The Smiley Smile Message Board

Its been said before and makes sense to me- Holland really was the last real Beach Boys album, and this is why- Holland had equal contributions from every member- Brian with Sail on Sailor and Funky Pretty, Mike and Al with CA Saga, Dennis with Steamboat and Only with You, Carl with Trader and Chaplin/Fataar with Leaving this Town.

When they returned with 15 Big Ones even tho it was a newly recorded album, only half if reflected new material while the other half was  an homage to their roots with renditions of classics. With it being Brian's return, the success of Endless Summer and the record company actually promoting them decently for once the album made it in the top ten and going gold.

Love You was originally intended to be Brian's first solo album but due to their contract it was a Beach Boys album, even tho Brian wrote, composed and did a good amount of the instrumentation himself from what I've read.

MIU was done when they were simultaneously on 2 labels and half of the material was from older sessions, and/or re-worked songs from the 2nd unreleased xmas album- Come Go with Me and Peggy Sue were from the 15 Big Ones sessions and other songs were from the unreleased Adult Child sessions.

Light Album was the result of older sessions as well as material Dennis intended for his 2nd solo album Bambu; with the exception of Good Timin and Dennis' songs the rest of the album was a sham. Dennis wasn't even involved with Keepin the Summer Alive and that album just like the Light Album was produced by Bruce and as was seen his production talents were nowhere near what they were in his early days with Terry.

I'm anticipating reaction here///

20/20 was a collection of oddities, as was So Tough.

In contrast, BB85 was all new material.

My reaction: If having "equal contributions from every member" is the test of a "real Beach Boys album", that wipes out everything before at least "Friends" or "20/20". pity, I was quite partial to some of that stuff.

After Holland it went downhill, in my opinion. Hardly any creativity left, although Love You is definitely the exception. I love that album. Mike's nasal voice came back, as did the cheesy lyrics and surf/beach/sun songs. The Carl-led period is probably my favourite. Their live shows were amazing as well.

Well put, very well put.

After Holland it never was the same to me. BTW Love You was never vetted as a solo album. Meaning Brian never made a move to not include the others on it or go truly solo at that point. He may have considered it briefly or made a retrospective comment, but it was always going to be a Beach Boys album.

In reading the OP, this is what struck me.  "Equal contributions" is not what defines a Beach Boys album.  Their best albums are when there is not "equal contributions".

I think "love you" could have been a hit if they had somebody like Tony Asher to smooth out Brian's lyrics. But it wouldn't be the album we all love today.

Kookadams, what exactly are the misconceptions of the post '72 output? 

The democracy aspect is way over-praised.  I could care less who contributes which songs-- I just want them to sound good.  And precious few post-60's songs sound good to me.

RE: Love You, I've been listening to this album over and over again for a week and I still have no clue why anybody, anybody likes that album.  I really am trying to keep an open mind about this period and Love You in particular, but I feel like y'all are trying to convince me that a turd is a tootsie roll.

Here we go again.......next will come the idea that we must be pretending to like it to be trendy  :lol

Actually my next idea was the it's-so-bad-it's-good theory, but that doesn't even hold water.  I'm inclined to accept that a turd is a turd and leave it at that, but it seems like every day somebody here is praising that album.  Since I really do respect most peoples' opinions around here, I figure there must be something to all the 'Love You' love.  I just haven't figured it out yet.

I think its just a really polarizing album. Your not alone in disliking it, Mike Eder (BBs expert) isn't a fan either.

That's cool. I was just teasing with you. I'm the same with such favourites as Holland, and TWJUTA. I  just don't like them despite having tried really hard.

I'm a "BB expert" and I like it.

In fact, quite a few people here are BB experts.

It's all good.  There are a number of post-60's BB songs that I have grown to love mainly resulting from insightful posts on this board.  I think my open-minded approach has backfired in the case of Love You, though.  I probably shouldn't have tried to like it.  

To be clear, I'm not a black and white, 60's-rules, 70's-sucks fan.  My favorite albums are Pet Sounds and Smile, and I ditch about half the tracks on both of these albums when I compile playlists.  I love Still Cruisin' and TWGMTR.  To each his own, I suppose.

I am not a big fan of the surf'up-holland period myself. The only tracks I really listen to on those are the BW productions.

It happens to be my favorite time period. Actually, Wild Honey thru BB 85 are my favorite albums. Yes, including MIU and KTSA, just not LA Light for the most part. That said, as soon as it becomes summer, I pretty much listen to SS through Summer Days exclusively.

what, even 'feet'?

Actually no, I forgot about that one since I don't listen to SU that often. The last three songs are the ones I only really like.

I feel like Feet is the 70s version of 'Vega-tables' (with the quirky subject and odd percussion)...it's kinda grown on me through the years.

Love You is a great album- let us go on this way, roller skating child, mona, johnny carson, good time, the night was so young, airplane... great tunes!

Take away "Let's put our hearts together" and every track is a classic

What are the misconceptions we're supposed to be refuting, here? The original post doesn't seem to list any: it just seems to be saying that post-'72 albums aren't good or aren't "real"; however, it never makes or backs up claims that there are misconceptions stating otherwise. Is there a misconception that all post-"Holland" albums are true and great? Whose misconceptions are they?

If there are misconceptions in the general public about the Beach Boys post-'72 output, it is probably that there was none. Your typical Joe Average likely doesn't realize they put out any new music after the hits of the '60s. I doubt there is some grand misconception out there that MIU is a masterpiece, for example.

In addition to that, I would add that it is nearly impossible to argue that The Beach Boys Love You is more of a Brian solo album because the other members' contributions were relatively minor without saying the same thing about Pet Sounds.

I think that overall the albums of the early '70s are overrated.  Sunflower is quite strong, and the three that followed it each have their essential tracks, but fall significantly short of any of the albums between Surfer Girl and 20/20, and certainly well behind Love You.  I would also agree that the equal distribution of tracks is not necessarily a good thing.  While I don't hate all of Carl's, Mike's, Al's, and Bruce's songs written without Brian, the only one who was a particularly interesting songwriter without him was Dennis.

Regarding their output in the late 1970's and beyond, I frequently find myself wishing that I lived in an alternate universe in which Adult Child had been released instead of M.I.U. Album.  It probably wouldn't have sold very well, but then M.I.U. didn't sell very well either, and was terrible (except for "My Diane.")  What would have become of the Beach Boys happened instead?

Great tunes how?  Musically?  Vocally?  Conceptually?

I think what it comes down to is people like what they like, and don't what they don't.  Aside from material that can be near-universally classified as a masterpiece, there's no logical reasoning with stuff like Love You (and for me, the 70's stuff in general).  It's always amusing to me when people chalk a general distaste for a set of material up to "misconceptions."  You may not be doing that in this post, but this is a common argument when it comes to the BB's later stuff.

What went wrong post-Holland?

1) Carl, seemingly poised to become a major songwriter-arranger, didn't.
2) Dennis, who did become a major writer, couldn't get enough of his songs on the BB lps.
3) Mike and Al, who seemed to be developing into decent songwriters, couldn't sustain the quality.
4) Brian, after delivering a late masterpiece ('Love You'), succumbed to his demons.

5) Blondie and Ricky left.

The context of the times has to be taken to account- at that point commercial viability no longer meant quality product. The best bands in the late 70s weren't topping the charts.
And since then there havent been commercial artists with a quality output in their legacy. The best artists that reflect the influence of the early 60s are underground and not on major labels.

Commercial viability never meant quality product--that or it always did (if you define popular as being inherently good, which to some extent I do. Pop music = popular music = popular.). In the record business, selling records has always been the business. That wasn't some mid-to-late 70s invention.

Yeah but the records that sold in the early-mid 60s were good and commercially viable. As the state of pop culture declined the media marketed crap and that's what made $.

The state of pop culture declined? Bah. And the media always marketed crap. There was plenty of crap in the 60s, it just happens to be the music most of the people on this board like the most. That doesn't make it better.

Sorry, I don't mean to get non-BBs specific in this thread the way I have been. Derailing complete (though I'm happy to discuss in the general music forum if anyone wants to).

6) And so did Jack Rieley.

I mean how the majority of what was goin on in the 70s was crap. The majority of what was popular in the 60s, at least til the late 60s was good.

In your opinion. I myself cannot listen to a lot of early 60s music.  That's also only my opinion, one that I'm aware most people don't share.

If you don't like Love You, get drunk and listen to it. You will definitely love it every listen after.

OK, again I don't mean to get off the Beach Boys topic here, but what, aside from your taste, are you using to qualify the 70s as crap and the 60s as good, or to quantify "the majority" of each decade's output? Have you scoured every release, listened, and ranked them to result in a scientific study? Or, based on the music you know from each decade, do you happen to prefer that of the 60s to the 70s? I suspect it's closer to the latter. Which makes it totally valid as your opinion, but dubious otherwise...

The majority of both decades, I dare to guess, is totally unheard by you. You've probably heard the hits, mostly, then album tracks of those bands you've explored. If you're old enough, you probably also heard what was generally happening on a more day-to-day basis. But to claim the majority of one decade is good and the majority of the next is crap is a little bit silly, to be honest. You can like what you like, your favorite bands can be your favorite bands, but come on...

I glance at my '70s CDs on the wall and see some pretty damn good McCartney, Lennon, Zappa, Beefheart, Big Star, Paul Simon, Nick Drake, Pink Floyd, Carole King, Joni Mitchell, Elvis Costello, Leonard Cohen, Led Zeppelin, Queen, Doors, Marvin Gaye, Stevie Wonder, Modern Lovers, Emmit Rhodes, Patti Smith, Randy Newman, Television, Prince, Bob Dylan, The Cars, Cheap Trick, Rubinoos, Earth Wind & Fire, Tom Waits, Devo, Raspberries, Eric Carmen, Iggy Pop, David Bowie, Miles Davis ... the list goes on. There is a tremendous amount of amazing music all the time, in every decade. It's impossible to talk about "most" of it any time because there is too much to hear, but if you want to find music you love, you can always find music you love.

At least I hope so. Otherwise that's a sad life.

When you've figured it out, tell me.

What finally hooked me on the album, after not getting it the first three or four times I listened (I'm slow on the uptake) was trying to play some of the songs myself. If you play an instrument, try just chording through some of those songs. You'll gain a whole new appreciation for them after that.

Everybody likes different music. I like vinyl and the blues, rock and roll, country, folk, gospel, particularly from the early fifties to early seventies. I like some stuff before and fair amount of stuff to the early eighties. I even like some music since, but I still have a 20-25 year period that I like best. Nobody is wrong here, but we do all intersect when it comes to The Beach Boys and that's all I care about myself as far as this board.

Every decade had its share of "good" music and its good for what it was. As far as rockNroll was concerned in terms of quality the 50s and 60s were its peak. When the direction when from singles to albums is when it got to the excessive era. Thats fine that some can appreciate that and to ea is own but I prefer the music before it got excessive and lost its fun. There are different levels of music appreciation and the majority appreciates it on a more shallow level and thats fine- its an acquired taste and when you get below the surface you can differentiate between quantity and quality.

Again, the quality or lack thereof lies in the opinion of the listener. You may feel like the move from singles to albums was excessive;others may view it as the music ceasing to be disposable. I'm trying like hell  to respect your opinion, but it's hard to do so when you're presenting your opinion as 'fact'.

There are some nice melodies and chord progressions on that album, but the lyrics are embarrassing, and I'm not into that whole synth-garage sound, and the vocals on Love You leave a lot to be desired. I never appreciated how well written the tunes were until I heard Brian doing them alone on the piano (Brian Loves You).

True. Nice music but awful lyrics and vocals. I can completely understand people liking Love You (partly because it has a Brian Wilson production credit) but a masterpiece it most certainly isn't.

Its not opinion or fact- the music speaks for itself. There was a timeless golden era of rock n roll and there was what followed that reflected dire times- that music was good for what it was but it was in a different vein or what-have-you.

I wrote this in a recent post on another thread:

Love You is truly a paradox: it's a really bad album that's totally brilliant.

Sorry man, you're not selling this one.  Just because rock and roll evolved in the 70's doesn't mean it wasn't "good". 

Considering the disappointment of 15 Big Ones, Love You was a great followup. The public wanted new Brian Wilson and with Love You they got an entire album of it. And the album reflected his mindset of the time. Brian poured out his soul with Pet Sounds and he did it in an entirely new fashion with Love You and I think that's respectable. And even tho the Beach Boys experimented with disco they never did with punk but I say Love You was as close as it got. There was definitely an edge with the album.

I never said rockNroll evolved in the 70s. It evolved in the 60s and went as far as 67. 68 and so on went in different directions but I wouldn't say it evolved at all. Some may see it differently and that's ok, not everyone wanted to see it for what it was and that's prerogative. 

You're letting your narrow-mindedness get the better of you.  Of course rock music continued to evolve into the 70's. Just because you don't like it doesn't mean it was bad.

'Timeless' and 'dire' are both opinions you're presenting as fact, and you keep stating music stopped evolving around 67-68. In your opinion it did; in many other peoples', it didn't. Neither side is necessarily right or wrong (although I sure know where I myself stand on that one); my issue is you are coming across as 'I'm right, and everyone else is wrong', when it should be 'this is how I personally feel' and leave it at that.

Moving on...
Personally speaking, I love the lyrics, and happen to love the synth sound. That said, I can certainly see why it is polarizing; a Beach Boys album has never sounded the same, before or since.  With that in mind, though, hearing the piano demos was a revelation for me, and Brian's rough vocals add to the ambiance. As a huge fan of Tom Waits, it resonated with me instantly.

That said, I prefer 'Everybody Wants to Live Just Once' to anything on Love You.

Oh, I absolutely appreciate the songs! On another thread I wrote: If I imagine "Let's Put Our Hearts Together" on Today, "The Night Was So Young" on Pet Sounds, "Love Is A Woman" on Sunflower... all instant classics. But the way they were recorded and how they sound puts me off to an extent that I'd like to puke out of rage. Unfortunately I haven't heard the piano demos, I'm sure I'd like them better.

Micha, are you familiar with the handful of Love You cover songs on the "Caroline Now!" compilation album? Maybe you'd enjoy these a bit better than the original renditions.

I felt that those were some of the weaker covers on that comp. But maybe partly because I think I Wanna Pick You and Good Time are weak songs anyway...

[/quote]
I never said rockNroll evolved in the 70s. It evolved in the 60s and went as far as 67. 68 and so on went in different directions but I wouldn't say it evolved at all. Some may see it differently and that's ok, not everyone wanted to see it for what it was and that's prerogative. 
[/quote]


On one hand you are saying some see it differently and that's okay, but then you turn around and nullify what you have just said stating that these people don't want to see if for what it is.  HUH?   You have had this opinion on a few threads now, well actually an opinion that you say is fact.

Maybe the owls that were puking in AGD's bed had been listening to Love You?  ;)

Hehe, you nailed it, it's because of that line that I used the word "puke" here! :-D

When I found out Alex Chilton did a cover for that album I thought a song from Love You would really fit his post-Big Star style and he did pull off "I Wanna Pick You Up" in his own "couldn't care less" and punky way which really opened to my eyes to how punky and off-the-wall LY is. I first started to really appreciate LY when I stopped comparing it to other BB albums and what it "could've been" and appreciate it for what it is.

I think that's what they call damning with faint praise...

I am and to me, they're an incredible improvement over the originals. Not that he will, but would luHv to see Brian and his band redo this album.

That would be very interesting.

Yup - the public wanted new Brian Wilson...which apparently is why Love You quickly found it's way to the cut out bins - so all BB's fans could buy it at a low price!

He did say he wanted to recently. Maybe that's what he was working on the past few weeks (doubt it though).

Just name the album "Brian loves you" ;D

I could go for that.  His voice sounds much better now and I bet they'd use real instruments this time.  As far as re-do's go, though, I'd love to see the Boys release an "enhanced" version of of "This Whole World" keeping Carl's lead and extending the outtro.  The production on that track does not do it justice.  Then it ends way, way too soon.

If they did, I imagine it would be just as good as previous re-recordings of Beach Boys classics, like "Here Comes the Night," "Surfin'," "Forever," or the Imagination versions of "Keep an Eye on Summer" and "Let Him Run Wild."

What I love about The Beach Boys Love You is its strikingly direct presentation of Brian's mental state from the time he wrote and recorded it.  There was a thread awhile back when Jon Stebbins said that asking Dennis' voice to sound less hoarse on "My Diane" (not a Love You song, but very much in the same spirit in my view) was like demanding a Monet painting to look more like a photograph.  That's more or less how I feel about trying to record Love You with the more cautious, streamlined, and smooth production style that we have been hearing on "Brian Wilson Productions" of late: the melodies would still be good, but the art is as much about the way we see the artist's brushstrokes (or in this case, hoarse vocals and crazed synthesizer-driven productions that sound like they originated in an alternate universe) as it is about the thing it shows.

Brian's current band doing Love You would be horrible precisely because they'd sing it professionally and use "real instruments" (whatever the f*** that means, since I'm pretty sure synthesizers are real instruments). That album, like Smiley Smile, is a disarming lo-fi achievement.

I don't mean to offend but someday someone's got to explain to me why an electric guitar is widely considered a "real instrument" among rock music listeners while a synthesizer is not.

Anyway, not entirely sure what to think about the prospect of BW and band revisiting Love You. I think I'd much rather like him to do another entirely new record in that vein. Still the original LY is probably my favorite album so in any case I'm glad it's getting some much-deserved attention.

Because people who deny the synthesiser are twats.

And right there's the distinction between those who like this album and those who don't.  It's how we individually define what's "good."  If the primary criterion for liking Love You is how directly it presents Brian's mental state at the time, I suppose It's a masterpiece.

My primary criterion is more basic, I guess.  It's how a piece of music sounds to me, which is obviously a matter of taste.  Does it hit the right buttons in my brain? In the case of Love You, quite the opposite for me.


Synthesizers are a real instrument like a vitamin is real food.  Real? Sure.  But unless I'm listening to electronica, I'll take an analog instrument over digital any day.  Not a huge fan of electric guitar either.

There are analogue synths, you know. They're all over Love You, even! I think you're conflating 'analogue' with 'acoustic' or 'non-amplified'?

I'm not a musician, but generally I'm talking about sounds that would be right at home on the Tron soundtrack.  Or sounds that mimic another instrument, but that are not generated by that instrument.  Or just electronic sounds in general-- something created by pushing a button rather than picking a string.  Nothing wrong with synths, but I personally prefer an instrument to an electronic sound.  The synths on Love You make it even less appealing.  That's not the primary factor, though.  I think I'd like that album much better if Brian didn't sound like death warmed over-- heck, if I could even recognize without too much effort that it's actually him.  Ah, but I suppose changing any one of those factors would moot the album's authenticity.

Absolutely! David Byrne once made a rare compliment of his Talking Head's former bandmates by saying that the great thing about that band was that they were never above playing the simplest little parts possible and that it's a rare thing to find: competent musicians who can see beyond the need to demonstrate what they CAN do and are as interested in the what is necessary (even if it's next to nothing) to make the whole complete..... I can't see Brian's drummer willingly just sitting there striking his floor tom on every other up beat for Love You performance. I'm sure he'd do it, but the whole thing would be a bit uncomfortable.... Besides, do we really want to have to witness Foskette murdering Love Is A Woman???

Brian should've just joined Can in the '70s. Think about how much that could've ruled. 

Oh, man! That would have been just awesome......

All that's missing here is Brian:

http://youtu.be/gOfWKzMgeac

I think to understand WHY everything kind of changed, you have to try to put yourself in their shoes.  So if I'm trying to do that, what's different?  In the 60's, you had young guys, one of the biggest rock bands in the world, making money, meeting women, etc....

and in the 70's, now you see these same guys, already rich, already used to living life a certain way, now with children around they're responsible for, etc...

So I always come to the realization that the reason the music changed, and everything became different isn't just a creativity or business decision, it was a change of life.  These guys were growing up, their personal lives had changed over the years like everybody's do... and it bled over into the music side of it. 

I mean when you're 21, it's easy to write and sing songs about girls on the beach, and falling in love, and whatever.... but when you're 31, now you're at a point where it gets kind of old, how excited can you get about the Beach when you haven't been to the Beach in 6 years?  You try to sing about things that are going on in your life right now, but nobody really wants to hear it, they want you to be 21 again. 

It's one of the reasons something like 15 big ones kinda sucks (with some highspots)... guys singing songs they should have been singing when they were 16 or 17, now they're 35...

and one of the reasons "Love You" rocks.  Guys singing songs about their kids, or with their wife, or about flying home and meeting their woman at the airport, or whatever.

I'd imagine as a musician, it would be almost impossible to get that balance right, everybody from Paul McCartney, to Sheryl Crow, to Britney Spears, to Dr. Dre is sitting somewhere, right now, trying to figure out how to make good music now that they're older than they were when they became famous. 

I just never will understand the love here for the train wreck that is Love You.

And I will never understand why some people have to state, out loud, that they dislike something. 

So people should only ever post positive comments about the group's work? Would make for a pretty dull board.

Ah yes, but you have to understand Synthesizers aren't just trying to emulate violins. The same way guitars aren't just trying to be violins. Guitars are not just a simpleton's violin hit crudely with your fingers or a little plastic oval-ish triangle. It is a guitar, and you get that. The proliferation and such of synthesizers has made it hard to get.

VERY WELL SAID!

It's more than that. I'm fine with people saying they like or dislike something, its when they say "I can't understand how anyone else thinks differently to me".  It is this lack of empathy that really winds me up.

I couldn't give a damn if someone hates Love You so much they want to wipe their arse on the multitracks, in fact I'm happy to hear about it, just as long as they accept the fact that some people do actually love it and aren't just pretending.

‍

No, post negativity if you want... but if somebody's talking about how they enjoy something, what good does it do to say "You're wrong.  It's sh*t."  ?

In my case, I'm more saying "I don't like it despite really trying, and am seriously at the point where I don't understand how anybody possibly could.  But I'm game- please enlighten me."

Here's how it works in my mind:  Not that anybody is obligated to explain themselves when it comes to musical taste, but personally, If I like some song/album/genre that 99% of people have either never heard of or don't like, I feel the onus is on me in conversation to explain what makes it so awesome.  Vice versa, if the world loves something I can't stand, the onus is on me to explain why.

Grab 100 music listeners of all ages, let them listen to Surfer Girl and Love You, I bet you can guess which album 99 of them would prefer.  

So when it comes to the BBs lesser-known, less popular material, I don't feel bad about politely asking why some of you like it so much.  Part of it is my desire to possibly be enlightened.  I'll admit this is how I came to love Smile.  At first listen, I thought it was a bunch of crap.  Now I'm mixing my own version.  So conversion isn't out of the question.  For Love You and other post Smile albums, I'd love to hear something more than "man that album ROCKS!" or "How can you not love Airplane."  I'd actually really like some insight as to why something is so awesome, aside from the fact that you just think so.

(although, "I just think so" is perfectly legit.)

I don't normally have a problem in accepting people have other tastes, and some people do like the strangest things.

Personally I can't stand their new album, but I wouldn't expect onus to be on the majority to explain why they like it.

In answer to your question......

I love Love You because it contains, on the whole, some wonderfully crafted songs.

I love Love You for the quirky humour.

I love Love You for the fact it's pure, undiluted BW, i.e he went in and laid down all these synth parts and the arrangements have his unmistakeable stamp all over them.

I love Love You for being the gift that it is. And on top of all that, sometimes your love for music is indefinable.I could go on, but hows that for starters?

If you can be converted, it's a very rewarding album, (which is what folk have told me about the new album) Sometimes you just have to accept, you like what you like.

Is there that much humour in Love You? And if there is was it intentional or was it Brian just writing songs under therapy (with or without Landy)?

Depends what you find funny.

If you're of the notion that Brian is / was and always has been a funny guy, with very dead pan delivery and a love of "put ons" then yes, it's pretty funny.

If you're of the opinion that Brian is / was and always has been an idiot savant with severe mental health issues who isn't capable of acting in a way that could be in any way described as human,  then no, probably not so funny


Personally, I'm in the first camp, and I don't think for one minute that "If Mars had life on it I might find my wife on it" and "The network makes him break his back" were ever meant to be anything other than funny. That, with all the other "dumb / beautiful" juxtapositions (that Brian consciously inplanted into a lot of his work),  are all over Love You.

Big Cosine. Hell, hearing Beach Boys Love You made me NEED a synth. Currently got an ms10 and a micromoog...synth bass is the best sound ever.

Ah, those are the only two types of people in the world are they...

Which translates as is Brian funny or is he mentally ill and therefiore incapable of humour. Your question was dualistic, I answered in kind. 

Look, I understand. You don't like Love You, or Smiley Smile. Maybe I should start aggressively quizzing you about your tastes.

I love these albums, and you don't. Is this an acceptable summary? Because to be honest I can't be bothered. This subject pops up every six months or so. I think we've put it to bed, and explained why we love these albums, then a couple of jokers like you appear who seem incapable of accepting these explanations.

Maybe you have psychological problems, if so I apologise, and suggest you get some therapy. Maybe you can write some songs?

Huh???

Firstly I've never said that I don't like Love You or Smiley Smile (the latter album isn't even being discussed here). Another poster stated that they show Brian's genius which I don't believe they do as a whole. I really like parts of each album but really dislike other parts.

I asked whether it was Brian writing songs as therapy because...isn't that what it was? Wasn't Johnny Carson written as part of Brian's therapy because he had a fear of going on talk shows? That's certainly a statement that has appeared in books in the past and that goes for some other songs from the era too. There was a claim that Landy had written the lyrics to several songs but we'll probably never know the truth on that score.

Now Brian was mentally ill at the time. No revelation there. So I think there is reasonable doubt as to whether Brian was trying to be intentionally humorous in these songs. Maybe he was and maybe he wasn't. As at the time he was also writing worrying dreck like Lazy Lizzie and Hey Little Tomboy I don't think it's unfair to question his songwriting intentions.

OK, It gets my back up to be questioned on my tastes, but I see were you're coming from.  You did, I think, contribute to the Smiley thread also, which was why I lumped you in with that. I apologise for my harsh response.

There was a very interesting thread recently about Love You, mental illness and how that made some listeners uncomfortable.  I'll winkle that out later.

I hear you. The old stuff on it was good, Night Was So Young, and I'll Bet He's Nice are more than decent, but the rest of the LP makes me feel like I am intruding.  Some seem to like it because they know of Brian's problems, but that's why I don't. I don't think he was trying to be funny, or experimental. In the vocals, lyrics, and even production, I simply hear an audibly lost person who sounds like he's being exploited.

My tastes aren't vanilla. I like offbeat artists like Syd Barrett, and Brian did some very quirky funky work over 1966-74 that I adore. Yet when it comes to Love You I just can't fathom how it is so well loved. It makes me very sad. I can get into some of Brian's 1975-82 stuff. For instance I really like the big band Adult Child recordings. On Love You I mostly get a sinking feeling. Brian being offbeat in his humor or music is part of his charm, yet songs like Love Is A Woman, or I Wanna Pick You Up don't sound at all self aware and that's the difference.

No problems.

You'll probably find the same comments. Myself and Mike Eder feeling that Brian sounds 'wrong' on this album.

Wouldn't it be good if there was some news soon?

You just lost this thread. Most people are utter idiots who's opinion is totally worthless and whose approval is not worth seeking.

Who the hell cares what 'most people' think.

For example, this:


is kind of like Biff in back to the future saying 'make like a tree and go away'. It makes you sound like a simpleton. The phrase is 'couldn't care less'. Just because lots of people get it infuriatingly wrong, doesn't mean it's an acceptable alternative.

Arguing about musical tastes is an exercise in futilty. Being put in a position of having to defend those tastes is offensive.

I don't care how many "experts" don't like this LP. I do like it and derive great pleasure from it.

I don't like "Let's Put Our Hearts Together"...is that offensive? If so-relax! At the end of the day this should be a fun hobby, not anything to get rattled up about. As good as a band as the Beach Boys were/are, nobody should lose sleep over what one fan digs over another. As far as my tastes go, they are no more "expert" than anyone else's. My feelings for it and anything else "Beach Boys", I do try to make a case for here or in my book. Yet it doesn't go beyond that for me. If you like the album very cool, I simply don't relate that's all.

Not in the slightest.

Reading it from the start, this thread is lose/lose for Love You fans- a non stop ear bashing and demands of explanation from a few die hard haters and then a 'whoa cool it' when driven to some slightly stronger terminology after pages and pages of 'I like it and don't really care if you don't.

Wish that box set would come out! And be full of re-records of Pet Sounds, with some nice fat synth bass all over it.

The thing that pisses me off about this Love You polarization is that you MUST either love or hate the album. Isn't it possible to love a good part of it, like some of it and think that a few tracks are dire?

Thank you Bear! I love much of the album, but think Love is a Woman to be one of the worst songs in the entire catalogue.

Beautifully put Bergen.

Mike, what's offensive is this.......


Can you see how a dismissive statement like this puts me immediately on the defensive? And when you reply to the afforementioned quote with.....


Then it predisposes me to not listen to a word you say. On principle.

I'm all for debate, and I'm interested in the reasons why people like / don't like this album, and I'm very interested in the issues it raises towards peoples perceptions of mental illness / creativity / humour. It could be very revelatory. However, outright dismissal of people's subjective tastes are not really conducive to an intelligent discussion

I personally just read it as one person stating they don't like it, and another agreeing. Now, if someone had said that 'anybody who likes it has poor taste in music' or something like that, it'd be different

Exactly.

Again agreed.

For the life of me I just don't get how you think that.

I think you are being a tad oversensitive...

'I will never understand...' is a commonly used expression after all.

I can think of many commonly used expressions right now  :lol

Language is a powerful thing, full of many subtleties and sub texts. The problem with solely text based exchanges are, without the clues that body language gives, a lot of things are very open to interpretation.

I could pick that "train wreck" quote apart, but you're still free to interpret it as you want, as am I.

Yes it is. For instance, I will never understand why the Beatles are the most popular pop/rock band in history, and why many people worship them above all other artists. That said, I understand that that is my opinion, and one that other people do not have to share. And hey, one man's train wreck is another man's...um...minor fender-bender? :lol

I know there are a lot of fans who don't like outsiders tinkering with Brian's works, but if the end result feels like a completed, polished production - i.e, BW88 or TLOS - then I will take those anyday over Love You. There are parts of Love You that are just painful to hear - Love is a Woman being example #1. I quite like parts of the album, but that grating synth sound gets tiresome after a few tracks. There was definitely some potential in the songwriting, but the record itself feels like "okay, this is the best Brian could crank out at the moment".

I think Bruce commented on that in an interview a while ago. He stated that Brian used the synth because it meant he could get the recording over with as quickly as possible because he didn't really want to be there.

I don't think I have any misconceptions about the post-72 (73?) output. The gems are few and far between. I've warmed to 15 BO over the years, but this is relatively speaking; I've always liked Love You; never cared for the bulk of MIU, a directionless album; always liked about half of LA; not cared for most of what came later (actively disliking most of Still Cruisin' SIP and the country album), until the new album, which is about half decent with two or three outstanding tracks. If you read about what they were working on and take the boots into account, it's clear MIU and LA could've been more interesting albums, but by that time, the emphasis was again on summery pop and with the Wilsons largely hampered by personal and psychological issues ramped up by drug/alcohol intake, Mike and Al took the band in a different direction.  What makes this all the more unfortunate, is that Love and Jardine seemed to have had songs that would've improved both MIU and LA, but preferred to go for a kinda cheesy rendition of the classic sound.  

As for the solo work, the milestone is POB, which, of course, is also the millstone around everyone else's neck because no-one has surpassed it. Carl's stuff is MOR AOR at worst (and a lot of it isn't great, let's face it); Mike's released stuff is MOR; Al's (when it fiiiiiinally appeared) had some interesting stuff paired with some ghastly stuff and disappointed too many people (not me, however) because it wasn't full of new songs; Brian's output (taking BWPS out of the equation) has been hit and miss, but those hits and misses have largely been on the same album. Of the three proper albums, hate the production though I do, BW88 has the best bunch of original songs; TLOS has some outstanding moments and others, like the neanderthal Going Home, that make me despair; GIOMH has two or three good songs swamped by awful arrangements and awful production and they're cast away on an island in a sea of crap. Gershwin, I quite like (sound's good anyway); Disney, I have a problem with because it's Disney and, these days at least, has desperately cloying associations; the Christmas album has one outstanding new tune - but it's a Christmas album and that sort of stuff doesn't work for me. With the Christmas, Gershwin and Disney albums is the added feeling that Brian has become a franchise. What next: Brian sings Pete Seeger?

Then we have the problem of the voice. There are plenty of singers who don't sing as well as BW and no-one gives a sh*t, but this is BW and you kind of expect more. Even now. Aside from his bass, Mike's vocals, of course, have been thin and reedy for some time. When I listen to recordings of the C50 tour, his vocals make me cringe more than Brian's, but perhaps I'm being easy on the big guy because I've seen him several times over the last few years and know when he's really off. There are plenty of people on this board who would like his output had the other Boys contributed vocals, but then they'd be autotuned and we'd be swamped by 'experts' (who only found out about the process the day before) banging on about it in every post...

pretty solid analysis imo!
tbh I cringe too much listening the C50 youtube clips out there, there is always something not right in the vocals, and it's generally Brian and often Mike. The others I cannot tell since Jeff is always mixed too high (though I understand this is to make the overall singing less cringe worthy).
Sometimes Brian has a good day and sings pretty well, but most often it would seem that is not the case and the singing can be a cringe experience. Still great to see/hear him and the rest anyhow.

Tbh the songs Brian wrote back then can only be sung by the very best singers in their apex of life. Trying to sing anything similar after 40-50 years and a helluva lot of dope and the results are quite predictable.

I like your overall analysis but to me the Light Album hardly sounds like "summery pop" at all and neither is Mike's "Sumahama" (like it or not) anywhere near a cheesy rendition of their classic sound. On the contrary I think that after MIU they did realize (for a short moment, that is) that hey should probably try something other than that and go for a different sound this time around. Anyway, I see your point and for the most part I tend to agree! Imo things really went wrong as soon as they realized the LA approach did not really work either (at least in terms of commercial success; artistically I think it's their last great LP ever).

Hey there were a few nice posts between (Stephen Newcombe) and myself where we understood each other on here. Where did they go? Removing them makes us look far more combative than we are.

Yes Mike, I think they got lost in the downtime. I think we left it that  its easy to misunderstand one another in a text based exchange, and I think I conceded I may have been overreacting (very unlike me!).

We had a text based hug and all was rosy again  :lol

Yes, I was being a little unfair towards LA - though they did have access to more, uh, interesting songs that they decided not to use.  Mind you, they also had Calendar Girl... Glad they gave that one a miss.  As it stands, LA was there last collection of decent material before TWGMTR, though a lot of that is down to Dennis' writing and singing. After that, the good stuff is few and far between.

Ummmmmmmmmm... I have some news for you, and it's not good. Carl did a lot of, ah, 'polishing' to Brian's original tracks. I'd say what we hear is maybe 60% BW.

Do you mean he half-asses it and Carl came along to finish up half-baked songs, or just that his mix is less shitty than what Biron Willis left the group with? I think it'd be at least interesting to hear his unadulterated mixes.

More the former than the latter. There was sweetening as well as polishing.

I swear, '70s album by just the Wilson brothers would've killed it. Or they'd just all do hella drugs and f*** around unproductively... but the session would probably be some great bootleg material, haha.

Does anyone have even remotely exact info on what Carl actually did? I'd guess all the guitar parts are his doing... How about the vocal arrangements, were they Brian's or did Carl add parts afterwards?

Old news. ::)

.

good idea! is it feasible though? Anything Beatles released will sell well but I can hardly imagine an unknown album like LY 'worthy' of such attension. TSS after all only made it to 25/27 and disappeared fast.

.