|
Title: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Jim V. on January 20, 2014, 11:10:19 PM I think the lack of sales in the late '60s, along with Brian's retreat from making highly commercial music, has to be focused on their label(s) around the world. I mean, look at this:(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDUwMA==/z/V58AAOxycmBS1-jy/$_3.JPG)
I know this is like a Swedish cover or whatever. But the lack of respect afforded these guys, even by this point (1967) is incredible. This is a group who not even a year ago had a huge, huge number 1 hit, and while maybe it wasn't up there yet, "Heroes And Villains" was also on it's way to a pretty respectable showing. So I really have to wonder how Capitol/EMI/whoever were really promoting them back then. Shoot, I wasn't there, so I don't know. Maybe they were pushed as a more contemporary group. Sure, you could blame them for the striped shirts, and then the cream colored suits. But, outside of Friends, which truly was just uncommercial, they had a lot of stuff in the late '60s that should have been even bigger. Obviously people should have latched onto "Heroes And Villains" more, and kicked it higher than 12, but that was still pretty good. But truly, even though "Wild Honey" and "Darlin'" weren't psychedelic, it was still a more rockin', fun, yet mature Beach Boys and really those singles should've done even better. I don't know though. Just me thinkin' out loud. Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: bluesno1fann on January 20, 2014, 11:14:20 PM What are you talking about? Wild Honey is one of the most psychedelic BB's songs!
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: leggo of my ego on January 21, 2014, 06:25:31 AM No no no, its b/c you cant dance to stuff like Diamond Head. ;)
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Amy B. on January 21, 2014, 07:37:15 AM Was there really a cover that only showed 2 members of the band? I thought it was weird that Al wasn't on the cover of Summer Days and Summer Nights, but this is just sloppy.
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: filledeplage on January 21, 2014, 07:41:40 AM I think the lack of sales in the late '60s, along with Brian's retreat from making highly commercial music, has to be focused on their label(s) around the world. I mean, look at this:(http://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/NTAwWDUwMA==/z/V58AAOxycmBS1-jy/$_3.JPG) It is a very good question. Looking back to that era, they started a business, in some manner, despite whatever distribution agreement they were working under. And, I'm thinking it was a response of sorts to the ineptitude, and mishandling of the cutting edge work they were doing. Or blatant, favoring one band over another. The "Gettin' Hungry" single was unusual but seemed to be timed to "keeping something" in the market distribution stream. Or to fulfill some other obligation? I know this is like a Swedish cover or whatever. But the lack of respect afforded these guys, even by this point (1967) is incredible. This is a group who not even a year ago had a huge, huge number 1 hit, and while maybe it wasn't up there yet, "Heroes And Villains" was also on it's way to a pretty respectable showing. So I really have to wonder how Capitol/EMI/whoever were really promoting them back then. Shoot, I wasn't there, so I don't know. Maybe they were pushed as a more contemporary group. Sure, you could blame them for the striped shirts, and then the cream colored suits. But, outside of Friends, which truly was just uncommercial, they had a lot of stuff in the late '60s that should have been even bigger. Obviously people should have latched onto "Heroes And Villains" more, and kicked it higher than 12, but that was still pretty good. But truly, even though "Wild Honey" and "Darlin'" weren't psychedelic, it was still a more rockin', fun, yet mature Beach Boys and really those singles should've done even better. I don't know though. Just me thinkin' out loud. Any new business "start-up" takes time and nurturing of sorts. And maybe they figured they would try to do what should have been done. It reminds me of some striking out independently. You learn fast what works and what doesn't. Not everything is "paved in gold" and we've discussed ad nauseum about the absolute weirdness of 1966-7. Winchester Cathedral over Good Vibrations? Impossible to fathom. And some of the bands were amazing, but socio-politically driven, with music being used as a vehicle for protest, and political action, and not purely entertainment. The resolute touring kept them "out there." I think without that touring and being physically present and visible, and promoting newer material in "more receptive" markets was the best thing they ever did. Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on January 21, 2014, 09:53:06 AM Was there really a cover that only showed 2 members of the band? I thought it was weird that Al wasn't on the cover of Summer Days and Summer Nights, but this is just sloppy. Well, it's only two members of the band because the single was released as being by Brian & Mike only. The sloppiness however - aside from the lazy cut-and-paste design - is in them using images of the wrong band member i.e. Carl rather than Brian. Imagine a John & Paul single and the record company used an image of John and George... Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: filledeplage on January 21, 2014, 10:26:48 AM Was there really a cover that only showed 2 members of the band? I thought it was weird that Al wasn't on the cover of Summer Days and Summer Nights, but this is just sloppy. Well, it's only two members of the band because the single was released as being by Brian & Mike only. The sloppiness however - aside from the lazy cut-and-paste design - is in them using images of the wrong band member i.e. Carl rather than Brian. Imagine a John & Paul single and the record company used an image of John and George... The sleeve on wiki shows just Brian for Caroline, No. Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on January 21, 2014, 11:08:59 AM Was there really a cover that only showed 2 members of the band? I thought it was weird that Al wasn't on the cover of Summer Days and Summer Nights, but this is just sloppy. Well, it's only two members of the band because the single was released as being by Brian & Mike only. The sloppiness however - aside from the lazy cut-and-paste design - is in them using images of the wrong band member i.e. Carl rather than Brian. Imagine a John & Paul single and the record company used an image of John and George... The sleeve on wiki shows just Brian for Caroline, No. Er... ok. What's that got to do with the record company lazily using a photo of Carl on a single bearing Brian's name?? Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: filledeplage on January 21, 2014, 01:34:17 PM Was there really a cover that only showed 2 members of the band? I thought it was weird that Al wasn't on the cover of Summer Days and Summer Nights, but this is just sloppy. Well, it's only two members of the band because the single was released as being by Brian & Mike only. The sloppiness however - aside from the lazy cut-and-paste design - is in them using images of the wrong band member i.e. Carl rather than Brian.Imagine a John & Paul single and the record company used an image of John and George... The sleeve on wiki shows just Brian for Caroline, No. I've seen (and bought) CD's which had a cover which did not relate to the work inside. Eg. The French version of Smiley Smile, which had the striped shirt era, and not contemporaneous to the work. I bought the "book" not the "cover." Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: bossaroo on January 21, 2014, 04:47:57 PM what were they thinking releasing this single AT ALL
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard on March 18, 2014, 02:00:31 PM what were they thinking releasing this single AT ALL Brian was trying to move away from the SMiLE stuff, and Mike was just happy to be group lyricist once again. Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Mr. Cohen on March 18, 2014, 02:32:13 PM I don't buy that "Mike was just happy to have his lyrics on a single" line everyone keeps trotting out when "Gettin' Hungry" is brought up. For one, THERE'S NO PROOF THAT'S HOW HE FELT. Whether Mike liked his lyrics or not, he couldn't have been happy with that bizarre, lo-fi, completely stoned backing track. Probably, it was nothing like the song sounded when Mike collaborated with Brian on the piano.
Mike wanted smash singles at that time, and when you look at what Brian was clearly capable of, "Gettin' Hungry" was barely even trying. The whole thing was cut in a single day, and I doubt it took much longer to write it. It's telling that Mike has publicly stated that "H&V" was Brian's last "dynamic", "competitive" track. Because then came "Gettin' Hungry". Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Mr. Cohen on March 18, 2014, 02:33:03 PM Don't get me wrong, I think "Gettin' Hungry" is a fun little album track. But as a single? NO WAY.
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard on March 18, 2014, 02:40:49 PM Don't get me wrong, I think "Gettin' Hungry" is a fun little album track. But as a single? NO WAY. And personally, I agree. But, I think Brian had just more or less given up at that point. I'm not one of those people who thinks his creative output was all downhill post-SMiLE. But as far as the Summer of Love goes, he tried making this great, complex album for the masses and it broke him and the group in two. The H&V single underperformed. After that, I think his attitude was basically "Screw it. I'll do what I feel like." and for the Smiley sessions, this was what he felt like. I'm not knocking those sessions either. Huge fan of that album, tho like most of ud, I would have preferred SMiLE instead. Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: smile-holland on March 19, 2014, 02:46:29 AM Er... ok. What's that got to do with the record company lazily using a photo of Carl on a single bearing Brian's name?? Probably a combination of both a lack of time and a lack of interest in actually knowing who's who. Especially outside the U.S. the local record companies often didn't have a clue who the individual members were. To me it's almost the same as using pictures from the pre Pet sounds era for releases up onto the early 70ies. By the way, the Dutch release of Gettin' Hungry was done properly. Actually one of my favorite sleeve designs. (http://i58.tinypic.com/2wo9g11.jpg) Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: bgas on March 19, 2014, 06:51:12 AM Er... ok. What's that got to do with the record company lazily using a photo of Carl on a single bearing Brian's name?? Probably a combination of both a lack of time and a lack of interest in actually knowing who's who. Especially outside the U.S. the local record companies often didn't have a clue who the individual members were. To me it's almost the same as using pictures from the pre Pet sounds era for releases up onto the early 70ies. By the way, the Dutch release of Gettin' Hungry was done properly. Actually one of my favorite sleeve designs. (http://i58.tinypic.com/2wo9g11.jpg) Really? Looks more like Carl and Brian there; both of them appear to have hair: Isn't Mike Bald? Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Cam Mott on March 19, 2014, 09:42:01 AM Brian didn't make music people wanted to buy anymore and then the Boys didn't either.
Title: Re: Possibly the reason for the lack of sales in the late '60s.... Post by: Amy B. on March 19, 2014, 09:47:11 AM Er... ok. What's that got to do with the record company lazily using a photo of Carl on a single bearing Brian's name?? Probably a combination of both a lack of time and a lack of interest in actually knowing who's who. Especially outside the U.S. the local record companies often didn't have a clue who the individual members were. To me it's almost the same as using pictures from the pre Pet sounds era for releases up onto the early 70ies. By the way, the Dutch release of Gettin' Hungry was done properly. Actually one of my favorite sleeve designs. (http://i58.tinypic.com/2wo9g11.jpg) Who's the guy on the left? He looks like he's middle aged. I do like the drawing of Brian, though. |