The Smiley Smile Message Board

I have seen a lot of people saying he is a "original" member or "founding" member, but at the same time, there are just as many people who disagree.
Doesn't help that until the 50th Anniversary, he was virtually forgotten by non-hardcore BB's fans. He wasn't even inducted into the RRHOF with the other BB's!
Anyway, was he a founding member or not? As far as I know, Wikipedia disagrees.

In my opinion, yes.  It's just that the circumstances of the band's founding wasn't as straight forward as most bands.

"Yes" from this camp too. As in my view was Al. It's too close to call, if anyone's mithered anyway, and given that it was more than 50 years ago everyone's earned their chops.

Fact: When they signed with Capitol Records, David Marks was a Beach Boy
Fact: When they recorded Surfin, or the Hite Morgan recordings David Marks wasn't there (?)

Was Ringo Starr an original Beatle? He was there when they got signed right?

Didn't he miss the "Surfin'" session solely because his mom wouldn't let him stay home from school? Swear I saw him say that somewhere.

Here's the thing...

He played and sang with the Wilsons before the Beach Boys existed. As someone actually CALLED a Beach Boy, he was not an original.

David Marks initially started getting more acknowledgement even before C50 because of Jon Stebbins' book about him, which also goes into more detail about the band's formation than anything that had been written before it.  I recommend reading it for the full story on whether DLM is an original member or not, but basically:

1) He played guitar with Carl prior to the formation of the Beach Boys
2) He wasn't at the recording of "Surfin'"
3) His joining and leaving the band had nothing to do with the leaving and rejoining of Alan Jardine, as had previously been thought

Yes, he is. Even when he wasn't officially in the band, he lived right across the street from and interacted with the Wilsons.

The 3 Wilson brothers, their cousin Mike Love and childhood friend Al Jardine, those are the founding members of The Beach Boys. Those are the 5 kids who formed a band, performed live and recorded a single (even if Al's first stint as a member was for a cup of coffee).
David Marks may have lived a few doors away, learned the guitar with Carl and even jammed with the others but he only became a BEACH BOY when Al left.


He was written off for too many years as a footnote, "filling in" while Al went to college. He seems to be getting his dues in later life.

I think that technically David Marks wasn't a founding member, since he wasn't part of the group during either the first recording session or the first live appearance, which I think is pretty crucial for being a "founding member". But others have argued that group's line-up wasn't set in stone yet at the time and that Marks was already playing with them before they officially became The Beach Boys.

Marks is a founding member. He signed the major recording contract with Capitol. By the time any of us who lived outside of LA heard of the Beach Boys, it was David who was part of the group.

He was on their first album so I'd say yes.  The band was still in its developmental stage during the Hite Morgan sessions.  When they officially debuted on a major label, Dave was in the band.

Of course Dave Marks is a founding member and an original member!  He was there at the beginning (first 4 albums and many singles) and he's there now.  And I'm really glad he is. Great guitar player, a good singer, and a good person.  He still represents the Beach Boys very well. 

I just wish Carl and Dennis were still around to see and appreciate Dave's talents on the road and in the studio, and to have a few laughs about old times. David was like a brother to the Wilsons.

That's the way I look at it. Al is an original member and David is a founding member in that Al was a member originally before David but David's name and not Al's is on the contract with Capitol.

Here's a thing: David is always saying that he was on the first five albums. He says it in the Endless Harmony doc, and again in the MIC book. But what Shut Down Vol 2 song(s) did he play on?

Contract with Capitol has nothing to do with it; they were the Beach Boys before they joined Capitol. They were the Beach Boys upon the release of "Surfin'," which did not have David Marks on it. Let me put it to you this way: David was never a Pendletone.

Hell, the Beach Boys didn't know they were Beach Boys until after Surfin' was released.

Hasn't it been mentioned that he was on Don't Worry Baby? I could be wrong...

It's been a few years since I read Jon's book but I seem to remember in it David saying how disappointed he was that he wasn't initially asked to join the band.
I know this is going to come off as snarky but some people need to read the definition of the word 'original' because it clearly doesn't apply to David's Beach Boys status.

The founding members of the Beach Boys are Brian, Carl, Dennis, Mike, and Al. Being a neighbor, friend, guitar buddy, doesn't make one a founding member. But David is about as close as a person can get without actually being one.  :lol

So, if you were to do this for the Beatles, then Ringo is just a replacement member?

I am glad you brought that up.

If you asked any person living in liverpool in 1962 they would say yes, Ringo is a replacement member... and I would agree. Yes. Ringo Starr is not a founding member of the Beatles. Not even close.

Having said that, Pete Best was not a founding member either. John Lennon is technically the only founding member of the Beatles. Though since they wouldn't take that name for 3 more years after he started the group I suppose a case could be made that Paul and George are also founding members of The Beatles.

John, Paul, George and Ringo are the only Beatles most of the world knew when they broke big. To me, it is all in perspective as to when they became known to the masses.

Therein lies the descrepancy. Is being a "founding member" defined by when they became famous or when the group made the commitments to be together in group?

By your definition Dave Grohl is a founding member of Nirvana, where I would say he was not (Chad Channing would bear that distinction).

So, the founding members of the Rolling Stones would be Jagger, Richards, Dick Taylor,  Allen Etherington and Bob Beckwith? Or Jagger, Jones, Taylor, Brian Jones, Ian Stewart, and Tony Chapman?

I don't know enough about the Stones.  :-[

Well, you guys have some good points about "founding member" and "original member". But.........this is what I have come up with as far as definitions. Note the similarities:

"Founding member". A founding member of a club, group, or organization is one of the first members. To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence. To establish or formulate the foundation or basis of. To bring something into existence and set it in operation. To create, establish, institute, organize.
 
When you look up the definition of "Original member", it points to "Founding member".

Then there's "Charter member". An original member or a founding member of a group, club, society, or organization.
 

And let's not go there with the similarities between Pete Best and David Marks. Stebbins will come in here and turn it topsy-turvy.  ;D

Agreed. The two are really not in anyway analogous.

The Beatles example gets very murky because through different line-ups they morphed from The Quarrymen to Johnny and the Moondogs to The Silver Beatles to The Beatles. I don't think Pete Best was even in the band when they dubbed themselves 'The Beatles'. So really The Beatles didn't so much form as 'evolved' from previous groups.

The Beach Boys line-up is much more clear cut because the 5 guys who formed as 'The Pendletones' were exactly the same 5 guys who changed/had their name changed to 'The Beach Boys'.

All I care about is how the band recognize it, and they recognize both Al & Dave. It's their band and their call that should answer this question.

I think just the fact that you've asked that question indicates that the very term 'founding member' is overrated.

Exactly.  Because the founding of the band included a morphing line-up of six different members, I say those six were all founding members.  In fact, had Al not rejoined (for the road) so soon after leaving, I'd count Dave as the founding band member and Al as just a guy who played on the demo.  ALL six guys were VERY active from the time Brian started putting the idea together and the time of the band really broke through.

I guess all those people splitting hairs don't think Dennis is a founding member either because Audree made Brian include him "after" he had the idea of a band AND he didn't even play on the "Surfin'" demo. :p

Except that Dennis was there at the first Hite Morgan session where he mentioned that they had a song called Surfin'.

+1

Reference? If I can see/hear that, it would be good enough for me too.

Look at the Landmark in Hawthorne...it was the Wilsons...actually it was Brian's call who would be named on the monument. Brian, Dennis, Carl, Mike, Al and Dave are the names on it. And in case anybody is forgetting, that was settled before my book on David came out.

Chad was actually their fourth drummer, Dave their sixth. ^_^ Further evidence that the whole hardon for the "founding member" thing is of little significance and, as others said, the formation of the Beach Boys was a very loose thing when compared to other bands.

Some are talking like it either has to be Al or it has to be Dave. To me, they may as well both be considered founding members when you actually consider all aspects and set aside rigid definitions of who signed a contract or who played on a first single or whatever.

True. Well that settles it for me. Signed. Sealed. Delivered.

Interesting topic though.

Per Nirvana, like the Beatles before them, they never had a real steady drummer until Chad. The others were pretty much just one night stands.

The monument should realistically settle the argument.... It hardly matters anyhow. I mean, isn't Malcolm Young the only founding member of AC/DC??? I don't even know if that's true. I think the older Young brothers actually started the band.

I see your question was answered with same one I would give you.

They should have put Bruce's name on the nearest manhole cover  ;D

Let's Get Together And Call The Whole Thing Off  :lol

Rb

So Peter Green and Jeremy Spencer aren't original Fleetwood Mac members? And everybody who came before Lindsey Buckingham and Stevie Nicks (including the great Danny Kirwan and Bob Welch) doesn't matter as well?

That one don't work for me.

True. Lol in my opinion the best Fleetwood Mac line-up would be the one with Peter Green and Jeremy Spencer! IMHO Their late-70's and 80's era is criminally overrated

With the Stones, the founding members are Brian Jones, Ian Stewart, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. Dick Taylor and Tony Chapman were fill-ins, like the Beatles drummers before Pete and Ringo. Bill Wyman joined in December 1962, and Charlie Watts joined in January 1963, so neither of them are founding members.

David Marks lived across the street from the Wilson's Home and i say that he was in the Original Band of the Beach Boys!   He was over at their house like every day playing Guitar with Carl Wilson.

I guarantee you NO ONE here knows who the founding members of Paul Revere and the Raiders are, other than Paul himself...and maybe, if I stretch it, Mark Lindsay.

Also, was David Marks ever part of the Pendletones?

(Malcolm and Angus Young founded AC/DC, then were taken under the production auspices of big bro George and his mate Harry Vanda, previously the brains behind The EasyBeats (Friday on my mind). Vanda & Young were subsequently responsible for a big chunk of commercially sucessful 70s/80s Oz hard pub rock and John Paul Young (Love is in the Air)).

There's the original/founding line up, and then there's the classic line up. The former is a question of definition, the latter the result of common acclaim. If you're being entirely picky - and that's so unlike me - David, while being undeniably part of the genesis of the band, wasn't on the first release or shows. However, rock & roll isn't so black and white: to me, David is an original.

From David's mouth in a Rolling Stone interview last year...

RS: Are you playing on "Surfin'" at that first Beach Boys home recording session?
DM: I was not present at that. I was at school. We rehearsed that song in the music room and it was in the afternoon and I was at school. Shortly after that, however, we did the "Surfin' Safari" demo for Capitol Records.

RS: Was Al Jardine around for much of this time period?
DM: Yeah. Al Jardine was in the very, very beginning of the band. When they were doing local gigs he played the standard bass. He was very into folk-oriented music, like the Kingston Trio. He really wanted to go in that direction. He did stick around for the first Capitol stuff that we did. He wasn't on the first contract, but he did end up participating on the albums. We were actually on "In My Room" and some of those songs together. He was also on "Catch a Wave" from the Surfer Girl album.
Al also did a lot of work with us on the road when Brian decided to stay home on those first tours. Al came on the road with us and did Brian's bass parts and sang his falsetto parts. I would say there were six original Beach Boys, if you really want to get technical.

So while Davis does say that the band played out without him early on, he considers himself an original member, as do I.

Really? A tagged-up slab on the bottom of an interstate is going to be our official point of reference?

And Jon -- really, you're going to trust Brian's judgment as the official definition, the man said:
- that he was born deaf in his right ear
- that he went deaf in his right ear after Murry hit him
- that he burned the Smile tapes
- that he didn't burn the Smile tapes
- that he only did acid twice?
- that he only did acid once?
- that his favorite movie is Norbitt?
- that Dennis was an asshole?
- that his favorite Beach Boys album is The Beach Boys Love You?
- that his favorite Beach Boys album is Keepin' The Summer Alive?
- that his favorite Beach Boys album is Friends?
- that he wrote "Lay Down Burden" in memory of Carl?

For all we know, if you ask Brian today who should go on the monument, he might say "Mike, Danny Hutton, Gloria Ramos, and me." Tomorrow he might say "Me, Al, and Mike." Next Thursday he might say to put David on there twice. You can't deny that the man can't make up his mind. The only things consistent with Brian: his favorite song/record: "Be My Baby," his favorite album: A Christmas Gift To You From Phil Spector, and his favorite Beatles song: "Let It Be."

Again???

Is David an "original"?

There's so much about this band that's yet to be discussed -- so much.
And we're back to THIS?
Haven't all the facts been uncovered?
Don't we already have the definitive answer on this?

I rate the question equal to "How tall was Denny?"

I have always  assumed he was 5'9-ish.

Discuss?  ;D

How about the 1975-1982 Brian's daily caloric intake? :hat

He never really said this, did he?

The way this reads is that Al was almost a secondary member when they started out. Dave rehearsed the first record but wasn't there for the recording of it. So actually he was in the band at that point. So was Al. Both Al and Dave were playing local gigs. Dave was on the first contract, Al wasn't. Al then bolted, Dave stayed in the band. Then Al came back and recorded on a few album tracks, but wasn't pictured on the album covers. Plus he went on the road to replace Brian. They switched back and forth the first couple of years, then Dave left the band and Al was there to stay until he became a full-fledged Beach Boy in what, 1973?

For some reason, all of this was not known to fans up until somewhere around the 1990's. And the details were still not known until around the time Jon's book came out. I remember discussing it with a fellow fan back in the 70's after I picked up the sheet music to Surfer Girl (Guild Music) and wondering why both David and Al were pictured on the cover sheet. It was confusing back then - the true history of it wasn't known to the average fan. Everybody figured Dave was fired by Murry - I think some article said that Murry tore off Dave's picture on the end of the Surfin' Safari picture sleeve, Murry fired him, and that was it. That's all we knew. Then we found out that Al was in the band before or around the same time as David, and that Al left for Dental school then came back. But NOW we know.......the truth!

Yup. When the album came out. He was asked in an interview what his favorite Beach Boys album was.

now I have a headache!   >:D

Is it really tagged up?  WOW that's too bad!

Well i think BW settled this argument  a few years ago. If you cant agree with the LEADER of the group and the whole reason they exisit (BW) whats the point af arguing.. I was around when the BB 1st started and there was no question David was an original..In the fall of 1963 on a local music show{ Hollywood a go go  KHJ #9 } BB showed up to to lip sync their new 45 release.. BTTYS + IMR. On this show BW introduced Al as the new member.. Now this was a few yrs before we would know the history of the group. When you ad up all available info there are 6 original BB..  No question about it.. Al + David were there at the start goin back + forth weather Al's pic is on the cover. Recording + touring together..BW allways wanted Al back in the group for his voice. It just took Al a yr or so to to do it..

It is a technical question and semantics come into play. It can't be BOTH AL and David. The one person I'm NOT going to rely on for facts is Brian Wilson. And, we already know how Al Jardine feels; he mentions "his story" in every interview lately. Please don't question him about this issue. I don't want him complaining about more stuff...

Sure it can!  Why not?

"Move along people.  Nothing to see here!"  >:D

(http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8d/FrankDrebin.jpg)

Now to take it up a notch, had Brian remained healthy in the late 70s, would Bruce ever have been invited back? Also, if Dennis and Carl were still with us, would Dave have been invited back to the reunion or would they still ignore his contributions?

If you want to choose Al, then you would hang your hat on Al and Brian talking about forming a group in high school, and, after graduation, actually seeing it through with the Hite Morgan sessions. That incarnation wasn't THE BEACH BOYS YET, so there is that technicality. But, if you still consider that unit to be the "founding" part of the argument, then Al is your man.

So Al (admittedly) leaves the band - which still ISN'T the Beach Boys (what are they, The Pendletons or Kenny & The Cadets or whatever) - and David joins. Al and David are not BOTH in the band at that point. They sign a contract with Capitol Records, Russ Regan names them The Beach Boys, so that's the LEGAL beginning of the group - and AL ain't there, David is.

So, hey, take your pick. But, in my opinion, it's one or the other.

Sorry, but the band Alan left in February 1962 most definitely WAS The Beach Boys. Record label said so.

You've got your early BB history arse about face.  ;D

The 'Surfin' single had been out a couple of months by the time Al left, so the band he was leaving was actually called "The Beach Boys".

It's simple semantics, David cannot be an original or founding member if he REPLACED someone who LEFT. Yes he had always been lurking in the background, was no stranger to the Wilson's musically and was the natural choice to join when Al bolted. But unless someone can unearth definitive proof of all 6 guys playing together at the same time in 1961, under the assumption that they had offically formed a six man band and having settled on the name "The Pendletones" then the question is moot.

Ah, but see they WERE The Beach Boys when Al left. You forgot the Surfin'/Luau singles on Candix and 'X' and the record labels where they say "Beach Boys" on them. So they were called The Beach Boys before signing to Capitol and when BOTH David and Al were in the group at that point.

But does it count if the Beach Boys didn't know they were the Beach Boys until after the record came out? ;) They were the Pendletones with a label mistake.

I just want to know how long the Carl & The Passions group lasted.  Days?  Weeks?  A few months?

Dave was a foundling member of the BB.

He was only 3 years old.  ;)

I stand corrected! I am starting to forget things... :-[

So according to AGD"S timeline Al was in the group 1st.. He leaves in febuary 1962 comes back one year later. Meanwhile Carl + David are learning guitar together before + after 2/62. When Al left im sure they were workin on songs that ended up on 1st lp. Ill bet Brian wanted Al in group and Carl + Dennis wanted David.. When 1963 rolls around Al is in the fold but not officially..But the pics on lp"s dont follow timeline that well . pics on SS + SUSA were takin around the same time + also LDC lp has those photos also they appear to be 1962. meanwhile SG lp pics look newer.. I believe BW when he says there are 6 offical BB..And Murry was so hard to deal with that using Al as his live replacment might have been a ploy to get Al back in group + around Murry.. If there werent problems With David + his parents with Murry things would be alot different..

Yep.  Six founding members.

It's a fine point and probably a pointless point but.....if David was in the band at the time why wasn't it made sure he was at the recording? Carl and Denny had school too. Probably a Mom thing. Anyway who cares.

Or played on the first batch of demos. Or was present on the long weekend when they hired instruments and offically formed the band. Or played at the first handfull of gigs. Or attended the Hite Morgan audition where they perfomed Sloop John B.  The answer is simple.

Agreed! Almost 4 pages and no minds have been changed.

so Why didn't David Marks play with the Beach Boys in their first few gigs??? :-\

Nah. You guys changed my mind... About Marks. Not Ringo though.;)

At the risk of causing a brain hemorrhage from banging my head on the wall further, because he wasn't in the fucking group when they first formed.  ;D

Lol. Your opinion. But I've noticed that more people agree on this discussion that David Marks was a founder than disagree.

What he said wasn't an opinion

???

That is a damn good question and one that I wish was answered. Another question I would like answered is when did David find out that the Boys went into the studio  and cut Surfin' and Luau?

I can't really imagine the classic Beach Boys (up until David left) with either three guitarists, with Brian as a singer without an instrument, or with Brian playing keys throughout the whole set. So I don't know how all six Beach Boys could've been in the band at the same time back then.

Let's go through the established timeline carefully.

In the Summer of '61 Al suggests to Brian that they form a group. Mike had also been on at Brian to form a group,  so the 3 of them join together. Brian also drags his younger brother Carl along.

A few months later Al secures them a tryout at Hite Morgan, having made contact with them before with his old band The Islanders. At this point Dennis had also joined the band at his mother's persistence. The 5 kids who go to Hit Morgan Studios to perform Sloop John B. (and maybe one or two other folk standards) are Brian, Mike, Al, Carl and Dennis. No David Marks. At the session Dennis tells the story of how they have written a song about surfing.

On the Labour Day Weekend with their parents out of town, everyone camps to the Wilson house with a rented upright bass to practice. The main focus is the newly written Surfin'. The five kids in the band again consists of Brian, Mike, Al, Carl and Dennis. No bandmember has ever mentioned David Marks being present at these practices in a musical capacity.

A couple of weeks later the band, by now dubbed "The Pendletones" demo Surfin' and two other songs at the Morgan's home studio. David Marks had nothing to do with this session.

At the start of October the five piece band record Surfin', Luau and Lavender at World Pacific Studios. David Marks is not present.

In December the renamed "Beach Boys" make their live debut during a Dick Dale concert. The line-up for the band is again Brian, Mike, Al, Carl and Dennis. No David Marks. The same line-up performs a second gig a week or so later, again without David Marks (is anyone else starting to sense a pattern here?).

Also in December the band make their first ever TV appearance, albeit on a small, local televison channel. David Marks must have been stuck in school YET AGAIN, because again he does not appear.

A handfull of other small time gigs over the next month or so again feature a David Marks free line-up.

In Febuary the guys again record at Pacific Studios. The early version of Surfin' Safari is one of the tracks laid down. And guess what?...that's right, David Marks was not a part of these sessions.

Sometime in the middle of the month Al resigns from the band. However he may have honored any outstanding live commitments he had made prior to leaving. There is speculation that the group may have done a concert or two around this time as a four piece. Roughly 3 weeks after Al splits, David Marks makes his live debut with the band.

Dem's de facts. That we have long time posters and BB fans from waaaay back suddenly posting under the belief that the group had 6 members from day one has me baffled.

There's one thing you're missing at least. In your version of what happened, it completely leaves out David Marks rehearsing "Surfin'" with the rest of the Beach Boys/Pendletones. Keep in mind this was just before the Hite Morgan sessions. Then, he was supposed to join them for the sessions, but his mum refused to let him go, she'd rather him go to school instead.
I'm not too sure about the rest of the story, but as far as I know, David was practicing and rehearsing with them since the very start.

Brian was mainly a pianist, and Al was sort-of the bassist at the start. Correct me if I'm wrong.

Common sense is telling me to walk away from this one but one last try.


Yes David was close to the Wilsons and had been learning guitar with Carl for some time. He also played in the family sessions that included Murry and Audree. If Brian was trying out some idea in the music room and needed a few extra voices he would rope Carl and Dave into helping him out. David has mentioned that several early BB songs had their genesis in the stuff that he and Carl helped Brian work on. Dave has also said that he attended countless jam sessions at the Wilson house prior to any solid decision to form a band.

BUT it seems the second Brian and Al (and Mike) became serious about forming a group Dave was cut out of the emerging picture. He WASN'T invited to the Hite audition, he WASN'T invited to the Labour Day rehearsal (and when he did drop by was not made particulary welcome by Brian and soon left) and he WASN'T invited to the Surfin' recording.

Where this story that his mother wouldn't let him skip school to attend the session has sprung from, I'm not sure. For YEARS David has told it that he simply wasn't asked.

Anyway I'm done. This thing will just go round and round.

So Mikes Beard, are you saying there is an attempt at historical revision going on within the Beach Boys camp?

Can't speak for MB, but I would say "yes", with a little help from influences outside the BB camp.

If nothing, clearing it up some. Everything took place in such a short amount of time, that all 6 needed to be represented and they are. There was much flux going on in that short amount of time. Everything from changing band members to changing band names. They didn't even know they were Beach Boys until after the Surfin' single was released.

Earlier people compared Dave to Pete Best but the truth is, it was AL who played the Pete role.  He was there as things were gestating but gone by the time of the band's real debut.  Compare: The sessions with the Morgans = the Decca audition tapes.  "Surfin'" = "My Bonnie".  "Surfin' Safari" (the song) = "Love Me Do".  Surfin' Safari (the album) = Please Please Me.  At this point, the band is Brian, Mike, Carl, Dennis, and Dave, while Al is relegated to footnote status.  However, since Al's absence is only temporary, the scenario changes and the band's early days wind up encompassing six different members.

Problem with that is, unless I am mistaken, Al still played on every record but Surfin' USA. Right?

Strictly speaking, right. To be more precise, Alan played on "Surfin'" on the first album, but nothing else (obviously), nothing on Surfin' USA, and four tracks on Surfer Girl. David played on everything except "Surfin'" on the first four albums. The probability that he played on "Drive-In" on SDV2 is pretty good in my mind.

That's my point, really.  Al's leave was VERY short and his speedy return is what kept him from being the Pet Best footnote.

Drive In is on All Summer Long..Sorry AGD..  I like Phoenix answer also.. There are 6 original BB..

Seventeen months is "VERY short" ?

And yes, mea culpa.

Mike's Beard is speaking the truth, David Marks is not an original member.

Pet Best

I guess you guys (and especially Mike's Beard) are right. Judging by everything I read, while David Marks was NOT a Founding member, he did join almost immediately after, and it was not because of Al Jardine leaving.

I think a much more interesting question is (and the answer may be obvious, so forgive me if so): was David always in the vocal blend on the first four albums? I honestly don’t know how to pick his voice out in the stack. Were some of the harmonies just Brian, Mike, Carl, and Dennis? Or was David always in there? Hell, was Dennis always in the stack?

Also, which songs, if any, have all 6 of them singing harmony? 

Compared to Pete Best's time out of the Beatles, it's EXTREMELY short!  ;D   As I said, had he not returned (as Pete did not), he would have been a footnote (as Pete was).  Because he did return, just outside the first year, he instead was "the new guy who was actually there at the beginning too" so his brief and early contribution made it seem like he just took a "short" break".  And in 50+ years, what's a year and a half between high school and neighborhood friends?  :)

Word is he was usually NOT in the blend, as he was still going through puberty and as such, his voicre hadn't fully developed yet.

I always wondered that too especially on The Surfer Girl album which has my favorite stereo (wide) mix of their vocals of any album.  Having Dennis on everything with just a Wilson/Love blend (no David or Al) makes it a little unique.  It's also interesting to think that at that point Dennis was probably considered the 3rd lead singer before Carl. 

One important difference between either Al or David on the one hand and Pete Best on the other is that Al and David both left of their own volition (or in David's case, that of his parents) whereas Pete Best left The Beatles because the other members of the band didn't want him.  There's no way that Best would have been allowed to return after 17 months the way that Al was, and even if a 50th Beatles anniversary tour and album were plausible, do you honestly think anyone would invite Pete Best to join them?

pete worst.

Your timeline starts a little late IMO...
1958 Carl and David begin regular rehearsals on guitar with the intention of getting something together musically
1959/60 Brian teaches Carl and David original BW material
1960/61 Carl and David are regularly rehearsing/developing material that ends up on the 62/63 Beach Boys albums

Add this to the beginning of your timeline for accuracy

I don't understand the obsession with some in the Marks mafia who seem to think that getting David credited as an "original" or "founding" member matters at all. Who cares? All I know is that he was for sure in The Beach Boys when they recorded "Surfin' U.S.A.", "Farmer's Daughter", "Lonely Sea", "Surfer Girl" and "Little Deuce Coupe" among many others. So that means he is on the recordings of a whole lot of Beach Boys classics. He is now recognized as a full, contributing member during a great era for the band. Who cares if he's "original"? Lindsey Buckingham isn't an "original" Fleetwood Mac member, but his contributions to that band mean a hell of a lot more to me and many others than Jeremy Spencer's.

So screw the "original" sh*t. Don't matter.

I'm totally with you on this one, Jon.

As for why those of us consider him an original member is for the simple fact that he (along with Al) was there at the beginning and the band's formation didn't happen with just one specific incident but over the course of several months, and including all six guys.  Seeing it beyond anything but that is splitting hairs. 

...In my opinion.  :)

As for the Pete Best comparison, OF COURSE there are differences.  Otherwise (as I've said a few times already), Al would be a footnote like Pete.

...But he's not.

...Because of the differences.

Get it?   :-\

Jon did you miss when I typed this -

Yes David was close to the Wilsons and had been learning guitar with Carl for some time. He also played in the family sessions that included Murry and Audree. If Brian was trying out some idea in the music room and needed a few extra voices he would rope Carl and Dave into helping him out. David has mentioned that several early BB songs had their genesis in the stuff that he and Carl helped Brian work on. Dave has also said that he attended countless jam sessions at the Wilson house prior to any solid decision to form a band.

Which still does not really validate a claim to original band status. The band formed in a strictly technical sense when Al approached Brian about getting something together and Brian hooked him up with Mike and Carl.

So I guess David was a band member but not available for participation in band activity in the beginning but then was available coincidental with Al deciding he was getting out of the band.

This.

The Marks mafia. I like that. I'm going to use that one.

I might add to any timeline the genesis of three eventual members learning/rehearsing material that ended up on the group's first albums...which happened prior to your suggested beginning of the "group".

Think it's pretty inescapable from the timelines presented that Dave was part of the Wilson circle, but not an original Beach Boy. Brian seems to have specifically not wanted him in the group.

On the other hand, he joined soon after and helped develop the sound we know and love with Carl. So he was inescapably part of the band that first rocketed to national fame.

My head hurts.

Not wanted him in the group in 1963 or not wanted him in the group for C50?  Or both?

He still wasn't fucking in The Beach Boys on their first record or their first appearances! Therefore, not an original. We get it, you wrote about him and you think he's a great guy. I've never met him, but he sure seems like a freakin' awesome dude. But he was not in the original group. But he was on their first album and the group's first really big hits. John McVie was part of the original Fleetwood Mac. Bob Brunning was the original bassist for the first show and I think a few recordings. However, you don't see any biographers wetting their pants trying to say McVie was an original member. Cuz it don't matter. He's been on nearly every important recording by the group, and who gives a sh*t if he is original.

Chill. Dave is still important, even if he wasn't there at the very beginning. He was there before the beginning, but that don't matter.

In the group originally. Probably because he was so young. But of course Dennis wasn't there originally either. Thanks, Audree!

I thought about bringing that up too but.......

I already did and for some reason it's OK to apply that type of hair splitting being to Dave but not Dennis.  Talk about making your head hurt.   ::)

Dennis didn't join until a little while later, so he's not a founding member. The founding members are Brian, Al, and Mike (and to a lesser degree Carl as he was roped into the whole thing by Brian). However as Dennis wasn't replacing someone when he joined and the band had neither played live or recorded anything in it's so far short existence you could make a good arguement that he was an original member.

Now my head hurts...... ;D

Why so nasty? Is it really that important that someone thinks differently than you? This is exectly what takes the fun out of discussing the band in here. It's not the end of the world if Jon or the surviving members of the band, or some of us in here believe David to be a founding member.

"Founding member" = "Original member".

A "founding member" or "original member" of a club, group, or organization is one of the first members. To establish or set up, especially with provision for continuing existence. To establish or formulate the foundation or basis of. To bring something into existence and set it in operation. To create, establish, institute, organize.

I'd say Dave was/is an original member based on that definition.

Mikie
Founding member, Marks Mafia
11818 Kornblum Ave.
Hawthorne, California, USA 90250

 :thumbsup

I know...pretty funny. He's cussing at me...throwing childish insults...but is simultaneously suggesting that I "chill".  I assume he feels my three brief posts in this thread have been out of line.

No. You just get way too emotionally invested in the guys you write about and let it cloud your judgment of reality.

 If the shoe fits....

Finding size 13 shoes when you have a wide foot and are looking for non-leather is a nightmare, you guys. Ugh.

Never wrote a book about David Marks.

Also, never wrote a book about Dennis Wilson either. Nor did I ever claim to have enough insight into the man's work that I would add a part into "Album Tag Song" that wasn't recorded for it.

and yet you "write" here all the time( and still can't see the forest for the trees)

Glad whoever added that part into Album Tag Song did though, coz it fits brilliantly. Good on 'em!

Oh, man. I can't imagine how difficult that must be for you  :(

Nope, I'm just another asshole on the internet. I don't claim to have any special insight or relationships with any of the group members that would make me think one way or another whether they were an "original" member.

You really have jealousy issues, don't you? You seem have issues with the historians in here. I don't see the other historians taking issue with anything that Jon stated. You know, you can believe anything that you want, mythical or factual. Your opinion will never compete with the people who actually do the research.

GUys we can settle this...lets take a vote... I vote yea for Dave to be a founding member.  :woot

Newly formed bands are frequently in a state of flux for their 1st few months. Take your Fleetwood Mac example, for instance. Their 1st recordings did include John McVie, back when McVie, Fleetwood, and Green were members of Mayall's Bluesbreakers and recorded as 'Fleetwood Mac', as a Peter Green side project.

David Marks is another marginal case. He was a contributer to the Beach Boys from the beginning, and was a full-fledged member within months of the group's formation, appearing on their initial major label releases.

I guess it's down to how expansively you want to define the term "original member".  I'd say yes myself -- David is an original member -- but I would distinguish "original" from "founding". Al, Mike and Brian founded the Beach Boys.

I can see where other folks can reason differently, though. :grouphug

Good way to put it clack, and good way to state it without getting nasty.Wish there was more of that around.

I'd rather the vote be on the Beach Boys Wikipedia talk page, as if we decide on yes, we can write that David Marks is a founding member on Wikipedia.
If we decide on no, We leave the page as it is.

No need for any of this to get personal. It's an interesting conversation if we keep it academic. Otherwise what's the point?

Sounds pretty clear to me.  :)

Exactly.  Life is stressful enough.  The last things I want to do when I come here are start a fight or get yelled at. 

Exactly. I find that when posts start to get personal, and people start insulting each other, it's time to end the topic.

Besides, what's the point of getting angry at each other? It's just a debate.
Another thing I'm not a fan of is Swearing when Angry. I don't mind Swearing if it's just for the sake of it, or just using it casually. But when it's directed at someone or when someone's angry at someone, then I'm against swearing. A couple of people started swearing at each other in this topic.
I know debates can sometimes get frustrating, but please, let's try and keep it clean from insults and swearing!

It seems to be 6 pages of going round in circles. Of what to me is rather clear cut. When the principals formed the band it seems quite obvious that they didn't want David Marks in it. I've seen some posts here that border on the ridiculous when it comes to trying to make a claim that Marks was an original. "David Marks lived across the street from the Wilsons"
So living in near proximity to the Wilson clan is grounds for being in the band? Interesting theroy.
"David Marks would play with Carl and Brian prior to any group being formed".
He did. If this is criteria for founding band status then Murry and Audree were also Beach Boy members.

I'm rather wary of the Marks quotes at the start of this thread because it seems to go against what he has said in the past about his Beach Boys origins. Is David suddenly being 'allowed' to start saying he was an original Beach Boy? Right around the same time the BW camp is hoovering up BB members to perform with Brian?
I wouldn't be suprised if David did play with the guys while they were rehearsing Surfin'. It's not as if his trips to the Wilson house stopped the second he wasn't let into the band. But again, being in the room with a band as they are playing is not the same as being in the band.
 

This is from the OFFICIAL concert program from the 2012 tour.  Look who it lists under "founding members."

(http://25.media.tumblr.com/fb84c5bd683d642e80fbd47c01cdad30/tumblr_mtkgkmQf231qzd1yeo1_1280.png)

Case closed.

Yeah it lists David Marks, the guy who wasn't even initially considered to be included in the C50 Reunion. It's gonna take more than a revisionist, back-slapping puff piece to convince me.

When did they decide to add David Marks to the Reunion?

I'd say this is one of the silliest discussions ever on this board, even outside the minor insults. I say, Dave deserves to be regarded as an original and/or founding member, regardless of any detail in the timeline. I am not interested in any I'm right - you're wrong discussions.

Also, I'd like to see a quote by Brian or anyone else in the band that originally they specifically didn't want Dave in the band. I think the reason he didn't feature in the first incarnations of the band was that he was very young AND not family. Al was older, Carl and Dennis were family.

Dave was a founding father in the evolution of the band - same with Al, but in a different way. Simple, surely?

Me, I don't see any biographers wetting their pants trying to say McVie *wasn't* an original member.

Do the words "close enough" ring any bells here, folks?

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Has there always been a poll attached to this thread? Well I just voted: "Sort of". That pretty much sums up the whole discussion to me.  :lol

Same here, this topic makes my head hurt! :lol

I just voted too, but voted Yes. If The Beach Boys say he is a Founding Member, then he is a Founding Member.

Touche'   :drumroll

A post which manages to state that David deserves to be regarded as an original member and then a paragraph down mentions that he didn't feature in the first incarnation of the band. You're right Micha, this is one of the silliest discussions on this board ever.  ;D

I vote for original member - yes.  When they signed their first recording contract with Capitol, Dave was signed as part of the group.  He was on their first album.

Founding member no, Alan was a founding member but got cold feet and bailed.  He was lucky Brian hated touring so much that he needed him to sub for him on the road so he could sleaze his way back into the group!

I'll take another shot at explaining why I think that David Marks was not an original member.

Were The Beach Boys originally going to have three guitarists? No.
Was Brian originally going to be a singer without an instrument on stage, or play keys throughout the entire set? Seems unlikely to me.
So could Al, David and Brian have been in the original live band at the same time? I guess not.
Between Al and David, who was Brian's first choice? Obviously Al.

So there was simply no room for David in the original line-up.

It worked out for both Brian and Al. Remember Brian still toured with the group for a little over a year after Al came back in October, 1963. Dave continued to record with them a little bit into 1964. And Al was still recording with them in '63 even when Dave was still in the band and the two of them toured while Brian stayed home to write and produce Beach Boys records and other artists. So Al didn't free Brian up from touring 100% (especially since Dave left) but Brian still needed Al as a vocalist for the harmony blend on the records and on the road because Dave wasn't singing that much anyway.

And do we know for a fact that David wasn't on any of the demo tracks that Murry submitted to Capitol? Surfin' Safari/409/Lonely Sea/Shut Down/Their Hearts Were Full Of Spring, April 1962?  Just wondrin'.

If Dave had stayed in the band for another year, there's a good chance Brian wouldn't have been against the wall like he was and maybe wouldn't have had a breakdown in late '64.

I voted yes, by the way.

Did you really not get what I mean? This is another post I think is spot on:

Funny thing is, this thread has dragged on page after page when the answer was summed up perfectly after about the fifth post.

I think the Wilsons, Mike, Al, and Dave are the 6 "original" members.

But only the wilsons and mike could be called the "founding" members. (although I really don't think this matters one way or other).

And I'd say the "classic" lineup is the Wilsons, Mike, Al and Bruce.

So I see a few here are still differentiating "Founding" and "original" members. So in your own words (disregarding how it's defined in dictionaries on the Internet) please tell us the difference between the two!

Someone will make something up to their liking, to be sure. ;)

Exactly. With no facts or other substantiation. Just to have something to argue about, I guess. Nothing else in the world to do at the moment. If it smacked 'em square in the face they would still argue no about it. Doc, you can't tell someone something that they don't want to hear.

Jeez. Sorry. I was definitely not arguing, just giving an opinion. I think you can make a distinction but it's not important especially if you're going to get angry about it.

I would certainly count McVie as original whether he was on the first recording or not.  The band is called Fleetwood Mac.  He is Mac.  But I'm getting off-topic here.

I'm not angry at all! Sorry I came off that way. No, there's no reason at all to get mad about this topic. I don't think it's really controversial, and it's no skin off my butt what people's opinion is here. I see the "Yes" crowd is leading in the poll and that's fine. If it weren't, that's fine too! Nothing changes over the outcome.

Dave joined in Feb. '62 according to some of the legal paperwork that is on file in the boys archive, it's hard to confirm a BB's gig that he played until March, but its a good possibility his first gig was actually in late Feb, hence the date on the filed paperwork. And it's been very clearly established that he played on the demos that were recorded at Western in April '62 and that got them signed to Capitol. That lineup was Brian, Dennis, Carl, Mike and David. The songs they recorded are the ones you listed above, and the same "demos" of Surfin Safari and 409 were the versions released as the Capitol hit single that June. Dave wasn't on any of the Hite Morgan stuff, but he's definitely on the first recordings they made at Western...also on the Gary Usher demos recorded around the same time.

haha - yes, there is plenty of other stuff to get worked up over in BB world!!

Surely you must realize that you're doing the exact same thing you're complaining about others doing.

Nope. Didn't realize that, Monikers. I ain't mad at nobody. No reason to be. Everybody has their opinions. Board would be boring if everybody agreed. I didn't argue - I just encouraged members of the board to differentiate between "Original" and "Founding Member".

I know you've very sensitive, Monicker. I'll try to be even more diplomatic and nicer than I already am when posting to make you happy.

Doesn't the fact that he joined automatically mean that he wasn't a founding member?

Everybody has to join at some point.  It's not like the other five guys were magically in the band at the same time.

Yeah, but wasn't it really Brian, Dennis, Carl and Mike who decided to form a band and Al and Dave joined after that decision was already made?

There really is, Tim. I think about what Howie said earlier in the thread. There must be SOMETHING else to talk about instead of regurgitating this issue again.  ;D

Yes, they were. They simultaneously became members once they officially founded the band. Joining means becoming part of something that already excisted.

Dave CLEARLY helped establish the formula otherwise they would have been a FOLK based harmony band.




For those splitting hairs, have any of YOU ever formed a band?  If so were you always lucky enough to hit on the magic formula with your first shot at putting together a line up?  And did that line up last beyond a few practices and/or one show?  Like Andrew said, it isn't always black and white.

David barely sang on one song and played rythmn guitar on the very early albums. This guy was hardly a very important member in the BBs on that resume. Plus the band didn't seem too broken up when he left the group in 1963.

Ok, here's how I distinguish between "founding" and "original". I'll take the Byrds as an example.

Gene Clark, Jim McGuinn, and David Crosby decide to form a rock group. Those 3 are the "founders". They extend invitations to several musicians (including Dino Valenti) in order  to round out the lineup, and Chris Hillman and Michael Clarke accept and pass the auditions. Hillman and Clarke are "original" members, but not founding members, according to my criteria -- criteria that I'm not claiming to be universal, but that is by no means unique to me. I've often seen Marty Balin and Paul Kantner, say, referred to as "co-founders" of Jefferson Airplane.

Good point but in this case, do you see Al as a founding member?  Because using the Balin/Kantner analogy, Brian was the sole "founder" of the Beach Boys.

Balin was the flat out "Founder" who met Kantner who added Anderson and Kaukonen to the band (who could be considered "co-founders" and "original members"). So I think yeah, David Marks could be considered a "co-founder" too by definition, right?

That's what I thought too. 



* Off topic:  I was big on the whole Jefferson thing until Paul decided to slap the J Starship moniker on his revived Airplane.  Call a spade a spade Paul and stop dragging that name through the mud.  With the Airplane name he could be playing arenas again but instead he relegates the J Starship name to the county fair circuit.  Hell, if that's the plan, just call the band "Paul Kantner's Airplane". 

And now back to our discussion, already fully decided by both sides but apparently still fun and interestingly enough to discuss. :)

I agree on the classic lineup. Most people say it's the Wilsons, Mike and Al. But really, it's the Wilsons, Mike, Al and Bruce!

Silly me. All these years I thought it was Mike and Brian who wrote Surfin'. Apparently it was Mr. Marks!




I do love how the Emperor of All Things Relating To David Marks doesn't jump in to correct misinformation like this when it suits his arguement.


Funny you should mention that, 'cos I was in several crappy high school bands. When the drummer left my first band after a few practices and the brother of the bassist joined in his place we didn't consider him to be our original drummer. Or when I joined another band as it's new bass player after the old one had left

Quote from Jon:  "Compared to 'Surfin', this was metal. No sign of stand-up bass or folk sensibility on this recording. And the tiny amateurish guitar sound and lazy feel of the [earlier demo] World Pacific version of 'Surfin' Safari' had now transformed into something crisp and modern."

Quote from Al: "It was Carl and Dave who brought that electric guitar drive into the band and because of that, Brian was able to expand a little bit."

You REALLY think the early sound of the Beach Boys was defined by an acoustic guitar, a stand up bass, and a pencil on a snare drum?!?



And yet you DO consider Alan to be the Beach Boys' original rhythm guitarist?  He didn't even play guitar at that point, which is just another example of how in flux the band still was then. 

It's interesting to be so at odds with you on this topic, as I've noticed we usually share the same opinions.  But like the man said:

Actually I have provided a ton of facts. As a matter of fact I provided all the band related activity prior to David Marks joining. Maybe I and others have been telling you something you don't want to hear? If you don't agree with it fine but please don't imply that I and others have just pulled our basis for arguing against out of our collective asses. Esp when the whole arguement for David Marks rests on the basis that he played with Carl and sometimes Brian prior to the band being formed.

On their first record, yes.


Whoops. My post was meant to highlight that we didn't consider the replacement drummer to be an original member. Because he wasn't. Just like David Marks.

And you are right; it would be boring if everyone agreed on everything all the time.

I don't know if say, I had a band, and while we practicing and playing our first shows, we had a bassist and then he quit. Then we got a new bassist and he played on the first recordings and we made a career out of it with him. I'd probably credit that guy as the "original" bassist, unless you wanna get incredibly specific about it.

Honestly, one would totally put Al in the position of the made-up situation I just thought of had he not actually been on the recording of "Surfin'" that started the group's recording career. Due to his presence on the first Beach Boys recording, I guess that truly makes him original.

On the other hand, it's kinda hard to say that the guy who was on their first album wasn't original, but due to this one single, it makes Dave a replacement member. If "Surfin'" were released under a different name or if it were released as an album track on the Surfin' Safari album before being released as a single, I might even say it would be different. But things turned out the way they did.

So....who are the original Beatles? Is Stu Sutcliffe an original member? Who is the original drummer? It's not Pete Best...would Tommy Morrison count? Do we count the Beatles' time as the Silver Beetles? Is Bob Klose an original member of Pink Floyd? Who would you consider an original Yardbird...Top Topham or Eric Clapton?

Here's the thing...who was in the band on the very day where their name changed from the Pendletones to the Beach Boys in Nov 1961? If you consider that the point where the Beach Boys became official (whatever the hell that means), then Al is an original member rather than David. Now, if you take it as 'who was in the band when they signed to Capitol?', then Dave is an original as opposed to Al.

Personally, I think both Al and Dave are original members, and this argument is based on semantics...that was the point of the sarcastic first paragraph.

Yeah but to the general public, that song is an anomly on the first album and was ever more of one in 1962.  As I said, Dave (and Carl, Brian, Mike, and Al) all helped "establish or formulate the foundation" of the groups' sound.



OK, sorry.  I got it now.  I've actually been in both situations tho.

I was in a rock "school band" like in School of Rock.  At a concert we got a reception like Beatlemania (just because we played "cooler" stuff than the jazz ensemble and chorus) and decided right then to form a "real" band, outside the classroom.  The class was real uneven between guitarists and everything else so all the groups had to share the one singer but she was a girl and wouldn't fit for the "real" band.  So we strung her along until we found a guy just to have someone there.  And when we we got the guy we let her go and never considered her (or the other drummer who played a couple of songs at the initial concert) to be original members. To us, they were just people sitting in until things came together, which I think is how you see Dave's pre-Surfin' Safari time with the band.

But the thing is (to me) it was Al (and Audree, etc.) who filled that role with the Beach Boys.  They were just people sitting in until the band became what it was.  The difference is that Al came back within the first two years.  Mr Wilson stated a few pages back that Al was just "the new guy" to fans in 1964.  Fortunately we now know he and Dave were both floating in and out of the group at the same time "in the beginning", which is why I count them both.

I just think you can't put an exact date on when a band forms.  Is it when a guy convinces his friends to form a band after going to a concert?  Is it the first time they rehearse together?  Their first show?  When after numerous line up changes, they finally decide on a new, permanent name?  When they sign the record contract?  Release their first album?  What if they never do either?

For me, it's too many variables but before you know it, there's a band.  Then you look back, see who contributed what, and weed out the ones that don't count, like the other Quarrymen, my old bands' female singer, and had he not returned relatively quickly, Al.



Definitely!  And if nothing else, we all share the same passion for these guys around here. 

Exactly! See my post above.

Yep.  Splitting hairs.  They both helped put the band on the map...at the same time!


Edit:  Obviously posted at the same time. :)   

I consider founding members as people who were members when they chose their final name. That means Stu Sutcliffe is a founding member, but Pete Best is not, as he joined shortly after as their first official drummer. Bob Klose is not an original member of Pink Floyd, he was a member of the Tea Set. He left the Tea Set in mid-1965, and they officially became Pink Floyd nearly a year later. Top is a founding member of the Yardbirds because he was a member when they chose the name The Yardbirds. Clapton joined and replaced Top 5 months later, so Clapton is not a founding member.
As for David Marks, he comes close to being a founding member, but he's not, as he wasn't a member when Candix records changed their name from Pendletones to the Beach Boys.

I suppose this is a question that dates can answer on one level. Not for me though. David to me is not separable from the era. He was around and contributed to the feel of what the Beach Boys were. Not too hard to pin down.

Which is exactly the crux of my argument. It's a technicality for sure, but a valid one which you can't really ignore. You can't just re-write history no matter how much the Marks Mafia wish to do so. BTW I'm very glad that Marks gets his rightly deserved accclaim these days after spending too many decades written off as 'the guy who briefly replaced Al Jardine while he attended Dental School"

Also consider this; if David Marks had never re-established contact with the band in the late 90s and been involved sporadically with various members since then, does anybody here honestly think his name and face would be flaunted on C50 material as an 'original member'? Of course he wouldn't.

Can a 'Does It Matter?' option be added to the poll please?

You got that right but all that means is he'd STILL be getting screwed over.  It doesn't change what happened 50 years ago (no matter which side your on), just that they never would have corrected their mistake.

If semantics are so important in this case let's argue that Candix and X called them "Beach Boys" not "The" Beach Boys. If that flies than David is in the original group "THE Beach Boys".

To me honestly he may not have been there in 1961, but the band really was not a "band" until around the time David joined so it counts.

Doubtful. But in any case I'm glad he re-established contact, things turned out really well from that!

A 9 page thread confirming once again that BBs fans are as crazy as the group themselves!!

Heck, Noel Gallagher wasn't even a founding member (or original member) of Oasis :old (Have we heard from AGD on this matter yet?)

That is to say, I think that there are more important factors than this to consider when assessing the significance of the contribution David made to our group.

I agree with Howie and folk like Pretty funky, Billy etc.

I grew up in the same time period as when BB first came out and i did say none of us knew the pre history at that point. When you saw the pic sleeve of SS/409 and the lp"s came out it was Daid we all saw as 1st in the band.. In fall of 1963 on either 9th street west or hollywood a go go tv show Al was introduced as a new member. BW did intro for Al.. since history has shown Al was there before David a few years later..I wish i could remember when that occured.. I think BW introduced  Al that way was to keep things simple. Back then it was unusual for members to leave bands especially as big as BB. Since all 6 of these  members were around at the same time playing together in various configurations i voted David full status and Al was back in less than 1 1/2 years he gets full status.. You might call this being charitable but im cool with it..And Brian agrees with this..And please dont tell me you cant believe BW..I dont buy it.. And Brian is the one who asked David to be involved in C50..

I was going to ask at the beginning of this thread when someone brought up the C50 program as enough proof, if anyone honestly thinks David would be part of the 50th reunion if Carl and Dennis were still around. I think that with two members gone they just needed more faces up there to give the reunion more credibility. I only bring this up to point out the tendency to cherry pick the "evidence" that best suits one's argument.

For the record, given the complicated nature of the band's formation, i am in the camp that considers both Al and David "original" members.

David's the founding replacement original.

You're right about the complicated nature. But while David Marks is not a full founding member, My vote on this poll goes to Sort-of.

Great! :-D

If semantics are so important in this case then let's remember that on January 25th 1961 the band played a small gig billed as "THE Beach Boys" a full month before David Marks joined. NEXT!

And MOST importantly here, the date YOU reference was NINE months before they got together with the Morgans to do any recording at all!!

Oooops, my finger slipped. I blame the laptop makers for putting the 1 key so close to the 2. Stupid f*ckers. This was clearly an accident waiting to happen.

Ah Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!   Good one.   ;D 

If you have to have a finger slip.....funny actually. I didn't remember that the THE was used before the record, but just a joke anyhow.

It seems, all things considered, that David was basically a founding member as much as Al was ... but the group was based around the family.

So what's the score on this thread so far?

Do you consider David Marks to be a founding member of the Beach Boys?

30 say yes. 14 say sorta. 9 say no.

Good to know there's some smart people on this board....

Yeah, 9 of us.  ;)

9 Deluded lost souls in search of redemption

Are we talking about the recording BBs, the touring BBs, or the name BBs?

I'd say the name, although judging by everyone's opinions, I guess all of them counts


Funniest comment I've seen in a long time  :lol

None of the above. Apparently we are talking about the first time young Marks sneaked a look into the family music room while Brian was working on something and thus, history was made.

 ;)

Now its time to decide weather John Stamos is an original member. Go!

Of FUll House? Totally!  :lol

But was Bob Saget?? Or John Posey??

(http://www.sitcomsonline.com/boards/attachment.php?attachmentid=172495&stc=1&d=1326676415)

So what's the score now?

Yes  32 (56.1%)
No  11 (19.3%)
Sort-Of  14 (24.6%)

Considering that he wasn't even born yet when the Beach Boys were formed in 1961, I think the answer is quite obvious.

Besides, he was never an official member anyway. Just another sideman who happened to be a star in his own right, like Glen Campbell

Im a genius to Brian !!  How about   Murry Wilson original member !!

I think Dave seems like a nice guy and a good guitarist. However I must say that during C50 when Dave said, "we've all been together constantly, but never together physically, and when we do we pick up right where we left off", and "when the five of us get back together, the magic bubble comes over us", or words to that effect, I felt like it was slightly re-writing history. I know that the BBs were happy to allow the "original lineup back together" image to run, but I slightly balked at that.

You do have a point but I remember after the roof top reunion of 06 when I think Jon Stebbins said when the 5 got together there was a real group feeling, which was interesting as they had never been in that line-up before.

edit. This from 2006

 Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: First Pics of Beach Boys Capitol Get Together  on: June 13, 2006, 10:44:01 PM 

Today was the first time since Carl died that I looked at these guys and they looked like the "Beach Boys" to me. Just the way they interacted as a group. It wasn't like I was watching five individuals...but a very exclusive club. I can only relate it to how the Beatles seemed in those early press conferences...the collective brain thing. When the five of them were with each other today it was obvious it felt good to them. Brian Wilson was having a great time...he was joking around and smiling the whole time. He and Mike seemed to have some very warm exchanges, and Mike made a point of telling the gathering that Brian was the reason the Beach Boys did great things. Brian made a point of saying the BB's were the greatest artists he could ever imagine producing...the ultimate vehicle for his music. I handed David the photos of Carl and Dennis and suggested he pose with them...and Mike got into the spirit and soon Al was there...they all wanted to make sure Dennis and Carl were included in the day. Dave made a comment to the gathering of how they were like brothers to him, and Brian seemed to affirm the statement with a nod of approval. I was blown away by the comeraderie they all displayed. When a clueless Capitol exec. asked David to step out of the shot so the "original" four could pose...Bruce, Al and Mike nearly threw the guy over the side of the building. Two of them shouted "f*** that...that's bullshit...get back in here David". It was like that all day...al for one...one for all. I never would have beleived it...but I saw it with my own eyes.
 
 

Sad. I'm sure that something like that won't happen again for David

That's a good point. But wasn't that sense of it really being the Beach Boys more about Brian and Al being in the same place as Mike? As far as I know that hadn't happened since Carl's death.