The Smiley Smile Message Board

(http://l.yimg.com/bt/api/res/1.2/IurZT6A3ARszuLn8_AAo0Q--/YXBwaWQ9eW5ld3M7Zmk9aW5zZXQ7aD04NTE7cT04NTt3PTYzMA--/http://media.zenfs.com/en_us/News/Reuters/2012-04-10T224520Z_01_DLM117_RTRIDSP_3_BASEBALL.jpg)

Since it was kinda off-topic in the "Taylor Mills"-thread, I'm just starting a new topic on the possibility of Brian retiring (in some way) after the reunion shenanigans of 2012.
To quote myself:


I very much enjoyed seeing him and the band twice (more than that, those probably were two of the best days of my life..), but somehow I think Brian would be happier at home. The reasons are obvious.
What do you think?

Brian should be able to retire on his own terms and work in the studio if he feels like it. He could do some sonic experiments or finally make his "rock and roll" album.

Yeah, that's what I would like to see as well. He could spend a few years to make it (à la Postcard) and keep recording until he's satisfied. Could be no concept, no suite, nothing of that sort, just a few separate cool rock&roll tracks. An album of "Message Men", maybe. Or anything else.

In a perfect world, Brian should do what makes him happy.

Brian has nothing left to prove to anyone as a solo artist. I don't know why he should keep touring if he doesn't like it.

I don't think Brian will retire touring after this reunion.  Whether he should or not isn't my place to say.

The answer to this question depends on how things go with 50th tour.  Even if Brian decides that his touring days are over, he seems to have more than a little interest in writing music and occasionally being involved in the production of it.

This is a complicated issue. But there are a handful of facts to consider first.

1.) Brian has never toured heavily as a solo artist. He has averaged a two or three months' worth of shows a year since he's started touring. Most people would consider someone who doesn't work for an average of 9 or 10 months a year retired already. (The one exception, so far, was the year BWPS came out.)

2.) He has taken entire years off from touring. In 2003, he did three shows. In 2006, he did 11. I'm also pretty sure he didn't tour much in 2010, although I can't find the figures for it. This is not the portrait of a man being pressured against all reason to head out on the road.

3.) AGD has stated that Brian enjoys everything about touring except the actual performing. I have no reason to doubt this, particularly -- Brian has never said that he find performing a wholly enjoyable thing. He has said he enjoys the standing ovations and feedback from his crowds, however.

4.) The two years mentioned previously -- 2003 and 2006 -- that Brian took off from touring are when he produced GIOMH, the BWPS sequence, and all the songs for the TLOS project.

5.) There have been tours that have been extraordinary (the 2009 fall U.S. dates, most of the Smile shows, the PS Live jaunt in 2000), where it was clear Brian was functioning on a high level creatively. There have been tours (especially the attempt for a few years to turn him into a summer hits machine) where he has, by reasonable standards, been running through the motions.

6.) Brian's tours have never made huge amounts of money. I seem to recall that his U.S. jaunts have never made money (and in fact lost it), and that his overseas trips are pretty much the only ones that turn a profit.

7.) Melinda has been very clear that they don't book Brian to tour unless he wants to go out. But given that you're dealing with someone with mental illness, it's entirely possible that he might agree to do shows at one point and then not want to do them at a later point.

If you take all of these things together, you have a very shaded picture. There have been tradeoffs made from all sides, including Brian's. I feel very strongly that -- taken in total -- Brian has not been exploited over the past dozen years of touring. I think all sides involved -- from the wifeandmanagers to his band and its various factions -- want him to do well and feel the appreciation of fans.

But we can't deny that the touring has been more erratic in quality than you might expect -- it was a very smooth upward trajectory the first three or four or five years. It then bounced around for the rest of the 2000s -- sometimes you get a great tour, sometimes you get a poor one. And while it was likely a transformative experience for Brian at the beginning to experience fans' love of him and him alone, you get the impression he really doesn't require reinforcement on that front anymore.

On the other hand, he's been extremely productive in the studio. You could say that many of his records from the past 10 years came about directly because he had built up trust with his touring group. But (yet again), if he hadn't toured, he might have been driven to write more original material.

I think everyone (again, including Brian) has done their best. I don't think Brian will ever stop playing or recording entirely. I think he's still driven, to some extent. I do expect that the touring will probably taper off a bit -- maybe only a month or so of shows each year, or a couple of weeks.

Looking back, I think Brian overall should probably have toured less. I think a few more years off would have allowed for more original records, and for more energized solo tours when they were arranged. But I don't know how that applies to the future. It all has to do with what we value -- more original material, more new recordings, or more celebration of the pristine music of the past. I'm not sure there's a single right answer.

We want there to be this one answer. We want this to be simple. We want Brian to be exploited or in command of his destiny. Yet the man's entire life has been one of someone continually clinging to others and forcing them to make hard decisions for him. This won't be any different.

Interesting post Wirestone, it covers all the issues. I saw Brian three times in 1999, 2004, and 2008 and he really was good but at the last show I could tell he was really bored by everything but TLOS and some of the really obscure songs. I didn't notice that at all the other times. Still I am really looking forward to finally seeing everyone together, I saw them with Carl, Mike, Al, and Bruce, but never with Brian or David.

Yeah, I head the Gershwin shows were like that too. For the record, I saw him in 2000 (PS with symphony -- awesome show), 2001 with Paul Simon (kind of dud outdoors show, frankly), 2004 with Smile (impressive, although the band did a lot), 2007 with Al doing PS again (pretty cool, although you could tell BW was irked with AJ), summer 2008 hits show (very much "let's get this done with," although well-sung), and two of the fall 2009 shows, which blew the rest of the ones I'd seen away.

It struck me how difficult it must be to be Brian -- imagine knowing that you're capable of kickass shows and writing at the age of 66 or 67. And yet imagine knowing that your mental illness will make that impossible a notable percentage of the time. Tough to contemplate.

I just can't go along with the arguement that Brian tours for the money, c'mon people he is unbelievably minted. The profits from his tours are small change to a man of his wealth. All I can say is that out of the 15 shows I've seen him perform, three are the greatest shows I have ever seen anyone perform, 11 were excellent and 1 was poor, namely the Liverpool pops show. If Brian didn't want to tour he wouldn't tour, he may be encouraged but I can't ever believe he is ordered to tour against his wishes. To answer the question asked by the post, whatever Brian's decision, I'm cool with it. He's given me more than I could ever have expected, will I turn up for more if he wants to tour again in the UK, you betcha!

I hope he can make it through this tour.  It helps that he won't be singing nearly as much with the rest of the band there

The Gershwin show I saw actually had Brian very engaged, unlike the 2008 hits show at the Albert Hall, which was just horrible (the band as well as Brian - they messed up Heroes & Villains appalingly). The most engaged I've seen him was in 2007, with the TLOS premiere, but he does seem in general to prefer to be singing stuff other than the hits -- and who can blame him? He probably never needs to hear Surfin' USA ever again.

I always hoped that someday he'd do a show (with his band) of material he wanted to do-the more obscure tunes, not the standard fare of hits that have been run into the ground that  seems to bore him to death. He could most likely fill small venues with well promoted mini tours of selected songs from Today all the way through to the Disney CD. Let Myke and his tribe sweat to the oldies.

Thanks to the magic of Disney animatronics, Brian Wilson will continue touring for another 50 years.

</thread>

No - in a perfect world, Brian should do what we think makes him happy.

1998 -   1
1999 - 24 [ 4 overseas]
2000 - 43 (mostly Pet Sounds)
2001 - 31 (29 supporting Paul Simon)
2002 - 41 [30 overseas] (mostly Pet Sounds)
2003 -   3
2004 - 72 [46 overseas] (mostly BWPS)
2005 - 45 [25 overseas] (mostly BWPS)
2006 - 11 [ 2 overseas]
2007 - 39 [26 overseas] (some TLOS)
2008 - 37 [ 7 overseas] (mostly TLOS)
2009 - 38 [13 overseas]
2010 -   8 [ 6 overseas]
2011 - 38 [12 overseas] (mostly BWRG)
2012 - 60 [12 overseas] (BB C50)

He doesn't do that many gigs because there's low demand for it.  He did a lot of shows for "Smile," but after seeing 500 people show up for a gig for TLOS in Oakland, it doesn't surprise me he didn't do quite so many shows after that.  He also is giving more leads to other band members.  I'm sure he's easing out of it, if not planning on retiring entirely.  The Beach Boys name can get more shows than Brian Wilson, but it's doubtful he'll want to keep touring with them.  They're all getting around 70. At Mike's age, even he might stating easing out of it.

I could've sworn there were two shows in 1998...the St Charles show that was filmed, and his set at Farm Aid. not sure if the latter counts though. If it does, then there was also that show with Deana Carter.

I'm more interested in Brian working in the studio, creating more works of the caliber of TLOS; if I want to see a touring oldies act, there'll always been Mike's band.

You joke, but they just brought Tupac back to life with holograms....

I can't believe he is touring as it is,  or that any of them still are and sounding pretty good.  Legends.

Brian does seem to prefer to perform the non-hits to the hits. At the Gershwin show I saw, he was bored/off key during some of the hits set and totally engaged/singing with feeling during the Gershwin set. I wish he could just sing what he wants, but honestly, some of the audience members actually got up and left during the Gershwin stuff. A lot of people go see "the genius of the Beach Boys" because they want to hear Help Me Rhonda, not I Loves You, Porgy. I'm thinking everyone-- not just Brian's camp, but Brian himself-- knows that.

The people who make decisions for Brian are really in a tough place. How do you know what Brian wants when he changes every day, or when he enjoys some aspects of touring but not others?

Hell, at the first Gershwin show I went to, it was seriously the best show I ever saw Brian do...voice was better than ever, rousing applauses in the middle of the Gershwin songs, etc...

Anyhoo....regarding whether he'll retire from touring after the reunion??? All I know is that on Brian's official web site, it said something like "If you want to see Brian on a solo tour, you'll have to wait until 2013."

Doesn't sound like retirement.  :)

Looking over the hard facts and number of shows as posted in this thread by Wirestone and Andrew, it was pretty surprising to see the sum of Brian's recent work added up that way. For someone who, as late as the 90's, was thought to be done with performing and releasing music apart from the occasional project, Brian has built quite a resume over the past 13 years, and not just a resume but a pretty successful one at that. It sometimes feels like the fans forget just how recent it was that such output and activity from Brian Wilson would have been unheard of, and yet we as fans have had all of these chances to see and hear him...it's like we're getting comfortable knowing he will be working on a new album when not too long ago even news of him recording two new songs or making a guest appearance on stage would have caused elation and havoc among his fans.

What made it seem like Brian was irked with Al? I saw them on two of the roughly 11 shows they did together (one in January 2007 and one in June 2007), and I didn’t see Brian irked or see any kind of tension. I recall the June show in Saratoga where Brian had his “episode”, and Al seemed more concerned for Brian than the rest of the band (not that the band seemed unconcerned).

As for Brian’s touring the future, my guess would be a gradual reduction in shows. I doubt he’ll never do another show after the BB tour. I could even picture them informally or formally saying he’s pretty much “retired”, but still having him do a show here and there.

I’m just as curious what the entire BB organization will do after the tour. I suppose I don’t want to see these guys all retire if they can still put on a reasonably good show. But it would also be sad to see it just revolve back to the Mike/Bruce show again. I don’t know how much better it would be to just see Al and maybe David join Mike and Bruce. I also wonder if this whole reunion is sort of a case of putting their regular thing on hold and nothing more. That is, Mike is otherwise still happy to keep his lean-and-mean touring operation going rather than splitting it with Al. I think Al would add immensely to a Mike/Bruce show, but without Brian or a “reunion” to promote, I don’t know if Mike/Bruce adding Al would really lead to more tickets selling or more venues booked. It would just mean having to pay some proceeds out to Al as well.

I know, tour hasn’t even started yet; getting way ahead of ourselves.

Jude, do you remember when Brian laid down on stage when he was out here at the Saratoga Winery?  Wasn't that when he had words with Al and called him an A-hole or whatever it was? Al got on his nerves or something. Seems to me they met up at Big Sur around that time for Brian to record some vocals for Al's album. Or was that another time - maybe I got my dates screwed up. I did see Al with Brian in Oakland in '07.

I think AGD told me once about the reason why Brian and Al parted ways early during that tour, but I forgot.  Please help me with the chain of events here if I have it wrong, Jude.  Oakland, Shoreline, Saratoga, Berkeley, San Fran Symphony Hall, it's a haze already - my memory is killing me!

It's funny. it's hard to describe exactly what I'm talking about, except for the fact that the atmosphere seemed a little tense. Brian did not seem to acknowledge Al much -- if at all. At one point, Al tried to speak to the audience and Brian actually cut him off.

They sounded great, but again -- a weird vibe. You got the impression that Brian was being challenged a little bit for leadership of the band, and he did not like it. And guess what -- Al left the tour. You don't need to know. backstage gossip or be a rocket scientist to draw your own conclusions there.

Wow. I was at the Saratoga show where Brian sort of wound down and sat down on stage. But he hadn’t had any words with Al at the show (before or after the incident), and I’ve never heard an account from that tour of Brian calling Al any names. At the Saratoga show, Al called an impromptu intermission and seemed to kind of take charge, but it seemed to me more out of concern for Brian and his professionalism from having played gigs for so many years. They seemed to get along fine at the two shows I saw.

They never gave a really solid explanation of why Al didn’t do the European tour in 2007, but the total speculation I read back at the time seemed to be that it had more to do with financial considerations. Brian and Al has supposedly “decided” that Al wouldn’t be on the European tour, but then they recorded together and did the Saratoga gig after that, so I don’t think it was any sort of souring of their relationship. Al didn’t even really “leave” the band, as the 9 or so “Pet Sounds” shows he did with Brian were isolated special events; not a case of Al “joining” Brian’s band permanently. Al wasn’t even advertised or scheduled to be at the Saratoga show with Brian.

I suppose there could have been tension from Al being there, but I wonder how much could have occurred. They only did 11 gigs together, spread over 8 months or so. Also, I didn’t see any indication of Al trying to “lead” the band. I continually noticed how Al was noticeably underutilized at the shows, only getting a few lead vocals despite his voice being in such good shape. They really only gave Al one “showcase” vocal of a song that wasn’t already in Brian’s setlist prior to Al joining (“California Saga”; I think they did “Come Go With Me” at the first LA show together). Al sang “Then I Kissed Her” and “Help Me Rhonda”, and bits on “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” and “Sloop”, and I don’t think much else. On stuff like “Marcella”, he even gave up his stage-front spot to Scott and went off to the side of the stage and shook a tambourine and sang backing vocals.

It doesn't seem like five years already since Brian's tour where Al joined him. In Oakland, Ricky Fataar joined them on stage and he sure looked good behind the drums! Al, wearing his all white suit, did a great job with his guitar playing and vocals on the songs he lead.

At Saratoga, I witnessed what some would call a meltdown. Or another breakdown. At first I thought Brian had fainted, then a couple of people gathered him up and not much more was said. Later, someone said it was a hissy fit and another said he was mad at Al for something. Ultimately, I guess it was an immature display of emotion. Maybe that's why Al kinda maintained the professionalism as you say and the show went on.

But something happened, and I'm not so sure Al suddenly no longer being in the tour was about money. Or maybe like the Hines/Lizik departures, it was. I think Melinda was involved in the decision and/or Al bowed out under a little pressure. I think it was political. Sure hope all is well and forgotten between Brian and Al and there's ZERO past animosities still existing from ANY camps.

If you follow the band's history at all over the last few decades, It's pretty clear that the most difficult person to actually deal with in the group is Al. Mike may have some issues but ultimately is a pro. Al was first suspended from the group -- even saintly Carl couldn't stand him -- and was then kicked out altogether in the post-CW band. He also couldn't complete a simple tour with Brian.

 Remember too that it is been said that the first reunion sessions last year didn't go well -- but it wasn't because of Brian and Mike. Unless Bruce has developed some personality disorder of which we're unaware, that puts the source of the tension in a familiar place.

That is, Al.

I've followed the band since 1970, Wirestone. Mike Love has ALWAYS been the focal point of 'issues' and who's garnered the most attention, especially in interviews with the press. At least in all the publications and media and message boards that I've read all these years. Al was always the "quiet one", remember?

The scuttlebutt on Al is that he's a whiner and that he just complains too much. He's too finicky - like an old man. A pain in the ass. I'm sure he must have tempered that a bit by now, don't you think?

Don't remember ever reading that Carl had any real issues with Al. Maybe I've forgotten, but it seems to me that Carl was the reason Al stayed in the band despite some internal animosities that existed before Carl's death. Then Mike finally made a move and got Al ousted very soon after Carl passed away. The timing of it..........so soon afterward made it obvious who was behind it.

Mikie: I defer to your experience on this. I will say the suspension from the band around the time of SIP strongly suggests to me that Carl was fed up with AJ too. Why else would he go along with it, unless he supported Mike's feelings to some extent?

And there's no question that Mike publicly was the focal point of "issues." But that makes me wonder -- is that necessarily what the inter-group dynamics are like? It seems like Mike was pretty consistently supportive of Brian after Landy left (with the BWPS debacle excepted) -- and was perhaps the band member most supportive of the Paley material. Mike also overhauled his band when Brian's started getting attention and made it a pretty great little unit -- I've never heard anything bad about Mike from backing players, past or present. I mean, he's probably a bit stingy, but Melinda seems to be that way too. I mean, yes, Mike seems to have been a bastard in the late 70s, but I'm talking about since then.

I'm a pretty anti-Mike guy a lot of the time, but he's generally struck me as being abrasive as hell but generally okay. That is, once you get past his shell, and "sense of humor," he does take the music and the work seriously. Al, on the other hand, just seems to have some strange personality problems ...

Postscript: And yes, Mikie, I've heard similar things blowing in the wind about Saratoga. Brian didn't seem happy with Al. And he wasn't the only one who felt that way.

Al [and Brian and Carl's heirs] gets a split from Mike's touring whether he [they] tour with Mike or not.

I used to think Al was kind of a freak, but I've come to appreciate him.  He is an OCD nerd, but his heart is in the right place.  I never liked him based on interviews where he harped on "Loop De Loop" being under-produced, which I thought was absurd.  It's a really minor song that deserved to be unreleased,and Al's production didn't help it at all.  Although I do like what he did with "Cottonfields," which was an improvement.  I also found it odd that he tended to blame the failure of "Beach Boys Love You" on the quality of the cardboard sleeve.  That's just Al.  I really enjoyed seeing him on the Brian tour in 2007 at the  Oakland Paramount show and thought he really added to it.  I also thought Brian showed him affection in his intros and gestures.  I'm sure they're like brothers, sometimes getting along and sometimes not. 

I've never sensed any arrogance in Al such as one sees in Mike.  I'm not one of those anti-Mike people, because Mike is who he is, and his arrogance translated as a self-confidence that helped sell the records and the shows.  Mike sometimes has made disparaging remarks about Brian's mental problems and I've never heard Al doing anything of the sort.

lying down at the Saratoga Winery would be a good chance to look at the stars and planets.  I did that once.  Maybe Brian still enjoys the cosmos as in previous years.

It’s surely most likely that at certain points Al has been “difficult”, but I think way too much is being ascribed to him here. If the breakdown found in Stebbins and Marks’ “Lost Beach Boy” book concerning what has happened in the last 15-20 years in the band as it relates to the touring operation is accurate, it doesn’t sound like Al being “difficult” had much to do with his departure from the touring band.

As for Al’s “suspension” from the band in the “SIP” era, I suppose that could be the most apt word to quickly describe what was going on. But I don’t think in any real sense he was “suspended.” He simply didn’t participate in much of the sessions apparently. He was and has always been a full member of the organization. I’ve never read anything about Carl taking issue with Al at that time. There are a few comments in interviews from that era with Mike where Mike discusses Al having an attitude (I think having to do with getting hung up specific old issues) and the entire group going to some kind of therapy-type situation to hash everything out, and Mike described Al coming into the sessions and doing some great vocals.

I also haven’t heard any reports of Al causing problems at the “reunion” session. I spoke to Al back in 2005 and even then he seemed pretty keen on doing a reunion. He’s been on about it for a number of years now.

I obviously can’t say what was going on behind the scenes, but nothing at the show itself seemed to indicate a rift between Brian and Al. I again have go back to pointing out that Al was not being prominently featured at these shows really. He did a few lead vocals and otherwise blended in with the backing band. He never emceed the shows or anything even. Al specifically wasn’t even scheduled to play Saratoga, and surely only could have done so at the invitation of Brian and his organization. If Brian, and certainly if “others” had some huge beef with Al, they would not have been hanging out in Big Sur cutting vocals on Al’s album and inviting Al to do an additional show that Al hadn’t been scheduled to do.

Believe me, I know how the BB world can be really weird and I don’t doubt the possibility that there are often behind-the-scenes odd politics. In this particular case, though, I don’t buy that they were involving Al to such a large degree if they had such a huge beef with him.

Not to dredge up old tired stuff from debates from nearly a decade ago or more, but it’s worth mentioned to those that aren’t familiar with the touring setup that Al (and all members of BRI) share in the licensing fee that the “Beach Boys” tour pays out. They do not all share equally in all tour proceeds. So it’s not as if Brian or Carl’s estate or Al have made the same amount of money as Mike on the Mike/Bruce shows even when they are just sitting in their pajamas at home.

It’s worth noting that this is how license situations are often setup. The operation licensing the name (in this case Mike’s touring operation) pays the license holder (BRI) a certain agreed-upon fee (either a flat fee, or a percentage, or a mixture of the two) off the top, and then the touring operation gets everything else and divvies it up accordingly. In other words, all these years in the 2000’s, Brian and Al would have been making more money actually actively being in the touring band.   

It will be interesting to see if we ever get any details on how the current “reunion” tour is being handled in this regard. Presumably, Brian, Mike, and Al at least are splitting it up evenly. I wouldn’t be surprised if Mike actually would make less money (per show anyway) on this reunion tour than he would on his own lean-and-mean tours where he’s only splitting the smaller licensing fee.

For sure, Al has his quirks. I can’t imagine he, or anybody in a band going that long, has always been perfect to deal with. It sounds like one of Al’s things is getting hung up on a specific, old issue. Isn’t there some story from the 80’s of Al still having some issue with money he had loaned Gary Usher like 20-something years earlier?

I just think it’s funny, given the history of this band and what most of the other members have done and gone through, that Al would be singled out much for being the difficult one. In the grand scheme of things when it comes to this band, it doesn’t appear Al has been the root cause for any major ills of this band. 

Depends on a variety of things. They may have been able to reduce the licensing fee to BRI for a set period (which might be why Bruce keeps saying that everything has to be done by mid-August). And if they're playing larger venues or charging higher ticket prices they might get more money. Also, remember, whoever organises Mike's tours (presumably MELECO) has to pay all the costs, while on this tour the costs will presumably be borne by BRI.

I imagine there'll also be some back and forth over the setlist. The more songs with a co-writing credit for Mike make the set, the more money he makes -- and of course the same goes for Al or Brian. I wouldn't be surprised to see a lot of the cover versions dropped for precisely that reason -- if they play California rather than California Dreamin', Al gets extra, and so on.