The Smiley Smile Message Board

From photos and text posted by Brian and co. this weekend, it appears that Brian and band are recording Pet Sounds fresh at Capitol in LA.  Apparently, it's for Spotify, probably an exclusive, but who knows.  Any further info on this project would be appreciated in this thread.

Thanks,
Mark

"Band" as in the other living Beach Boys or Brian's touring band?

According to the pictures: Brian, his band and Al Jardine. No other Beach Boys.

Possibly a promo for a documentary ala "Do It Again" for C50?

Maybe they could head to the San Diego Zoo and recreate the cover art while they're at it.

Or maybe a new cd, Brian Wilson's Pet Sounds - BWPS.

I hope they are not doing this project in the studio.  I've got cold feet on that straight away.
I don't think a re-recording is a great idea unless it was done live, oh wait......
unless it's a reimagined version, which I don't think it would be.
why? already it will be judged against the masterpiece.

I would presume it's just live in-studio. Essentially the live show sans an audience.

My impression is that they are just rehearsing.

And make poor Al contend with another damn goat? How demeaning! :)

I seem to remember reading somewhere that a goat ate Bruce's radio at that session (and he wasn't even in it). Maybe I dreamt it...

Al posted on Facebook that they were specifically "recording" the album for Spotify at Capitol Records studio. I would guess they're doing an in-house "live session" exclusively to air on Spotify; many bands do this for Spotify and for other radio services.

The "tour rehearsal" photos Brian posted are from the following day.

The "recording" setup at Capitol looks much more like they're *recording*, albeit in a "live in studio" setup. Typically they wouldn't be using big condenser mics and other "studio" microphone for tour rehearsals:

(https://scontent.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xft1/v/t1.0-9/10294313_1051199018252166_4192101318710812162_n.jpg?oh=f03bf3bd4e5dcd475fab271a5f8da540&oe=57895192)

Touring on a classic album is a great treat for fans, especially for the inclusion of deep cuts that don't often get live airings.

Over the years, I've had the opportunity to see Roger Waters do Dark Side of the Moon and The Wall, Queensryche do Operation: Mindcrime, Judas Priest do British Steel, and The Who do Quadrophenia.  I'm looking forward to experiencing Pet Sounds in person later this summer. 

To experience these albums live is great, but re-recording them just seems kind of pointless IMO. 

But again, I don't think they're "re-recording" it for an album release. They're just doing it "live" in the studio for Spotify. Instead of just recording a live gig out on tour and giving that to Spotify to air, they're knocking out a "live" recording in-studio. It's literally the same as the live show, just without an audience (although there could well have been a small audience in the studio), and recorded with nicer mics in a more controlled setting.

Gotcha.

I'm also hoping that this Pet Sounds 50th Anniversary Tour yields a full concert DVD. 

Hey, Phil Collins did it with his albums. I can see it now, some creative Photoshopper recreates Beach Boys album covers with the guys the way they look now, or would look now, in the case of Dennis and Carl.

It's obviously promotional!


Record live in the studio, and publish on spotify so that the listener hears the music, understands this is the sound that will be delivered on tour, and buys tickets  ;D

it would be nice to hear a complete symphony orchestra version with Brian singing it..

Lei'd in Los Angeles?

I think it's a different kettle of fish if the are recording live in the studio, my initial thought was they wanted to record
and try and better what has been done.  That sounds more fun now if that is what is happening.
My wonder is now, considering Brian sang most of the leads, how is gonna tackle singing some of those leads in a recorded
environment? you can get away with murder 'live' but a recording is under the microscope.
songs like YSBIM, IJWMFTT aren't quite the easiest.

Some of the pictures have a green and yellow PS backdrop, probably for interviews.

Not on an album but you can in Boston.

http://www.boston.com/culture/music/2016/01/25/brian-wilson-will-play-pet-sounds-with-the-boston-pops-this-summer

Nice maybe we'll get a cd release of it..or a Blu Ray/DVD release..

;D LA'd.

If it's a recording they can easily 'sweeten' it in the studio.  Hence a reason for doing it in the first place.  I also suspect Brian won't be singing the lead on YSBIM, or some of the other songs.

It's gonna be fascinating to put this next to Pet Sounds Live from the early tours.  My general sense of things is that Brian's singing is so much stronger now, and we might get a sense how the few changes in the band have affected the re-creation of the backing.  And given how much more loose and alive the live version of Smile sounded, I'd love to see if they can capture that same sense of celebration...

Cheers,
Jon Blum

I think Brian may still sing (at least most of) YSBIM. As it is, he'll probably have Matt singing "Don't Talk" (as Foskett did in 2013; unless they lower the key for Brian as they did in 2000), and possibly Matt and/or Al singing WIBN.

Who had the lead vocal assignments when they did PS in 2013? I know they took "Don't Talk" back to the higher key and Foskett sang it. Al added his bits. Did Foskett and/or Al sing WIBN? I think Brian sang YSBIM in 2013.

It seems like a major part of Brian's post-BB's career has been performing, re-recording, reliving Pet Sounds. It's not the only great album he ever did. How about a live show devoted to Beach Boys Today/Summer Days? Wild Honey? Sunflower?

There are a couple of reasons why that won't ever happen, sadly.
The first, and more obvious, is that those albums don't have the "classic album" status bestowed on them. A *lot* of people own Pet Sounds and no other Beach Boys albums, and think it the only worthwhile album Brian or the band ever made. They'll go and see a Pet Sounds tour in a way they wouldn't go to a Sunflower tour.
The second is that Brian's management seem to have been going for a particular kind of "classic artist" image for Brian ever since he started touring, and with that goes a particular story: Genius whose classic pop singles led to a single brief brilliant album, but like Icarus he got too close to the sun with Smile and had to retreat, handwave handwave, triumphant return against all the odds. That's the promotional story behind every album he puts out, it was the story told in Love & Mercy, and I bet it's the story his autobiography tells, too.
Focusing any amount of promotion on something that isn't a) greatest hits, b) Pet Sounds or Smile, or c) whatever Brian's most recent solo work at the time is damages that message. In the actual show, of course, he and his band can play anything they want, but if you promoted a tour as, say, the Wild Honey tour, that would mean having to explain a far more nuanced, complicated story.
And that isn't, in any way, a criticism of that as a strategy. It clearly works in terms of getting audiences and publicity. It's a branding thing, and it allows Brian to compete against the Beach Boys branding as a more "classy", "arty" alternative to the fun-in-the-sun brand.

But it does mean that the only whole-album tours that make sense from a branding point-of-view are Pet Sounds, Smile, and $newalbum. Anything else would dilute the brand (anyone else remember the poster here during the reunion tour who was absolutely *outraged* that during that tour they played anything that *wasn't* from 1966 or 67, and said it was an insult to Brian that they were only doing five songs from Pet Sounds?). But on those tours, Brian can of course play as many songs as he wants from those albums anyway.

The insane amount of sell-outs for this tour (more than I've ever seen on any Brian tour; west coast promoters are saying they could have added a third night in places like San Francisco; promoters are literally turning bookings down at this stage) tells me hinging the whole thing specifically on PS is what is selling the tickets.

I don't think Brian has beat it to death too much. It's the first time he's toured extensively behind PS in around 14 years or so. He did PS as a surprise twice in 2013, and did about 9 PS shows with Al Jardine in 2006/2007.

Considering he did two full years of "Smile" touring in 2004 and 2005, I wouldn't be surprised if he's done nearly as many "Smile" shows than PS shows prior to this year's tour.

A quick, very *rough* tally (you know, holding my finger up to the screen and counting!) from AGD's Bellagio site shows around 94 "Smile" shows done in 2004 and 2005, and about 82 "Pet Sounds" shows done across 2000, 2002, 2006/07, and the two shows in 2013. Again, rough tallies; I may be counting a few shows as Smile or PS shows that weren't.

PS: If AGD is reading this, you can remove the September 19, 2000 "Mountain Winery" show from the 2000 tour dates list; that show was canceled, never happened. The September 20, 2000 show did happen, and was not at "Villa Montalvo", but was at "The Mountain Winery". (Looks like the venues for these two shows were flipped; it was the 9/19 canceled show that was going to take place at the Garden Theatre at Villa Montalvo).

LS,

Andrew makes some good points. 

Also, as much as I'd love to see a tour of Today or Sunflower, I feel Pet Sounds is the Beach Boys album that's most associated with Brian Wilson, especially in the wake of Love and Mercy. 

Sunflower, especially, is much more of a team effort - Dennis, Carl, and Bruce all play huge parts on that album.  Collectively, they do leads on nine of the 12 tracks.  Two are no longer with us, and one has other commitments.

I would love to hear the Brian Wilson album live in it's entirety.  At least give us Rio Grande and Melt Away and even One For The Boys!

It would be interesting to hear what it would sound like, done live with his backing band. 

I wouldn't mind hearing some more solo songs in the setlist, especially some tracks from That Lucky Old Sun. 

And how about the closing "Suite" from TWGMTR.  It would be sad if From There and Back Again is never performed live.

I agree!

Also worth noting perhaps is that the likelihood of something like "Sunflower" in full is unlikely because Brian's shows are (understandably) very Brian-centric. You don't often hear something at a Brian show that he didn't either write or originally sing, especially once cover versions are factored out. There's his version of "Forever", which hasn't often been a regular staple of the setlist, Dave's take on "Little Bird" in 2013, Al's "California Saga" (which even technically had Brian singing the opening lead lines on the original recording), and not much else ("Hold on Dear Brother" was of course done for the one PBS show, and they rehearsed but didn't perform "Lookin' at Tomorrow" for the same show). Even most of the Al and Blondie leads in the shows on tour are songs co-written by Brian.

I just can't picture Brian and his band doing something like "Tears in the Morning."

Yes! Yes! Yes! I know it doesn't follow the storyline that has been layed out for Brian, but he did make great music after PS and Smile - even during the Landy years.

I don't know if Brian has a strong-enough affinity for the entire '88 album to do it all live. Beyond L&M, he has occasionally pulled out "Melt Away." My jaw dropped when I saw him premiere "Let It Shine" in the setlist in 2000, but that was gone by the end of that year. I don't think he's touched much else.

He hasn't much gone back to old solo albums after he promotes them. "Your Imagination" was surprisingly pulled out for some summer 2013 shows with Al and Dave (I've sometimes wondered if Joe Thomas suggested it, he popped up in a few pics on that summer 2013 tour), but he doesn't do much solo stuff outside of L&M and whatever new album he's plugging.

surprising really how Brian has not pulled much out of his solo albums and uses them on tour anymore.
I remember him doing Melt Away, Your Imagination, but never anything from OCA, ITKOD, GIOMH he could pull
some off of 'imagination' again, and a few reworked arrangements of songs from '88' would be great.
I know there were some current songs that were played at the time of some album releases, like 'desert drive',
but he has really fallen into boat of doing the 'beach boys' hits and 'beach boys' rare songs, which the later is
refreshing, but he has some great songs in his solo albums.  I guess it comes down to me being in a minority too.

I can't say I have any burning desire to hear him do a ton of solo stuff. A surprise now and then is always nice. The band could probably pull off "Orange Crate Art" quite well.

My weird favorite that I would have figured they'd never do is "Let It Shine", and they actually did that one. I even saw the first show they did the song at, still probably the biggest surprise.

I love the 88 album, but I'd like to hear it rerecorded. Properly. I suppose we'd get autotune but I'd tale that over what we have. Whatever their origins, I think it's his best and most consistent  solo work

I like a lot of his solo material, but its The Beach Boys material that gets the butts in the seats. 

Artists like Paul McCartney, Roger Waters, and John Fogerty used to feature primarily solo songs in their sets, but they've become much more successful touring artists by featuring sets heavy on The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and CCR respectively. 

“Sloop John B” from this recording session http://petsounds.com/sloopjohnb

That sounds awesome!  Great clean vocals from Brian and Al, no audible pitch correction at all.

so let me get this straight  ::)  I go to thebeachboys.com, and there is the link there to Brian and Al combo doing 'sloop john b'....
now I'm a lil confused.  So are Brian and Al now 'The Beach Boys'? Yet I don't see M&B?  and why is this not just on Brian's site?
oh, and the clip is on 'The Beach Boys' facebook page.
help me SS, help help me SS.

Brian singing extremely well...loved his harmony part too

youtube link for Sloop John B - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDZgl7H-coQ (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eDZgl7H-coQ)

Great voices from Brian, Al, the whole band. Good instrumentation too  :-D

Also, PS is an album of only good songs. It is after all one of the greatest, if not the greatest album ever made. It's an instantly recognisable classic even if Joe Public doesn't know each title on the album. People at least know WIBN, GOK, SJB.

Sunflower is stunning, but in a different way and there is hardly any public recognition or widely known songs on it. Other albums with some known hits such as SD&SN has two main hits; CalG, Rhonda but also quite a few weaker titles. WH is unknown, LY is unknown. SU or Holland could've been done if Carl were around and working with Brian/Al.

Thank you!

Does anyone have the exact date this album performance was recorded/filmed? I would like to add it to the Pro Shot Concert list

Love it!

Brings tears to the eyes to see those guys at it...it reminds you that one of the reasons the band was so good live w/o Brian was that they had Al there. It's great to see him get so much exposure and recognition for being such a great singer and having so much of his youthful voice intact. They are missing the power and purity of Brian's falsetto--none of the latter-day guys seem to really be able to reproduce that--but IMO they do justice to one of their greatest songs.

Is the rest of the album going to be released?

Just watched this from the official site where you had to sign up. Great stuff! Al's vox and his son Matt's harmonies are brilliant! Brian's vox are great as well!

Imagine Brian had kept his ability to sing falsetto into his later years like Foskett and others (but obviously I don't mean sound like them).  It would be amazing.  It might not be a popular opinion but for a guy who sang like Brian did it's a shame the voice changed so much.  That 60s and early 70s voice was an amazing gift.  Imagine him standing front of the stage with the bass on.  The guy from the TAMI show but older and more wrinkled.  What a sight that would be.

This PS recording session was billed as recording for Spotify, so I would imagine the full live in-studio album performance, at least the audio of it, will be made available on Spotify at some point.

It's a great video clip. The one weird thing is the lack of drums. It does at least lend a slightly "unplugged" vibe to it (I realize it's obviously not actually all-acoustic of course).

I love the look on Brian's face as he watches Al sing.  Such a look of pride and approval.  It is heartwarming to see these two men still in the same room together enjoying their life's passion.  The Hawthorne High quarterback "handing off" vocal duties to his halfback.

Their vocal blend even at age 73 is still great.   

It's especially heartening, and shows some growth and getting past BS, that they're at this place now versus, say, 2005 when they both went to the Hawthorne Landmark event yet couldn't even perform together or do anything other than pose for photos together. I remember thinking, "Really? Three Beach Boys there and none of them can perform together? They wouldn't even have had the added pressure of it being a 'reunion.' It would just be three dudes performing a few songs!"

I think even Al's handful of 2006/07 gigs with Brian were imbued with some politics, so I'm glad that in this latest iteration, there seems to be true admiration and appreciation on all sides.

I thought Brian's vocal was pretty rough.

Yeah, that was a great moment indeed! Heartwarming in many respects.

I thought Brian pulled off a great vocal for a vocal line that reaches the upper end of his current range-- usually at the end of a phrase, too! They made it work together in a wonderful way that transcended their limitations.

Probably my new favorite version of "Sloop John B." I think Jardine the Younger blends really well with the rest of Brian's band, the arrangement was tasteful, and it has two Beach Boys harmonizing without outside interference.

That's what I missed the most during the C50-- I wanted to hear Mike, Brian, Bruce and Al (with Foskett's falsetto on top... but nowhere else... although I wish it had been Matt Jardine back then) to hear what the modern day "blend" sounded like. The closest we came was that filmed acoustic set with just Jeff and Scott augmenting the Boys. TWGMTR sounded like Foskett doubled every singer, and that bothered me more than the "mysterious audio effect that turns people into robots."

Regarding Brian's current vox range, I think he did really well. Keeping all that in mind they're not rough at all lol.

That was a great version.  Al and Brian sounded really good.  Matt Jardine - fantastic high harmony and blend with the others.  I definitely prefer him doing it to Foskett.  Can they go back and fix TWGMTR by having Matt re-do Foskett's parts? ;D

Wow! I'm shocked at how good Brian and All sounded together! Now I'm really upset there isn't a Pet Sounds show anywhere near me

I think Brian may be mixed a little too high or perhaps there's too much of a presence boost on his voice or something, something sounds slightly off to me, not sure what others think.

Cool video on the whole though and look forward to seeing the rest.

I thought he sounded ( this is for bro Manning) EFFIG fantastic.  :woot

Good point.  Technically, Al was the fullback, per Jim Murphy's superb book, Becoming the Beach Boys

And that's a shame; his voice is much more suited for the solo songs than trying to redo the 60's hits. Plus, I would expect the fans at a Brian Wilson show to be much more hardcore fans that know the lesser known material; I figure Mike's show is for the casual fans that just want the greatest hits. Maybe the 80's solo stuff brings back too many painful memories of his "collaborator who never left me alone". I never even knew he'd done Melt Away live; and if the relationship with Van Dyke is frostly now, that probably means we will never hear the Orange Crate Art songs live.

I don't think Brian is necessarily opposed to doing songs written with people he's presently estranged from. I just think, especially on a PS tour, there isn't much room left to mess around with the setlist. I'd have to say I'd rather hear a BB deep cut we haven't heard than hear him pull out "Imagination" or "Gettin' in Over My Head" material. A few '88 tracks might be interesting, but I'd probably even in that case rather hear something like "Goin' On" or "Don't Go Near the Water" or "Santa Ana Winds."

Sure seems like there's not much enthusiasm for his solo material. Not all of his solo material has been Pet Sounds quality, but there are plenty of great songs he could do. It's not like he died as an artist in 1967. Or 1971.

Yes, excellent.  Well, there are supposed to be great airfares through tomorrow, and lots of great places to see along with Brian's show.

WIBN from the same session:

http://www.shortlist.com/entertainment/music/this-joyous-beach-boys-video-will-make-you-happy-to-be-alive

Matt does a nice job but I still think Al sings it better.

Oops. A certain ex-keyboardist lurking in the background in that one.

Is that Probyn wearing a cap playing guitar btw?

Looks like Probyn, yes.

As for Bennett, it's hard to say for sure, but it kind of looks like they've purposely put the few distant shots of him out of focus in post production. Not sure why that would be easier than just cropping the footage or editing it without any shots of him if that was the goal.

Ouch. That is really awkward. I'd be lying if I didn't say it wasn't insulting too. Yet it's not as though I don't completely understand why it was done.

I wonder if both Brian and Scott really thought that Scott would beat the charge. If Brian and Melinda had an inkling that it was probable that Scott was gonna be found guilty in a few months, I wonder if Scott would have been part of a video filmed for future release.

Al sings WIBN better for sure, he always has but it really challenges his range especially night after night. It would be awesome if he did it for one offs like this though like the Vegas thing they did.

I thought Brian sounded a little rough on that first chorus of Sloop with just he and Al. I think it sounds better when Al takes the higher step.

Just looking at the 'Sloop' clip again and there is a piano being played at 46sec. Must be the same ex-keyboardist. I wonder if we are now going to get each song individually rather than a complete performance due to some digital wizardry required. Must be time consuming.

It's a pretty common thing to release individual tracks through different websites/channels, so I don't think that aspect of it has anything to do with Bennett.

I think the main purpose of the session may have been for Spotify, and they're just separately releasing a few videos as promotion.

Please explain how it is insulting? Do you really want Brian to continue to be associated with Scott? In hindsight, it is incredible that he was allowed to participate in this session. Whose call was that?

I can only think that they did not know the facts, and that they were presuming innocence until proven guilty.  Maybe they talked to his lawyer, and the lawyer told them that the plaintiff had no case.

No, I think you're missing my point. I think it's completely understandable that Scott has no more association with Brian's band. Of course; for one, he's incarcerated, and for two, he's been convicted of something awful. I just don't like the idea of rewriting history and pretending that a band member wasn't present at a prexisting session by blurring their face. It insults the viewer's intelligence, and like it or not, it insults a person who contributed to the session, even if that person did an unrelated terrible thing.  I totally, completely get why it was done, I think it was probably unavoidable - but the manner in which it was done is just plain weird. I similarly think it's incredible that he was allowed to participate at this session, and I would tend to think that Brian felt loyal to a longtime friend who was only charged, but not at that point convicted of a crime. I agree with HeyJude that it would be less obvious, less conspicuous if he was just cut around instead of blurred out, if the idea was that they can never show Scott on tape again on a Brian Wilson product. The next logical step would be to re-record all of Scott's parts on TLOS and then re-release that album with his name removed.  It would be better comparatively speaking if that album were just not re-released at all.

I think they did whatever they could in post-production and ended up striking a balance, one could at least try to argue, by not literally scrubbing Bennett from the footage but just making it look like shots of him aren't in focus.

The "out of focus" effect isn't awful; I would venture to guess that nobody much would have noticed or cared had Bennett's story not unfolded. The didn't blur his face like an episode of "Cops" or something. I've actually never seen an artificial out of focus background before. It probably would even be a pretty believable effect, but, even though I'm no expert I photography, there are some bits where it doesn't seem realistic that only one portion of the background is out of focus but not the rest.

It probably would have worked better in a two-man shot, with just Brian up front and Bennet behind him. But one of the Bennett shots has Al in the foreground, then Brian further back, and then Bennett way in the back, and that's where the "out of focus" thing seems most obviously wonky.

Bennett is all over numerous Brian (and Beach Boys via C50) products including videos, so I would imagine that's one of the reasons they ended up striking the balance they did; not removing him but just taking him out of focus.

As for why Bennett was at the session in the first place, I would assume as I've said before that Brian and his operation didn't know much of the details of the case beyond Bennett proclaiming his innocence. As I also said awhile back, both the prosecution and Bennett's defense would likely not want to disclose any more details about the case prior to trial than they absolutely had to.

All good points. It's possible that the blurring, even though it strikes me as clunky in its execution, was an attempt to rewrite history less compared to just cutting around him completely.

I would assume that Scott was there for Sloop John B, but they had enough other shots that they could effectively edit him out. It appears the angle they had for Matt on WIBN almost exclusively had Scott in it. There is no way they would release these videos with Scott prominently featured--call it rewriting history, but I prefer to have this historical document than leaving it in the archives.

I personally feel this could have been avoided. It was obviously known what charges Scott would be on trial for, even if he had been acquitted this wouldn't have been a good look. If Brian wasn't willing to boot him, someone on his team should have taken care of this.

Apart from just editing him out (which I'm really curious why they didn't do, none of the shows including him in the background are integral; they could have just cutaway to Nelson or Gary or whomever), I think they would be damned if they do or don't. Had the not blurred him, someone at some point would have said "Can you believe they included him?"

Maybe I'm just conditioned by the supposed/alleged literal digital erasure of Joe Thomas and Steve Dahl for the "On Tour" DVD years ago, so a (semi) subtle blurring effect seems less drastic. Bennett is still there in the footage, and anybody that knows what he looks like can tell it's him. He's just out of focus.

Keep in mind again that, at least according to some Facebook posts from Al and/or Brian, this sessions was for Spotify. I think they were doing mainly an audio deal here that also just happened to be captured on video. Unless Spotify releases video of the entire thing, I would guess we'll probably just get a few video clips via Vevo, and then the full thing in audio form on Spotify. I haven't used Spotify much, so I don't know how much (if any) video content they do.

That's a dangerous road to go down, where a person is fired just for being accused and not yet convicted of a crime. Think for a moment of the broad implications of that. Can an employer even do that legally (let alone ethically)? I agree that it was a risky proposition to keep him in the band with this issue (and was certainly not a small one) looming.

I'll admit I was a little vague with my wording of "boot him", but you're telling me they couldn't suspend him with pay?

This veers into off-topic territory I suppose, but I would imagine the people in Brian's band are essentially "contractors" rather than employees, and are paid on a project-by-project (and show by show or tour by tour) basis. In most cases, nobody has to be fired, they are simply not called up again for the next project.

California is an at-will employment state anyway. I suppose if they did have an "employer-employee" relationship, and they called Bennett in and said "We're firing you because you've been charged with a crime", then that might be actionable.

But if they just didn't call him back in, or told him they were just making a musical change in the band, that's part of the at-will concept.

But again, I'm guessing the band members weren't/aren't employees, but rather are contractors. Some independent contractors have made moves to get some of the benefits and status of actual employees for companies, with mixed results I would guess.

If they had already paid him for a project he ultimately was not allowed to do, they would probably have to go ahead an pay him anyway. But I think in Bennett's case, regardless of who thought what about his case, it was known that, I believe, he was prohibited from international travel leading up to his trial while out on bail, so they knew ahead of time that he wouldn't be making the first legs of the tour anyway.

If I had been Bennett's friend, I would have thought the charges against him were bogus, unless I had witnessed similar situations myself. Friends tend to be loyal to each other. I'm sure Scott told Brian and whoever that the charges were made up, and that he would beat them (the charges, not Brian or his bandmates  :o). It's an uncomfortable thing for everyone involved, and it sucks that Scott chose to throw away his friendships and his music career the way he did. But are we going to rewrite history and pretend he never existed? I suppose they can do what they did with Landy - reissue TLOS with all credits to SB removed. I dunno, it's not my call to make. I just hope that somewhere down inside himself, Bennett recognizes what he did was wrong, and can be rehabilitated.

Has he actually been sentenced yet?

I think the articles mentioned that would happen on June 14th.

I know some people, not without some justification, are curious how much Brian and his operation knew about the Bennett case up until the point he was still playing in the band prior to the trial.

But I'd say even if you look at it from a rather cynical, PR point of view, I think it's pretty likely that they didn't know any of those sordid, awful details of the case. They probably didn't learn those details (e.g. anything other than the charges and whatever Bennett told them) until we all learned of them due to the court record and the articles posted recounting bits and pieces of the case.

If they were even inclined to blur him after the fact, it tells me that they wouldn't have kept him on had they known all of those details back X number of months ago.

Just my guess/opinion.

I guess that could have been an option. It's all very strange, but at the end of the day, I can have some admiration for Brian being a loyal friend during the time when nobody was yet convicted of a crime. Even if in hindsight at this point it might be regrettable, the innocent before proven guilty thing is an important distinction. Still, I doubt that same level loyalty would have happened for a shorter term member of the band, and I would tend to imagine it would speak to Brian and Scott likely having had a solid friendship, beyond just being bandmates, for many years.

Going off topic and remove if thought to be the case but in light of the Stanford case and the criticism of that sentence I await with interest. Some similarities in both.

From California Labor Code section 432.7:
"...nor shall any employer seek from any
source whatsoever, or utilize, as a factor in determining any
condition of employment including hiring, promotion, termination, or
any apprenticeship training program or any other training program
leading to employment, any record of arrest or detention that did not
result in conviction..."

http://law.onecle.com/california/labor/432.7.html

So, that would preclude Brian from suspending him with pay?

Yeah. Without a conviction, it's not legal for an employer to change the employee's status in any way in response to an arrest (in California).

And let's face it. That's a good protection for citizens to have, even if it's imperfect at times.

But again, let's keep in mind the guys in Brian's band are probably contracted for each project; they likely aren't employees of BriMel or whatever entity pays them. They aren't kept on retainer most likely.

Absolutely.


It's not so clear. If something went to court, the court doesn't care particularly whether the people considered themselves contractors or were paid like contractors; they care what the actual relationship was determined by an "economic realities" test, the main consideration being "whether the person to whom service is rendered (the employer or principal) has control or the right to control the worker both as to the work done and the manner and means in which it is performed,"
Other factors considered:
•1. Whether the person performing services is engaged in an occupation or business distinct from that of the principal;
•2. Whether or not the work is a part of the regular business of the principal or alleged employer;
•3. Whether the principal or the worker supplies the instrumentalities, tools, and the place for the person doing the work;
•4. The alleged employee’s investment in the equipment or materials required by his or her task or his or her employment of helpers;
•5. Whether the service rendered requires a special skill;
•6. The kind of occupation, with reference to whether, in the locality, the work is usually done under the direction of the principal or by a specialist without supervision;
•7. The alleged employee’s opportunity for profit or loss depending on his or her managerial skill;
•8. The length of time for which the services are to be performed;
•9. The degree of permanence of the working relationship;
•10. The method of payment, whether by time or by the job; and
•11. Whether or not the parties believe they are creating an employer-employee relationship may have some bearing on the question, but is not determinative since this is a question of law based on objective tests.

So, it could go either way, with some projects leaning more one way and some the other. I'd think touring would lean more toward "employee" while recording more toward "contractor" but it really would end up determined by the courts on a case-by-case basis, if it actually had come down to that.

http://www.dir.ca.gov/dlse/faq_independentcontractor.htm

But, you're quite right that since they are likely hiring by project, once one project is done, it's easy not to hire for the next.

Good points. Also worth considering is that if one's job description included a requirement for international travel and a charge and bail led to a court restriction on international travel, that might be a legitimate reason an employer would have to find a replacement.

Can anyone confirm if all or any of Brian's band are on a retainer?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_dyI36DEY9c

Just went up - WIBN at Capitol Studios

No way the the whole band is on retainer.  They are contractors.  At one point JF was on retainer, but i believe he was the only one.

Just wanted to ask again if anyone has the date for the recording/filming of this performance.

You can probably whittle it down to within a couple of days, if not the precise date, by looking back at Facebook photos posted by Al and Brian (and possibly others in the band) back in March. Looks like the weekend of March 19-20 based on the top post and photos posted on March 20 on Brian's Facebook. I don't think they ever named the precise date.

Thanks, good idea! I looked at Al's site and the earliest post also came from March 20th if I'm not mistaken.
If anyone has the precise date, I'd be very thankful if you could tell me. Thanks!