For better or worse, the 1975 NME tryptich was the single galvanising element of my BB fandom. I read it and wanted to know more, hear this music, and when I did, it was beyond wonderful. Over forty years on, I still love it as no other. Even Steinman doesn't come close. However, even at the time of the 1980 article, I could see his treatment of Debbie was disgusting, and when I later discovered he'd shamelessly appropriated parts of the Vosse Fusion article as his own in TLBM I was more than discomfited. Made me wonder how many other of his pieces were similarly... "borrowed".

When I wrote "And does it matter anyway ?" I was being facetious: of course it matters to me, and others. I happen to think that the music of The Beach Boys, individually and collectively, and the context thereof, is so important that it demands to be documented as accurately as possible. I've done my bit, others are carrying that torch much further than I ever could, but it's always been an uphill struggle, since the earliest days. Fans have given countless explanations as to why the band are held in such relatively low esteem (and yes, they've rarely helped themselves: it wasn't only James Watt who shot himself in the foot...), but to my mind the overriding cause of this lack of respect is simply this: the existence of The Beatles.

Researching The Beach Boys is a generally thankless task as not only the press of the time, such as it was, but also the principals, tend to be either contradictory or flat out misleading. Sometimes there's concrete proof, or it's patently obvious (viz, the summer 1962 tour: when you sit down and think about it, you swiftly realise that at the time the band couldn't have managed a fourteen date tour of southern Califoirnia, much less a 40-date tour of the Midwest), more often you're having to sift the data and evolve the best - or, frankly, least unlikely - scenario. This 1964 thing is a prime example: it's emerging that the likeliest answer is that the dates, but not the tour venues, are wrong. Thank you, Keith Badman. Thank you so much.  

Derailed ? Not really, more shunted into a siding. When it starts slipping into the Brian-vs-Mike mire, then it's derailed.

"Just a little something I'm working on... the inside story of this august forum. I'm thinking of calling it F*ckwits & Sh*tweasels, With A Light Frosting Of Trolls."

Judge not, that ye be not judged.

Not judging. Just stating facts. We have all three, plus a smattering of World Champeen Fence Sitters.

You're assuming the absence of an "S" means the track is mono, without actually hearing the disc in question. I've heard the US "Marcella" 45 and can assure you, it's stereo - because it's exactly the same as the album cut.

Maybe so, maybe not... but at least I couch my posts in fairly good basic English and spell his name correctly. 

Ok so to be 100% accurate the situation is this: the December 19 1964 Tulsa show was confirmed by an advertisement I found in the Tulsa newspaper that day.  However Tulsa papers did not review or write about rock shows in those days and I can't 100% say it took place ( meaning it could have been canceled but no notice of cancellation can be found in the newspaper). Recently I discovered an ad for the little rock show on December 20. The newspaper doesn't say it was canceled but when advertising a show in little rock on February 4 1965 the paper states that tickets for a canceled show will be honored. So putting two and two together: little rock show on December 20 canceled and tickets honored at show on February 4. Now Keith badmans book listed two nights in Houston and a show in Dallas with dates of December 23, 24 and 26. As you all know his book is riddled with errors of date and venue. So when I did my book I went and researched every date he listed for accuracy.  Unfortunately for us all the Houston and Dallas newspapers (and I checked both major papers in each city) ignored the shows. They didn't advertise them or review them. Now we have lots of people who confirm the Houston show took place and the Dallas papers have some passing mentions in late December of the recent Dallas show without dating it. So the two shows are confirmed as taking place but where badman got those dates is a mystery. I have advertisements and some reviews or photos for every show after that-beginning with Omaha on December 27 1964. So what is an absolute fact is that the bbs were in Omaha with glen Campbell on December 27. If you get my drift here-other than badmans dating the two Texas dates could be December 21 and 22. So a radical but perhaps logical rethink would be to throw out badmans unconfirmable dates and say bbs fly to Tulsa on December 19.  Brian is not happy and little rock show on December 20 is canceled. Tulsa to Houston flight is break down. December 21 Brian gets it together and plays Houston gig. December 22 Brian goes home and glen joins bbs for December 22 Dallas show. The band goes home for Christmas and than flys to Omaha with glen for second leg of the tour on December 27. This makes sense to me. I've always questioned the band staying on the road over Christmas. They never did it again.

So... what of the 12/26 Dallas show ? Another Badmanism ? From my brief interaction with him, I got the distinct impression that he simply accepted what his researchers handed him and put it in the book.

[Today]

Wish I could help. My guess is it was cancelled because of that reason. Would these dates cross with the story Brian told about being in the hotel room telling the guys he won't be able to tour anymore.

I've always know that as him telling them during the January 1965 Today ! sessions.

Not sure how helpful but there is a concert eye witness, Ron Foster:

http://www.houstonpress.com/music/shored-up-6564082

Thanks.

So I'm wondering, do we know for sure that BW actually appeared at the 12/23 show, or that it took place?

Yes, we do... or rather, Ian does, and if he says it happened, it happened. I've not said this publicly before, but it's rare that a week goes by without at least one email from him bearing the latest fruits of his ongoing research. That some of these missives are swiftly - indeed, at times almost instantly - followed by another saying, in essence, "forget that, it never happened" tells you just what a sterling researcher he is, not afraid to admit he's got it wrong. Like all the very best historians, he's in it for the accuracy, not the ego massage. It's Ian who makes the 10452 concert listings the single best repository of such data. Accept no inferior imitations.

To answer your question more exactly, a few months later Brian related the incident to Earl Leaf.

Also, an amended timeline:

19 - Assembly Center Arena, Tulsa, OK
20 - Little Rock Auditorium, Little Rock AR* [cancelled]
22 - Memorial Auditorium, Dallas TX* [postponed to the 26th ?]
23 - Music Hall, Houston TX
25 - Memphis TN [cancelled]
26 - Memorial Auditorium, Dallas TX

Need your help people. As is well known, Brian cracked up on a plane from LA to Houston on 12/23/64, played the gig that night then flew home, being replaced by Glen for the Dallas gig on the 26th.

However, two recent discoveries have cast some doubt on this long-held supposition. One, The tireless Ian Rusten uncovered a cancelled show in Little Rock AK on the 20th, while the equally redoubtable Jim Murphy found a ticket stub (note, a stub) for a 12/22 Dallas show. Now, there certainly was a Dallas show on 12/26 - Glen's first - so unless they played two shows at the same venue within five days, and the ticket was certainly used, the locical assumption is that it was honored for the rearranged date. Put this together with the cancelled gig on the 20th and it's looking possible that the Tulsa show on the 19th wasn't originally a one-off but the first of a short tour of the southwest. Thus:

19 - Assembly Center Arena, Tulsa, OK
20 - Little Rock Auditorium, Little Rock AR* [cancelled]
22 - Memorial Auditorium, Dallas TX* [postponed to the 26th ?]
23 - Music Hall, Houston TX
26 - Memorial Auditorium, Dallas TX

So, just shooting the breeze... were those shows cancelled because Brian was showing signs of strain ? Was the flight from Tulsa to Houston, not from LA ?  Did the band indeed fly back to LA from Tulsa, then on to Houston ? And does it really matter ? 

Ultimately, I think that Brian and Al are just making the best of it, not necessarily touring "the way they want to".

Uh... I never mentioned Alan. I doubt he'd be happy even if you managed to reanimate Carl & Dennis especially for him. Not the epitome of a happy camper...

[is]

In a perfect world, Mike, Bruce and Al (and possibly Dave) would've toured without Brian, only having him pop up at selected shows like they had done decades before, so Brian wouldn't have to live out of a suitcase like the others....but then we probably would've been back to the same old argument that poisoned fan circles in the 80's and 90's. "It's not the Beach Boys without Brian". People forget that even Carl was vilified by hardcore fans in those years.

So what do you do? You've got Mike who wants a stripped down unit to play as many shows as humanly (and economically) possible, and Brian who wants a larger unit playing less shows. We're not even getting into the lawyers/accountants/managers point of view which is a major factor in all of this business.

This subject won't be closed until both men can no longer tour at all, a day that's coming sooner than later.

That's "a perfect world" for that most rapacious and intolerant of creatures, the fan. Or rather, the hard-core fan. Joe Q. Public could are less. Point being, the subject is closed, as far as Brian & Mike are concerned: they're both touring the way they want to, and that's fine by them. The End. 

Brian's already booked  for Portland on the 7th and Seattle on the 8th.

I had NPP in my car player all summer long. It went by the wayside a bit this winter, but I still really like the album.

Then we are in rare accord: a solid summer album. 

The idea that a subset of fans have more trouble getting over something (e.g. C50) than the actual members is something worth pondering. But I think, especially after the immediate aftermath and all-around disappointment from most fans, we all "got over it"...

Except those for whom the very mention of a certain name causes their eyes to glow a terrible, baleful red, the frothy drool to start dripping from their lips, their incisors to grow a good foot and their few remaining brain cells to turn to mush. 

Is that an exact quote from your foreword to the book? If so, I'll have to seek it out.

Just a little something I'm working on... the inside story of this august forum. I'm thinking of calling it F*ckwits & Sh*tweasels, With A Light Frosting Of Trolls. 

The idea that a subset of fans have more trouble getting over something (e.g. C50) than the actual members is something worth pondering. But I think, especially after the immediate aftermath and all-around disappointment from most fans, we all "got over it"...

Except those for whom the very mention of a certain name causes their eyes to glow a terrible, baleful red, the frothy drool to start dripping from their lips, their incisors to grow a good foot and their few remaining brain cells to turn to mush. 

Tribute bands: as ever I stand to be corrected but tribute bands do not routinely include one or more original/core members. Members of the "mother" band may sit in now and then (Mike Rutherford with In The Cage is one example that springs to mind) but they don't tour exclusively with them. Thus, neither Brian's nor Mike's is a tribute band.

Anytime Brian and Al want to Mike to stop calling his band the Beach Boys, they can put a stop to it. Don't let him license the name again.

No, they cannot.

If they could, why haven't they since 1998 (especially in fall 2012) ? If Brian & Al decided to call a special meeting of BRI to revote on the license issue (assuming they could - as fans we don't know if, or how, things have changed since 1998), the vote would still be locked at 2-2 as Carl's estate are highly unlikely to give up a yearly six-figure income purely on a supposed point of artistic principle, thus the status quo would prevail. But anyway, fact is they can't do it at the drop of a hat.

To the best of my knowledge,  all new BB singles issued in the US after "Cotton Fields" were stereo only. The mono mixes were only on DJ copies.

[15 Big Ones]

There's a picture in Leaf's book of a "Brian's Back !" sticker, as printed by Reprise with the catalog number for 15 Big Ones on it.

Er, try about 520 to date.

That is indeed Steve Desper. He played me that stuff back in 1985.

Apparently holding a grudge for many years hasn't prevented Mr. Love from writing an autobiography.

This is true. In fairness, AGD, grudges shouldn't prevent you from applying the same 'judge it after I've read it' approach to Al that you give to Mike.

My original "read it first" comment was in response to the usual dimwits who instinctively "know" the worth of Mike's book... but you have a valid point, even though the chance of Alan actually doing a book before we all die is a slim as a slim thing.  

I think Al's more likely to get namechecked in Brian's book, especially since just about every concert Brian has done over the last five years (including BB C50) has included Al.  

Last four years: Alan didn't tour with Brian at all in 2011.

As for a book by Alan... if he ever gets around to it - and he won't - his ability to harbour, and nurture, a grudge for decades would likely render it close to unreadable.

  Who is the primary culprit for these words? Mike Love or Jack Rieley? Brian Wilson? All three?

Given his previous track record, gotta be Jack.

Correctamundo.

On the topic of stuff misheard: for years, I thought the bvs on the second chorus of "Trader" was "And they believed him": sounded like it, and it fit the rest of the lyric. Then, when scheduled to do a live rendition at a BB fan gathering and having Jack's email addy, I decided to double check. Back came the answer:

"They don't believe our deity".

Ah. And um. 

My point: what you think you're hearing isn't necessarily what you actually hearing.

My second point: listened to "FP" again. There's no "g". None at all. Nada. Zilch. Diddly with a light frosting of squat. 

Oh man, this brings back memories of learning that for LONG PROMISED ROAD.  John Perry took great delight in reminding us to sing "they don't believe our deity" at every opportunity.  I can't recall who put us hip to the right words.

**koff**

  Let's face it. Mike and Brian have autobios scheduled for publication roughly one month apart. This is likely to be the ultimate Brian Wilson/Mike Love showdown as both put their spins on the group's history for posterity. I'll read both and comment when the time comes.

Not originally. Brian's book was supposed to bs published October last year.