50th Anniversary live double CD up for pre-order on Amazon

[Rob Dean]

I have less respect for Brian Wilson for choosing a complete, talentless, tasteless hack like Joe Thomas to oversee the reunion. Melinda Wilson got it totally right in suing Joe to get rid of him many years ago. Too bad Brian has less good taste than his wife. For all the complaints people have about the bad taste and instincts of Mike Love, now it looks like the shoe is on Brian's foot, as well. He really should have more respect for his own songs and even his own singing voice, even if it is a little rougher than it used to be.

Or more respect for his fans. After hearing the final mix, Brian should've demanded that it be fixed and done right.

Maybe we should wait for the Japanese release , with the additional tracks , then  

[guitarfool2002]

I wonder why the DVD release wasn't enough, and why a live album which strips away the visual element would be necessary when the DVD would suffice as a marketable product and worthy document of the tour for fans.

I'll withhold other comments or critiques for now, other than to say they lost my purchase as soon as I listened to Heroes and got hit with a blast of what sounds like a fake or overzealous overdub of applause as it kicked in.

[KittyKat]

I suspect the "bring back Joe Thomas!" idea was entirely Brian's. He had the bright idea to write special songs just for the Beach Boys back when he was working with Thomas in 1998, then put them in the vault. Since he's not at all an assertive or confident person, it was easier for him to call back Joe to complete what they started.  Joe brought with him some renewed credibility from working on PBS music specials and other projects. Joe could offer wraparound services for video and studio production, in addition to having the ability to finish the songs from waaay back in 1998. Also, the last time the Beach Boys worked together, it was on the Thomas-produced "Stars and Stripes." Brian figured that Al and Mike would be able to work with him again. It was the path of least resistance, especially given that they didn't have much time left to make the 50th anniversary date.  Maybe without Joe, there would have been no reunion.  However, it made for a bad-cheesy live album. I'm not sure why people think sounding like Cher doing "Do You Believe" is a good idea.

[Shady]

Who actualy was responsible for bringing back the incompetent Joe Thomas?  Was is really Brian's idea?  Everything Joe Thomas touches seems to turn to garbage.

This is so true.

He's the musical Landy.

[Quzi]

This is more embarassing than Summer in Paradise and Al's ponytail combined.

[Nicko1234]

I have less respect for Brian Wilson for choosing a complete, talentless, tasteless hack like Joe Thomas to oversee the reunion. Melinda Wilson got it totally right in suing Joe to get rid of him many years ago. Too bad Brian has less good taste than his wife. For all the complaints people have about the bad taste and instincts of Mike Love, now it looks like the shoe is on Brian's foot, as well. He really should have more respect for his own songs and even his own singing voice, even if it is a little rougher than it used to be.

Was it really just Brian who got Joe Thomas back in? I doubt anything could have happened without Melinda's say so.

[AndrewHickey]

I'm listening to it now and... it's not as unlistenably bad as the clips made it sound. Not a *good* sound, by any means, but not quite that bad.

[absinthe_boy]

One of the best live albums I have is Dire Straits - Alchemy Live. There is a note on the back saying that there are no overdubs or fixes, and that therefore the listener should expect to hear mistakes, buzzes, etc. One of the worst live albums I have is Peter Gabriel Plays Live. It's full of overdubs, re-recordings, fixes dropped in from special studio sessions. It sounds lifeless, has no soul, is not a live performance or a document of one.

There were 60-70 "takes" of every song on the 2CD set. The producers could pick and choose the best version of each song, or electronically splice several performances together. If there really were bad flubs then yes, a modicum of overdubbing is acceptable. But not wholescale autotuning to the extent that the frakking Beach Boys of all bands sound like robots.

Think back to the BW presents Pet Sounds Live in London CD and DVD. It is culled from five or six performances. You can tell where the cuts are on the DVD as Brian's shirt changes depending on which night a given song was recorded. On the CD is pretty much sounds like one performance, delivered from start to finish. THAT is what I expected from this Beach Boys 2CD set. I've no problem with them cherrypicking the best songs from different dates and putting them together to make a "concert".

[Cabinessenceking]

Who actualy was responsible for bringing back the incompetent Joe Thomas?  Was is really Brian's idea?  Everything Joe Thomas touches seems to turn to garbage.

This is so true.

He's the musical Landy.

Musical Jimmy Savile. Disgusting I know, but he is.

[Nicko1234]

Musical Jimmy Savile. Disgusting I know, but he is.

Come off it.

If the band are willing to put out poor product then it is their problem. Comparing Joe Thomas to one of the worst paedophiles in history is just daft (putting it mildly).

[Iron Horse-Apples]

Well considering Brian once said his songs were his children, then comparing JT to Saville is not that far off the mark.

[Rob Dean]

Well considering Brian once said his songs were his children, then comparing JT to Saville is not that far off the mark.

Just to note that there is a link between the BB's and Saville , he got the Boys to play an acoustic set at 'Leeds (uk) Hospital' in the late 60's - Just saying 

[AndrewHickey]

Well considering Brian once said his songs were his children, then comparing JT to Saville is not that far off the mark.

Just to note that there is a link between the BB's and Saville , he got the Boys to play an acoustic set at 'Leeds (uk) Hospital' in the late 60's - Just saying 

Unfortunately there are links between Savile and pretty much every major entertainment figure of the last half of the twentieth century.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

So, which subjects haven't we discussed on this thread yet. How about realism vs symbolism in 19th century theatre?

[Gertie J.]

Musical Jimmy Savile. Disgusting I know, but he is.

 one of the worst paedophiles in history

there are better? 

[guitarfool2002]

Live albums in general aren't really a favorite of mine, for the very reasons stated above: Many go over the top with overdubs and fixes, and as that has been the standard practice for four or five decades (or more), I just prefer studio albums. There are of course some notable and legendary exceptions, like the Allman's Fillmore East or Frampton Comes Alive and that lot, but in general I do not care for live albums.

I was just reading an interview with Eddie Kramer about some work he had done preparing all the "lost" audio from the Woodstock deluxe releases. Part of that involved some missing tracks from Carlos Santana's full set. Now there is no doubt his performance of Soul Sacrifice is a highlight of the film, a burning, terrific performance which featured teenage drummer Michael Shrieve tearing it up, Santana battling and wrangling his guitar in the middle of an acid trip, and terrific camera work.

However, in trying to get the rest of the his set prepared for release, they actually called in Santana decades later to replace the guitar tracks which were missing from the multis. Santana still had the exact guitar and gear he used at Woodstock, so they fired everything up, Santana played the parts, and that was it.

Do fans who either love Santana, love the Woodstock film and soundtrack, or simply wanted a complete set from that day mind what they did with Santana adding those guitar parts decades later? For me it seems a bit dishonest, yet it did fill in the missing parts as close as could be done with the original artist and original equipment adding rhythm guitar in the 2000's to tracks from 1969...but it surely is not "live" at that point.

Tough call.

[leggo of my ego]

Think back to the BW presents Pet Sounds Live in London CD and DVD. It is culled from five or six performances. You can tell where the cuts are on the DVD as Brian's shirt changes depending on which night a given song was recorded. On the CD is pretty much sounds like one performance, delivered from start to finish. THAT is what I expected from this Beach Boys 2CD set. I've no problem with them cherrypicking the best songs from different dates and putting them together to make a "concert".

Glad to hear that b/c Pet Sounds Live sounds awesome to me.
As for any live concert recording I think it should be natural and not tampered with outside of minor editing.
If the performance NEEDS modification its crap anyway. shitcan it. 

[Mike's Beard]

So, which subjects haven't we discussed on this thread yet. How about realism vs symbolism in 19th century theatre?

Who would you rather die serving under - Kirk or Picard?

[Heysaboda]

So, which subjects haven't we discussed on this thread yet. How about realism vs symbolism in 19th century theatre?

Who would you rather die serving under - Kirk or Picard?

"that's what she said"...... 

[the professor]

samples are on amazon; had this been noted yet?

sorry: belay that order; they are there listed but not available.

[guitarfool2002]

samples are on amazon; had this been noted yet?

sorry: belay that order; they are there listed but not available.

Ooooh, free samples! 

[OGoldin]

However, in trying to get the rest of the his set prepared for release, they actually called in Santana decades later to replace the guitar tracks which were missing from the multis. Santana still had the exact guitar and gear he used at Woodstock, so they fired everything up, Santana played the parts, and that was it.

Do fans who either love Santana, love the Woodstock film and soundtrack, or simply wanted a complete set from that day mind what they did with Santana adding those guitar parts decades later? For me it seems a bit dishonest, yet it did fill in the missing parts as close as could be done with the original artist and original equipment adding rhythm guitar in the 2000's to tracks from 1969...but it surely is not "live" at that point.

Tough call.

Here I think of the cd of Sandy Denny's last performance: "Gold Dust: Live At The Royalty Theater" -- a  concert where she was in top form, singing her heart out, but the band was a bit off, with an inferior guitarist instead of her usual Jerry Donahue (whom she would have much preferred).  JD rerecorded nearly all the guitar parts, and additional vocals were flown in.  It sounds great, and although it's not history, it is a treasured recording -- not least for providing the opportunity to hear Simon Nicol (who hadn't yet learned to sing well when they were both in Fairport Convention) singing backup to Sandy -- they sound wonderful together, a natural combination, a glimpse at what might have been.  So in that case anyway I don't mind at all.  I'd much rather hear that than my boot of the undoctored performance.

[Nicko1234]

there are better? 

I wouldn't use the word 'better' around this subject.

But when you consider the sheer number of children that Jimmy Savile raped, I don't think you can quibble about using the word 'worst' in that context.

[Iron Horse-Apples]

However, in trying to get the rest of the his set prepared for release, they actually called in Santana decades later to replace the guitar tracks which were missing from the multis. Santana still had the exact guitar and gear he used at Woodstock, so they fired everything up, Santana played the parts, and that was it.

Do fans who either love Santana, love the Woodstock film and soundtrack, or simply wanted a complete set from that day mind what they did with Santana adding those guitar parts decades later? For me it seems a bit dishonest, yet it did fill in the missing parts as close as could be done with the original artist and original equipment adding rhythm guitar in the 2000's to tracks from 1969...but it surely is not "live" at that point.

Tough call.

Here I think of the cd of Sandy Denny's last performance: "Gold Dust: Live At The Royalty Theater" -- a  concert where she was in top form, singing her heart out, but the band was a bit off, with an inferior guitarist instead of her usual Jerry Donohue (whom she would have much preferred).  JD rerecorded nearly all the guitar parts, and additional vocals were flown in.  It sounds great, and although it's not history, it is a treasured recording -- not least for providing the opportunity to hear Simon Nicol (who hadn't yet learned to sing well when they were both in Fairport Convention) singing backup to Sandy -- they sound wonderful together, a natural combination, a glimpse at what might have been.  So in that case anyway I don't mind at all.  I'd much rather hear that than my boot of the undoctored performance.

Another fantastic performance by the best female folk vocalist EVER.

Fact not opinion! 

Good taste there OGoldin

[MarcellaHasDirtyFeet]

Great perspective on the need for a balanced approach on live releases, GuitarFool. I guess it really all comes down to the quality of the finished product, and not the approach taken to the live/overdub mix