarket.  They're okay, I guess, but give me the likes of John Hiatt any day.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Loaf on November 13, 2012, 11:00:02 AM
Aegir, i'd thought you were one of the more sensible posters on here, but i really have to point out what bullshit you started! Utterly incredible.

Not a jazz fan, i take it?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Aegir on November 13, 2012, 11:17:05 AM
No, no, I've certainly noticed that Oasis sounds like a second rate Beatles. Still, evening using "straight" to mean "heterosexual", "I like my Beatles straight" makes sense as an insult towards Oasis.

OK, you want to see me really pissed off ? Congratulations, you've just pressed all the correct buttons.

Listen you rampant f***wit, I DIDN'T USE THE WORD STRAIGHT TO MEAN HETEROSEXUAL, BUT UNDILUTED. Can your pea sized brain grasp this concept, or are you so hooked up on finding fault with everything I post that its rendered you mentally impotent ? More to the point, can you actually read, or does Mummy do it for you ?

One more time, slowly, in the (vain) hope that you'll eventually grasp this most basic of linguistic concepts -  Oasis sound like The Beatles. Got that ? Therefore I made the mildly amusing observation that, regarding them, I preferred my Beatles straight, that is, undiluted from the original, or in other words, I prefer the original to a second-rate bunch of impersonators. Got that too ? Nope, thought not, because it's from me and thus viewed through a red mist of bias.

You accuse me of being homophobic. I'll readily agree I'm irascible, short-tempered, arrogant, at times pompous, condescending and quick to pounce and trivial errors or gaps in knowledge. And those are my good qualities. But one thing I am, IRL, is tolerant, at least until it's proven to me that I'm being taken advantage of. I have no problem with anyone's sexual orientation, unless they try to ram it down my throat (inelegant phrase, and one open to jokes of a lewd nature, but you get my point...) or insist that only gays are truly creative. What I am hideously intolerant of is people who either put words in my mouth or twist what I have said. Like you just did, for whatever arcane reasons of your own.



I do get what you're saying. I didn't at the time I made my original post on this subject because "straight" has multiple definitions, one of which means heterosexual (that's the one I originally thought you meant), which still fits in "I prefer my Beatles straight".

I realized upon your first response that you meant "undiluted" and I'm sorry I misinterpreted you. We're just repeating ourselves ad infinitum because you don't seem to understand that I get you. I don't see what you're still going on about.

Quote
Seriously, if you're not gay, or leaning that way... why so bothered ? Wirestone hasn't said word one, and he's pretty active on that front (and rightfully so).

I still don't see how this is at all relevant. I'm against hate speech, whether it is intended to offend me personally or not.


Title: Re: \
Post by: No. Fourteen on November 13, 2012, 11:21:15 AM
Gonna go out on a limb and say that post #1279 contained an apology.....which was overlooked (understatement).

BOX SET!!!!!

Hell, I'm psyched for the packaging......after the amazing smile sessions box.


Title: Re: \
Post by: I. Spaceman on November 13, 2012, 11:25:03 AM
When the box set comes out, I am going straight to my local store to buy it.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Andrew G. Doe on November 13, 2012, 11:26:31 AM
If you "get" me, then why repeat the insinuation that my comment was homophobic when you realise, as you admit, that it wasn't. A simple "sorry, let's move on" would have sufficed, but you have this compulsion to keep dragging in the perceived - but only by you - homophobic comment, even after I've pointed out your error. It's like a six year old that keeps saying "yes, but what if...".

Anyway, I'm done.


Title: Re: \
Post by: rab2591 on November 13, 2012, 11:32:57 AM
Gonna go out on a limb and say that post #1279 contained an apology.....which was overlooked (understatement).

BOX SET!!!!!

Hell, I'm psyched for the packaging......after the amazing smile sessions box.

Me too! They set the bar so fantastically high - My friends all drop their jaws when they see the 3-dimensional Smile Shop.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on November 13, 2012, 11:35:24 AM
You [Aegir] don't have a basic grounding in the English language, best avoid this forum. No loss to the rest of us.

This is very true!  :)


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mark H on November 13, 2012, 11:39:24 AM
Firstly on the 'straight' saga, I would imagine most people would have read it as was meant.  Weird to think that anyone could think that 'heterosexual' was even  inferred from the context.  

Lastly back to the box, is there a finished version of 'Sherry She Needs Me' from the 60's, IIRC I heard a backing track track once with partial (backing?) vocals.

I'd also like to see official releases for Stevie and Lines.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mikie on November 13, 2012, 11:53:39 AM
Aegir, i'd thought you were one of the more sensible posters on here.

No he ain't!  He likes to stir the sh!t!


Title: Re: \
Post by: SMiLE Brian on November 13, 2012, 11:54:59 AM
Firstly on the 'straight' saga, I would imagine most people would have read it as was meant.  Weird to think that anyone could think that 'heterosexual' was even  inferred from the context.  

Lastly back to the box, is there a finished version of 'Sherry She Needs Me' from the 60's, IIRC I heard a backing track track once with partial (backing?) vocals.

I'd also like to see official releases for Stevie and Lines.
The track of "sherry she needs me" from 1965 only needed a lead vocal to be finished. :(


Title: Re: \
Post by: Mark H on November 13, 2012, 12:00:27 PM
Firstly on the 'straight' saga, I would imagine most people would have read it as was meant.  Weird to think that anyone could think that 'heterosexual' was even  inferred from the context.  

Lastly back to the box, is there a finished version of 'Sherry She Needs Me' from the 60's, IIRC I heard a backing track track once with partial (backing?) vocals.

I'd also like to see official releases for Stevie and Lines.
The track of "sherry she needs me" from 1965 only needed a lead vocal to be finished. :(


 :-[   :-[   :-[ 

Bummer.


Title: Re: \
Post by: EgoHanger1966 on November 13, 2012, 12:04:29 PM
Firstly on the 'straight' saga, I would imagine most people would have read it as was meant.  Weird to think that anyone could think that 'heterosexual' was even  inferred from the context.  

Lastly back to the box, is there a finished version of 'Sherry She Needs Me' from the 60's, IIRC I heard a backing track track once with partial (backing?) vocals.

I'd also like to see official releases for Stevie and Lines.
The track of "sherry she needs me" from 1965 only needed a lead vocal to be finished. :(

I'd venture that Brian would have put some more vocals from the guys on it as well.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 13, 2012, 12:14:31 PM
What the hell?  I see this thread jump at least 3 pages since the last time I checked in and expected maybe we got a bit of news or even a tracklisting.  Instead it's more Oasis bullsh*t and the various definitions of straight.  

No wonder why I don't participate on this board more.

This.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 13, 2012, 12:17:56 PM
No, no, I've certainly noticed that Oasis sounds like a second rate Beatles. Still, evening using "straight" to mean "heterosexual", "I like my Beatles straight" makes sense as an insult towards Oasis.

OK, you want to see me really pissed off ? Congratulations, you've just pressed all the correct buttons.

Listen you rampant f***wit, I DIDN'T USE THE WORD STRAIGHT TO MEAN HETEROSEXUAL, BUT UNDILUTED. Can your pea sized brain grasp this concept, or are you so hooked up on finding fault with everything I post that its rendered you mentally impotent ? More to the point, can you actually read, or does Mummy do it for you ?

One more time, slowly, in the (vain) hope that you'll eventually grasp this most basic of linguistic concepts -  Oasis sound like The Beatles. Got that ? Therefore I made the mildly amusing observation that, regarding them, I preferred my Beatles straight, that is, undiluted from the original, or in other words, I prefer the original to a second-rate bunch of impersonators. Got that too ? Nope, thought not, because it's from me and thus viewed through a red mist of bias.

You accuse me of being homophobic. I'll readily agree I'm irascible, short-tempered, arrogant, at times pompous, condescending and quick to pounce and trivial errors or gaps in knowledge. And those are my good qualities. But one thing I am, IRL, is tolerant, at least until it's proven to me that I'm being taken advantage of. I have no problem with anyone's sexual orientation, unless they try to ram it down my throat (inelegant phrase, and one open to jokes of a lewd nature, but you get my point...) or insist that only gays are truly creative. What I am hideously intolerant of is people who either put words in my mouth or twist what I have said. Like you just did, for whatever arcane reasons of your own.



I do get what you're saying. I didn't at the time I made my original post on this subject because "straight" has multiple definitions, one of which means heterosexual (that's the one I originally thought you meant), which still fits in "I prefer my Beatles straight".

I realized upon your first response that you meant "undiluted" and I'm sorry I misinterpreted you. We're just repeating ourselves ad infinitum because you don't seem to understand that I get you. I don't see what you're still going on about.

Quote
Seriously, if you're not gay, or leaning that way... why so bothered ? Wirestone hasn't said word one, and he's pretty active on that front (and rightfully so).

I still don't see how this is at all relevant. I'm against hate speech, whether it is intended to offend me personally or not.



STFU!!!


Title: Re: \
Post by: The Real Barnyard on November 13, 2012, 12:25:50 PM
01 Kiss Me Baby (Stereo Track)
02 In The Back Of My Mind (Stereo Track)
03 Mona-Kani
04 Big Sur (1970)
05 Seasons In The Sun
06 (Wouldn't It Be Nice) To Live Again
07 Beatrice From Baltimore
08 Any early 70's live soundboard recordings
09 California Beach
10 Still Cruisin' (demo)


Title: Re: \
Post by: runnersdialzero on November 13, 2012, 12:40:10 PM
Little experiment - try going to an Oasis forum and introducing The Beach Boys into any thread there. Somehow I doubt they'd be as polite as we've been here.

As for the band themselves - hugely overrated. Always preferred my Beatles straight.

Oasis are better than the Beatles.


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on November 13, 2012, 12:59:17 PM
if i take the best oasis albums (ie the first 2), i really don't hear anything overly beatles in them than any other british band of the 90s.  actually i think that continues through out their career.  Yeah the have beatles-y moments, and they're open with their obsessions, but i don't think the gallagher's were just a beatles rip. 


Title: Re: \
Post by: Runaways on November 13, 2012, 01:01:16 PM
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pcOJu0g8dbw this one is the worst, this is Liam's solo project and this song sounds almost exactly like Instant Karma.

which is why i suspect it was never on any Oasis albums.  Btw that album isn't a Liam solo project, he wrote 4-5 tracks, the rest of the band had theirs too.  The Roller isn't a gallagher song.  Odd thing about that album is Liam's songs are far and ahead the best tracks on it.  The rest of the band brought tracks like the roller *shudder*


Title: Re: \
Post by: tansen on November 13, 2012, 01:20:10 PM
When the %^%$@$ did it start to become a bad thing sounding like the Beatles? Geez!

Oasis is not a tribute band, neither are they second rate. They are very obviously influenced by the Beatles, but that doesn't make them bad, or less talented songwriters.
Regardless of Andrew's 'ignorance' (;)) towards Oasis, his initial comment was quite obviously not homophobic, in fact, I thought Aegir was joking with his reply.


Title: Re: \
Post by: doc smiley on November 13, 2012, 01:41:00 PM
09 California Beach

would this be considered a BB track or Mike Love/Adrian Baker with the backup band?

or am I thinking of a different track?

would this be a good time to remember "Surfer Suzie"  the decent cover of "At The Hop" and "Goin to the Beach"?


Title: Re: \
Post by: Cabinessenceking on November 13, 2012, 01:50:01 PM
Screw the boxset. All I want is an audio recording of Bruce' reaction to Obama winning the election. He mad now I bet.



Title: Re: \
Post by: Freddie French-Pounce on November 13, 2012, 01:56:18 PM
Screw the boxset. All I want is an audio recording of Bruce' reaction to Obama winning the election. He mad now I bet.



Disc 1: [Hidden Track] Bruce in Apes*it Mode


Title: Re:
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on November 13, 2012, 02:11:03 PM
I'm going to close this thread. I said to keep this on topic, and many of you basically just sh*t in my face by keeping talking about fucking Oasis. Thank you for the complete lack of respect.

As for the alleged homophobic comment...get your head out of your ass. There was nothing of the sort.

Not having the greatest of days to begin with, and to be disrespected like this was the last thing I needed.