The Smiley Smile Message Board

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but does anyone want to speculate as to what The Beach Boys set would have consisted of and how it might have been recieived?

Probably wouldn't be too dissimilar to the Hawaii set of that summer.

Ah, well, if they did it "stripped down" (for lack of a better word) like Hawaii, it might not have gone over.... so well!

I just got done watching the Monterey Pop Blu-Ray, and I can't imagine them not going over well if they even played a typical for the time "Live In London" type set! Stripped shirts and all!

It's weird, watching that movie, they cut away to the certain audience members quite a bit, and it's a pretty horrifying. The Byrds are up there playing an amazing song and they cut to some girl who's sitting there like she's in the waiting room of a dentist's office with this confused/bored look on her face. When Laura Nyro's up there, they cut to this gorgeous hip blonde girl who's sitting with her arms folded and with the bitchiest expression off all-time. But I'm sure she was just looking at Laura with it sinking in that she was nowhere near as beautiful or as talented as Laura who was this total "unhip" chick wearing a tiara! Must've been rough!

But, anywho, I have a feeling those hipsters would've laughed at The Beach Boys perhaps, but would have been also singing and clapping along without even really realizing it!

well said.  "The beach boys aren't supposed to be hip. They're supposed to move you emotionally whether you like it or not." -Daryl Dragon (I think..)

I think it would have been closer to their late '66 set than the Hawaii shows. Certainly striped shirts. I believe it would have gone over similar to Sha Na Na at Woodstock: a lot of heckling. Disagree with me if you wish but I do not believe they would have played any SMiLE music since that project had already been shelved and it took Brian to work up "Heroes And Villains" for Hawaii. I do not believe he would have performed with the band had they played at Monterey.

You're probably right about a lack of SMiLE material, excluding maybe "Heroes" (if Brian could have worked it up for the touring band in time).  The set list probably would have been heavy on Pet Sounds, with "Good Vibrations" and maybe something like "California Girls" thrown in. 

The only thing I disagree with is Brian...I think he would have made an exception and performed with the group.

If you take a look at the original program/poster, you'll see that the Monterey 'house band' (tried to rustle it up quickly online to no avail...i know for sure this is in look listen vibrate smile, anyways) consisted of many members of the wrecking crew. remember, brother records recording equipment was used to record the event after all and the boys' only backed out a week or so before. what i am saying is i've always imagine the beach boys band being augmented by session musicians who were not only familiar with beach boys material, but had been playing on smile sessions and would be a natural fit for brian to unveil his new 'trip' to the world. so i see the beach boys touring group + brian + wrecking crew guys, doing a kind of hawaii '67 set but a little more lush

I doubt that. If they'd used the Wrecking Crew in front of that audience it would have been an admission they weren't really a band. I'll agree with AGD that it would have been a truncated version of the Hawaii set. Probably Cal. Girls, Sloop John B., GV's, God Only Knows, H&V's...and Brian definitely would have participated. If the harmonies were tight the audience would have appreciated them as the best singers around, but still thought of them as a bit square. If Smile had been released that opinion would be less prevalent and shrinking fast.

But if Brian was there, what would he have done? Sit at the piano? Would Bruce have been 86'd for that show like Hawaii? Probably so. And yeah, considering Brian showed up for Hawaii, he probably would've made Monterey!

I kinda suspect if they'd played Monterey Pop, even in stripped shirts, they would've gone over so well, they might have even made stripped shirts cool and hip! I think the general consensus was that everyone (yes, even Laura Nyro) was accepted and appreciated at Monterey. C'mon, if the Mamma's And The Papa's were considered hip (which of course they WERE, but...) the BBs would've have sailed through with flying colors!

Here's my dream set:

1. Wouldn't It be Nice
2. Help Me Rhonda
3. Heroes And Villians
4. Little Deuce Coop
5. Dance, Dance, Dance
6. God Only Knows
7. Good Vibrations
8. Barbara Ann

That set list is not good!! :-[

Agree.  I would have liked to hear a set list like this:

Wouldn't It Be Nice (Al)
California Girls (Mike)
God Only Knows (Carl)
Heroes and Villains (Brian)
Surfer Girl (group)
Sloop John B (Al and Mike)
Wonderful (Carl)
Good Vibrations (Carl)
Caroline No (Brian)
Barbara Ann (group)

I think Surf's Up would have been a great song to throw in there (having been on the INside Pop special recently on TV), but let's be realistic . . . it wasn't going to happen.

Yeah, I know it aint the greatest set of all-time, but I was trying to imagine what that actually MIGHT have played rather than what I would've wanted them to play..... which, is, like, kinda ass-backward, and beside the point!!!  :P

Ok, then here's what I would've wanted!!!!

1. Our Prayer
2. Heroes N Villians
3. Barnyard
4. Vegetables
5. Wouldn't It be Nice
6. When I Grow Up To Be A Man
7. You're So Good To Me
8. Calirfornia Girls
9. God Only Knows.
10. Good Vibrations
11. Barbara Ann

The only way the Beach Boys would go there would be if SMiLE was completed.

Totally the right call by Brian. Still going would've hurt the band even more then we could fathom.

Brian stops touring to be more creative in the studio? Beatles stop touring to be more creative in the studio? Smile un-finished!-Pepper released!-Brian pulls The boys out of the festival!

What is a "stripped" shirt?  Whatever that means, I'm sure they would have gone over better at Monterey than the striped ones.

i think the fact that we can't quite figure out what they would have done and how they would have pulled it off is the exact reason that they didn't play it

but i always assumed it would be similar to the hawaii set as well ... i don't know how the striped shirts would have gone over, but i think people still respected the group around this time.  remember, this is really the show where hendrix first happened.  after all, the association played there and went over okay

I must've been thinking of Mike's "stripped-of shirt" period that came later!  :p

I always had a problem with the notion that the group backed out because they feared an unfavorable reception. Pet Sounds had a couple of hit singles, and non-surf & turf ones at that. "Good Vibrations" speaks for itself. I'm thinking of that 1966 poll that voted them the top group (in the world?), surpassing The Beatles. And, while the audience might've been hip, they WERE from California, and undoubtedly just spent their high school and college years listening to Beach Boys' records. Did they outgrow the group already? Also, it was an outdoor summer concert; the Beach Boys were in their element. Was "California Dreamin'" and "Monday, Monday" THAT much hipper than the Beach Boys' soon-to-be new single "Heroes And Villains"?

It is always reported that Brian pulled the group out. Is that true? Did he have that much power that it wasn't even taken to a vote? And he wasn't even touring at the time.

I don't see much of a problem coming up with a set list:

California Girls
Sloop John B
Surfer Girl (why not, there were several thoudand of them in attendance?)
Wouldn't It Be Nice
God Only Knows
Heroes And Villains
Good Vibrators
either Fun, Fun, Fun or Barbara Ann or Surfin' USA (come on, you know the people would be clapping and dancing along)

"Surfer Girl (why not, there were several thoudand of them in attendance?)"

LOVE THIS!!!!!!

I'll bet there were some females in the audience who would have truly appreciated the second to last song in your proposed set.

Dennis had a very brief "no pants" period, too, right?

I have always doubted the un-hip argument, too.  Actually, I had thought (until I checked just now) that Dionne Warwick had performed, but the fact that the Association were there makes the point just as well.  "Good Vibrations" should have given them all the credibility they needed. And when they smashed and burned their instruments during "Papa-Oo-Mow-Mow" Hendrix and the Who would have been totally upstaged.

Seriously, the Beach Boys have a pretty long history of showing up and getting over in a big way onstage. There have been a few selected blips in their fifty-year career as live performers- the no-show at Monterey, some criticism of the British '66 tour, and the Hawaii shows were not a highlight for various reasons.  But they have a great pedigree with getting audiences and critics on their side that continues to this day. People will knock them and knock them until they go see them, and then the response tends to be overwhelmingly positive.

Playing in Monterey or not was a non factor. The singles after Good Vibrations just didn't find an audience. Simples as that.

I feel like I heard a very odd story once about the Beach Boys not playing the festival because Mike Love didn't approve of some sponsor, or something like that...does anyone know what im talking about? 

that said, I think that the key to success would have been a) knocking the covers from the set, and b) as apposed to slowing everything down, speeding everything up.  I feel like the sets they were playing in 64 were waaay heavier/louder/faster/cooler than much of what was played at Monterey.  I mean, you just can't argue with those surf beats when they're going a million miles an hour and carl is wailing on the guitar and brian is wailing on the falsetto. 

One story was the band pulled out of Monterey because Mike objected to Coca-Cola being a sponsor (thinking the soft drink was toxic). I seem to recall that it was Stephen Desper who reported it...maybe it's floating around in the archives of this board?

This seems a bit weird to me, since I seriously doubt other members of the Beach Boys were avoiding soft drinks at the time and their riders in the 70s requested Mountain Dew and such be provided backstage. In fact, isn't Mike seen blowing into an empty Coke bottle with the others in the "Good Vibrations" promo film? How could he stand being that close to such toxic waste?!

I agree, and the band could've been significantly better by taking a different approach. They did slow the tempos down a lot from the surf period, and that was a mistake. They would have sounded much fuller had they let Bruce play piano/organ on the majority of the songs, and had Alan play bass guitar.

As a Beach Boys fan, it IS interesting to hear their performances from these periods; however, as a musician, they simply weren't a mind-blowing live act at that point. Even with limited talent, I believe they could've been a better act, simply by putting the work in.

I also seem to remember (from a book, maybe David Leaf's?) that they didn't play because of money.

Whatever the case, they DID play the Big Sur Folk Festival, which did gain them a few hipster brownie points!

Speaking of: does anyone know of any footage of the Boys from that gig? There's a ton of stuff from that festival, including CSNY playing in what looks like a backyard pool area, so I'd be amazed if no one pointed a camera in The Beach Boys direction!!!

CSNY footage is from the 1969 Big Sur Festival for which a feature film was made. Beach Boys(minus Dennis and Brian) played there in 1970, and no film was made that year.

Damn, I had no idea those were two different festivals!!! Thanks for the info!!!

Wouldn't It be Nice from that gig is on some compilation album, I think!

The whole gig is also unavailable to listen to. :)

Funny because wasn't it supposed to have been a great gig?

Ah, but I'm sure the whole show will be up on "BeachBoysCentral" any minute now!  :p

Celebration, Recorded Live, Big Sur Folk Festival, Monterey, California 1970, A&M Records, originally released 1970.

If it was as cut and dried as that, they never would have had major chart success in Britain with those so-called uncommercial singles.

I doubt SMiLE mattered much one way or another and their invitation was because of Pet Sounds and Good Vibrations and the rest of their previous catalog.

Uh, ok. If you want to stick to the old myth that the Beach Boys' commercial decline was due to not playing in Monterey, Jann Wenner's evil schemes and the acid rock dictatorship, feel free to do so. One million bands and singers sold millions of records without having played in Monterey or having street cred with Rolling Stone magazine.

I don't believe he said that, about wanting to stick to myths, etc.  I think he said it wasn't as simple as indicated.

There were EIGHT Big Sur Folk Festivals...every year from '64 through '71.

Ok then. Another angle:

"Why wasn't Smile released in 1967?" isn't simple. "Why did Brian change so much from '65 to '75" isn't simple.

But "Why did the Beach Boys started selling less and less records in USA from '66 to '70" IS simple. If it's not the case, I'd like to know why.

Correct me if I am mistaken, but the Americans aren't the only people in the world who bought records. The band continued to enjoy commercial success outside the US. Singles that flopped in the USA became hits elsewhere. That's not Leafian myth, it's fact. 

Surer Joe, thank you for "getting" my point.

Whenever we talk about the band's comercial decline in the late 60s, it's about the American market. And if their non appearance in Monterey, the main subject here, would have any consequences, it would be in the American market.

Debating with Mr. McCabe often seems like being in a Monthy Python sketch.  :)

Why wasn't Pet Sounds a hit album?  Because Capitol didn't promote it, and because they released a hits compilation against it, which was always a signal that a band was over.

Turns out that nothing I just said really bears close scrutiny of the facts, but it's perceived history.  History is a process of streamlining and simplifying the story, and reducing people to characters, but the truth is often more complicated.

In 1967 the Beach Boys were at a crossroads, and Monterey would have been a nice time and place to re-launch the band's image.  By all accounts it was a great showcase for Hendrix, Otis Redding, Big Brother, and the Who. Dropping out either hurt them or was (at least) a missed opportunity. The New Beach Boys could have gotten some nice press and been widely seen in a classic film, in some prestigious company.

SMiLE was, of course, the big missed opportunity.  Rolling Stone undoubtedly hurt them, and Hendrix' "You'll never hear surf music again", whatever it meant, probably hurt them about as much as Jeff Bridges' hip ranting against the Eagles in "The Big Lebowski" has hurt that band in recent years.

On the other hand, the Four Seasons were still having some success in this period, and attributed it to not changing. 

When you hear records like "Do It Again" "Darlin' ", and "I Can Hear Music" it sounds to me like a band that still had plenty to offer.

The Four Seasons had LESS chart success than the BB's did in the '67 to '68 period.

What I was objecting to was your idea that they didn't find an audience post 66.  I'm saying that they did find success overseas. Nothing more. 

Also, the 4Seasons WERE changing as per their album Genuine Imitation Life, which is sorta good, the best song being the only 4seasons song that has Beach Boys-like harmonies (Something's on her Mind).

I didn't say otherwise.  Just said "some success". Couple top twenty singles, something like that. Just making a comparison.



Yeah, by 1969.  Nonetheless, I've heard them attribute their continued success, whatever that was, to not changing, as stated. Right or wrong, it's their own view, which I thought was interesting enough to mention.  And I don't think Genuine Imitation Life Gazette was a huge career milestone as much as it is a well-regarded album.

Also, the 4Seasons WERE changing as per their album Genuine Imitation Life, which is sorta good, the best song being the only 4seasons song that has Beach Boys-like harmonies (Something's on her Mind).
[/quote]

Yeah, by 1969.  Nonetheless, I've heard them attribute their continued success, whatever that was, to not changing, as stated. Right or wrong, it's their own view, which I thought was interesting enough to mention.  And I don't think Genuine Imitation Life Gazette was a huge career milestone as much as it is a well-regarded album.
[/quote]
True. Man, that was '69 huh?

I had cheated and looked it up.  Apparently it was January, '69.  Is "Idaho" from that album?  That's a great sounding record.

Jimi's comment "and you'll never hear surf music again" was a reactionary message about Dick Dale, who I believe had been injured in a major accident in early 1967 and was also one of Jimi's heroes.

Well done.

(This is gonna be a single paragraph because I'm using a computer whose Enter key was f***ed by wine. I didn't spill it, but it was spilled. Hopefully we can all get through this.)      People here put so much stock into the missed opportunities of the Beach Boys, as if each of them might have been the thing to keep them from everlasting, uninterrupted super-popularity. The promotion of Pet Sounds, the release of Smile, playing Monterey, whatever. But as much as all of us here love and respect this band, only one band that I can think of has ever achieved uninterrupted mass appeal combined with uninterrupted critical acclaim: the Beatles. And while I also realize plenty of people here prefer the BBs to the Beatles, I'm sure there are Doors fanatics who prefer the over the Beatles, Zappa fans who prefer him over the Beatles, and on and on. Realistically, any of the missed opportunities wouldn't likely have had any major effect on the longer-term reality: pop bands come and go pretty quickly, and even the long-lasting ones (as the BBs clearly have been) have their ups and downs. Playing Monterey would not have inspired 10 consecutive Pet Soundses, each a triple platinum hit. Brian used up his innovative brilliance and moved into interesting but infrequent output, the family didn't get along, most everyone struggled with drug problems, management sucked, teens moved on to other things (as they always do) before new ones came aboard. I don't believe it could have gone otherwise.

What you posted is true, Luther. But I think what you have on a Beach Boys' board, or any other band's forum for that matter, is a search for some answers - note the plural. There are many Beach Boys' fans who believe the 1967-1973 period was just as good "musically" as the previous era, 1962-1966. However, commercially, and in some cases critically, it was not. Why was that?

Of course there were a number of reasons, and you listed some valid ones above. But that doesn't make any one of them invalid, and I know you're not saying that. Some of the things we are discussing were REAL and valid. Do we add more validity, yes, in some cases. I don't think it's possible to agree on a percentage, but that's OK; that's what makes the discussion fun. That's what makes these message boards interesting. It makes you think.

Did not playing Monterey have an adverse effect on the group's career? Maybe, maybe not. Probably yes. Major? No, not really. How much? You tell me! :police:

1.13%. Exactly. I measured. And I know not everyone, or maybe even not anyone, is overtly saying that any of these singular missteps were the be- and end-all. It's more the underlying tone sometimes that just strikes me as unrealistic. I guess that's what you get on a board dedicated to a band, though, so I ought to shut my mouth on such things.

All bands have their season and the Boys season passed. I remember the shock to find out that not everyone in subsequent generations revered the Beatles as I do so I don't think even the Beatles were immune to seasonal change.

I think the story on that is that Dale had just been diagnosed with cancer, or some disease, but it seems to be kind of unconfirmed. Apparently it comes only from Dale, at some unspecified later time, and may be second hand at that, as in "someone told me this is what he meant..." since I don't think they knew each other.  One version I've seen has it that Hendrix had been misinformed that  Dale was dead.  And to add to the confusion, I think there are mixes where Hendrix goes on a bit more, and it gets even vaguer- just non-sequitur stuff. If anyone knows for sure, please post.

In any case, I heard about a year ago that Dale's website was implying he's in bad shape once again.  I sure wish him the best.

Also, Luther, Cam, SJS, all good points in good posts, despite Luther's obvious ongoing alcohol problem (moment of clarity?).

I agree with what you guys are saying, and think these points all mesh. The one thing I would try to add is that the Beach Boys' decline (I know that word is going to start a riot, but what the hell) is just so sudden and abrupt that you can't help but zero in on that period and ask questions. The change from "Good Vibrations" to the rest of Smiley Smile is a jolt almost unlike anything else in rock history.

Dylan had his ups and downs but his career followed a generally logical path. The Rolling Stones evolved logically, waxed and waned here and there, and then gradually declined to dinosaur status. If the Beatles had hung in there, albums consisting of the solo material as band material would have shown more hits, but some slightly less iconic ones,  the emergence of George followed by a fairly gentle decline into increasing musical incompatibility, and then various personal problems, especially John's circa 1973-75.

The Beach Boys were cruising at full altitude when they flew into the side of Mount Everest.

Of course I'm talking about their career status and perception, not the artistic merits. But the nearest comparison I can think of would be Elvis in his schlock movie soundtrack period, which still yielded a lot of gems like "Bossa Nova Baby" but was a jolting and bewildering change from where he had been.

Luther, to your (alcohol-tinged, but lucid and insightful) point the only "what-if" of great substance in 1967 would be one involving Brian's mental health and well-being.  But I think of it this way: they had Sunflower in their fairly near future.  That wasn't a hit album in 1970, but they had lost a lot of ground by then.  The kind of focus, talent, and multiple contribution that produced that album might have gone quite a bit further in 1967 when they still had more career momentum. If only they had managed themselves better when Brian abdicated...Good as some of the stuff still was, you just look at all that talent and shake your head.

About ten years ago Mojo magazine reviewed the (then) latest Lennon compilation and called John Lennon's solo career the biggest disappointment in rock history, which I thought was an interesting comment. I would rank the Beach Boys' failure to step up following Brian's golden age right there with it.

Wine having damaged the keyboard doesn't intoxicate me.

Denial- that's one of the phases, right? We're here for ya, man!

The Boys' popularity did take a nose dive [more or less] but I think Brian's mental and emotional problems are generally dated a little too early [and a little more severe] than actual. The Boys' popularity took that nose dive on Brian's watch, with him going at full tilt and full power at least through Friends and maybe beyond. The decline can't be blamed on Brian, the Boys, or mental or emotional issues, but just on the whim of Popular music buyers. No one's fault, just the clock ran out on their season.

Man Luth, I'm sorry to hear about your obviously crippling booze issue but I'm sure there's some hope of recovery in some distant future, so chin up!
 I agree that the BB are an unusual example of career trajectory, but I wonder if it might be because they were never really all that mainstream. Yes, they had hits, many of which I'm not yhe biggest fan of, but the hits were all kinda novelty songs. Were the Beach Boys ever really accepted as cool by the masses like the Stones or Beatles were/are? Seems like maybe the early hits were sort of a fluke of timing (not that those songs aren't head and shoulders above almost anything else from that time period) and it was a real struggle for Brian to succeed in the popularity contest part of music so he just gave up that struggle. In turn, the public stopped paying attention.

wtf.

O.K., now I really disagree with the last couple of posts, except of course the parts about Luther's tragic but inspiring battle with addiction. But he's beginning to ask questions, and that's a good sign.

Cam, just my opinion, but I think BW underwent a radical change, personally, professionally, and creatively, the biggest of his life, in Spring '67 and the BBs let that define them from pretty much then on. Have at me.

Grillo, one big difference I have with most here is that if I chose my top fifty BB songs, many more would come from before Pet Sounds than after. I like the later stuff, love much of it, indifferent to a lot of it. But I really love the earlier hit-era stuff.  Songs like "Wendy", "Warmth Of The Son", "Please Let Me Wonder", "Don't Worry, Baby", "Girl Don't Tell Me", "Keep An Eye On Summer", "California Girls", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Girls On The Beach", "Salt Lake City", "Good To My Baby" - seldom equaled by anyone at any time- again, just my opinion.

You can look at the group's decline WITH A NUMBER OF REASONS, or, as Cam pointed out, you can view it as the band simply running it's course (or season), as all bands do.

I'm somewhere in between. And I do put a lot of emphasis on Brian's input. When the Beach Boys were popular, Brian was composing/producing/performing music that the public wanted. They were in synch with each other. When the group's popularity started to wane, Brian was making music that the public didn't want.

Brian WAS "Surfer Girl", "Don't Worry Baby", and much of Today, Summer Days, Pet Sounds - and even "Barbara Ann". And the audience loved it. They wanted it. They wanted more. But Brian changed. His music changed. He became Smiley Smile and Friends and "I Went To Sleep" and "You Need A Mess Of Help". But the audience didn't want that.

It is said that the Beach Boys audience changed, and that the Beach Boys weren't hip, or edgy, or hard rock-ey enough to change with them. Just like this thread; would the new "hip" audience (like Monterey) accept them? But, I don't think the Beach Boys' audience changed much at all. It was the Beach Boys, or mainly Brian, who was changing. Brian wanted Smiley Smile; the fans embraced "Darlin'". Brian wanted Friends; the fans wanted to "Do It Again". Brian wanted "Time To Get Alone", the fans preferred "I Can Hear Music". Brian wanted a Fairy Tale; the fans wanted to "Sail On Sailor".

This is a long way to say that the band probably would've gone over fine at Monterey. Those fans were still there. They still "liked" the Beach Boys, the good old Beach Boys. Did they (the fans) really care if the Beach Boys changed, looked cool, were hip guys, or smashed their instruments? Probably not. They might've just wanted to hear some good old Chuck Berry rock and roll music with some nice harmonies. Didn't Endless Summer eventually prove that....

Nothing to go at you about, that is just my opinion too, according to my understanding of what I think I know.

Well, I respect that, even if I see it differently, because I know from years on here that you know your stuff.  Good points, SJS, too. I strongly agree that the BBs changed more than their audience did. The standard line that they were suddenly out of step would make a lot more sense if they had been putting out more "Barbara Ann" and "I Get Around" and "Help Me Rhonda" and suddenly flopping with it.  The truth is probably closer to the opposite of that, striped shirts and "Papa Oo Mow Mow" excepted. And (as you mention) when they did put out a nostalgic record, "Do It Again", with a surfing mention, it did pretty well.

Grillo, one big difference I have with most here is that if I chose my top fifty BB songs, many more would come from before Pet Sounds than after. I like the later stuff, love much of it, indifferent to a lot of it. But I really love the earlier hit-era stuff.  Songs like "Wendy", "Warmth Of The Son", "Please Let Me Wonder", "Don't Worry, Baby", "Girl Don't Tell Me", "Keep An Eye On Summer", "California Girls", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "Girls On The Beach", "Salt Lake City", "Good To My Baby" - seldom equaled by anyone at any time- again, just my opinion.
[/quote]


Surfer Joe, I think you hit one of the biggest Beach Boy nails on the head, and God (only) knows there are many of them!

That list of songs you pointed out really is just the tip of the iceberg, as far as pre-Pet Sounds stuff is concerned. A truely mind-bending run of quality, that, in my opinion has never been equaled. At some (debatable date-wise) point the Beach Boys sort of became a monster eating it's own tail, or rather, the tail eating the monster!!! Nothing they could do would ever eclipse the insanely strong impression they made as purveyors of a FORMULA!!! A wonderous formula at that, but such a distinct and singluar formula! It's a bit like the "New Coke" fiasco! Remember that? The new Coke might have tasted fine, but people's reaction was "You're chaning the taste of Coke? Why??" They even did away with the old logo seemingly without realizing or caring about how entrenched that logo had become in the public's hearts and minds for 50+ years, at that point.

And yeah, I agree completely that it was The Beach Boys who changed rather than their audience. I honestly think The Boys could have come out carrying surfboards and wearing the damn striped shirts and played an entire set of nothing post 1965 and the audience would have eaten it up! Sure, some might 've snickered here and there, but they'd still be clapping along. Hell, for all we know "The Beach Boys At Monterey" might've have very well marked the birth of ironic hipster-nerds as we now know them, 30+ years ahead of schedule.... But The Boys had already hurtled around their own personal curve and were a different creature. Their leader was a troubled genius who couldn't care less about being a rock star and being hip, or rather his hipness had little to do with being cool and showing how hard you could rock in 4X4 blues or shred on guitar. Brian had already gone from "what the kids want" into deeply personal/painful introspection, into wild vibrant avant garde pop, and was now veering into the vortex of psychodrama and doing whatever the hell it was that pleased him. And what were the rest of the Beach Boys supposed to do, tuck Brian into bed and continue on as if it was 1965 forever? That wasn't an option. So, they struggled for a few years but became their own band and their own people, then came Endless Summer and the tail ate the snake. But how was this not supposed to have happened? We can blame Mike all we want, but pre 1966 Beach Boys is some powerful merda!

Set list and reception. When this topic last came up a year and half or so ago, I wrote something along the lines of this:  If they had come out like they owned the place with a huge guitar riff for Surfin' USA or that great opening instrumental Carl did live for Fun Fun Fun, and to heck with anyone who didn't like it, I truly believe they really would have owned that place.  Yes, their star had fallen somewhat and there was always pressure to be "new" or "relevant", whatever any of that means, but they were still the Beach Boys and were asked to play for a very good reason. Set list?  A couple of power openers like I mentioned, then maybe Sloop John B, Heroes and Villains , Rhonda, anything to get the hips to clap along as if they could resist anyway.  Darlin' would have been good but I can't recall if it was available by then. Another Pet Sounds tune, Surfer Girl and another golden oldie, close it off with Good Vibrations.  Absolutely nothing to be embarrassed about, and the proof of that is we're still listening to those songs 40 years later and everybody still knows the words. Would performing have helped their career?  No clue. I will say, though, that speaking only for myself as a first-generation fan, not so much that came after that period was even close to what came before.

Brian may have been okay emotionally, he may not have, but it's hard for me to understand the statement that Smile to smiley-smile/wild honey wasn't a nose dive.  I actually prefer Wild Honey and Smiley Smile most days, but in terms of an artist firing on all cylinders, pushing for the best and the newest, working constantly to progress...all that changed.  Smile was spending days to get 30 seconds of one song perfect.  Smiley Smile was: "how about we smoke some weed and finish this record up by next wednesday." 

Somebody who had access to a lot of the studio tapes once told me (twenty years ago) that it was like one day a different guy walked into the studio.  He said all the confidence and command you always hear on the earlier stuff just seemed to vanish overnight.

Great post, ED5- to back up your "tip of the iceberg" point, just pull out Endless Summer, which was drawn strictly from that era, all pre- Pet Sounds, and then Spirit Of America, which was drawn from the same pool, other than "Breakaway".  Just a stunning achievement, when you think that those eight incredible LP sides loaded with iconic songs represented about fifty months' work and completely excluded the band's (consensus) best album and single greatest hit*.


*Though "Good Vibrations" was later tacked onto the CD version.

The "Brian pulled the group out" is probably just some working-claim at the time and they've kept up with it since.

In 1967, they could have blamed it on fifty different things and one of them would have easily fit the excuse.

Monterey, I'm sure, is a lot bigger now in memory and footage than it was at the time being just a festival. 

I just want to point out that I wasn't saying the early songs are bad, in fact I too love '61-'66 the best. My point was the songs BW wrote or used as singles are NOT the songs that I like best, nor do I think they are a true representation of the group or Brian's headspace. Brian changed, sort of, in a way, by ceasing to care about writing hit singles and instead he went with his rather weird muse, something that has always been there from the start, but now its ALL that is there. Whatever chart action they saw came clearly from Brian and Murry's dramatic need for popularity, and when Brian decided it was taking too big a toll on himself he simply reverted back to his strange muse, public be damned. On some level I do enjoy the early hits, but I like Our Car Club WAY better than BTTYS or even FFF.

O.K., Grillo, I'm getting you now- misunderstood before.  Your point is well-taken. I think a lot of people see it that way, and I did too, to a degree, at one time. I've really grown to love the hits a lot more over the years. Some of them are monsters, obviously- "California Girls", "Don't Worry Baby", "I Get Around"- and I know you're not talking about those, at least not primarily.  But "Little Deuce Couple", "Shut Down", "Catch A Wave"...these records have a really special place for me and they just seem to get better with age.

And one that I think is one of Brian's most underrated achievements- not one of his greatest, necessarily, but one of his most underrated- is "Help Me, Rhonda". The bass line on that one is one of the greatest in pop history, and the changes are  really slick, too (though they nearly always were by then).  Certainly one of his most inventive tracks, when you think of that guitar lick playing off the totally unique bass line. Then the little eight-note device to get into another key for the chorus is just more icing on an amazing slice of cake. Something as simple as learning it on guitar only increased my admiration for it, but the Stack-o-Tracks version of it is the single biggest testimony to that record, other than the record itself.  It also has great lyrics. To borrow a phrase from J.R.R. Tolkien, I wish it had more honor among its own people (us).

I also love "Fun, Fun, Fun" , but I've loved that one since I was seven years old, so I might be biased.  I think it's possibly Mike's and Brian's greatest lyric, and it's just an exciting record that never gets old.

One I'll single out to sort of "agree" with you on- though you didn't say this- and though I might get pelted with rocks and garbage, is "Surfer Girl" (which I like a lot) vs. "Girls On The Beach", which I love. "Surfer Girl" will always be the classic record; to me "Girls On The Beach" is "Surfer Girl" revisited and perfected- just a better record than the classic, in my opinion.

There's another song from that era (1962-66), which is sometimes viewed as simplistic, or child-like, or even as a novelty, but I think it's a work of art, from beginning to end, and that's "Little Saint Nick". There is soooooooo much packed into two minutes. Dare I say genius?

COMMENT:

Michael Love was in a strange mood during that time. He was in his "idealistic period" discovering his inner spiritual self and all that sort of thing.  The boys were booked to be at the show, but Mike wanted to pull out at the last minute because he found out that coca-cola was one of the sponsors.  To him (at that time) coke represented all that was wrong with big corporations pushing the younger person into drinking something that was not healthy. He felt so strongly about this that he refused to appear. The group followed.

However, the American Productions (A Beach Boy Inc. subsidiary) sound system was booked -- and me along with it. I was the winner on that one!  I got to mix all those groups -- one great sound after another. I had a fantastic seat, right in front of the stage, elevated above the crowd about 20 feet back.

While Hendrix was on stage, getting ready to perform, I had to make some microphone adjustments on stage. I remember going up to him and identifying myself as the Beach Boy's engineer. I ask JH what he thought of Brian. He said he thought Brian was "cool" but he didn't like surfing music much -- and then proceeded to tune up at 120 dB.

Having been there and experiencing all that went on, I would say that if the group had performed, they would have been right up there with all the other great groups that apperared.  Their music was as much a part of that crowd's experience as any of the other bands or singers. I'm certain they would have been well received as they always are.

The organizers wanted them and made concessions to get them there. One being that they would be able to bring their own sound system -- and engineer.  The American Productions sound system was the heart of what came to be a collection of several sound systems into one big system. Their's was the largest mixing board and most powerful amp/speakers around the area, but still other systems were needed to fill the entire area with quality sound. So all these systems were pooled together. When the group pulled out, the sound system was already on its way to the gig. Had it not been allowed to be used, the festival would have not been the success it was. The other consoles available were very much smaller and would have compromised what turned out to be a very special moment in time.

As it turned out, the group made money from their sound system rental, but certainly missed out on becoming a part of history. 

Good Listening, ~Stephen W. Desper 

Fascinating comments.  I just got ahold of the 4-CD boxed set of the festival that came out in the early 1990s.  One of the most striking things about this set is the sheer sound quality.  It literally sounds like the bands are playing in the room with you... leaps and bounds better sound quality than the Woodstock recordings!

Thanks so much for sharing your memories Steven...I can't even imagine what an incredible experience Monterey must have been for you.  I never thought that the Mike Love/Coca-Cola reasoning had any merit, but I'll certainly take your word for it.  It really is a shame too, since most of us think that with the right set list, the Boys would have killed at the festival.

Glad to have you back on the board in general too!

This talk about Mike Love and Coke (the soda) reminds me of that Pet Sounds-era video (was it for "Sloop John B" or "Wouldn't It Be Nice"?), the one where the guys come out of a house and shake hands with Brian, and Mike is holding a bottle of something in his hand, he even shows it to the camera. The video was black & white and wasn't too clear; can anybody see which beverage Mike was holding/drinking?

Well, he's definitely holding a Coke bottle in the "Good Vibrations" promo film. I suspect this "momentary lapse of reason" regarding not appearing at Monterey is similar to the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame speech in that Mike became unhinged for a day or two and stopped making sense.

Just saw the Monterrey Pop Festival movie on TV last week...bemoaning the fact the Boys were no-shows...

Setlist from Adelphi Theatre, Dublin, Ireland
May 2, 1967
Second Show:

1. Help Me Rhonda
2. I Get Around
3. Surfer Girl
4. You're So Good To Me
5. God Only Knows
6. Sloop John B
7. Do You Wanna Dance
8. Then I Kissed Her
9. California Girls
10. Wouldn't It Be Nice
11. Good Vibrations
12. Barbara Ann

How much different would you suppose the set would change in only a month's time? Probably not too much.

excuse me but i could be wrong but here goes..I could swear there is a quote in the first few books written about BB that the complaint  was BB werent gettin paid for gig or had ti sign there rights away to the film + didnt like the deal presented to them..BW was on the board i dont remember details but there was a money issue involved..Please dont throw fruit i bruise easy..!..Just puttin this out for discussion..

In my opinion, that's pretty realistic.

I'd say so too, at least in a world where Smile never came out.  Only thing I'd kick off is "Then I Kissed Her."  They only did it at the Adelphi show because EMI had decided to release it as their single (which they weren't happy about), but they wouldn't have had similar pressures at Monterey.

What's always interested me is what they would have sounded like at Monterey...would they have tried the drugged-out sound of their Hawaii shows to try and get over with the young and hip crowd?

Add H&V, Caroline No, Wind Chimes, and Let Him Run Wild,  and knock off Barbara Ann, and we'd be golden!

Hhhmmm, interesting timing ... I was watching "Respect Yourself: The Stax Records Story" last night and it had these two quotes relative to Monterey Pop. The first by Booker T Jones (same of MG's fame) and Wayne Jackson (Brass section for the Mar-keys) - both were on stage with Otis Redding who, as we all will recall, took the Beach Boys spot on the Saturday night:

Booker T Jones: "We ended up playing the Monterey Pop festival and that was a life changing experience for me".

Wayne Jackson: ".. there were fifty thousand people there and they had all the hippy guys there with the long hair and the torn jeans and the tennis shoes and there we were in silk suits and Beatle boots and swaeters and, like, doing steps ... we must have looked like a lounge act or something, I don't know what but it killed them and the when Otis (Redding) walked on the stage it was over for everybody".

Silk suits, Beatle boots and dance steps? Perhaps striped shirts wouldn't have been so bad.

Interesting point. The Boys were asked there because of what they were, not to be something they were not. Also I don't think all of these genres and styles were considered corny because the tolerance of diversity was massive at the time because they were all successfully going head to head on the Top 40 radio everyday.

Monterey wasn't the Top 40 friendly affair that some of have suggested.  At the time of the festival the large majority of the acts including Canned Heat, Big Brother and the Holding Company, The Paupers, Electric Flag, Butterfield Blues Band, Quicksilver Messenger Service, Steve Miller Band, Moby Grape, Laura Nyro, Ravi Shankar, Country Joe and the Fish, Hugh Masekela, Blues Project, Grateful Dead, and Jimi Hendrix had never made the top 40 in the states and most of them never would. The Who, Jefferson Airplane, Scott Mckenzie and Buffalo Springfield had each made the top 40 once as of june '67, Lou Rawls and Booket T. twice. Otis Redding hadn't cracked the top 20. There were only a few truly successful top 40 acts at Monterey....those being Simon and Garfunkel, Mamas and Papas, The Association, The Byrds and Johnny Rivers. The Beach Boys would have by far had the most Top 40 exposure of any act at Monterey.

I'm sure there were multiple reasons the Boys didn't attend Monterey, Coca Cola, Carl's draft problems (given as the reason in the press, hard to see how that would prevent an appearance),  working on finishing their album, their unreadiness (had they been rehearsing or even playing live in the month before Monterey?), Brian's mental state. 

The Beach Boys fall from commercial grace was due to one person, IMO . . . Brian.  He lost interest in making "commercial" music and continuing to "compete" with the Beatles and others for top 40 success - at the same time as pressures mounted on him to have a hit single to keep the Beach Boys financial entity intact.  Smiley Smile and to a certain extent Wild Honey sound a bit "desperate" (as much as I like them) - the still talented but damaged Brian trying to churn out material for the Beach Boys in the quickest and simplest way possible.   It could be he lost interest in the Beach Boys as a group (as he would express in the 70s) but felt obligated to keep the family business alive anyway that he could.  He had hit a wall during Smile and now had completely turned his back on the brilliant production and arranging techniques he had developed and perfected.  He returned to them with Friends but that also failed due to a lack of a hit single.  Then, either due to his deteriorating mental condition, his disappointment in the failure of Friends, or just creative burnout (most likely), his productivity dramatically decreased, and production was turned over to outside producers and the Beach Boys themselves in an attempt to regain commercial success.

So all of these genres and styles represented at Monterey weren't going head to head in the Top 40 at the time? Surely, it wasn't so only on KUDL and WHB.

As of June '67 all of them were not. Some were, but not all...unless you had Chicago Blues, African Jazz, Indian instrumentals or anything similar to Hendrix in your top 40 in June '67.

I suppose it depends on how narrow or broad you define the genres and styles but point taken, all is an over-statement.

Here is a fantasy Monterey concert I found. This is if they had released SMiLE. "Gettin' Hungry" would be brand new.

Intro - 00:00
The Letter - 00:10
Surfer Girl - 02:06
You're So Good To Me - 05:43
Gettin' Hungry - 08:33
You Still Believe In Me - 11:54
Vege-tables - 14:49
Surf's Up - 17:45
Caroline, No - 23:02
Sloop John B - 26:53
Wouldn't It Be Nice - 30:10
Heroes And Villains - 32:20
God Only Knows - 36:13
Good Vibrations - 39:35

http://vimeo.com/60884004

Wow. I had never heard the Beach Boys live version of Surf's Up before.  :o