Title: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Smile4ever on July 11, 2014, 08:22:14 PM It seems the consensus among Beach Boys fans is that Bruce was a positive addition to the group's vocal blend for their crucial mid-60s work. As a result, he is viewed positively. But as the band was working on developing as a serious live act in the early 70s, was his multi-year departure a good thing? It seems from interviews around this time that the Beach Boys thought the group was going different places from Bruce's style. Was it good for the parties to go their separate ways for a while? And what would the band have been like if he stayed?
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: rogerlancelot on July 11, 2014, 08:33:52 PM I think it was good for Bruce to spend more attention on his major solo album, the craptacular Going Public because it just gives us all one more reason to not take him very seriously. Kudos for him coming back into the fold though because I'm okay with the LA album.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: bluesno1fann on July 11, 2014, 08:35:46 PM As much as I like the addition of Chaplin and Fataar, I don't think it was good for Bruce to have left in the long run.
I wonder what the Beach Boys would have been like with all 8 of them? Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: bossaroo on July 11, 2014, 10:23:24 PM Bruce is kind of a non-issue. His membership in the band was neither good nor bad in my opinion. He's just kind of there. He holds down his parts, but he is not personally vital to the end result. He's a glorified extra hand.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: phirnis on July 11, 2014, 11:35:58 PM Bruce could've contributed "Brand New Old Friends" to Carl and the Passions. For better or worse... :-D
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Jim V. on July 11, 2014, 11:39:42 PM You know, I'm pretty gonna get major sh*t for this but oh well. Here goes...
First I'll start with the good. Bruce is a fantastic singer. From the first record he's on with The Beach Boys ("California Girls") he fits in perfectly and sounds great. He is an integral part of the fade to "God Only Knows" and plays a major part on Sunflower. He produced L.A. (Light Album) which I dig. However, let's be honest about his career. Sure, he worked with Spector and others when he was in his teens. However, he made the "name" for himself with Beach Boys cash-in or rip-off albums, like the albums Surfin' USA by The Hot Doggers or Kustom City U.S.A. by The Kustom Kings or Rev-Up by The Vettes. Not to mention the fact that him and Terry Melcher basically "became" The Rip Chords and got a hit single under the name even though they weren't really in that group. And also my personal favorite Bruce Johnston group, Bob Sled & the Toboggans, who released the single "Here We Go (The Surfer Boys Are Going Skiing)" in March 1966. So yeah, around the time Brian was doing Pet Sounds apparently Bruce was trying to hop on the trend(?) of skiing? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Anyways, guess what all these aforementioned "groups" have in common? The fact that they are hardly groups, just Bruce Johnston doing crappy versions of something Brian Wilson did better a few months before (besides the skiing single, which I'm sure woulda been wonderful coming from The Beach Boys, hah). Now to also be fair, sure, his early album, the Surfer's Pajama Party is decent innocent early '60s rock 'n roll, and he did a few nice things with Terry in the mid '60s, but besides that, he was kinda just a hack. And him getting a spot in The Beach Boys is to me basically kinda like how the current singer of Journey used to be in a Journey cover band or whatever. Which I guess means that really Bruce was the first "minor league" surf-rock dude to get promoted to the big leagues. Because in the decades that followed, you had all those goofs from Papa Doo Ron Ron and Jan & Dean's band who would pay their dues playing at Disneyland or whatever, and then get promoted up to the big time and play with The Beach Boys (looking at you Chris Farmer, Jeff Foskett and others!!). Bruce was just lucky enough to be the guy who became a formal member. The other guys came along too late, and had to settle for being mere sidemen. And I've noticed that out of all The Beach Boys, Bruce has always seemed to put on the biggest "Beach Boy act", if you know what I mean. Like to an outsider who knows nothing, he does the happy go lucky act and always gave off a vibe of Eisenhower era squeaky clean boy next door who just wanted to sing about girls, cars, surfin' and school. And he will happily continue that act even to fans that wanna know more sometimes, flicking them away with snarky lines like "you care more about this stuff then I will in one thousand lifetimes" or whatever. And to the snobs who still don't give The Beach Boys cred, he represents what those people think The Beach Boys are (square as sh*t, about as funky as Mitt Romney, country club, Tommy Bahama douchebags). I also gotta point out that I think it's hilarious that he thinks that Europeans "hate success" yet the only Beach Boys community he is part of is the Beach Boys Britain page, which I'm preeeeeeeetttty sure if based in a place called Britain, which I also believe is in Europe. Maybe I'm wrong though. So yeah, do I think Bruce is a net positive for the group? No, not really. I don't think he's contributed very much of any worth. And perhaps Billy Hinsche woulda been interesting had he joined. Or if David Marks had stayed. I don't know. But whatever, as vicious as I've been, I'm glad Bruce is still around, a-clappin, and adjustin' his mic. Maybe one day he will write a new song. And I would be happy to listen. Bruce Johnston Surf City, USA July 12, 2014 Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: bluesno1fann on July 11, 2014, 11:44:37 PM Juice Bronston is rolling around in his grave ;D :lol
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on July 11, 2014, 11:48:18 PM You know, I'm pretty gonna get major sh*t for this but oh well. Here goes... First I'll start with the good. Bruce is a fantastic singer. From the first record he's on with The Beach Boys ("California Girls") he fits in perfectly and sounds great. He is an integral part of the fade to "God Only Knows" and plays a major part on Sunflower. He produced L.A. (Light Album) which I dig. However, let's be honest about his career. Sure, he worked with Spector and others when he was in his teens. However, he made the "name" for himself with Beach Boys cash-in or rip-off albums, like the albums Surfin' USA by The Hot Doggers or Kustom City U.S.A. by The Kustom Kings or Rev-Up by The Vettes. Not to mention the fact that him and Terry Melcher basically "became" The Rip Chords and got a hit single under the name even though they weren't really in that group. And also my personal favorite Bruce Johnston group, Bob Sled & the Toboggans, who released the single "Here We Go (The Surfer Boys Are Going Skiing)" in March 1966. So yeah, around the time Brian was doing Pet Sounds apparently Bruce was trying to hop on the trend(?) of skiing? Riiiiiiiiiiight. Anyways, guess what all these aforementioned "groups" have in common? The fact that they are hardly groups, just Bruce Johnston doing crappy versions of something Brian Wilson did better a few months before (besides the skiing single, which I'm sure woulda been wonderful coming from The Beach Boys, hah). Now to also be fair, sure, his early album, the Surfer's Pajama Party is decent innocent early '60s rock 'n roll, and he did a few nice things with Terry in the mid '60s, but besides that, he was kinda just a hack. And him getting a spot in The Beach Boys is to me basically kinda like how the current singer of Journey used to be in a Journey cover band or whatever. Which I guess means that really Bruce was the first "minor league" surf-rock dude to get promoted to the big leagues. Because in the decades that followed, you had all those goofs from Papa Doo Ron Ron and Jan & Dean's band who would pay their dues playing at Disneyland or whatever, and then get promoted up to the big time and play with The Beach Boys (looking at you Chris Farmer, Jeff Foskett and others!!). Bruce was just lucky enough to be the guy who became a formal member. The other guys came along too late, and had to settle for being mere sidemen. And I've noticed that out of all The Beach Boys, Bruce has always seemed to put on the biggest "Beach Boy act", if you know what I mean. Like to an outsider who knows nothing, he does the happy go lucky act and always gave off a vibe of Eisenhower era squeaky clean boy next door who just wanted to sing about girls, cars, surfin' and school. And he will happily continue that act even to fans that wanna know more sometimes, flicking them away with snarky lines like "you care more about this stuff then I will in one thousand lifetimes" or whatever. And to the snobs who still don't give The Beach Boys cred, he represents what those people think The Beach Boys are (square as sh*t, about as funky as Mitt Romney, country club, Tommy Bahama douchebags). I also gotta point out that I think it's hilarious that he thinks that Europeans "hate success" yet the only Beach Boys community he is part of is the Beach Boys Britain page, which I'm preeeeeeeetttty sure if based in a place called Britain, which I also believe is in Europe. Maybe I'm wrong though. So yeah, do I think Bruce is a net positive for the group? No, not really. I don't think he's contributed very much of any worth. And perhaps Billy Hinsche woulda been interesting had he joined. Or if David Marks had stayed. I don't know. But whatever, as vicious as I've been, I'm glad Bruce is still around, a-clappin, and adjustin' his mic. Maybe one day he will write a new song. And I would be happy to listen. Bruce Johnston Surf City, USA July 12, 2014 Got to say I agree with a lot of this. The only thing I'd add is an acknowledgement of Disney Girls - his one truly great BB song - in your opening summary of his positive contributions to the group; certainly I'd namecheck this before I'd mention his Sunflower contributions (personally, I think his contributions are the absolute low points of Sunflower, especially Tears). Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Smilin Ed H on July 12, 2014, 02:45:51 AM As someone who thinks Tears is good, I'd have to say his absence doesn't seem noticeable. When he returns, the slickness he gave the production is often a major negative, but the guy can sing and play.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again on July 12, 2014, 03:53:28 AM A prominent vocal part on California Girls!! Part of that sacred vocal trio on GOD ONLY KNOWS!!!!!!!!! .... Disney Girls!!!
Bruce wipes his arse with this thread on those credentials alone. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Jim V. on July 12, 2014, 06:37:13 AM Got to say I agree with a lot of this. The only thing I'd add is an acknowledgement of Disney Girls - his one truly great BB song - in your opening summary of his positive contributions to the group; certainly I'd namecheck this before I'd mention his Sunflower contributions (personally, I think his contributions are the absolute low points of Sunflower, especially Tears). Yeah, after I finished writing I realized that it probably was a mistake to make a mention of the successes of Bruce Johnston without mentioning "Disney Girls". I honestly think that the sentiment expressed is kinda buying into a vision of the '50s that never existed, but it's still a great song. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: halblaineisgood on July 12, 2014, 07:21:18 AM .
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Jim V. on July 12, 2014, 07:27:51 AM Yeah, after I finished writing I realized that it probably was a mistake to make a mention of the successes of Bruce Johnston without mentioning "Disney Girls". I honestly think that the sentiment expressed is kinda buying into a vision of the '50s that never existed, but it's still a great song. The being white part definitely matters, but I think it's the fact that he grew up very, very well off (read: very rich) that also helps color his view. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: DonnyL on July 12, 2014, 01:04:43 PM I think Bruce's contributions to 'Sunflower' show he was in sync with the band ... everything gels nicely, and I think his vocals and songs are part of what make the album have a unique charm.
On 'Surf's Up', it seems like he was already not quite fitting in with the direction ... so it makes sense that he left when he did, and came back when he did. 'L.A. Light' needed his vibe to come together. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Dave in KC on July 12, 2014, 09:37:32 PM Did Jack Reilly really dislike Bruce?
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Kurosawa on July 12, 2014, 10:43:51 PM They got a lot better after Bruce left and apart from Love You they haven't been nearly as good as they were with Blondie and Ricky. And Love You is more of a Brian album that Carl had to finish because Brian can't finish things. It's all been downhill from 15BO to the present.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Niko on July 12, 2014, 10:57:15 PM "They" meaning Bruce's contributions?
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Kurosawa on July 12, 2014, 11:06:39 PM "They" meaning Bruce's contributions? They meaning the Beach Boys. Bruce is a skilled guy but sort of a non-factor. His greatest moment as a musician was writing a song so cheesy that Barry Manilow recorded it. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Jim V. on July 12, 2014, 11:37:20 PM I think there's also the fallacy out that Bruce was ever anything more than an occasional songwriter. Until recently, it kinda confused me as to why he hasn't made any "new" compositions available in the last 20 years (besides the two or three songs from the recent Doris Day album, which were recorded in the '80s, so they don't count anyways).
Then I figured it out. As I was talking about in an earlier post, he did a lot of work in the early '60s, which coincidentally is the era where he was either recording Beach Boys covers or Beach Boys sound-a-like songs. So it kinda seems that the guy was never terribly inspired, and once he joined The Beach Boys and finally put his sound-a-like career to rest, you will notice that he had, what about 5 songs on Beach Boys albums from '69 to '71? Then he had his solo album after he left the group, which collected new recordings of some of his old Beach Boys cuts, an old Bruce & Terry song, some other stuff he gave to artists, and maybe one or two songs that hadn't been on an album. And then after his solo album tanked, he had like one or two songs that went to Captain and Tennille, and a Beach Boys re-do of a song he did with California Music earlier in the '70s ("Endless Harmony") and then "She Believes In Love Again", "Happy Endings" and maybe a few more co-writes where he might have written a lyric or added a small part (I know he's credited on "Somewhere Near Japan", but I'm also pretty sure that a John Phillips song). And then lastly that "Slow Summer Dancin'" song from Summer In Paradise, and besides the Doris Day cuts, that's the latest we've heard from him. So what's that mean? Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. So the point is, despite the fact that he's looked at like a songwriter, I'd truly take somebody like Al Jardine over him as a songwriter. And before people start complaining about Al "ripping off" people, keep in mind he comes from the folk tradition, where somebody like Bob Dylan has been doing the same thing for over 50 years. And that Dylan guy has done quite alright with that. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: phirnis on July 13, 2014, 02:01:57 AM They got a lot better after Bruce left and apart from Love You they haven't been nearly as good as they were with Blondie and Ricky. And Love You is more of a Brian album that Carl had to finish because Brian can't finish things. It's all been downhill from 15BO to the present. They got a lot better with Carl and the Passions you mean? Wow... Or do you mean as a live band? Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: filledeplage on July 13, 2014, 06:27:37 AM Did Jack Reilly really dislike Bruce? It is interesting. From what I've read, Reilly "inflated his credentials," eventually got let go, and created what appears to be a "hostile work environment." Karma is a beautiful thing, coming back ( and it also appears Johnston had vocals on the albums, while not touring ) with a Grammy. Manilow's biggest hit, whether you care for his style or not. It was a big deal. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Sheriff John Stone on July 13, 2014, 07:03:04 AM I think there's also the fallacy out that Bruce was ever anything more than an occasional songwriter. Until recently, it kinda confused me as to why he hasn't made any "new" compositions available in the last 20 years (besides the two or three songs from the recent Doris Day album, which were recorded in the '80s, so they don't count anyways). Then I figured it out. As I was talking about in an earlier post, he did a lot of work in the early '60s, which coincidentally is the era where he was either recording Beach Boys covers or Beach Boys sound-a-like songs. So it kinda seems that the guy was never terribly inspired, and once he joined The Beach Boys and finally put his sound-a-like career to rest, you will notice that he had, what about 5 songs on Beach Boys albums from '69 to '71? Then he had his solo album after he left the group, which collected new recordings of some of his old Beach Boys cuts, an old Bruce & Terry song, some other stuff he gave to artists, and maybe one or two songs that hadn't been on an album. And then after his solo album tanked, he had like one or two songs that went to Captain and Tennille, and a Beach Boys re-do of a song he did with California Music earlier in the '70s ("Endless Harmony") and then "She Believes In Love Again", "Happy Endings" and maybe a few more co-writes where he might have written a lyric or added a small part (I know he's credited on "Somewhere Near Japan", but I'm also pretty sure that a John Phillips song). And then lastly that "Slow Summer Dancin'" song from Summer In Paradise, and besides the Doris Day cuts, that's the latest we've heard from him. So what's that mean? Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. So the point is, despite the fact that he's looked at like a songwriter, I'd truly take somebody like Al Jardine over him as a songwriter. And before people start complaining about Al "ripping off" people, keep in mind he comes from the folk tradition, where somebody like Bob Dylan has been doing the same thing for over 50 years. And that Dylan guy has done quite alright with that. It's a mystery. The lack of released Bruce compositions AND productions over the last three and a half decades is perplexing. It's not that he didn't have the time. I wonder why he lost the motivation. I used to think he was saving them for some follow-up solo album or special project with another artist. But then in 2012 when the stories were coming out about potential songs for TWGMTR, it was mentioned that Bruce wanted to re-record "She Believes In Love Again". Again, while perplexing, I guess it was typical Bruce Johnston. It makes you say, "What!?" Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on July 13, 2014, 08:11:54 AM I think there's also the fallacy out that Bruce was ever anything more than an occasional songwriter. Until recently, it kinda confused me as to why he hasn't made any "new" compositions available in the last 20 years (besides the two or three songs from the recent Doris Day album, which were recorded in the '80s, so they don't count anyways). Then I figured it out. As I was talking about in an earlier post, he did a lot of work in the early '60s, which coincidentally is the era where he was either recording Beach Boys covers or Beach Boys sound-a-like songs. So it kinda seems that the guy was never terribly inspired, and once he joined The Beach Boys and finally put his sound-a-like career to rest, you will notice that he had, what about 5 songs on Beach Boys albums from '69 to '71? Then he had his solo album after he left the group, which collected new recordings of some of his old Beach Boys cuts, an old Bruce & Terry song, some other stuff he gave to artists, and maybe one or two songs that hadn't been on an album. And then after his solo album tanked, he had like one or two songs that went to Captain and Tennille, and a Beach Boys re-do of a song he did with California Music earlier in the '70s ("Endless Harmony") and then "She Believes In Love Again", "Happy Endings" and maybe a few more co-writes where he might have written a lyric or added a small part (I know he's credited on "Somewhere Near Japan", but I'm also pretty sure that a John Phillips song). And then lastly that "Slow Summer Dancin'" song from Summer In Paradise, and besides the Doris Day cuts, that's the latest we've heard from him. So what's that mean? Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. So the point is, despite the fact that he's looked at like a songwriter, I'd truly take somebody like Al Jardine over him as a songwriter. And before people start complaining about Al "ripping off" people, keep in mind he comes from the folk tradition, where somebody like Bob Dylan has been doing the same thing for over 50 years. And that Dylan guy has done quite alright with that. It's a mystery. The lack of released Bruce compositions AND productions over the last three and a half decades is perplexing. It's not that he didn't have the time. I wonder why he lost the motivation. I used to think he was saving them for some follow-up solo album or special project with another artist. But then in 2012 when the stories were coming out about potential songs for TWGMTR, it was mentioned that Bruce wanted to re-record "She Believes In Love Again". Again, while perplexing, I guess it was typical Bruce Johnston. It makes you say, "What!?" It's only perplexing if you think of Bruce as a prolific song-writer. Whereas if you think of him as a rather lazy song-writer, who makes the effort (occasionally successfully) when the need arises - which is rather closer to the truth - than his output is considerably less of a puzzle. Unlike Brian and Dennis, Bruce is clearly someone for whom music is just a hobby - albeit a lucrative one - rather than something he absolutely needs to do and struggles to live without. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: clack on July 13, 2014, 09:17:21 AM Bruce is a good craftsman. Could he have made a strong contribution 1972-78 as a songwriting collaborator, co-writing with Mike, Al, even Carl and Brian? Dunno, but then it's unclear why Bruce has done so little in the way of co-writes even after rejoining in 78.
Anyway, if Bruce had been in the co-writing mix with Mike, Brian, and Ron Altbach, M.I.U. might have been a better album. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Sheriff John Stone on July 13, 2014, 09:48:49 AM I think there's also the fallacy out that Bruce was ever anything more than an occasional songwriter. Until recently, it kinda confused me as to why he hasn't made any "new" compositions available in the last 20 years (besides the two or three songs from the recent Doris Day album, which were recorded in the '80s, so they don't count anyways). Then I figured it out. As I was talking about in an earlier post, he did a lot of work in the early '60s, which coincidentally is the era where he was either recording Beach Boys covers or Beach Boys sound-a-like songs. So it kinda seems that the guy was never terribly inspired, and once he joined The Beach Boys and finally put his sound-a-like career to rest, you will notice that he had, what about 5 songs on Beach Boys albums from '69 to '71? Then he had his solo album after he left the group, which collected new recordings of some of his old Beach Boys cuts, an old Bruce & Terry song, some other stuff he gave to artists, and maybe one or two songs that hadn't been on an album. And then after his solo album tanked, he had like one or two songs that went to Captain and Tennille, and a Beach Boys re-do of a song he did with California Music earlier in the '70s ("Endless Harmony") and then "She Believes In Love Again", "Happy Endings" and maybe a few more co-writes where he might have written a lyric or added a small part (I know he's credited on "Somewhere Near Japan", but I'm also pretty sure that a John Phillips song). And then lastly that "Slow Summer Dancin'" song from Summer In Paradise, and besides the Doris Day cuts, that's the latest we've heard from him. So what's that mean? Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. So the point is, despite the fact that he's looked at like a songwriter, I'd truly take somebody like Al Jardine over him as a songwriter. And before people start complaining about Al "ripping off" people, keep in mind he comes from the folk tradition, where somebody like Bob Dylan has been doing the same thing for over 50 years. And that Dylan guy has done quite alright with that. It's a mystery. The lack of released Bruce compositions AND productions over the last three and a half decades is perplexing. It's not that he didn't have the time. I wonder why he lost the motivation. I used to think he was saving them for some follow-up solo album or special project with another artist. But then in 2012 when the stories were coming out about potential songs for TWGMTR, it was mentioned that Bruce wanted to re-record "She Believes In Love Again". Again, while perplexing, I guess it was typical Bruce Johnston. It makes you say, "What!?" It's only perplexing if you think of Bruce as a prolific song-writer. Whereas if you think of him as a rather lazy song-writer, who's makes the effort (occasionally successfully) when the need arises - which is rather closer to the truth - than his output is considerably less of a puzzle. Unlike Brian and Dennis, Bruce is clearly someone for whom music is just a hobby - albeit a lucrative one - rather than something he absolutely needs to do and struggles to live without. I DID think of Bruce as a prolific songwriter. He seemed to be gathering momentum and building a nice catalog - "The Nearest Faraway Place" > "Deidre"/"Tears In The Morning" > "Disney Girls" > "I Write The Songs". A Grammy, hit singles, recordings by Barry Manilow & Francis Albert Sinatra. I suppose "conflicts" with a band associate, in this case Jack Reiley, could lead to somebody leaving a group, but this was The Beach Boys, not The Rip Chords! However, he went on to do that Equinox Records thing, wrote songs for others, did his own solo album, did some studio singing on others' records, produced The Beach Boys at a very crucial time in their career, and then....about 35 years of very sporadic work other than touring with The Beach Boys. Bruce is a talker and I'm surprised he hasn't addressed his lack of songwriting and/or recording at length in an interview. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: MyDrKnowsItKeepsMeCalm on July 13, 2014, 09:57:17 AM I DID think of Bruce as a prolific songwriter. He seemed to be gathering momentum and building a nice catalog - "The Nearest Faraway Place" > "Deidre"/"Tears In The Morning" > "Disney Girls" > "I Write The Songs". A Grammy, hit singles, recordings by Barry Manilow & Francis Albert Sinatra. Agree 100% ... this is what bugs me too about just saying 'eh, he wasn't that good'. And honestly, I think Disney Girls is one of the BBs best-written 70s songs, with evocative lyrics rich with detail and emotion. It makes me wish for so much more from Bruce, whether in that vein or not. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: clack on July 13, 2014, 10:36:47 AM Maybe Bruce has problems coming up with songs from scratch, writing by himself. Still, he was the best lyricist in the band, and second only to Brian (and maybe Dennis) as a pop melodist. It's a mystery why those gifts were so seldom tapped by the other writers in the band -- maybe Carl, for instance, might have been more prolific in the 70s if Bruce had still been with the band, and if he had Bruce writing lyrics and coming up with hooks. Al for sure could have used a collaborator to help with the melodies.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Andrew G. Doe on July 13, 2014, 01:35:30 PM Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. I know of at least three more - "Brand New Old Friends", "If There Were Time" and "Let's Visit Heaven Tonight", all from the 70s/80s. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Moon Dawg on July 13, 2014, 01:59:21 PM If Bruce had remained in the band, "I Write the Songs" might have been a Number One hit for The Beach Boys. Then again, maybe not.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: the captain on July 13, 2014, 02:25:46 PM Unlike Brian and Dennis, Bruce is clearly someone for whom music is just a hobby - albeit a lucrative one - rather than something he absolutely needs to do and struggles to live without. I don't think that's at all fair to say. Maybe you have a solid point if you amend the statement to say that Writing music is just a hobby..., but the man has been professionally involved in music for more than half a century. I think it's safe to say music is more than a hobby for him. Writing isn't the only valid musical endeavor. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: donald on July 13, 2014, 07:28:25 PM a lot of people who were not the "original" Beach Boys have contributed to the band over the decades. IMO Bruce has contributed the most overall. enough said I think.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Jim V. on July 13, 2014, 07:37:45 PM Discounting the early '60s sound-a-like material, dude has probably only released somewhere around 20 songs in about 45 years. And I'm gonna assume he didn't write many more besides what's out there, because we know Bruce loves money, and if he coulda gotten some more songs covered back in the day he would have. I know of at least three more - "Brand New Old Friends", "If There Were Time" and "Let's Visit Heaven Tonight", all from the 70s/80s. I counted "If There Were Time" and "Let's Visit Heaven Tonight" when I mentioned: And then after his solo album tanked, he had like one or two songs that went to Captain and Tennille "Brand New Old Friends", yeah I didn't remember that one. That was written for California Music right? I'm pretty sure my point still stands. About 20 songs in 45 years. Hardly a songwriter. Which makes his sidekick role to Mike make a whole lot more sense. Cuz he ain't gonna be doing anything else. Surely not songwriting. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on July 13, 2014, 10:47:19 PM Unlike Brian and Dennis, Bruce is clearly someone for whom music is just a hobby - albeit a lucrative one - rather than something he absolutely needs to do and struggles to live without. I don't think that's at all fair to say. Maybe you have a solid point if you amend the statement to say that Writing music is just a hobby..., but the man has been professionally involved in music for more than half a century. I think it's safe to say music is more than a hobby for him. Writing isn't the only valid musical endeavor. True. There's also grinning, waving and hand claps to take into consideration... Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Joel Goldenberg on July 14, 2014, 08:45:42 AM BTW, I happen to like Tears in the Morning, the sound is sweet, but the lyrics are quite angry.
Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Cabinessenceking on July 14, 2014, 10:23:04 AM Bruce is kind of a non-issue. His membership in the band was neither good nor bad in my opinion. He's just kind of there. He holds down his parts, but he is not personally vital to the end result. He's a glorified extra hand. word ;D Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Bill Ed on July 14, 2014, 05:58:50 PM Leaving the band for several years was certainly good for Bruce. He wrote a Grammy-winning song and did production/arranging work for far more successful artists than the group he departed. I love his vocal arrangement on Art Garfunkel's version of Disney Girls and his work on the background vocals of Don't Let the Sun Go Down on Me.
I also give him a lot of credit for pegging Jack Rielly as a snake oil salesman. And a few years later the Beach Boys reached out to him for help. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: bossaroo on July 14, 2014, 08:34:24 PM lotta help he was. Here Comes the Night ('78) is possibly the worst thing in the BBs catalog.
missed the disco boat by a mile and may be the most bloated cliche unmusical thing ever. one of my favorite Brian tunes too. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on July 14, 2014, 08:50:11 PM Quote I don't think that's at all fair to say. Maybe you have a solid point if you amend the statement to say that Writing music is just a hobby..., but the man has been professionally involved in music for more than half a century. I think it's safe to say music is more than a hobby for him. Writing isn't the only valid musical endeavor. Bruce has gone on record stating that playing with the Beach Boys is nothing more than a job to him, and has stated so several times (most notably in the Peter Ames Carlin book). Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again on July 14, 2014, 08:52:42 PM Quote I don't think that's at all fair to say. Maybe you have a solid point if you amend the statement to say that Writing music is just a hobby..., but the man has been professionally involved in music for more than half a century. I think it's safe to say music is more than a hobby for him. Writing isn't the only valid musical endeavor. Bruce has gone on record stating that playing with the Beach Boys is nothing more than a job to him, and has stated so several times (most notably in the Peter Ames Carlin book). I love it, but agree it was unnecessary. The original is quite great though. What a mean rhythm track. Fat, pounding piano/bass .... Bruce and Brian are the one's credited with playing piano/organ, so whatever Bruce is doing on the track is awesome. What a great Brian lead vocal too. In fact, I can only really hear him on the backing vocals as well. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Kurosawa on July 15, 2014, 12:09:01 AM They got a lot better after Bruce left and apart from Love You they haven't been nearly as good as they were with Blondie and Ricky. And Love You is more of a Brian album that Carl had to finish because Brian can't finish things. It's all been downhill from 15BO to the present. They got a lot better with Carl and the Passions you mean? Wow... Or do you mean as a live band? Discounting Love You, I don't think much of anything they've done since C&TP and Holland. I like about half of LA, and a few tunes here and there. But apart from Love You, they haven't done a whole album that I liked much since Holland. And as a live band they were never better than with Blondie and Ricky. The early days with Brian are close just for pure energy, however. Title: Re: Was Bruce's departure in the early 70s good for the band? Post by: Disney Boy (1985) on July 15, 2014, 02:21:37 AM Quote I don't think that's at all fair to say. Maybe you have a solid point if you amend the statement to say that Writing music is just a hobby..., but the man has been professionally involved in music for more than half a century. I think it's safe to say music is more than a hobby for him. Writing isn't the only valid musical endeavor. Bruce has gone on record stating that playing with the Beach Boys is nothing more than a job to him, and has stated so several times (most notably in the Peter Ames Carlin book). I love it, but agree it was unnecessary. The original is quite great though. What a mean rhythm track. Fat pounding piano/bass .... Bruce and Brian are one's credited with playing piano/organ, so whatever Bruce is doing on the track is awesome. What a great Brian lead vocal too. In fact, I can only really hear him on the backing vocals as well. I've always adored the HCTN '67. Such a great, insanely catchy tune. I remember playing Wild Honey one time in the presence of family and friends; it was just kind of on in the background as people chatted. Then HCTN came on and my mum's fella suddenly announced 'what a great song' and played it again. And again. And again. And again. Pretty much for the remainder of the evening. And thus a new Beach Boys convert was formed :) |