The Smiley Smile Message Board

Mine call goes to either:

1.  The 1981 Long Beach 1981 show with no Carl and a destitute Brian

or

2.  The Crocodile Rock video.  Man does Carl look embarassed in that video.  Hurts me to watch that one....

Melbourne 1978 has to be high up there.

Actually it was Perth 78, not Melbourne.

My vote for low point is the entire SIP album with MIU not far behind - upon release both were, for the most part, unlistenable - and time has not be kind to either of them. Bad concerts can be forgotten and hidden from public scrutiny - bad recordings cannot.

The 25th TV special was bad, Full House, Happy Endings, Problem Child, Summer In Paradise, Stars and Stripes, Cheerleaders, wearing shorts on stage, the car medley, the long note for Be True To Your School, the Wilson's stoned. Al, Mike, and Bruce phoning it in. The trouble started around 1976 with substandard tracks and vocals, by 1977 it effected the live show. 1978 was a low point, but we still had Lloyd in the band and a good setlist. 1981 was very bad, but the drama of it kept me interested. Frankly I sledom watch or listen to anything past 1983. When Dennis died and Brian was seperated by Landy it got dull.  The 1984-5 shows still had a little bit of youth to them. 1988 tour that summer had a better set then they had since Carl first returned. Of course the 1993 boxset tour was almost back to old standards.

So how does that leave the group? I guess I would have to say that 84-97 was the low point. Image wise things got better after 1993 box set, so I guess their image low point would have been from say 87-92. I don't consider them the real Beach Boys after Carl died. Brian, Al, and even Mike and Bruce, all did better shows after the break up then we could have hoped for on previous evidence. Mike and Bruce and occasionally Brian have also done some bad shows, but their legacy redeemes the group now. I don't think anyone who seriously studies music can write them off.

To someone who came late and only gradually worked his way through their career (beginning with Pet Sounds and going both ways, slowly, simultaneously), it seemed like one new "lowest point" after another. Frankly, starting with Pet Sounds, things like Wild Honey seemed like "lowest points" to me, although in context and retrospect, that isn't anywhere near true. I suppose I'd say anything after '85 is officially tied for lowest point in my opinion. As bad as it had been from the late 70s onward, once Brian is more or less officially gone, it's just a bad fucking joke. (Note: I like "Wipeout," though. That's for real. I really do.)

Happy Endings.

inSIPid

Lowest point? Right after Carl passed away and Al was relieved of his duties. The setlist was not adventurous, and the performances were lackluster. The songs were performed tooooooo slowwwwww.

Since that time, the setlist has been improved and lengthened, there have been some significant personnel changes(for the better), David Marks has appeared with the group off and on, and the vocals/performances have gotten stronger. The comeback has begun! :police:

Lowest point? I'd have to say when there was one original member left in the group plus one non-original-but-twice-new member and they had the nerve to call themselves "The Beach Boys."

Brian being unable to complete SMiLE.

I think Mike & Bruce have the right to keep playing as The Beach Boys. It's not like they at one point left the band, started a new one and called it 'The Beach Boys'... They just stayed where they were while the other members left or died one by one.

Selling out to the majors by signing with Capitol.

They should have stayed on Colpix.

As a group, basically anything from Summer In Paradise onwards. Post-1998, post Carl's death is just pointless to me.

Yeah every time I've seen Mike & Bruce,I kept asking myself "why are they playing the songs so slow?". Maybe it's cuz they're old and it's easier to perform them at a lower tempo I dunno but that always bummed me out. But yeah I guess you could say they had some low points but there isn't a band out there who hasn't so I don't see what the big deal is. I mean even the Beatles had a low point, the last few years of their career but you never hear anyone talk about that. The two low points in the Beach Boys existence I would say was after Dennis died and after Carl died.  After Carl passed there is no Beach Boys as far as I'm concerned. Dennis was the heart, Carl was the soul, and Brian of course is the brains; so when you go to see the "Beach Boys" and only see Mike and Bruce you're pretty much just seeing a shell of something that was. To me I thrive on the spirit of their music and that's something that will keep me a fan for life.

 ???

In their 'last few years' the Beatles made The White Album, Abbey Road and Let It Be (and Yellow Submarine, but that doesn't really count)... Just where exactly is the low point?

"They should have stayed on Colpix"

I think it was Candix? I could be mistaken

That's what I was thinking. That might be why no-one "talks about it". :D

Basically everything after Holland and In Concert excluding Love You, POB, parts of LA Light and BB85, and the Box Set tour were low points, and after Carl's death, the Mike and Bruce Endless Summer Kokomo Oldies Revue (aka "The Beach Boys") being the lowest of the low.

Man I have only been a beach boys fan for two years, and to be honest I don't know if I could of been a fan from the late 80's to around Carl's Death.

But from 2000 there has been a somewhat of a rejuvenation in the Beach Boys world, there bigger than ever that can't be denied, things seem to getting more and more exciting.

Lowest point:

--When Brian abandoned Smile in 1967.

Most pathetic:

--"I'm pickin' up Bush vibrations."

Honorable mention:

--Any outfit Mike Love wore in the late '80s. Zooba pants stand out, especially.

Oh, that can quite easily be denied. Bigger than ever?

If you're counting from 2000 on, I guess you could say bigger than ever. But why even say that? It has no relevance to The Beach Boys history as a whole.

Tallied sales of records, CDs are at an all-time low, and I don't know how downloads effect that, but to say the Beach Boys are bigger than ever now doesn't seem about right to me.

I've always understood it that the record industry was at it's biggest during the 1970s. It was at that time that the Beach Boys played stadiums, and had Top 10 albums in "Endless Summer" (#1) and "Spirit of America" (#8). It would seem to me that that was when they might have been at their biggest, sales-wise.

In terms of singles, they'll never be bigger than they were in the '60s.

Wait, I diidn't really mean 'bigger than ever' like bigger than the 60's

I meant that since their terrible slump in the early 80's, and I guess there wasn't much going on in the 90's in the beach boys world.

It just seems thngs are really exciting in The Beach Boys camp at the moment.

Just how I feel

Bigger than ever???? The band that calls themselves The Beach Boys has been reduced in a large degree to playing county fairs and five hundred seat casinos.

I hate to say it, but I agree. The venue I last saw the Touring Beach Boys was a small venue that looked just like a high school auditorium-literally very small.

Nice, intimate settings! God bless 'em. Did the people leave happy?

The only time I saw Brian was in the same venue I saw the Beach Boys.

Murry's death.  Anything good after that, we should be exceptionally grateful for.

The few that were there probably did leave happy. A nice show, in a tiny venue, by a good cover band.  Maybe there are advantages to playing on the oldest of "The Oldies" circuit.

Not the beach boys touring band, that's not even the beach boys.  ;D

I just mean the beach boys music is still as relevant and in your face as ever.

And in my very humble opinion, there 70's music is only getting bigger and more appreciated

Alright! Gotta keep spreading those good vibrations. That's what it's all about.

Row, row, row your boat....

You left out part of my reply. Smoke and mirrors, eh? Sort of like the cover band that you seem to need to defend.

Simple solution, The band calling themselves The Beach BoyS should change their name to The Beach Boy ( singular ) That would be truth in advertising!!!

No one's gonna say "Kokomo"?  That's so many low-points, it's hard to pick just one.  Has any other major group made so many mistakes & squandered their credibility as often??   ???

How in the world could "Kokomo" be seen as the low point in the Beach Boys' career? You mean artistically? Even at that, there's lower.

Whether "Kokomo" reached the heights of Brian Wilson's '60s material or not -- and that doesn't even need to be argued... it was way below -- "Kokomo" was presented to the public with a lot of moxy. Rarely has a classic band been given that much cache in the public eye so long after their golden era. It would have been easy to present the Beach Boys as a bunch of old squares. Even though they weren't pitched to teenagers, they also weren't being pitched as part of the adult contemporary market.

I personally find the song to be middle of the road, at best. But it was a big hit for a reason.

As mentioned before there where many low points, like 1978 and 1981, where the Beach Boys became a juke box band. And since that, it was really all bad. But even after that there were some interesting stuff and the Beach Boys kept going. And 1981-83 was an interesting era to follow because of the Wilsons and since 1983 the Beach Boys did again some music. So I would say the low point for me was when they played without passion (bad setlist without surprises, though every year was something rare in the set) and didn't record something, besides Stars & Stripes. So my vote goes for 1994 - 2003. Since the UK shows in 2004 the BBs got a lot better.

BTW The Beach Boys played some days ago before 60 000 people.

I think that one of the lowest points was Mike Love's R+R Hall of Fame speech. They lost a lot of their fans with that one....

Be careful, jeffh. You advocate calling Mike Love "The Beach Boy"? He'd like that! ;)

And in the midst of a low point...

I think it was only 50,000. But what's a few thousand among friends?

And that reason was: because the song was used in the movie COCKTAIL, starring Tom Cruise?

Then why didn't Wild Again by Starship also become a big hit?

That was a high point in my mind. I continue to get a lot of laughs over that.

..."Wwwwwwwwwwwwwhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhheeeeeeeeeeeeeennnnnnnnnnnnnn..."

Most Likely a freebe-

And that reason was: because the song was used in the movie COCKTAIL, starring Tom Cruise?

I was a teenager at the time, and it did trickle down ever so slightly to the teen audience. But again, it was pitched perfectly to a 30-something audience that could relate with Tom Cruise and his aspirations in that film. To pin it all on that one factor would be a disservice to a single that was marketed flawlessly, no matter how bad or unartistic some of us might like to think of it.

I remember seeing it at the very height of my obsession with late '80s college rock and indie music, and as a teenager at the time, I didn't find the Beach Boys to be relatable. However, I also thought they genuinely looked like they were having a good time, and they looked comfortable. That factor has kept a lot of their other "fun" material from looking like it was much fun at all. One example I can think of, off the top of my head, would be that campfire scene where the Beach Boys are all surrounded by twenty-something girls... in like 1989... and you have Brian with his eyes practically bugging out of his head. It was all so contived to make everything seem a-okay and good timey... but no one buys it. With "Kokomo," I knew little about the Beach Boys' private lives, other than that Brian Wilson was sort of a disturbed person... so they looked like they really belonged there... the way they were in the music video.

And especially with the Baby Boom generation in America... you get quite used to the idea of people not getting old as quickly as the generation before them.

Death's of Dennis and Carl. Nothing could be lower. Period!

Followed by the realisation that Mike was not going to stop using the Beach Boys name, the 'departure' of Al, Bruce becoming Mikes partner in crime. The sight of two old men and a bunch of wannabes onstage wearing Hawaiian shirts with a senior citizen leering at young woman. The inconsistent and often unsettling image of Brian Wilson on stage. Not convinced he wants to be there.

Exclamation point, it seems, instead of a period.

Touché

Well, I thought it was kind of funny.  ;D

Played the speech to lots of friends who are completely unfamiliar with the BB's history and none of them thought it was scandalous or shocking, just plain hilarious. I have to agree it's more of a high point as furthermore there's nothing exactly tragic about it, it's just plain embarrassing and rather funny at that.

People would have a lot less hate for Kokomo if it hadn't been a huge hit.

Um, you looked at Brian's touring schedule of late ?  Casinos - check... free shows - check... outdoor festivals - check. Plus, these last few days, exactly who turns up is questionable: of late, no Taylor, Paul or Darian. The 'new' rhythm section was conspicuous by its absence at a Canadian show last week.

Can't we please just let these guys play their music at whatever casino/state fair/BBQ/alley ect.. they feel like?

It's what they do. it's what they've been doing their entire lives pretty much. They make some cash doing it and the audience love it. Big deal! Would we have any more respect for Mike and Bruce if they were sitting around at home playing horseshoe and eating prunes?

If you wrote and sang on these songs you'd wanna play them whenever and wherever you could as well.

if certain "rock" jounalists and other writers had been a little more fair to The Beach Boys over the years, they'd be playing much better places, but so be it..... With such little respect paid to Mike (OR Carl, Dennis, Al, Bruce, for that matter) why should he care less about being hip or cool or whatever or making the Brian-nazis happy?

Dennis + Carl Dying..1981 tour..

The question was what is the lowest point in the Beach Boys career erikdavid.

Nobody here would begrudge the guys making a living. Its just the choice of name by one act, marketing of another that upsets people. Has been the case for years.

Your idea of a lowpoint may differ.

I for one would go to a Mike and Bruce show in an instant. But not their Beach Boys and associated inflated ticket price. I'm also done with Brian. I'm now unsure he wants to be out there.

To me they only have the LEGAL right to use that name. They're not THE Beach Boys. For God's sake, when Brian toured in 2006, his band contained more original members than the group using the name "The Beach Boys"!

What happened?

I'm pretty sure that at least 50% of the time he doesn't want to be up there, but it beats the alternative.

Hasn't history proven that if Brian truly doesn't want to do something, he doesn't?

Glastonbury.

I know, and you're right. I just get sick of all the Mike/Bruce bashing. It really has gone on too long and is really just.... very mean. Of course, I know it's warrented in some cases, but still....

For me, the lowest point would have to be 1976, dragging Brian out and forcing him to write and record with The Beach Boys. I have a major soft spot for 15 Big Ones and the shows from 76-77, but when I listen to Holland, 15 Big Ones starts sounding like the audio equivelant of a snuff film. It really just killed all the hard-won momentum the band had acheived and shut down the whole enterprise as a valid/relevant act... It really was shameful in so many ways.

True until the day he met Landy.

The lowest point is the demolition of SMiLE in 1967 and Brian stepping back after not getting the support he needed. That was the first and most serious low point.
But certain compilations still sell millions these days, so I say the BB did everything right.
"Kokomo" is certainly one of the high points for me. I mean, if Brian would have written it, everyone would praise it as a work of Genius.

"Kokomo" is a good pop song - no doubt about it. It's very catchy and as Mike would put it, it's very 'commercial'. I wouldn't call it a work of genius though!! Otherwise almost every decent pop song (whatever that is) would be classed as a work of genius

We had this debate when "South American" was released as a single.

If Brian had written Kokomo, you would've dismissed it as a piece of crap, or, at best, workmanlike and you would'be blamed his wife and thge revisionists would'be blamed whoever he was working with at the time.  If any other band had come out with Kokomo, nobody here would've remembered it.  It's okay in a middle-aged 80s pop fashion, but nothing more. I prefer some of the stuff on Bummer to this, largely because of Carl and Al's singing.

Everyone?  Not me.

Me neither. Fun pop songs are just that... something like "Surf's Up," "By the Time I Get to Phoenix" or "What the World Needs Now"... those are works of genius.

I love South American... but genius it's not, except maybe the vocal arrangement.

I remember at the time nobody seemed to like it until it hit. I was just becoming a fan and I remember thinking it was nice that they were popular but I felt it wasn't much. After hearing it a bunch of times I like it less. Just nothing there. To show I don't favor Brian I think Night Time or Walking The Line are just as bad. Still Brian did some great work at the time and so did the Beach Boys if only Somewhere Near Japan and some of the creative 1988 sets.

You mean the Cracker song?

"Work of genius" - I didn't mean this literally, of course. Should've written "Work of a Genius". Just wanted to point out that if it would be Brian's work, "Kokomo" wouldn't get the beatings it gets now. People would say "Oooh, Brian was still able to come up with commercial, contemporary music in the 80's that sounds good. What a Genius." :-D
In context that this nice pop song was called a lowpoint in BB history here. A lowpoint! How can a worldwide chart topper be a lowpoint? That's automatically a high point. And because it happened in 1988 and was exactly what the boys needed at that point, I can't understand how the importance can be undervalued with such critism.

Commercial highpoints and creative highpoints aren't always the same thing.

If Brian had written Kokomo, it would have been the work of a genius, just like if Michelangelo had doodled a picture of his dog taking a whizz.

Mee too. Lahaina Aloha blows Kokomo out of the water.

If Brian would've been co-writer of Kokomo, people of course would argue that he didn't have that much of an impact. :)

I would argue "Kokomo" ended the Beach Boys, because it ruined Mike Love as a writer.

What I mean to say is, Mike was writing craptastic material before that, but he also came up with occasionally interesting -- well, passable -- stuff..."Rock And Roll To The Rescue" was proof that the Mike/Melcher team didn't have to blow chunks.  Then "Kokomo" goes to #1, Mike finally has his validation, and what does he do next?  An entire album of "Kokomo Part II, III," etc.  Everything Mike did after that reeked of trying to recapture lightning -- he wasn't even subtle about it.  And that's why SUMMER IN PARADISE and STILL CRUISIN' to a lesser extent are so awful.  It's not just that Mike was trying to be commercial -- he was also being cynical or worse, didn't know any better.  And people can smell that.  They don't buy it.

The proof to me is that the follow up to the Beach Boys' biggest single ever only went to #93 on the charts.  Do you realize how bad a song has to suck to not chart higher than that following a #1?  And that even though the Beach Boys charted regularly throughout the '80s, they never charted again after that.  So yeah, "Kokomo" was a low point.  Mike lucked into a #1 single and then spent the rest of their brief recording career trying to repeat the formula in the most clueless and obvious way possible.

You raise a good question what was the last really good Mike Love material. Well First Love was pretty darn good, a select few of the Celebration tracks were decent. KTSA had one or two good tracks by him. By the time he was doing those Adrain Baker sessions though it just seems like he lost it. I said before that I like SNJ but he had a lot of co-writers on that. I don't know but I really think he was a good writer until 77 or so. I am even among the select few the like SDT.

Do mean RIGHT before Kokomo Mike was writing craptastic and maybe passable stuff? That I can buy, but if one were to list ALL of Mike's co-writing (and writing credits) with The Beach Boys from 1961 up till 88.... I think we'd have to rate the guy slightly higher than that!

Hey, Kokomo may be silly and not really very deep (at least not as deep as "Johnny Carson") but what exactly makes it so bad? Is it the mere fact that an aging dinosaur rock band had a late career hit without the help of it's main genius writer? The fact that somehow a bunch of no-talent leeches managed to write a catchy song? I mean, admit it, Kokomo IS catchy if nothing else. And there really isn't much else needed for a hit pop song. Throw in Beach Boys harmonies and a Carl lead and what do you really have to hate? Mike, Terry Melcher, and Jon Phillips certainly didn't break any molds as far as vapidity is concerned. So, who cares? It's 1988, most Top 40 pop sucks just as bad or worse and probably still does today.... Even Brian thinks Kokomo is good, and he's the real reason we're all supposed to hate it anyway, so jeez!!!!

Also, like it or not, Kokomo WAS something of an acheivement! How many dinasour bands have had number one singles so late in their career? What was the last Stones number one? Or Who number one? Or so on? If anything, Kokomo just proves that even the silliest and superficial Beach Boys qualities have the ability to grab a hold of even the most mainstream and unhip top 40 audience. I won't defend the horrendous decisions mabe by The Beach Boys after Kokomo hit, but if I were them I'd be rightly proud.

For me it has nothing to do with Brian. I like Brian and Dennis best but I don't look down on the other guys at all. I think Carl, Mike, Al, David, Ricky, Blondie, and Bruce had talent to spare. They were capable of being great even as late as 1988 so I think the fact that it was just top 40 fodder was a letdown.  I didn't hear my band in there. Simply I just don't like it.

I remember even when Getcha Back and California Dreamin came out, there was something unique about them. I don't love those records, but I don't know they stood out in some ways. When I hear the Beach Boys classic work let's say 62-72 it just is so intrinsically good and special. Nothing else is quite like it. Even with the uneven 76-80 era, it still feels like a group who had something of substance to them.In My Car or Smart Girls are far worse then Kokomo. Outside of maybe 2-3 tracks so is Summer In Paradise. I just look at Kokomo as a very nothing song. It was something of a lift in their careers but did they group together and build a strong album around that sucess? No it took well over a year for an LP to come out and the it had three old songs, soundtrack material that was average at best, and two or three new songs only one of which I think had something to it. When that album came out I just felt that they had blown it. I think what irritates me today is when people clap more for Kokomo then Here Today. They should be known for the latter not the former.

I agree that Getcha Back is a much better song than Kokomo. Most people can relate to what Getcha Back is about. Not a lot of people other than millionaire rock stars can relate to relaxin on the beach in Kokomo without a care in the world, but hey, Kokomo was the hit song!!!!

I think what happened, and what happens with a lot of bands who've been around forever, is The Beach Boys got their jollies playing live and being cheered at and making money, and left it at that. Kokomo was a fluke and that was it. I don't think they had it in them, or even cared, to forge a third great era of Beach Boys recordings. By then, things were too complicated, and the Beach Boys had their families and private lives and played their shows and went home at night. They'd had some huge highs, but it all seemed to come with a price. Maybe it was nice to simply coast. And I mean it in the nicest way possible. Brian is different. Brian has a lot of supporters pushing for him to give his best and to nurture his artistry. Mike's hardly had a nice word said about him in over 40 years, and the other guys (even Carl) have been treated like mouthpeices for Brian and have had all their great struggles for relevence appreciated by a small few and ignored by the rest. Who can blame them for "Wipe-Out"

Ok, bad example.

GREAT post MBE!! I agree with pretty much everything you say :)

erikdavid5000, all valid points! And Jasper's posts, too.

Just imagine that Brian did write/record "Kokomo" for a second, and it went to No. 1. He/we would be ecstatic because he had a hit, even a single that charted! Fans would be saying, "See, Brian still has it. He could knock out these kinds of songs easily if he wanted to." Yeah, not only could he, he did. It's called "South American". But, "South American" never had a chance, because of what it DIDN'T have - Mike Love and Carl Wilson singing. But, I've been beating that dead horse into the ground...

If "Kokomo" was Brian's song, I guarantee that it would be performed at all of his concerts, probably as an encore, and people would be clapping and singing along...I don't think he dwelled on it, but Kokomo's success bugged Brian. He didn't write it and he didn't sing on it. And he brought up that fact a few times in interviews. Wasn't there a recent post/interview with Brian from 1997 where Brian was talking about checking the charts and worrying about Imagination's position on the charts? He cared.

I don't particularly care for "Kokomo", but there is one thing I love about it, which erikdavid 5000 kind of alluded to. How many times have you listened to the radio over the last 20-30 years, and thought, "This stuff is crap. I can't believe that Brian or The Beach Boys can't get a hit with their songs. It's so much better than the junk that's being played". Well, who would've thought that "Kokomo" would do just that? But it did. And, even though I/we don't consider it one of our favorites, a large amount of Beach Boys' fans do. "Kokomo" was very important at that time; it brought a lot of young fans into the fold. Yeah, it started with "kokomo", but you know it was just a matter of time before they found Pet Sounds and others....

"Just imagine that Brian did write/record "Kokomo" for a second, and it went to No. 1. He/we would be ecstatic because he had a hit, even a single that charted! Fans would be saying, "See, Brian still has it. He could knock out these kinds of songs easily if he wanted to." Yeah, not only could he, he did. It's called "South American". But, "South American" never had a chance, because of what it DIDN'T have - Mike Love and Carl Wilson singing. But, I've been beating that dead horse into the ground..."

This isn't even worth addressing again. South American' a bloody awful song.  Might be okay for Jimmy Buffet on his own.


"I don't particularly care for "Kokomo", but there is one thing I love about it, which erikdavid 5000 kind of alluded to. How many times have you listened to the radio over the last 20-30 years, and thought, "This stuff is crap. I can't believe that Brian or The Beach Boys can't get a hit with their songs. It's so much better than the junk that's being played". Well, who would've thought that "Kokomo" would do just that? But it did. And, even though I/we don't consider it one of our favorites, a large amount of Beach Boys' fans do. "Kokomo" was very important at that time; it brought a lot of young fans into the fold. Yeah, it started with "kokomo", but you know it was just a matter of time before they found Pet Sounds and others...."

That, on the other hand, is probably true. And God bless 'em.

Thanks mikeyj.
Re South American.
Sheriff John Stone always has good posts, but I have to respectfully say I see things different from my own standpoint. I happen to truly dislike this song for the same reason I dislike Kokomo. It's just corny, and plastic. I remember my dad went to see Brian with me in 1999. He liked every song except this one. I couldn't help but agree, it just brought down the whole show. I don't care if it was a hit or not, same with Kokomo. I mean if an artist I like gets recognition cool, but it doesn't impact what I think. Maybe some Brianasta's would say "Wow Brian's knocking them out like the old days" but I either like something or I don't. I am not right or wrong for this, taste is subjective. Yet again I can't help but feel let down when I hear something that doesn't seem to be coming from the heart. Even something as lightweight as say Land Ahoy is worthy to me because the fun of it is real. The energy is genuine. At that moment the Beach Boys were feeling the song.

Lowest point.  Thats hard to say.  The quality and performances have gone up and down through a few cycles.  I think MIU was the first really low point.  Another  low, not too long after MIU, was Here Comes the Night.  The live band around 81 as someone mentioned, an obese and uninspired Brian and no Carl.   Later in the 80's when they were plkaying two towns in a day.....I felt cheated ...they had to have been phoning it in....

And pretty much every recording after 1985.   One would have trouble culling one good albums worth of material out of the whole lot. 

And Finally, the Al-less, Carl-less, Brian- less Mike and Bruce show.      Of course this isn't the low point of the Beachboys, because    A.   They  sounds pretty good  B. They are not recording new material, and C. They are NOT the Beachboys.

And Finally, the Al-less, Carl-less, Brian- less Mike and Bruce show.      Of course this isn't the low point of the Beachboys, because    A.   They  sounds pretty good  B. They are not recording new material, and C. They are NOT the Beachboys.
[/quote]


Very well put!

I agree, I always enjoy Sheriff's posts. Even though I don't always agree with him, they are always great in opening up debates.
MBE, as is plainly obvious I totally agree with you on this subject. "It's just corny, and plastic" is exactly right. I listen to music to get enjoyment out of it (and obviously everyone differs in what entertains them) and when I hear something like "Kokomo" I can't really get into it in the way that I can for say I Get Around or Good Vibrations (other huge hits, all #1's of course). As you say, even Land Ahoy is fun because the energy is genuine and that is so true. Obviously it's virtually impossible to prove it but I think some songs are written and/or performed from the heart or are done because the musicians are truly enjoying what they are doing whereas other songs are written/performed just to be hits. And Kokomo is one of those songs in my opinion. Even if it's not the case it certainly feels like it.

I also feel exactly the same way about the recognition that an artist I like gets. If Brian re-records Barbara Ann in a rap style and it goes to #1 then I'd be happy for Brian. Of course I would hate it and never listen to it but if it's going to get people to like Brian and explore what he has done in the past then I think that's a good thing. Though it'd be bad in many other ways in that it might tarnish Brian's reputation etc...

So of course it's good that Kokomo went to #1 in that it perhaps made some people explore the Beach Boys music (as I'm sure there are a few on this board that can say that's the case) but I still don't really like the song. But in the end if a person REALLY likes Kokomo, Barbara Ann, South American, God Only Knows or whatever, then so be it. Whatever makes a person happy is all that really matters as that is the most important thing about music. This world can be pretty cruel to some people but music can lift peoples spirits.

First off, I like both Getcha Back and Kokomo.  Good enjoyable pop songs and both got the Beach Boys back on the charts.  

As for South American, the reason it didn't have a chance had nothing to do with whether Mike or Carl sang on it.  The reason South American never had a chance is because Giant never released it as a single, period.  And the reason for that (purely my speculation here) is because Your Imagination didn't perform as well on the charts as they hoped.

In fact, I'll take it a step further and suggest that South American should have been the lead off song in the first place.  Without getting into the ridiculous Mike v. Brian dynamics, South American would have been a nice summer single in the same vein as Kokomo and Getcha Back and probably would have attracted more airplay than Your Imagination did...IMO.  

I'll take it even further and state that if the idea was to get Brian back on the charts, then they should have done an entire record with Buffett in 1998.   Brian's melodies with Buffett's lyrics?  The best of both worlds combined into one.  A Wilson-Buffett collaboration would have been an event.   It would have garnered  more attention and resulted in more airplay and sales...again IMO. 

Oh...BB low point.  Queen Mary concert-1981.  Brian hauled in front of a large crowd and TV audience and forced to sing when he was in no condition or shape to do so.  Awful.

I think what Sheriff John Stone is trying to say is that The Beach Boys have a very special vocal blend. Possibly the most special of all-time. Mike, Brian, and Carl's voices in particular are instantly recognizable to the general public as being "The Beach Boys" and when their voices are heard a certain little itch is scratched and it feels good. Latter day Brian just doesn't SOUND that way. Mike still sounds like Mike and Carl had the greatest voice in the world right up until the end. No matter how great Brian's new songs or recordings might be, they simply will not have that THING the Beach Boys had. This isn't a judgement on the quality of Brian's newer material, just the SOUND. With Kokomo, you had a very very catchy, simple song that was unmistakenly The Beach Boys. That was their ace in the hole.

You raise a good question what was the last really good Mike Love material.

"Big Sur."

Just imagine that Brian did write/record "Kokomo" for a second, and it went to No. 1. He/we would be ecstatic because he had a hit, even a single that charted! Fans would be saying, "See, Brian still has it. He could knock out these kinds of songs easily if he wanted to." Yeah, not only could he, he did. It's called "South American". But, "South American" never had a chance, because of what it DIDN'T have - Mike Love and Carl Wilson singing. But, I've been beating that dead horse into the ground...

I'm more inclined to think that "Soul Searchin'," as it was recorded in 1996, was the latter-day Brian Wilson masterpiece that both featured the Beach Boys and had hit single wirtten all over it. If only IT was placed in a hot summer movie with breezy P.R. that didn't come off as fake, it would have been huge.

Brian's voice sounds different, but it still sounds like the Beach Boys. Most people who don't know his solo material still recognize it as being related to the Beach Boys.

Good call on "Land Ahoy"! That song is awesome.

Yeah, erikdavid5000, that's what I was trying to say (except for the "judgement on the quality of Brian's newer material" part :police:), but you said it better....

I think you might be onto something here...of course it is modern days, so he probably would have to extend the list of girls he's been with to include more than Peggy Sue and Betty Lou (up in the club, you know what to do)

Good heavens, if this is a response to my post, I thought my whole point was that Mike's writing didn't become completely worthless until AFTER "Kokomo."   God knows I'm not a Mike fan but my point being after he had a #1 hit the desire to repeat the achievement poisoned everything he wrote from that moment onward.

I've always been under the impression that the main reason the fans hated "Kokomo" was because it stole the thunder of Brian's first solo album.

Honestly, I don't think "Kokomo" sounds like classic BB recordings at all. No falsetto. No thick harmonies. No orchestral (or even Chuck Berry-style) backup. And Mike never sounded that creepy in any 60s hit. And if you don't like the word "creepy," substitute "smooth and soft."

I personally didn't even know Brian had a solo album back in 1988. I saw him on David Letterman, sitting in the chair shaking like a leaf, and looking really uncomfortable. My dad told me that that was Brian Wilson, who wrote all of the Beach Boys' songs. I couldn't believe it. He looked like our family friend, Joel, who was a Beverly Hills guy that got addicted to cocaine and used to come to our house looking downright scary after his wife left him. Joel was this adult guy that was so fun and I looked up to him as a teen. So seeing the Beach Boys guy... he looked cleanly dressed and still handsome, but he looked like he'd seen a ghost. It was rough watching him.

That's just my experience as a teen. Even though it was all laid out for me, I never associated that guy with the group that was playing "Kokomo." The latter just seemed like a fun summer single that was nothing more than that.

In hindsight, now, I still don't quite see the need to compare the two. Brian's 1988 solo album was this incredible production, using '80s synthesizers and drum machines in a simulation that has "Pet Sounds" arrangement technique written all over it. Besides a few cuts that were meant to be "commercial," largely that album is beautiful, lyrically strong, all about love and deep feelings... and optimistic. It's one of those Brian albums that you don't really need a hit from, because, like, thank god it exists.

Mike, don't f*** with the formula...

Yeah, people don't realize that, though. It's got Mike Love singing on his own and then the whole group singing at once, and they're singing about the beach. There's a guitar solo. There's an accordion. Blam.

I think that was true for a very short period of time. But Brian disappeared shortly thereafter, as did his album, and the resentment became ancient history in a hurry.

Kokomo was a hit for one reason. Cocktail!

It has nothing to do with it being any better or worse than any other Beach Boys song of the eighties.

It has everything to do with marketing of a Tom Cruise movie.

Reason already suggested ... and refuted.

Adam, thank you for that post. I agree 110%!

I will also add that some on this board, in an attempt to take the heat off of Mike (I'm looking at you SJS!!!) crticize Carl and Al for "not stepping up to the plate" during SIP. I think it is possible that someone like Carl noticed exactly what Adam points out in his post and thinks "the stuff I'm doing is good and something to be proud of, but it's not going to get a fair hearing from Mike, especially after 'Kokomo'".  Carl was following his own muse that had nothing to do with Mike's Kokomo-fueled vision of the BB.
 

They clap more for "409" and "Barbara Ann" than "Here Today".  Always have, always will.

No reason to single out "Kokomo" for that...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

Think of a soundtrack album being the same as a album by a single artist. A few tracks will stand out as having  single potential and will be promoted as such I guess. Having Stamos onboard for the music video was also a stroke of genius by the marketing people. Although I have not watched the video for awhile, I seem to remember him getting more screentime than other long time backing band members.

Yes that should have been a single circa 1995. Best Beach Boys song in many years.

That's true but I feel those songs deserve to be remembered.

The reason I dislike Kokomo (except for when Carl's vocal kicks in) is because it epitomises what had become so bad about the Beach Boys in the post Holland period. I'll call it the "Do It Again Syndrome" - The success of Do It Again in '68 showed that it was posiible to apply nostalgia and to milk the formula. Starting with It's OK on 15 Big Ones there was an unrelenting string of "Do It Again Syndrome" songs epitomised by Kona Coast, Keepin The Summer Alive and California Calling - and then the "Do It Again Syndrome" came to an ugly head with Kokomo. What made it worse was that what had become an albatross around the groups artistic neck became a bloody commercial hit! AAARRRRRHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!!!!!!!  >:(

When I want to hear a song from that period were I can sit back and enjoy the listen then I put on Somewhere Near Japan, the last quality Beach Boys recording which was released.

Good heavens, if this is a response to my post, I thought my whole point was that Mike's writing didn't become completely worthless until AFTER "Kokomo."   God knows I'm not a Mike fan but my point being after he had a #1 hit the desire to repeat the achievement poisoned everything he wrote from that moment onward.
[/quote]


Simple misunderstanding. I just disagree on point. I don't think it's worth slamming Mike/Brian/Carl/Al/Bruce (Dennis gets a pass because he never wrote anything bad) at all really for anything post 1976. They'd already given us more great stuff for a longer period of time that pretty much anyone else. Life is complicated and these guys are proof if there ever was any. So what if they did some silly stuff as middle-aged guys in the 80s!

Let them live in peace.

Simple misunderstanding. I just disagree on point. I don't think it's worth slamming Mike/Brian/Carl/Al/Bruce (Dennis gets a pass because he never wrote anything bad) at all really for anything post 1976. They'd already given us more great stuff for a longer period of time that pretty much anyone else. Life is complicated and these guys are proof if there ever was any. So what if they did some silly stuff as middle-aged guys in the 80s!

Let them live in peace.
[/quote]

Eh.  I get your point, but disagree.  It's not like they hung it up and just stuck to touring oldies (like they did in the '90s).  They had pretentions to staying relevant and continuing to make records.  Mike is particularly egregious in that he was trying very hard to be commercial, but was so inept at it that he wound up alienating a lot of fans.  He only pulled off a hit once or twice..."Almost Summer," "It's OK," and "Kokomo."  It doesn't really make up for "Kona Coast," "Summer In Paradise," etc.

Mike also comes in for bashing because he's one of those people that has a big ego but is essentially clueless.  True, I don't know the guy, but you can make a solid inference based on his public statements vs. his artistic output.  If he had the commercial sensibility he really thinks he has (at least post 1966), or conversely he was more honest with himself about the extent of his talents and composed accordingly, then we wouldn't be having this conversation...and Mike wouldn't have written the SUMMER IN PARADISE album.

Believe me, I understand better than most people the kinds of compromises working musicians -- even famous ones -- have to make to put food on the table.  And I have some sympathy for him in that being in a band with the Wilson Brothers had to be a vexing proposition in the '70s and early '80s. That said  in my opinion, Mike made a lot of decisions based on short-term monetary considerations that limited his options in the long term, and that he didn't really have to make.  But he had to live with those decisions, not me, so that's fine.  I just had to sit through the musical results, sadly.

Good points and I can't argue with any of it. Maybe I feel a tad differently because I happen to love (well, not LOVE, but strongly like) MIU, LA Light Album, 15 Big Ones, Kokomo, therefore the relentless bashing anything post Love You, tends to offend. Simple matter of taste. There has always been a certain goofiness about the Beach Boys in general. And it only got more pronounced as time went on. Dennis really was the only one able to be hip and cool effortlessly. Maybe this is why nothing "bad" they've ever done has really offended me.

I have to say I don't have the slightest problem with recordings like It's OK (which I happen to like very much) or Kokomo as such. To me, much more of a problem is how they were surrounded by poor artistic decisions, which were just so typical about The Beach Boys. Imagine It's OK being the successfull lead single off an album just as good as Holland, released in the wake of Endless Summer. Just about the same scenario can be applied to Kokomo: What about BW88 being recorded with full Beach Boys participation and Kokomo being on there instead of Night Time? Now that would have been one hell of a comeback.

That said, as it turned out in reality it always seems like Mike Love threw lots of sh*t against the wall until some of it eventually stuck. Mind you, some of that material still is quite enjoyable to my ears, yet I wish there was more of an artistic balance there (like in 1968, where they had Do It Again and the Friends album released almost simultaneously).

I completely agree.  I was working in New Hampshire the summer Still Crusin' came out and there was anticipation about the BB's next single after Kokomo.  It came on the radio to great fanfare and afterwards I thought "that was it?"  Here's the galling part, after scoring a #1 single the best the Beach Boys could do was offer a record that was half new songs and the rest the repackaging of their classic hits.  What the hell? 

I wouldn't go so far to say that it's a low point, but Still Crusin' to me was a collossal let down.  It was like they threw a few songs together, packaged with a few classics, and just put it out just to say they had a new record out.  Total missed opportunity.

Still Crusing the song is not all THAT bad! It's catchy and silly and not very endearing, but not all that bad. Still Cruising the album was a horrid decision that I will in no way defend. I don't mean to sound like an apologist in my posts. See, I just don't think they had it in them at this point. Honestly. But I also don't think it's something to be frowned upon so ferociously. Let it go. They've given us enough.

No, the song itself wasn't Summer of Love cringeworthy bad.  But Still Crusin' was Kokomo with cars.

OMG, now why'd you have to go and reming me of THAT song?

Do yourself a favor and look that video up on youtube :)

I swear Mike actually thinks those girls are into him.

wasn't it despite Kokomo/Summer of Love/Still Cruisin' that the Beach Boys have somehow gained new fans? Via the GV boxset, a few of the tunes on BW'88, namechecking of Pet Sounds,  or an old vinyl copy of Carl and the Passions So Tough picked up from a yard sale or old record shop? Thats how it seems from the UK anyway

I'd say it 's a combination of both. Speaking for myself, I was raised in Hawthorne, so the Beach Boys were mythic, but it didn't mean I cared about them at all. Then I saw Summer Dreams on TV and was fascinated. Then Kokomo, then (gasp) Full House! Then I got the Made In USA compilation and was blown away by the Pet Sounds stuff. Keep in mind that PS was still out of print at this point, so all this cheeseball-ness actually did lead me directly to Pet Sounds.

On Kokomo; has anyone ever considered the possibity that so many people despise the song simply BECAUSE it's associated with Cocktail ?

Newest low-point: the artwork for Brian's new album -- especially the text.  What were they thinking?!

Hey Mike actually married one of those girls. ;o)

I have this funny memory of being 16 and watching TV with a buddy of mine and saw the video for Still Cruisin' on Much Music. His mom when she saw Mike leering at the BB cheerleaders went, "oh that is just GROSS!!!!!"  :-D

Much as I think "Summer in Paradise," the album, is hokey and dull, I'm of the opinion that it, along with "Still Cruisin'," should have been paired for the Capitol two-fer series. And I agree with the person who posted earlier... part of the charm of the Beach Boys is the crudeness and idiocy that is applied to some of their dumb All-American music. In the early '60s, it was brash and teenage, from about 1978 on, it's been tepid nostalgia. But even at that, I get a kick out of it. It's not like following the Smiths or something. The cheese factor is kind of what keeps it interesting. Knowing that there was a real suffering artist, capable of writing the way Brian did, in the midst of something as pop, kitsch and locally-derived as the Beach Boys... it makes it this amazing experience... sort of an underground train, whereby the "serious" rock cognoscenti will NEVER take the Beach Boys that serious, but that if you care to get into it, you discover all of these amazing people like Jack Rieley, Steve Kalinich and Van Dyke Parks.

Like that Ken Burns ten-part documentary on baseball... watching the Beach Boys saga unfold is sort of like watching America through the years.

As for the song Summer in Paradise, I know that Mike Love and the Beach Boys backed Reagan and Bush, but remember, so did Neil Young and lots of '60s icons. I shudder at the thought of "I'm pickin' up Bush vibrations," but at the same time, I think Mike genuinely means what he said on Summer in Paradise, and the environment is still an issue that hardcore conservatives refuse to recognize as a problem. So, you know, whatever... Mike Love is a dufus... but who gives a crap? He's like Johnny Ramone. He's just a part of that world. Without Mike, things would have been a whole lot less interesting.

I haven't heard the album Summer in Paradise, life's too short. The videos for Summer of Love and Still Cruisin' are a scream, in hindsight - as the smiths said, I can laugh about it now, but at the time it was terrible.  Mike Love may actually be gay.

Um, okay.

I don't know about that, but the way he looked during the Looking Back With Love period (especially on that Dick Clark thing in which the boys..uhmm....lip-synched to "Beach Boys Medley," with Brian doing Carl's parts and Dennis almost falling off the drum stool)...ya gotta wonder.

Oh well...I have to go on record as saying I have defended LIGHT ALBUM to the death, over and over.  That's one of my favorite Beach Boys albums but as a guy that got into the Beach Boys in the '70s largely on the basis of Dennis and Carl's stuff, you'd expect that.  I'm into LOVE YOU and M.I.U. in spots.

I think Mike's songwriting is inextricably tied to his attitude about the band and about life, and the result is that it sounds contrived and hokey where in 1964 it sounded vibrant and youthful.  I'd much rather hear "Cool Head Warm Heart" because he's singing about something he actually cares about.  The other guys have made their share of cringeworthy music, but it's sincere.  Bruce loves schmaltz, Brian's writing about wallpaper, Al's obssessing about horses, Carl wants to be in the Eagles...whatever.  It's still coming from the heart and even if I don't like it it doesn't bother me. 

What Mike wants is money and fame and those kinds of things and rather than writing about that (which has been done well, a la Joe Walsh), he writes music that he thinks is going to GET him that.   He also doesn't really understand his audience as well as he thinks he does.  You take someone who's a total commercial writer -- a Dianne Warren for example -- and they know exactly how to get the punters on board for the song.  There's a certain art to that.  Mike's approach is more like, hey, I'll throw in some old Beach Boys titles and sing like I did in '65 and it'll all be cool.  He doesn't realize how condescending that is...part of the point of writing a hit is relating to your audience and not letting them figure out you're pandering to them.  Mike, for all his professed ability to relate to the masses, alienates a whole lot of people with this approach.  I believe "Kokomo" worked because (a) the song was written by other people; Mike just added the geographical chorus; (b) it's catchy; (c) it was in a hit movie; (d) there was, I am told, some skulduggery behind the scenes to get radio play (I'm shocked); and (e) it DOES resonate with the Beach Boys image as it was in the '80s, that is to say, older guys hanging out on the beach doing not very much, just kinda cruising. 

Based on public comments made, Mike apparently believes, as he did with "Good Vibrations," that it was his minor contrbutions to the song that made it a hit.  And so we get "c'mon let's cruise, you got, nothing to lose..." on the very next single.  That's the best example I can think of of why "Kokomo" ruined Mike as a writer.  He can't really objectively assess his writing, his skills or his audience.  It's all wrapped up in and warped by his self-perception, in which he needs to be more than a guy who was a lead singer and wrote some cool lyrics on some hit songs back in the '60s.

Adam, why do you think Carl dried up as an interesting songwriter after Long Promised Road / Feel Flows / Trader / Angel Come Home?

Very well put and I couldn't agree more. I have often thought that Mike just doesn't get it as far as what's "commercial", even though, ironically, he's been pretty open to that being his chief goal--commerciality.

I put it down to lack of imagination on his part, he just has trouble thinking outside the narrow confines of his Beach Boys box--and yes, the fact that Kokomo/It's OK, etc. were hits does not help that. I really think if he was behind their late sixties/early seventies stuff rather than just behind the hits, the whole catalogue would sell steadily and they wouldn't have to rely as heavily on their greatest hits packages for their bread--in the long run they would sell more records, gain more respect from the public and the snobs, which would sell more records, and on and on.

I have to say, though, I don't hate Kokomo, or It's OK, or whatever. I liked Kokomo when it was on the radio, for all it's eighties slickness it was more organic and enjoyable than a lot of pop records of its day--and I was nowhere near a Beach Boys fan back then--just wish it had remained an occasional facet of the band rather than the point that got hammered home the most.

I believe "Kokomo" worked because (a) the song was written by other people; Mike just added the geographical chorus; (b) it's catchy; (c) it was in a hit movie; (d) there was, I am told, some skulduggery behind the scenes to get radio play (I'm shocked); and (e) it DOES resonate with the Beach Boys image as it was in the '80s, that is to say, older guys hanging out on the beach doing not very much, just kinda cruising. 

Unbelievably astute observation. I could have written five pages worth and not said it so well.

There's a really good quote in David Leaf's book, I think it was an anonymous one.  It went something like "Brian's always been surrounded by these ordinary, bowling-league type people who never said 'great' for the right reasons."

I've been thinking a lot lately how much of the Beach Boys history can be explained by this quote.  Brian had a lot of problems, for sure, some self-created and some inherited.  But he also had a sharp, active mind and part of the reason he got into trouble was wanting to stimulate that.  You can have people around you that love you and care about you, and you them, but don't exist on the same plane as you and aren't ever going to get you.  That' s a very lonely place, and an understimulated place and if you've got depression already that sense of isolation will fuel it.  

A lot of creative people and people with mental illness are very sensitive and in some ways see reality more clearly than the rest of us...they pick up more.  Carl has made this point about Brian many times.  So there's a lot of Brian being forced again and again to revisit stuff he did 20-30 years ago rather than doing whatever he feels like doing, and of course he got bored.   And unfortunately, the most interesting people around him were probably the most destructive ones, so that didn't help either.   I'm not trying to minimalize the other stuff.  I'm just saying that the practical role of an active mind in isolation a la "I Just Wasn't Made For These Times," isn't thought of as much, although Leaf's book touched on this.

So as regards Mike, I'd make the argument that he just doesn't know any better.  Lack of imagination is a good way to put it.  Everything about his history argues that he's just an average guy, probably with some deep insecurities and worthiness issues with his family, who's overcompensating.  It's no wonder he was in the tank for George W. Bush for so long, because it's a similar kind of psychological profile.  This is not to paint Mike Love as an evil dude, although I am given to understand he has indeed done some nasty things.  I'm just going by what causes a guy to act out the way he has and to express himself creatively in the oddly unreflective and detached way he does.  One of the more interesting things about Timothy White's book was to put a more human face on Mike and the things that drive him.  The fact that he was legitimately denied songwriting credit for at least one song ("California Girls") only fuels whatever sense of injustice Mike has felt, and indeed, his role in the band's early success is often overlooked because of his later behavior (which is partly his own doing, but I'm sure Mike doesn't see it that way).

Or as one person who knew him said to me, "If only MIke didn't take himself so goddammed seriously."

I think you make a good point that Mike could have gotten behind the late '60s-early '70s stuff more, but in fact, he did to some extent...witness a lot of his public comments in the early '70s vis a vis Capitol Records.  The problem was, again, it often came off as insincere pandering, like when they talked about getting stoned with Buffalo Springfield onstage with the Dead in '71, or in songs like "Student Demonstration Time" or "Don't Go Near The Water."  Everyone's like, yeah, right, regardless of whether it's true or not, because the motivation is transparent and the execution is clumsy.

My own take is that Mike had a valid point about where the band's strength lay...in its legacy and in its past...by 1974.  The problem was everything that took place after that, from rushing Brian back into the limelight to 15 BIG ONES to M.I.U., seemed only driven by commercial considerations without factoring everything else in.  Brian onstage in the state he was in in 1976 and the stream of embarassing albums did irreparable damage to the band.  A little more perspective, and a little more quality control, and a little more awareness of how much time Brian needed to recover, might have gotten a different outcome everyone could have lived with.

What if the band had actually been able to craft a decent album, even on a compromise level of say a LIGHT ALBUM, after "Kokomo?"  What if the follow-up to "Kokomo" hadn't been "Still Cruisin'" but another equally light pop song that didn't scream out "I'm trying to write Kokomo Part II?"  They could have had a decent resurgence.  But instead, the band opted for the quick buck and the easy way out, and faded away once more.  Commercialism is fine, but it seems to me Mike never really understood how badly he was undercutting his own goals.

But, y'know, this is the band we know and love and hate...a bunch of real people with real faults and personality differences that were thrust into a situation that they had to deal with for 40 years.  Everybody I'm sure was doing what they thought was right at the time.  Hindsight is 20/20.  I wouldn't have wanted to have been any of them...a very tough road to hoe for sure.

Hmm.  Good question.  Well, I think there are a couple of possible factors.

One's not so obvious...when I worked out those songs for the LONG PROMISED ROAD album, I noticed how odd the chord structures were.  They're the kind of songs you write when you're not a very schooled keyboard player but you're really searching for the sounds and interesting chord shapes.  Carl would have this weird chords with 2s and 6s and 3rds in the bass.  It made it sound like there was never any home key, and combined with the particular layered production style he favored in the early '70s gave everything an otherworldly quality.

Now you get into the later stuff, it's much more traditional, and may I say guitar-oriented.  Carl's not really stretching out on an unfamiliar instrument, although "Heaven" has some weird chords, some of those same kind of chord structures.  The difference with "Heaven" though is whereas on keyboards and with that particular type of song structure, it sounds like you're in outer space, with acoustic guitar and a more generic production style, it feels like you're just idling and not really going anywhere, which songs with lots of sixth chords in them tend to be like ("Babe" by Styx leaps to mind).  (I know a lot of people love "Heaven" so I don't mean to bum anybody's trip...but imagine it being done on SURF'S UP on a Wurlitzer electric piano and that might convey what I'm talking about)

Another thing is that ever notice that "Feel Flows" and "Long Promised Road" are the same song?  Same chord progression, just a different production and melody.

So my personal theory is a lot of what made Carl interesting wasn't what he wrote, but how he produced it.  He didn't really start writing prolifically until the late '70s, after what most of us think of as his peak.  Once you take the guy out of the studio he owns and put him in Caribou Ranch, or with Steve Levine or whatever, he's much less likely to say "I would produce it this way" than go with the flow of people who have more experience.  Plus by the '80s Carl wanted a hit as much as everybody else did.  And so you get a much less interesting interpretation of the songs he came up with.

Another factor is from what I'm told Carl by 1980 was into country music and hard rock, basically.  And I mean new country, 1980 country, not Johnny Cash or Merle Haggard.  So his tastes were reflected in what he wrote, and I think a lot of us would feel that that wasn't as interesting as what he was probably listening to 10 years before.

That said, a lot of my favorite Carl stuff is from later years.  "Keepin' The Summer Alive" and "Maybe I Don't Know" were fascinating...he actually forced the Beach Boys to try to be an '80s AOR band, and just about pulled it off.  And "Where I Belong" is gorgeous.  I like some of the Beckley-Lamm-Wilson stuff too.  But I get your point.

What!?  Is this on YouTube??

Listening to the music is a subjective thing; I like chocolate ice cream and you might prefer vanilla ice cream. But blaming someone , in this case Mike Love, for career low points, should at least have some facts to substantiate the claim.

First, what did Mike contribute leading up to "Kokomo"? Mike contributed to the writing/recording of "Getcha Back" and "Rock And Roll To The Rescue". What's wrong with those two songs?  Mike was also instrumental in the recording of "Wipe Out" and (I think?) "California Dreamin". Those two songs were featured prominently on MTV, and contributed in keeping the Beach Boys in the public view. These were not low points. That was fun, enjoyable music.

Then came "Kokomo", which was a catchy, No. 1 single. Somebody in a previous post stated (incorrectly) that Mike went on to record Kokomo Part II, II, etc. So I checked the songs that Mike contributed to the Still Cruisin' album. When I listen to "Still Cruisin", "Somewhere Near Japan" and "Make It Big" (I know it was written pre-1988), I don't hear "Kokomo". And, again, I don't have any major problems with those songs. Pet Sounds they ain't; low points they ain't either.

So, I looked further for "Kokomo Part II and II". I checked the Summer In Paradise album. "Summer Of Love" - nope. "Still Surfin" - nope. "Strange Things Happen" - nope. "Lahaina Aloha" - nope. "Summer In Paradise" - nope. "Island Fever" - YES! I found one. Well, Mike Love, that no good SOB. He wrote a song that resembled "Kokomo". How dare him! Never mind that it wasn't a bad song. And neither were the other songs that Mike contributed to Summer In Paradise, except for "Summer Of Love"....

Why are you singling out Mike as being responsible for the low point(s)? RESPONSIBLE? Not Mike. He produced something. He gave them hits ("Getcha Back", "Wipe Out", and "Kokomo"). But, most of all, he tried. I wish I could say the same for Brian, Al, Carl, and Bruce. You wanna criticize Mike for BB85? When Al contributed "Crack In Your Ass"? And Brian contributed "I'm So Horny"? And Bruce contributed his typical, just one, ballad? Carl did come through with "Where I Belong". But Mike co-wrote and sang lead on a Top 40 hit from the album. If youre gonna criticize BB85, criticize everyone; don't single out Mike Love.

You want to criticize Mike's contribution to Still Cruisin'? You call it "Kokomo-like"? When Al contributes "Island Girl" and Brian contributes "In My Car"? Who forced them to write those songs? Did you ever hear the one about calling the kettle black? Oh, by the way, what songs did Carl and Bruce contribute to Still Cruisin'?

And then there's Summer In Paradise. A lot of people's low point. It might be. BECAUSE AS SONGWRITERS, BRIAN, CARL, AND AL ARE NO WHERE TO BE FOUND. If you're going to blame Mike for not allowing their songs, would you please include some proof? As I stated above, Mike contributed enough good songs for one person. Why was Brian sitting on "The Spirit Of Rock And Roll", "Don't Let Her Know She's An Angel", and "Angel Eyes"? He was 5-6 years away from his next solo album. Where were Al's and Carl's songs? And Bruce's only contribution is a semi-cover? And you wanna blame Mike? Those other guys were still Beach Boys, and Summer In Paradise was a Beach Boys' album. Did they get paid for the album? At least Brian, of all people, could've contributed a few songs to cover the several thousand dollars worth of checks that he's been receiving for NOT showing up at concerts.

The points made about Mike writing songs about "fun" and related themes are absolutely correct. He did and he still does. He is what he is. But he's always been that way. There might've been a 2-3 year window (1970-72) when he mellowed out. But, the group must've known what Mike was gonna contribute. If they - Brian, Carl, Al, and Bruce - were the true songwriting "artists" of the band, they should've COMPLIMENTED Mike's songs with some of their own. But they didn't. They either saved them or didn't write them. There was no "Disney Girls", "California Saga", "Feel Flows", or even "A Day In The Life Of A Tree". When I look at the lowpoint(s), it's because of the ABSENCE of certain members, not a guy who was doing his thing, like he had been doing for decades....

SJS, you just don't get it, do you?

Well, SJS, I get that you often want to defend Mike from unfair attacks, and I can support that (admittedly more because I like being a devil's advocate than that I like Mike's work). But if the topic is "lowest point," and Mike's songs are what people consider the lowest point, then it's a fair answer. I agree: those final couple Beach Boys albums are their worst. Mike wrote or co-wrote the bulk of the material. So Mike is responsible. Was Brian there, could he have done more, should Al or Carl have contributed, etc.? Maybe. But I can't blame them for an absence. Sometimes nothing is better than something, and those albums are such times. Why not continue with presumably successful oldies touring? Why make those records--did those songs really need to be released? Was someone clamoring for them? I don't know the sales figures, but I doubt it strongly. If you like them, cool. But if others don't (myself included), cool. It's a legitimate answer to call them the worst. And Mike was at the helm.

"should Al or Carl have contributed, etc.? Maybe. But I can't blame them for an absence."

Exactly! If I was Carl, I would have done the samet hing he did. Especially if I had the songs that wound being on Beckley-Lamm-Wilson. As I mentioned, Carl was follwing a muse that nothing to do with or even could share a place in Mike's vision of the BB during that timeframe.  Read the '92 Goldmine interview and  his gushing over SIP. The guy wouldn;t have been open to an "I Wish For You" in '91 (to give a random example).  Kokomo established a new BB forumls: the Mike lead on the verses and the preety carl vocal on the chorus and there was plenty of that on both SC and SIP. Any suggestion otherwise is, well, horse poop.

We'll just have to respectfully disagree, Luther. I do think, yes, Brian could have done more. I do think, yes, Al and Carl should've contributed more. I can blame and do blame them for their absence. Yes, sometimes nothing is better than something (GIOMH for example), but not in this case. Those BB albums in question needed more. It's one thing to blame someone, it's another thing to single them out unfairly. But, hey, no problem; look forward to your posts....

On the former, I agree wholeheartedly. On the latter, I also agree wholeheartedly (and don't think I really did). So let's fight about our agreement!  ;D

John, man, you got a right to express your opinion, and more power to you, my friend...but I have to say you are way off base in this post.  There's so much in your post above that totally misconstrues or misunderstands what I've said.  I'll go through it briefly, just to set the record straight, but not belabor it.

The point wasn't "blaming Mike Love for career low points."  What I had said originally was that "Kokomo" was a low point because Mike kept retreading the formula after "Kokomo."  For that to be case, he had to be NOT sucking all the time prior to "Kokomo," which is the same point you have made above.  I specifically pointed to "Rock and Roll To The Rescue," which you also mentioned, as something I liked.  As you say, music is subjective, but if you can't hear the influence of "Kokomo" in nearly everything Mike wrote after that, I'm really shocked...I mean, the "c'mon let's cruise" chorus of "Still Cruising" is a clear lift from "Aruba, Jamaica..." 

As to your other points about not criticizing the other guys' contributions, again, you didn't read my post very carefully. I specifically said, just as you did, the other guys came up with plenty of stinkers.  The difference IN MY OPINION -- and stated as such, my friend -- is that the other guys were writing lame music that they really believed in, and Mike was writing disingenuous music in trying to get a hit, and in so doing, was undercutting his own goals, because people could tell that's what he was trying to do and weren't buying it.  The point isn't that Mike is a bad person or a bad songwriter...the point is that he wasn't succeeding in what he was trying to do in going about it the way he was, and he isn't the best judge of his own talent or material.

As for "blaming Mike for not allowing the others to write songs," no one's suggested that.  You make an excellent point that Mike is just doing what he has always done and the others for whatever reason did not contribute.  I can only point out that you've made a logical construction where it's the other guys' fault for not contributing, but at the same time, we can't blame Mike for not allowing them to, because there's no proof.  There's no proof that the guys DIDN'T try to contribute, either.  You can't have it both ways.

Anyhow, John, it's clear you have a lot of passion on this subject and I commend you for it.  It's just that your post is one of those things where it seems like you have a lot of things you want to say, and in so doing, you made the points you wanted to make -- but you were making an argument that wasn't on point to what was posted.  Which is cool, and I understand...just don't put words in my or anybody else's mouths, cool?  Keep on keepin' on.

You know, just as an addendum: "Getcha Back" is an interesting case in point.  It's pre-"Kokomo", it's Love/Melcher, and the song isn't terrible, and it was a mid-sized hit.

The one problem with the tune, though is that Carl specifically stated at the time that Mike wanted to write a song that had the Bruce Springsteen vibe, specifically "Hungry Heart."  And if you listen to "Getcha Back," the songs are so close in structure, chord progression and melody that Springsteen could have sued.  ("Hungry Heart" was Springsteen's tip of the hat to the BBs, so that wouldn't have been very cool of him)  The other touchstone was supposedly "Hushabye" and indeed, the intro vocla part is very similar.

Now, this doesn't bother me a whole lot in the sense that the tune was OK and Mike was clearly into Springsteen and it was coming from a good place.  But it is kind of ironic, given Mike's litigious nature when it comes to even the smallest songwriter contribution ("ba ba ba ba ba ba, bee do be" from WIBN is one example), that Mike's tribute to "Hungry Heart" was so close to the original.  And it also seems that it's hard for Mike to come up with something that's not really very derivative of something else...and again, it's not that it's necessarily a bad thing, it's that there's a subtle, artful way to do it and there's an obvious and clumsy way to do it.

I never connected Getcha Back with Hungry Heart. I always heard more of a 50s doo-wop influence than anything like Bruce Springsteen.

How could you not? Both songs have the same chord changes (which, of course are both derivitive if doo-wop).

I remember reading an interview with Mike where he states that he wished Melcher had produced Getcha back because he would have gotten closer to an E Street Band feel than Steve Levine did.  Mike then added that Getcha back was inspired by Hungry Heart.

Sometimes nothing is better than something-Country Love, Looking Back With Love-I'll take GIOMH over those two jewels.

...and he never will.  :smokin

Thanks for your response, adamghost. I'll respond also....

1) I don't think I misconstrued and misunderstood what you said. I only read your post one time, I don't remember most of it, and I didn't quote you. The part about Mike writing "Kokomo Part II and III" stood out, and I did quote the characterization. I thought that was funny. Incorrect, but funny.

2) By saying that you're NOT blaming Mike for the career lowpoints, and then saying that "Kokomo" was a lowpoint because Mike kept retreading the formula after "Kokomo", is basically placing the blame at the same place - at Mike Love.

3) Adam, I know you're a musician. I went on your website and saw/listened to your music. It's quite good. So you know what you're talking about. But, I can honestly say that, other than "Island Fever", I don't hear the Kokomo influence that you do. And I tried to point that out in my post. I'm sorry if that shocks you. But I'm just an average Joe, not a musician. And, as I pointed out, what about "In My Car" and "Island Fever"? They are somehow never mentioned.

4) You say that Mike wasn't succeeding? "Getcha Back"? "Wipe Out"? "Kokomo"? "Somewhere In Japan"? Not successful? You don't have to LIKE them, but they were successful. And, I'm sorry to repeat myself, but I didn't find Mike's SIP songs THAT bad.

5) Don't want it both ways. But, to me, when Brian, Carl, and Al have NO songs on a Beach Boys album, it's more logical to assume they did not submit any, than to speculate that Brian Wilson, Carl Wilson, and Al Jardine submitted a song(s), and one person, Mike Love, had the power to say "No". I also don't buy the theory that they withheld songs because the project didn't warrant or merit their inclusion. What project did? Youngblood Part II? Postcards From Wherever - 20 years later?

6) Again, didn't put words in anybody's mouths. I purposely didn't quote anybody because I only read the posts one time -  including yours. What I wrote was a response to the multiple posters who singled out Mike Love - or his contributions - as a low point. As Luther correctly pointed out, it's fair for people to consider Mike's songs as a lowpoint. My point was to not SINGLE him out, but include the others as well. People seem to have short memories when they discuss that infamous period. I like to remind them. Cool?

<<Again, didn't put words in anybody's mouths. I purposely didn't quote anybody because I only read the posts one time -  including yours. What I wrote was a response to the multiple posters who singled out Mike Love - or his contributions - as a low point. As Luther correctly pointed out, it's fair for people to consider Mike's songs as a lowpoint. My point was to not SINGLE him out, but include the others as well. People seem to have short memories when they discuss that infamous period. I like to remind them. Cool?>>

Oh yeah!  Totally cool.  I sensed that you had the thing that you really wanted to say, but it wasn't necessarily addressing or refuting what I or anybody else was saying.  As long as we're clear on that, rock on.

There IS a difference between blaming the band's low points on Mike Love and saying that "Kokomo" was a low point because it ruined Mike as a writer.  The first is saying everything the band did that sucked was Mike's fault.  That's not what I or anyone else said (though we might be thinking it!  No, just kidding.  I don't).  The second is saying that the success of "Kokomo" altered Mike's writing to the point of self-parody and as you point out, since he was the main creative force of the group at that point, that's a bad thing.  I accept that you don't hear the influece of "Kokomo" in what came afterward as clearly as I do, but I did give you one concrete example, and other non-musicians here heard the same thing, so it's not like we're all just on a Mike Love vendetta.  It's true that when Mike sucks it bugs me more than when the other guys suck because I sense a cynicism in his writing that isn't there as much with the other guys.  But I admit that that's my perception and also point out, again, that I specifically said Mike was not the only person who ever wrote a crappy BBs song.

Mike DID have a few chart successes, as you point out.  What I was saying is that in my opinion by making decisions for short term gain (e.g. squeezing out a hit by mining a formula) he was trading away long-term options (respect for the band and also songs that had more lasting appeal and would have kept the band more commercial viable).  As evidence of this I pointed out that "Still Cruisin'" made #93 in the wake of a #1 record, and the band never charted on the top 100 again.

The only other thing I'd say is that, again, making a construction that says that since there's 4 of the other guys and only 1 of Mike Love, it's the other 4 guys' fault if they didn't have more influence on the records, and at the same time saying we can't question whether Mike had anything to do with it because there's no proof, is making assumptions that are biased in favor of Mike.  I think it's fairer to say -- and I never said anything different -- that we don't know why Mike took such a dominant role in the band in the later years, and any speculation is bound to be colored by our own prejudices.  Fair enough?

Fair enough. I just have one more question - for anybody. Then I'm putting this - and me - to bed! For tonight anyway....

My question centers around Mike's alleged "power", going back as far as 15 Big Ones, when it was mentioned (on this board) that Mike was rejecting others' songs. Here's the question:

If Mike was so much more inferior to the others as a songwriter, he didn't play an instrument, his later singing ability was being called into question, his penchant for "fun in the sun" music was not the direction to go, Mike was too commercial, nobody liked Mike, he didn't get along with Dennis, Brian didn't want to work with him, and on and on...

Why did Mike have the power (or whatever the appropriate word is) to single-handedly veto/reject songs from Beach Boys albums? Why didn't the other guys (including Al, if you think he was into "art") disrepsect him, out vote him, shut him down, shut him up, or crush him like a grape. Instead, according to many on this board (and I'm not putting words in their mouths), Mike prevented the other Beach Boys' songs from getting on the albums. And please don't respond that they didn't feel like fighting him and it was easier to give in....

It's worth remembering that power in a group situation often has little to do with skill or accomplishment, and much to do with force of personality.  If you've got plenty of self-confidence and forcefulness, and the other people in your group can have their self-confidence more easily damaged, then sure, one guy can out-disrespect all the others.

And it sure sounds like all the Wilsons at the very least were in that boat to one degree or another.  Even Dennis veered between extremes of self-confidence and self-doubt.  And yes, there's a tendency on all their parts to withdraw in one way or another rather than stand and fight.

It's just a classic dysfunctional-family situation, really.

Cheers,
Jon Blum

A couple pages up there was a quote refrenced: " If only Mike didn't take himself so seriously"

That might be true, but perhaps we're taking HIM too seriously. Mike's never set out to be Dylan. So, he loves silly fluffy "fun" songs about summertime or the beach. Big deal? And if he's trying to make money? Big deal! What rock star can you stand behind100% who's NOT trying to make money? Or at least make a living.

Someone mentioned how Mike is like Johnny Ramone. Very astute! Hits the nail on the head in so many ways. I don't see how if Mike is so concerned with having hits, repeating some magical formula, how it should completely negate him of any artistry, creativity, or talent. It's soooooooo mean to sit here and analyze every move/word/act/deed of Mike's like we all have psych degrees and try to chip away at any bit of self respect or ego the guy might have left. Why do we have to find excuses for how he was somehow "permitted" to be a part of such an amazing musical legacy? Why do we pick away at every fiber of the guy's personality and make-up when we warmly embrace guys like Gary Usher who wandered to the Wilson house from down the street, or Tony Asher, and advertizing guy for God's sake!, and laud their words as droppings from heaven. Why is it such a freakish thing that Mike and Brian, two first cousins with a lot of history, would have a chemistry for writing songs together? Why treat Brian as a God and Mike as trash? Do we worship Keith Richards as a God and slam Mick because he merely wrote some great lyrics to some classic songs? Or the other way around?

If I was Mike I would have an attitude the size of Mars. I don't see why he should give a damm, at this point, about anything other than making himself happy, playing shows and making money. Honestly. He's been fodaed since 1967 and couldn't redeem himself in the "fans" eyes no matter what he did.

I gonna go right out and get myself in big trouble here and say it:

It SUCKS that Brian quite the touring band and created a giant crack in the band's varnish that was never healed. It was a selfish thing to do really. Selfish and weak in a lot of ways. Then he sat back and let the guys tour relentlessly and make cash while he didn't do much of anything. I'm not saying he didn't have his reasons. And I respect them. But looking at the big picture. Yeah, it sucked in a massive way. Since then it was pretty much slam after slam after slam in the other guy's faces. Why do we have to bash the other guys for wanting to continue as the Beach Boys and do it? Didn't they just want to function as a band and be exactly that? Just like pretty much everyone else in history who was ever in a band? Who can blame them?


If the Brian and The Beach Boys had stuck together like a real band. A band like The Stones/REM/The Beatles even, we probably wouldn't be sitting here blaming Mike love for everything. The whole thing just sucks. Sure, they did become a true band again, but by then it was too late and the well had been poisioned by too many interlopers. It's sad.

Alan was excluded from the band for the majority of the SIP sessions, so it would have been a tad difficult for him to contribute material.

[quote author=Sheriff John Stone link=topic=5795.msg93186#msg93186
4) You say that Mike wasn't succeeding? "Getcha Back"? "Wipe Out"? "Kokomo"? "Somewhere In Japan"? Not successful? You don't have to LIKE them, but they were successful. And, I'm sorry to repeat myself, but I didn't find Mike's SIP songs THAT bad.
[/quote]

One, "Somewhere Near Japan" was written almost entirely by John Phillips (as was "Kokomo")... and two, as a single, it tanked. Never charted. As it happens, I consider it the last halfway decent song the band did, but Mike had little to do with its genesis.

Simple - he had the voting power. back in the 70s and 80s, he & Alan formed a voting block. Brian either abstained or gave his vote to Mike (I have no idea why), which left Carl and Dennis, or most frequently, just Carl. Simple politics. After Dennis passed on, even simpler, as his estate sold his vote and shares back to BRI.

One very important of Mike's character to consider - when he was quite young, 18, 19, he was thrown out of his comfortable family home and forced to fend for himself and his new family (one purely incidental spinoff: The Beach Boys), then a few years later his family's business failed. Don't know about you, but that would make me concentrate on the commercial rather than the artistic more than a little. To have had money and then lost it suddenly is hugely traumatic.

very good point!

Why did Mike have so much control later on? First of all Brian effectively stopped having final say when Surf's Up was used against his wishes back in 1971. Sure he cooperated but after that his role in the group's decision making lessened considerably. Carl and Dennis' positions were compromised once Jack was fired and Stephen Love hired. This worsened once Ricky and Blondie left. Murry's death also took some the drive out of all of the Wilson brothers. Once all this occurred Mike got his way more often, and Endless Summer strengthened his already strong desire to return to the oldies.

By 1976 Carl and Dennis were dabbling in hard drugs and Al felt more comfortable on Mike's side regardless of his own artistic desires. The back and forth over the next seven years is well documented. Fast forward to 1984 Dennis is gone, Bruce is back, Landy is making Brian's decisions for him, and the Beach Boys haven't recorded regularly in five years. They cut an album and Mike contributes its most successful and debatabley most memorable moment. Steve Levine is someone no one wants to work with again, Brian's now being further pulled away, and Terry Melcher is the Beach Boys new "recording caption". Carl seemingly no longer has the desire to write for the group. Because they can't land a long term record deal, they do a bunch of one offs. among which was Kokomo. That was the ace in hole they needed, so they do a half baked album in 1989 of which nobody (even Mike if you read the Goldmine interview) seems to take a great deal of pride in and it bombs taking along their chance to be major recording artists with it.

The one off recordings continue with no fanfare and litigation over Landy begins. As the sessions for SIP commence, the group is in total disarray. Brian is now completely being kept from participating. Al and Mike fall out, and Jardine only comes back towards the end of the session, Bruce hasn't been prolific for years, and Carl just doesn't seem to care much. Mike is left in charge because he is the only one really giving a darn about making a record at that point. Brian and Al seem not to have the opportunity to contribute, so that leaves, Mike, Bruce, and Carl at fault for the results. Carl should have pushed more, and I doubt Mike would have prevented him from recording, He is at fault for going along passively. Bruce seemed to have given up any artistic pretensions and also seems to have just let Mike go ahead with his plans and must share that part of the blame with Carl. Mike should have encouraged more group work, and not sought to redo the 15 Big Ones formula. That is his fault, and the album is his baby. He also takes fault for not writing any decent material. Getcha Back and Rock and Roll To The Rescue were OK but Mike hadn't really been consistent for over a decade. He did rely too much on nostalgia, trends, and yes Kokomo styled production.

The Beach Boys had one last chance in 1994-95 and they blew it by doing a lame country tribute to themselves. It all came to a sad end and they were all at fault. That my friends was the low point.

I think it's impossible to pick a specific low point. There are just to many, and it depends on the fan. Releasing a live album(their first one, specificly) filled with dumb covers (Monster Mash, Long Tall Texan, Pappa Ooo Mow Mow) instead of their great original songs(no Don't Worry Baby???) was a low point. To the hardcore surf fans, Pet Sounds was a low point. For the people that actually understood Pet Sounds and Good Vibrations, Smiley Smile was practically a slap in the face. I could go on and on. My point is, virtually every Beach Boys album/era was a low point to SOMEBODY.

Pure genius! This is MUSIC/ART we're talking about. To many Warhol was a genius, others a no-talent opportunist. Music is no different. It's all subjective and everyone's opinion is right.

Great post! While I was reading it, I had a thought. Do you(by "you", I mean just anybody who happens to read this) think that in regard to everything stated in the above post, and with the financial issues Andrew pointed out, that Mike's infamous speech at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame might have been his misguided attempt at a pep talk? I mean, maybe he realised that nobody but himself actually cared by this point? Sure, he insulted everybody and their brother, but Mike ended his speech with something along the lines of "...and we're going to do it for world peace, and harmony!". If you watch it closely, Mike seems to have a fire in his eye as he says it. Perhaps we all sometimes take Mike for granted?

I think Mike was tactless, but he was trying to point out the soulessnes of the music industry. He was offended that people like Diana Ross and Paul McCartney didn't show for political reason's Perhaps he was trying to say it didn't have to be that way, but I don't think it was aimed at the other Beach Boys exactly. He was on a fast and not thinking normally, it's hard to know what he would have done had he been in a different place. It's not his finest hour but it was genuine which most of these occasions aren't.

As far as taking him for granted, yes we do but that doesn't mean I like many of his post 1973 creative decisions. He has had a handful of great moments that show his full potential since then, but like the rest of the Beach Boys was never as consistent as he had been previously. The big mistake is to deny how great he and the others all were before that point. Each and every Beach Boys played a part in their creative and commercial success, but each is also to blame for their failures or decline.

Ok, because we've been talking about the Summer In Paradise album so much, I went and listened to the title track and have to admit, it's a pretty damm good little song! The eco-lyrics certainly aren't "cynical" but then again, anything can seem cynical if you're looking at it with a cynical mindset. For 1992, I don't see anything at all wrong with this track. The production doesn't even sound all that dated.

I also listened to Still Cruisin and tried to hate it, but I dunno.... the beat is nice, the chorus is catchy, and Carl's vocal parts are, dare I say, killer! Other than being at it's (gasp) heart silly, I honestly can't see what the big deal about this stuff is? Like Mike or not, you have to admit, he has a THING he does, and he does it well. His voice is unique and if he didn't dress so bad, you might actually be able to call him cool.

I just can't, for the life or me, hate this stuff.

and Adam, I'm totally with you on a song like "Cool Head Warm Heart" ..... It's night and day when Mike writes about something he really cares about rather than what he thinks Beach Boy "fans" wanna hear and will make into a hit. Even though I'm not offended by that stuff.

I would say that the 1st live album was an aberration during a prolific period. But let's turn it the other way round. For many people, Pet Sounds was a high point. The only BB album they collected. The period following Smile's abandonment was difficult, however just 3 years later, and a few steadily improving albums behind them, Sunflower is seen by some people as a high point, and the late 60s collected output can also be seen in its entirety as a high point. The early 70s marked a different stage, and for me personally many of the high points in this sprawling back catalogue can be found at this time.

Other than "Love You" there were not so many high points in the late 70s, but there were some good tracks around.

But who can honestly say that the late 80s early 90s BB output was a high point?

So I don't buy the basic argument. There is a basic quality or not within art, and it's not just subjective in a crude way - however you slice it, some albums really do stink, for real.

Difficult, but not impossible. How many days was Al present? How long does it take to present a tape (or whatever you present), and say, "Here's a song I wrote which I think is pretty good. Would you give it a listen?". There, that took ten seconds... :police:

I think we was actually banned from the band at this point for having attitude problems, or something to that effect.

One, "Somewhere Near Japan" was written almost entirely by John Phillips (as was "Kokomo")... and two, as a single, it tanked. Never charted. As it happens, I consider it the last halfway decent song the band did, but Mike had little to do with its genesis.
[/quote]

Mike's name is on the credits, and, based on Mike's record as being proven (in a court of law) to be honest in his songwriting claims, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, and at least some credit. Is he at least partially responsible for bringing the track to the group's attention? I'll give him credit for that also.

I'm aware that "Somewhere In Japan" didn't chart. But after being scolded for equating some (but not all) degree of success with sales, I included "Somewhere In Japan" as being successful, based on what I heard, rather than its chart performance. Jeez, I can't win no matter which way I go....

 

In the Beach Boys first decade this is a very feasable scenerio, but by 1992 relations were too strained for that easy give and take. I have a feeling Al was lucky (if you want to call it that) to be on the album at all.

I'm aware that "Somewhere In Japan" didn't chart. But after being scolded for equating some (but not all) degree of success with sales, I included "Somewhere In Japan" as being successful, based on what I heard, rather than its chart performance. Jeez, I can't win no matter which way I go....

 




[/quote]


Hating Mike is like a religion: based on a sliver of fact and a whole lot of mythology. What are you gonna do, argue someone out of their religious faith? It aint gonna work.

Just remember...... "It's a Love-thing"

Mike's and Carl's material in the early 90s share the distinction of being songs that I wouldn't listen twice or even once if they weren't written by a Beach Boy. That's a lot in common.  :p

Great post, I see what you mean about production vs. songwriting. Btw, "interesting" is too harsh, maybe "songs I wish I had written" is a warmer way of expressing it. I like some of his stuff in KtSA and BB85.

Another problem for me is Mike's voice. I too don't really mind Getcha Back as a song, but I just wish Mike had done a better job of the vocal.

On the other hand, we have five more Beach Boys songs that we wouldn't have otherwise (well, Papa-Oom-Mow-Mow is on PARTY!) rather than shaky versions, tainted with overloud screaming, of songs we've already heard. Sounds like a good deal to me. Why would you want something you've already heard rather than something different? I'd rather take a chance on the quality (and only Long Tall Texan is irredeemable rubbish) and have something different.

While I totally agree with you about the fact that when Brian quit the band it wasn't as good I do think it was for the best in the end. I do think the band adapted without him and I think that the material that Brian created in the studio just got THAT much better after he quit.. at least temporarily it did. But I think it's a little unfair to call Brian's decision "Selfish and weak". Firstly, don't take me as a 'Brianista' or whatever cause I am not but clearly the other guys owe Brian a lot for their success and I think you really have to look at it from Brian's point of view. He had a LOT on his plate, he was writing, producing, arranging, singing, playing on a large chunk of Beach Boys tracks but also doing the same for a few outside artists too and when you add touring, promotional work etc.. to that as well, who can blame him for quitting touring. But I honestly think you have to take his mental illness into consideration. I mean I think a lot of people underestimate Brian's mental problems.

No, I have never seen the movie and I don't despise the song, just not a fan of it.

In regards to the power to say "no", in that Goldmine interview from 1992, didn't Mike say something like "well I know what is commercial since I co-wrote Kokomo and Good Vibrations" and then he says how that if people have an idea that they have to go to him to decide whether it is commercial or not, something like that anyway. I'd have to take a look at it again.


Well how about Beckley-Lamm-Wilson?

As it happens, I consider it the last halfway decent song the band did, but Mike had little to do with its genesis.

I shudder to say this, but I think "Lahaina Aloha"  has a great melody and Carl sings it beautifully. It's the only song on SIP that I like, truthfully.

The Beach Boys had one last chance in 1994-95 and they blew it by doing a lame country tribute to themselves.  It all came to a sad end and they were all at fault. That my friends was the low point.

Totally agree. I think the 1994-96 Wilson/Paley sessions, which were song earmarked for the last Beach Boys album, stand as the last time that Brian Wilson truly created an autonymous piece of work.

Allan returned to the fold just in time for the vocal sessions for an album that had a very tight deadline. There was no time to cut any new tracks, however good they might have been.

Mike's name is on the credits, and, based on Mike's record as being proven (in a court of law) to be honest in his songwriting claims, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, and at least some credit. Is he at least partially responsible for bringing the track to the group's attention? I'll give him credit for that also.

I'm aware that "Somewhere In Japan" didn't chart. But after being scolded for equating some (but not all) degree of success with sales, I included "Somewhere In Japan" as being successful, based on what I heard, rather than its chart performance. Jeez, I can't win no matter which way I go....
[/quote]
[/quote]
Bruce's name is also on the credits.  ;D  I strongly suspect that Mike's contribution could be editing the song down from its original 20-odd verses.

Mike's name is on the credits, and, based on Mike's record as being proven (in a court of law) to be honest in his songwriting claims, I'll give him the benefit of the doubt, and at least some credit. Is he at least partially responsible for bringing the track to the group's attention? I'll give him credit for that also.

I'm aware that "Somewhere In Japan" didn't chart. But after being scolded for equating some (but not all) degree of success with sales, I included "Somewhere In Japan" as being successful, based on what I heard, rather than its chart performance. Jeez, I can't win no matter which way I go....

 [/quote]

Well, in all fairness John, I have to say in making your argument you're making every possible assumption in favor of Mike, and discarding some factually proven information to make your point.  I don't have a problem with advocacy in favor of Mike -- God knows he could use one -- but let's just call it what it is.  :)

I strongly suspect that Mike's contribution could be editing the song down from its original 20-odd verses.

Who wrote the 20-verse version? John Phillips? If so, I'd like to hear that. My hunch has always been that this song deserved a better voice than the Beach Boys. Weird to say it, but the song could have been given to a better entity at that time. The Beach Boys could sing it, but they weren't "singing" much at the time that was really moving. Maybe that's why "Somewhere Near Japan" is good, but slightly tained as not being the best production in the world.

Yup - the subject of the song is his daughter Mackenzie's honeymoon experience with her husband/pusher on Guam. The money & the drugs soon ran out, hence...

"Late last night I got an SOS
The fairytale girl's in deep distress
She said 'I don't know where I am
But it's near Japan'"

Awesome. Thanks, Andrew.

Lowest point in the BB career?

The entire Keepin' the Summer Alive album. They just didn't care one bit. An absolute travesty, coming off the heels of what was, truthfully, a fine LP for the band so late in their career. It's like a Serge Gainsbourg put-on, only it's nowhere near as funny, unless you like laughing at men when they're down. Can you blame Dennis for wanting nothing to do with it? Not even Carl could be counted on to deliver the goods like he had so wonderfully in 1970-73.

In the end it's an LP documenting a half drug-addled, half apathetic group. Of course, when you sink this low, there's nowhere else to go but up, but that came at a price.

The cover art is quite fitting. A worn out oldies act in their summery bubble isolated from the cold, bitter landscape that had long since rejected them creatively.

I think it all comes down to everyone just being a bit too hard on The Beach Boys in general. Mike gets the worst of it, but it's not just him. Poor Brian has been punished for over 40 years for not staying 24 years old and writing Pet Sounds Part 2 every other year. Well, actually, he DID deliver Pet Sounds part 2, but it was called Love You. And the guy wasn't 24 years old anymore and life had taken a toll. A fascinating toll, of course, but a toll still.

I honestly don't think the "worst" Beach Boys stuff is half bad. And if I can like Summer In Paradise, I mean TRUELY like it, how in the hell am I supposed to despise Mike Love? It just doesn't work. Only Dennis was blessed with the ability to ONLY write great stuff. But of course he wasn't under the same sort of pressure the other guys were to deliver. It isn't easy to create perfect music for 10/20/30/40 years and to please the fans, let alone yourself. Can't we please give these guys a break. For my money, The Beach Boys have an insanely unbeaten streak of great stuff from 1961-1980. That's more than enough.

I think it hit a few lows, and was more cynical, but all that came after that was worse. It's the last Beach Boys album that really sounds like the Beach Boys even a little. L.A. Light is better as was basically everything to that point, but the feel was still there even if it was in dilluted form. No excuse for School Days,  Endless Harmony, or Oh Darlin though.

I won't speak for anyone else, but my intent is not belittle the best years (though I would only go to 1973) but to try to understand why they ended before they had to. I think Mike has been treated poorly and deserves a defense but if I feel he did something artistically subpar I am not afraid to say it. With Brian I think through the Good Timin-California Feeling era he was great, but once the voice went his songs also took a hit. All but the most dedicated Brian fans have to admit that from 1975 on he didn't maintain previous standards. He still has some brilliant moments, but the handling of his career both as a Beach Boy and solo since that point has made people who care about him somewhat uncomfortable. I don't think there ever was a band as good as the Beach Boys in their prime and they should be seen as one of the all time greats by any knowledgeable music lover.  Yet here where we analyse everything as hard core fans, constructive criticism can be insightful for even the most knowledgeable among us. Note that I said constructive. Saying things like Mike Love is evil is just silly.

Extremely well put, and I agree with everything. Please keep in mind, I'm not defending late era Beach Boys (80-95?) as being anywhere near them in their prime. I'm just saying that it's hard for people (because bands are just that: people) to maintain a constant level of greatness at nearly anything. At 45-50-60-65 ect, you're just not the same person you were when you were 24 or 34 and your life experiences shape you and distort and illuminate the past in various ways. If the Beach Boys in their 40s and 50s just wanted to be fun and light and make money and play shows, I just don't see anything wrong with it. And for a bunch of 40 or 50somethings in the late 80s and early 90s to have some less than wonderful ideas about what's cool/hip or commercial, doesn't strike me as at all odd or unexpected. Especially after what these guys have gone through. I just don't see any point in deriding Mike or the boys for not releasing Pet Sounds quality material in 1988 or 92. If Mike had a cynical outlook, think of all the highs and lows they'd had by that point. All those lows would certainly make anyone cynical at times. Especially when most of The Beach Boys highs were too often followed by soul crushing lows.

And just to make it clear, Holland is my favorite Beach Boys album by far. So, to be honest, I consider anything and everything after that (other than Dennis' songs) to be a complete travisty in so many ways. But once I recover from that shock, I find a lot to enjoy in post 73 BBs and will defend it all. The Beach Boys were always a multifaceted band (easy when you have 5 singers/writers) and if they decided to focus on a particular facet from then on, well, I can live with it.

I feel exactly the opposite. I think fans are too easy on the Beach Boys, and that not only is the worst Beach Boys stuff really bad, but a lot of the stuff even in the prime years wasn't very good compared to their best. It isn't some big deal or hatred I have or anything, I'm just saying that's how I look at their music: some brilliant, a lot good, the majority in the upper mediocre range, quite a bit of bad and some absolute atrocities. No big deal, just opinions. Just funny how people's--even who are both fans--vary so dramatically over the same thing. As to the latter things though, about not being able to sustain greatness, I do agree with that. I don't think they (or much of anyone else) did, and it's ridiculous to expect them (or anyone) to. But choosing a lowest point doesn't have to be some mean-spirited thing, or an assault on the band in general. You could do a "choose the lowest point of Pet Sounds" if you felt like it, or "worst bit of your favorite song." It's all just for discussion; it's not like much of this--a fan message board devoted to a pop band--matters in the least.

I don't anyone was pretending it did...

If there was 'Beach Boys 80/ 90s' album put out today I wonder if it would appeal to the same surf/ car singles clientele of the early 60s.

LOWEST ALBUM?

KOKOMO
GOIN ON
GETCHA BACK
CALIFORNIA DREAMIN
STILL CRUSIN
WIPE OUT
PROBLEM CHILD
HOT FUN IN THE SUMMERTIME
UNDER THE BOARDWALK
FOREVER (STAMOS)

In the mixed up world of the music biz...it might just have legs! :lol

Goin' On doesn't deserve to be in that un-illustrious company. Swap it for Happy Endings...

Beach Boys album 101

Must always have at least one Brian gem. ;) 

I agree on one point - Smiley Smile.  Carl called it a bunt. I'd call it three straight called strikes, bat never leaving the shoulder, standing on the wrong side of the plate and back to the dugout.  Good Vibrations, Heros & Villains, sure, but the rest - - - - what a mess.

On the other hand, Beach Boys Concert was the first BB album I bought in 1965 and I loved it, every song.  The studio albums and the singles had the rest of the hits, this one also had some fun takes on other popular songs.  To me, it showed their versatility.  I was as hard core a fan as you could get in 1966 and I was absolutely knocked out with Pet Sounds. For this hard core fan it was the highest of a high point. I got it from the first note.  Absolutely overpowering, and nailed it but good.

Like you say, everybody has a different take on these things.  For me, it wasn't MIU or SIP (i like most of both those), etc., it was Carl's passing.   I realize the "low point" is most likely  considered to be regarding their actual history in terms of recording, touring, etc..  To me, that's stuff that comes and hopefully goes.  I'd probably say late 60's in terms of touring, or perhaps the personal problems plaguing them in the late 70's.  But the real low point was losing Carl for all the obvious reasons. Sure, it was out of everyone's hands and had nothing to do with decisions, output, etc., things they could control, but to me that was the end of it all.  I like the fact that Mike and Bruce are trying to keep the band alive but for most of us it will never be the same, and can't be.

Inarguable point, as much as I would love to argue it!

MIU: My Diane
Holland: Sail On Sailor
Carl ATP: Marcella
LA:........ Hmmmmm, well, I guess post 67 you can claim that an album must have a Dennis gem, therefore: Baby Blue
KTSA: Goin On
Summer In Paradise:....... never mind

I'd definitely enjoy the above album mix.  Getcha Back is one of my all-time favorite BB songs.  I love to listen to Still Crusin, the Stamos vers of Forever, etc.  In fact, with the exception of the embarrassingly dippy Problem Child and to a lesser degree Wipe Out, I like all of the songs here.   And, I do fall into the category of "the surf/ car singles clientele of the early 60s" having first heard Surfin on the radio when I was in Junior High School.

This is a comp I made for the car a couple of months ago.  I pull it out occasionally and get some enjoyment from it.

The Beach Boys  1985 - 1992

1. Still Cruisin'
2. In My Car
3. Radio Spot - "Hi, we're The Beach Boys...."
4. Hot Fun In The Summertime
5. Still Surfin'
6. Wipe Out
7. Slow Summer Dancing
8. Strange Things Happen
9. Radio Spot - "You're listening to Murray The K"
10. Kokomo
11. Under The Boardwalk
12. Lahaina Aloha
13. Somewhere Near Japan
14. Radio Spot - "Wonderful KYA"
15. I'm So Lonely
16. California Dreamin'
17. Rock And Roll To The Rescue
18. Crocodile Rock
19. Radio Spot - "Down by the old mill stream...."
20. Getcha Back
21. California Calling
22. Where I Belong
23. Summer In Paradise
24. She Believes In Love Again
 

I had heard that story when we lived on Guam during the 90's but never knew if it was true.  Interesting.  Also somewhat weird.

Lowest? I would bet Smile not coming out.

How about when Carl was heavy into drugs in the late 70s? They momentarily lost their anchor. That was a pretty low point, if you watch that YouTube of the show where Carl is drunk or on something.

\
Great song, too.  The second best song the Boys did in the 80s, right after "Where I Belong".

I love "Japan" and "Belong," but along with "R&RTTR" I'm partial to "In My Car," a few cheesy lyrics aside that's a very good melody and the best car song the BB had done in a while. You see, I find it a tad bit annoying when Mike does some of his nostalgia trips, but when Brian does it, I don't get bugged so much. I know that's biased, but I hope I'm not the only one in that camp...

I love In My Car. Brian sings his ass off on that one! There was a time when Brian going retro was cool because ir was sincere. That's the difference between Brian going retro and Mike doing retro.

I'm not the only one who likes In My Car, I see.  It has a nice little vocal arrangement, too.

"In My Car" goes off the rails because of the mix, which is awful, just totally cluttered.  There is a decent  song in there, though.

Anyone see the version on the ENDLESS SUMMER show?  Brian's performance is spotty, but the song takes on an almost martial feel with the different lyrics in the verse.

I don't like it because Brian is singing way too high for the era. Note Daddy's Little Girl suffers from the same problem. I don't think a car song was what Brian or Mike should have been doing when something like Baby Let Your Hair Grow Long or Somewhere Near Japan shows they could do so much more. .Just substandard to me, reeks of Landy.

Yeah, I remember that version. Brian called "In My Car" a "work of art". ::)

But, you're right, that version did have a different feel, a better one IMO....

Vis a vis In My Car.  Good tune with overly busy production.  However, I love the bridge part (Dance, Dance, Dance with me baby now)  the best.

You could put together a very good Beach Boys 80's, 90's retrospective:

Come Go With Me
Goin' On
Keepin' the Summer Alive
Livin' with a Heartache
East Meets West (w/Four Seasons)
Getcha Back
It's Gettin Late
Where I Belong
Rock and Roll to the Rescue
California Dreamin'
Wipe Out
Kokomo
Still Crusin'
Somewhere in Japan
In My Car
Summer in Paradise (live version on MOM CD)
Don't Worry Baby (w/Lori Morgan)
Little Duece Coupe (w/James House)

Extras:
Runaway
Soul Searchin'
You're Still a Mystery

Never heard East Meets west. Is that worth tracking down? (I still haven't fully recovered from Happy Endings. :) )

IMO- yes.  It's not special but it's a nice song that received a little bit of airplay pre-BB 85.

I actually like Crocodile Rock. It has a energetic lead from Al and some nice bass vocals by Mike.

I would have rather the Boys had done "Harmony" or High Flying Bird or Someone Saved My Life Tonight. Crocf was too obvious a choice.

It was an easy choice, but I still think it was pretty well done for a post Dennis recording.

I'm being redundant, I know, but I think for mainstream top 40-aimed "rock" the Beach Boys 80s-90s stuff holds up pretty darn well.

The lowest low has to be Smiley Smile.

I still can't imagine the thud it must have made in 1967 -- after all that smile hype -- and after Good Vibrations and Pet Sounds.  You must have been able to hear a collective pin drop across the rock and roll world in 1967. 

She's Goin' Bald....I mean...what the ???  I mean, come on!  It must have been like walking into the Apollo Theater, and dropping the N-bomb.  It was a total bust.

Surely, they would reach artistic lows few could imagine throughout the remainder of their career, as you all have so well pointed out...but the SHOCK of Smiley Smile.  Wow.  The fall has to be unprecedented in pop-culture.  If you plotted the Beach Boys out like a commonly traded stock...what would the graph look like?  Straight down!  Going from so high, down to the rock-bottom, cellar -- overnight.  THUD!

Smiley Smile.  Lowest point in the Beach Boys career.  It destroyed Brian.  He was never the same.  The Beach Boys would never get back.  What a dilemma!

I hear ya. Like it or not there was a chance of a compilation album of ok stuff IMO.  Sure it was not 'art' in a PS/ SMiLE style but a updated surf/ car style. Don't think it would be of interest now but mid 90s it could have done well.

Jaws dropped, hopes faded, fans lost, heads scratched, puzzled expressions, WTF going through the head, playing it over and over until its confirmed that this is no joke(or is it?), cleansing the ears, checking the pulse, wondering if you got some bad stuff at last night's party, explaining it to your friends, not hearing any of it (except GV & H&V) played on the radio, seeing it not being bought at the record shops, and finally wondering if you could take it back and exchange it for something better-That, and Brian quitting the road.

That's a pretty good argument for low point, even though you have to appreciate the sheer balls of putting a record out like that.  But no question about it...things were never the same after that.

That's closer to a high point in my eyes. He created what is by far my favorite of his work after quitting the road. Those songs almost certainly would not have come out in the form they did had Brian continued to tour. Considering Pet Sounds and the Smile material are what got me interested in the Beach Boys, and that I didn't even like anything previous (and hadn't heard anything after), there's a good chance I wouldn't be a fan at all if that hadn't happened.

Exactly...I did the same thing.  Are they serious?  Am I hearing this right?  Wait, are my speakers hooked up correctly?  It's gotta be a joke--am I the joke here?  Dude, I was pissed!!  :lol


Did that too!  I wondered how I could re-purpose the cassette.


That's how I see it now.  I don't think they were just crazy.  Maybe a little -- but was Mike and Al?  Doubt it.  I still TO THIS DAY don't know how Brian got that one through.  Especially with all the fuss over Smile.

Smiley is an enigma wrapped in a mystery to me.  I love that sonofabitch though!

 :smokin 

You are correct, but I was probably thinking more on the selfish side of things-I would have enjoyed seeing Brian live before he retired from the road when he was writing, producing, arranging, and recording. First saw them live in Johnstown, Pa. in 1966-it  was a good show, but without Brian's voice, it didn't live up to expectations. Uh, sorry-the show was in '67.  : )

Problem Child?

You know what? I can't call Smiley Smile the lowest point in their career. Commercially, it hurt them big time, but even if SMiLE had come out, it still would've bombed at that point. It was too late by then.

I'll go into more detail on the album discussion forum later, but Smiley Smile was the first Beach Boys album I ever bought, in 1995. At that point, all I heard besides the oldies on the radio (which I didn't care for at the time!) was BW 1988 (bought the tape for 99 cents), IJWMFTT, and Pet Sounds (at a Blockbuster Music listening booth!). I knew very little about their history, and I thought it *was* Smile. I...thought it was the coolest album I ever heard.

Meh.

"Problem Child"...yeesh. That was pretty bad. Really, any thing post-Kokomo.

Somewhere Near Japan was good post Kokomo and so were the 93 tour and the Was sessions. 

The last ten to fifteen years of the band proper (before Carl died) were pretty bad though. The ultimate low for me was the country album. I love classic country (which this certainly wasn't) so it's not the genre so much as the exicution. It was such a waste. They got Brian back and did that!

Yeah, Somewhere Near Japan was a great song, and Strange Things Happen was pretty nifty too.

Low point, Beach Boys concert in Long Beach at the Queen Mary.  It was on television and Brian was fried and Carl had quit the group.

I like my Beach Boys partly because of the low points. For me they not only are the greatest band that ever existed, but also the silliest, the most tragic, the most litigious, and the most honest. That does not mean that I don't regret SMiLE being left unfinished in 1967, mind, or the major health issues that hit the Wilson brothers. But somehow it's a mirror image of how any family functions, with lots of inexplicable stuff, disillusions, bad periods, and so on. The genius and the low points are inseparable.

Just my three cents.

Agreed

I watched that concert on TV in a room filled with relatives (at a 4th Of July weekend gathering), and the response of the people watching the show wasn't bad; I think a serious fan is more critical of that performance than a casual one.

Anyway, a few months after that concert, The Beach Boys had two Top 20 singles with "The Beach Boys Medley" and "Come Go With Me".

I agree. I try to explain to friends my age why it is that I am so interested in this band. The Beach Boys story has it all, success, murder, drug use, divorce, theft, abuse, hair-brained concepts, and a ton of excellent music. It's like a rock 'n' roll soap opera.

Every time I go back and watch that show I get a different vibe.  Sometimes good, sometimes aghast.  I remember watching it live and I thought "what the hell?"

Jan. 1969 Get Back sessions are a low point for sure.  Most of the tracks are very sloppy, the group hates each other, and the whole thing was filmed.  Billy Preston saves the day.  The later revamping of the sessions by Spector (Let It Be) also have some rough moments (Long and Winding Road with sappy strings and choir etc).  Also, 2 years earlier, Magical Mystery Tour has to be a low point.  I love that film for what it is, but it is a big mess.  And if you take away the stand-alone singles from earlier in the year, the sound track album (save for I Am The Walrus) is pretty lack luster.  Your Mother Should Know--what awful song!  Fool on the Hill--not much better.

Not finishing SMiLE in 67 defintley...

They could have a thousand low points and it still couldnt compare to their million amazingly awesome points:) I will forever love them no matter what.

How about The Beach Boys recording and releasing a Culture Club leftover...?  :-X

Now that you mention it: Culture Club's 'Time (Clock Of The Heart)' is one of the greatest songs ever, IMHO.

From my own experience, the low point in their career was roughly mid 1969 to mid 1971, when you couldn't even look at their records in the record store without hipper than thou derision from the staff.  It was so uncool to like them it wasn't funny.  I heard "Breakaway" only a couple of times on a car radio and thought at first it was the Four Seasons!  Never once heard "Cottonfields".   The "Add Some Music" 45 got a little airplay probably due to the promo push by WB but died quickly.  I did see copies in the stores though. I bought "Sunflower" in early 1971 and I might as well have been buying the new Andy Williams album from the looks on their faces. It wasn't until they played the May Day rally in DC in 1971 that I heard anything positive about them.  "Long Promised Road" was played a little on the underground stations in my area when it was a 45 prior to the lp- I liked it a lot and couldn't wait for the lp which I bought first day of release- my journal says Aug 31, 1971.  I saw them 11/7/71 at Georgetown University and it was indeed an amazing show (no opening act and Jack Reiley came out beforehand to ask that the crowd not call out oldies until the very end.  Didn't stop one very high guy from yelling out "Don't Back Down" throughout, though) .  I clipped out the ad in the Washington Post and kept it for years (no longer have it).  It had a photo of their faces and an obvious Jack Reiley  declaration "They've changed more than you!" It got better after that, but it took a while and a lot of touring- I saw them five times in 1972 alone.

And, to think it was just 3-4 years since Pet Sounds and being voted the world's Top Group (in some major poll). And, on top of that, to be dropped by your record company. Hard to believe, actually....

But for some reason the Europeans seemed to LOOOOOVE them!!

Here in the Netherlands the Beach Boys actually had their commercial peak after Pet Sounds came out. Before Sloop John B (four weeks on #1 and the best-selling record of 1966) they had just a handful of minor hit singles. After that they did quite well on the charts until 1972. Then I Kissed Her went to #2, Heroes And Villains #11, Wild Honey #26, Darlin' #21, Do It Again #5, Bluebirds #9, I Can Hear Music #6, Break Away #17, Cottonfields #12, Tears In The Morning #6 (!), Student Demonstration Time #21, Mess Of Help #31, Marcella #20...

You were really fortunate to be one of the enlightened few during that time period (not to sound elitist about it). I didn't become a serious fan until much later
and would give a lot to have been at the shows you went to. :'(

Is that why we got 'Definite Album' numbers 1 and 2? Because these were my particular introductions to the Boys, and they were really nice samples... on the EMI/Bovema imprint.