The Smiley Smile Message Board

They have added Glasgow, Scotland on May 26th 2017.  I'm a little disappointed that I am the first to post this info (I think) here and on the other board.

I heard from a friend, not a big fan, at lunchtime by which time a lot of good seats were gone.

I just happened to notice AGD's mention across the road of a local show and managed to get two pretty good seats (as I reported in the 2016 tour topic). Sorry you found out about the Glasgow gig so late...  

    

Since they are constantly just adding dates and not really doing structured "tours" at all, you've constantly got to be checking to see what has been released since they don't really get "announced". Mike should really have some kind of email list or something for people that want to know immediately though.

I managed to get good seats in Row E for Glasgow but wouldn't have if I only had these boards for info, which is a shame. Surely fan boards should be the first place to have that info?  It is for other bands.

Well, there's always "The Vibe Room".  :-D

They'll be at the Keswick Theatre in Glenside, PA (Philly suburbs) on April 1, 2017. I saw them there in December 2013 and it was a really good show - they played half of the Christmas album. I got an absolute front row seat for this one, so I'm pretty psyched. I'm hoping by the time I see them they are still doing the Pet Sounds set.

(What's the best way of trying to get them to include All I Wanna Do for my show? Post on their FB a few days beforehand?)

Interesting...wonder if they'll be coming by way of Baltimore/DC in April too...I'm not riding up to the Keswick after seeing them twice last year.

But anway...All I Wanna Do. I requested it on FB multiple times, as well as directly to Scott Totten leading up to the show. I know others did the same and it got onto the setlist, it was printed ON the paper. Yet, just as "Disney Girls" was ending (I think that was the song before it) Mike rushed up to Scott and whispered in his ear a while and Scott kinda gave all the band members a look, and they skipped right over it.

Ugh.

They'll also be back at the American Music Theatre on Thursday, March 30th...so if you like watching a bunch of stuffy old white country folk sit firmly in their seats for nearly three hours, this is the one for you!  ;D

According to recent setlists, it appears that they're finished celebrating the 50th Anniversary of Pet Sounds. 

I also requested All I Wanna Do on Mike's and The Beach Boys' Facebook pages before the Baltimore show.  I really think had the crowd reaction to All This is That not been so flat, All I Wanna Do might've been played. 

Playing the Detroit Auto Show red carpet gala "Auto Prom" event tonight. Some pictures if they go through...
Where is the sax player?

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GRDlmUsAABH2H.jpg:large (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GRDlmUsAABH2H.jpg:large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GSKmIWEAA7kUe.jpg:large (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GSKmIWEAA7kUe.jpg:large)

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GNAtFXAAANopT.jpg (https://pbs.twimg.com/media/C2GNAtFXAAANopT.jpg)

This was the charity preview night.  $400 per ticket.  Looks like they had a good showing and managed to raise 5.2 million dollars.  I'm planning to go up Sunday, but probably would have went tonight if I had more than a college budget lol.  :P

Looked at the pictures but where are the Beach Boys?? :-D

They probably did a shortened set being a one-off event, so I'm sure Mike didn't think it was justifiable to pay him to be there. Obviously the staging etc. was a "no frills" thing on their part, and since it was charity it's not surprising he would be cutting corners every chance he could. I also got the vibe that the sax player was only brought on because of the deeper cuts on their "pet sounds tour" (if you want to call it that). He seemed quite unnecessary at The Kennedy Center when I saw them, but that's because there was the entire NSO behind them.

I am wondering what will this years Tour theme be. Last year was 50 years Good Vibes and the year before Summer days and Fun, fun fun the year before that.
50 years of Smiley Smile?  :lol :lol     I wish !

Pretty sure they could market it as the "grab them by the p*ssy" tour?   ::)

But seriously, aren't they in a bit of a difficult spot? From this point on, any anniversary is not going to be something that is from an album which they particularly acknowledge as even having existed.  Even though Mike wrote most of the lyrics for Wild Honey,  I just don't see them doing anything to promote that album as having an anniversary, nor the subsequent couple of albums, because the vast majority of their audience would be scratching their heads.

55 years of Ten Little Indians!

Some upcoming shows are being billed and promoted as the "Surf & Soul Tour", a package concert with the Temptations. Subtitled "California surf meets Motor City soul". Video promos are already up and running, unless they're yet another ruse created by Noven Jaisi... :)  Not sure if "Surf & Soul" is only for the Temptations dates.

More interesting is a search of StubHub for tickets, and the band is billed as "Mike Love and Bruce Johnston's Beach Boys", with the shows in April adding "with The Temptations".

I can understand wanting to run things lean n' mean, but I'm still wondering why the sax player was not there at the Detroit gig - Has he been absent from other recent shows too or was he just off this Auto Show gig?
Edit: he was there playing 2-3 weeks ago. Maybe it was just this one gig last week.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/reliable-source/wp/2017/01/17/the-beach-boys-will-headline-the-black-tie-and-boots-inaugural-ball/?utm_term=.e73fc4c25a45

Reliable Source
The Beach Boys will headline the ‘Black Tie and Boots’ inaugural ball
By Helena Andrews-Dyer January 17 at 1:31 PM


“The Beach Boys,” that prototypical all-American boy band founded in 1961, will perform at the Texas State Society’s “Black Tie and Boots” inaugural ball on Jan. 19, according to several people close to the planning of the quadrennial bash.

#NotMyBeachBoys

#FakeShemp

#BiffTannen

f*** and it's not even a top tier right wing either.... :lol

Will Billy C go? >:D

I think they used that same title for their tour with the Temptations last year.

Noticed on a recent set list on Mike's Facebook page there was "Getcha Back 2016".  Anyone know what the significance of 2016 there is?

I know since Christian's departure that Mike has resumed the lead vocal with the exception of a David Mark appearance...perhaps it has something to do with that? Probably in a different key, as they often indicate that on setlists for songs that may alternate lead vocalists.

I saw they're doing a Sunday afternoon show at Wolf Trap in mid August.  I attended a show like that 2 summers ago, with David Marks on board. 

Unfortunately, theres so many other, not cheap, shows I want to see this year, Ill be skipping both Brian and Mike in 2017.

Same here. Brian had such an incredible night at the Strathmore...I'd like to remember that. Now, if he releases new music or decides to dust off smile again...that's a different story! As far as Mike & Bruce...they need to shake up the setlist a little more to get me back out. I'm not going to the PA shows this spring, and I certainly won't be going down to Wolf Trap.

From January 25th this year:  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLNY_D8boog (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLNY_D8boog)

I can't make out the new lyrics (maybe someone else can) but it sounds like the lyrics at the end of the first two verses are altered a bit, and the beginning of the tag is changed a bit with added lyrics too.

Interesting!

Also, the whole ending part has been removed "I leave her and you leave him, can we maybe get it back again?"

I'm wondering what the reason behind the rewrite is.

When I saw them at Wolf Trap in 2015, I was surprised how long it took me to leave the venue.  It's not that big, but we sat in that parking lot for at least an hour. 

Plus, I went to six BB related shows in 2015 & 2016 (Four Brian and two Mike), and there are a lot more bands out there this summer we want to see.

My guess is that the new "Getcha Back" may appear on Mike's eventual album. I'm expecting a good hunk of the album to be re-recordings either of previously released tracks or old outtakes. He apparently also re-made the 4/4 version of "Big Sur" as heard in one of the YouTube "trailers" for either his tour or book (which, I can only guess, is how/why the original 4/4 BB recording of that song inexplicably didn't make it onto the MIC set in 2013).

At least you got in the parking lot! I've been there twice. First time was Happy Together Tour '13 and we parked on the grass on the street...second time was for Ringo & All Starrs '14 and we parked at some school in a neighborhood blocks away. I hate everything to do with Wolf Trap beyond the actual amphitheater itself. It's got a gorgeous sound and is a pure beauty to take in...it's just a pain from Baltimore and once you get there.

Yep, I thought Jiffy Lube Live was bad.  Wolf Trap was much worse.   

I was just thinking same thing. I miss the tag at the end. That was probably my favorite part of the song. I can't make out the last verse now lyrically. ( Mike still sounds weak on this lead just as he has for years.)

Well obviously it was "too negative"  ::)

Mike & Bruce are doing two shows at the Ocean City Performing Arts Center which is an insanely small theatre that's actually inside the Convention Center in Ocean City, Maryland. If the ticket prices aren't too crazy that is quite tempting...it's Wednesday, August 23rd...a nice send-off for the summer with a trip to the beach and what better music to accompany it?  :)

Mike worked on a remake of Getcha Back in the studio, middle of 2016 with John Stamos on drums.

If you wanna hear the definative version of Getcha Back, check this out:)  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G20fSXjx2A

I saw that, and it would be cool to see them in OC.  Had I realized that you can actually watch Sunfest acts without paying attention (we stood to the side of the tent for Eddie Money last year), I'd have gone in 2013. 

But, 8/23 is when Deep Purple and Alice Cooper come to VA. 

Where'd you hear this from? That's news to me!

Also, wow. Mike doesn't seem like he's doing ANY previously unknown material on his [supposedly] forthcoming solo album. It's all remakes of previously released material. Hopefully he puts something we haven't heard before when his album comes out.

SunFest was a lot of fun...a great day. I'd love to see the Deep Purple tour but again...JiffylubeLive.  :lol

Still mildly in shock, but I got front row dead center tickets for the 7:30 show in Ocean City on 8/23!!! Super stoked! I've been 2nd row many, many times but never the front! WOO!

Wow, that's pretty cool.  Enjoy the show.  Funny how the dates synch up. 

8/23/15 - M&B appear at Wolf Trap in VA

8/23/16 - BW appears at the Hippodrome in Baltimore

8/23/17 - M&B appear at the Ocean City, MD Convention Center

Thanks! I hadn't realized they were in Wolf Trap on that date- caught the BW immediately!haha

Yep.  I remember when Brian announced his Baltimore PS date, I said, "a year to the day after seeing Mike and Bruce, with David Marks." 

So, that means Brian will be playing the MD/Baltimore/DC area supporting his new album on 8/23/18

I'd like to think that the fact that he has released solo albums every year ending in "8" since 1988  supports your theory :)

I didn't even think of that.  Good catch.

NICE!  :lol

Gonna catch them in June in Berlin. What the hell, it's literally around the corner.  :smokin The only thing I'm wishing for is Scott Totten crooning "Ole Betsy"..

I'd say you've got a good chance of that! What you really want to hear, is Scott singing "I'm Waiting For The Day"...his delivery was absolutely sublime with the NSO last summer.

Scott really knocked it out of the park singing it on the C50 tour. I actually MUCH preferred it to the original.

Good gawd!!!  I hope they wear more than just that!!!  The Rock and Horror...no pictures [PLEASE] show. ;) 

I wish I were in town during that show.   I doubt that Mike and Bruce will be featuring the PS album tracks this year.  Maybe if they're still touring in 2026

The symphony really made it. Don't get me wrong, Brian & Al's PS show takes the cake, but it was really nice to see Mike & Bruce tackling those deeper cuts and doing them justice too.

Yeah, I heard really good things about their PS shows.   I'd have gone to the DC show, but the timing didn't work out. 

:lol

Mike and Bruce should have played When Girls Get Together for International Women's Day.  ::)

BURN! :lol

They probably played a new version of "everyone's in love with you" for Trump ::)

I'm surprised they don't tackle "Everyone's in Love With You"...that would fit in their show pretty well actually and give them a chance to play something post-Pet Sounds that's actually semi-decent.

Mike's band did occasionally do the song on the 2004 and 2008 tours, most likely spurred by Mike's 2000s re-recording that has never been officially released.

I'm actually surprised they don't do California Saga: California.  I think Mike's band would do a great job with it. 

I think that was probably literally the *one* song Al actually got to pick on C50, and I never got the impression Mike was super into the song. He certainly put enough gusto into singing it on those dates in 2012 (I saw the first C50 performance of the song in Berkeley; Mike clearly didn't remember the song and was using a lyric sheet), but I tend to doubt Mike would add a song to his setlist written solely by Al Jardine.

I suppose so, plus that would give them three "California" songs in the set (with Girls and Dreamin).  Who do they think they are, the Red Hot Chili Peppers?

One of the cool things about C50 was being able to see various BBs singing on stuff they *never* would do in their own solo shows. Mike singing on "Marcella" or "Our Prayer" or "California Saga", Brian singing on "California Dreamin'" or "All This Is That", Al singing on "It's OK" or "Don't Back Down", etc.

Very interesting! I never noticed that. I'd like to see it replace...oh I dunno, perhaps Pisces Brothers?  :lol

That was very cool.  Unfortunately, they didn't do Marcella or California Dreamin at the show I attended.  But, it was really cool hearing Brian do Kiss Me Baby and Please Let Me Wonder, and it the only time I got to hear Brian and Mike together on sounds like GV and SJB.   

Yes it was the hightlight of the tour, they didn't just go full greatest hits and really treated their fanbases with gifts, just hearing them all together on Add Some Music.. what a treat

Off all the great moments on C50, how in the world could they have left Add Some Music, with Mike, Al, David, and Bruce at Brian's piano, off the C50 DVD???   If we're gonna get a half a$$ed release with just over 20 songs, at least include that one. 

There's tons of stuff from C50 that could and should be released. Multiple additional shows were professionally captured on video, including Red Rocks and Hollywood Bowl.

I would tend to doubt anybody wants to get near the political minefield of more C50 product right now, but Mike is the one would have the most reason to eschew more C50 product, as it pretty directly contradicts his current "Beach Boys" show. I'm not suggesting Mike has blocked any releases, because I don't know of any stories of anybody else trying to release anything else from the tour.

I do recall buzz/rumors back in the early 2000s that Mike didn't like, for instance, Al going out to promote archival BB products, because he was attaching his name to "The Beach Boys" during a time where Mike both logistically and legally probably wanted Al's name as far away from the BB trademark as possible.

Yeah well, let's not pretend anyone else but him would be so nazi on the marketing... dude brings out Summer In Paradise on his current "Beach Boys" tour, that was a hit right?........

It's all about him and his business.


Tell me about it brother! but you know what at the end of the day, i'm still amazed even to this day that we got a live reunion dvd that has All This Is That and Marcella on it! of all things, on a 21 setlist cut for it, how wild! who would have ever thought of that prior to 2012, you know??? and that is, with David Marks along on stage.

Some fan bonus wouldn't have hurted anyone, why not include Summer's Gone? altho they did play it over the credits heh, nice little nodd, and maybe a real closer to it all here, more than the song itself closing the album

This is why I hold out hope that, when there is no longer a touring version of The Beach Boys, we someday get a good C50 live release. 

Wonder why Blondie was so left out of the tour but now is with Brian all the time, hehe.....

At least Brian included Summer's Gone as a bonus track on the Brian and Friends release.  So, we do have a legit live version (though I wish it appeared on the CD companion too).  

I'd have to check, but Blondie may have been touring with the Stones. 

Oh wait, really? i had no idea he was still hangin' out with them
my bad then

I guess he would have joined afterwards anyway, if only some egos would keep it low, we were pretty close to getting a kickass followup rock'n'roll album with Blondie on it, it seems like we're pushing our chances but Brian sure was on it! oh well, i guess all of this drama helped to birth the amazing Love & Mercy (imagine if Mike was involved)


How in the world have i missed that !!!!! i havn't heard a word about that bonus track :o and i was -just- looking back on that Brian and Friends release, thinking how crazy, following up the surprise of the C50 how he went on to do Hold On Dear Brother live and commercialize it, once agian, who would have ever thought this would happen these days, crazy

I suspect after all these guys are dead and gone, all of the footage, memorabilia, archival interviews and well, THE DIRT will come out on the crazy time known as "C50" in some over the top boxset documenting the last time they decided to "do it again"...get your BestBuy Exclusive now with authentic TWGMTR sun-block pack for just $195.99

I wouldn't hold your breath on there not being a touring version of the Beach Boys. When Mike ends his run whether due to death or retirement, I would imagine Foskett is *already* chomping at the bit to take that license over.

Oh my, what a terrifying vision of a choatic nightmare you just brought to me! ruined my day :'(  :lol

If Best Buy is still selling CD/DVDs by the time they're all gone.  

I really thought we'd see a package like that.  Best Buy did similar packages for The Stones, and the reunion for The Police.  But, the Stones kept going, and The Police went their separate ways.  

I think we'll either see a massive C50 live release or some C50 stuff will be including in a larger live anthology.  

But, of course, before that, we'll see at least three more Pet Sounds reissues, about 17 new best of compilations, and maybe even another career spanning boxset.  

I highly doubt that we'll see a version of The Beach Boys minus any Beach Boys.   Maybe Jeff, Scott, Coswill, etc touring that music as a tribute act, but I think once Mike is done, the b(r)and is done.

I would hope that's true, but if I had to bet on it, I'd say it's very likely the various estates will continue to license the name out. It's free money, and the trademark and sort of "rep" of the touring band has already been hugely devalued, so it's not a huge leap to move to licensing the name out the same way various Motown bands do, etc.

I actually would tend to think Mike Love will plan something with their "California Saga" family band

Considering the CalSaga band hasn't done *anything* publicly for nearly five years now, I'm not counting on that. They apparently did some studio stuff after the C50 tour was over, but it all sounded very preliminary and without a specific goal.

The only way I could see that happening is if Brian and Alan leave this earth before Mike does, and Mike can no longer perform...but obviously wants the dough...I'm talkin' like he's 100 years old propped up a chair kinda scenario...

I don't see people paying $50-$60 a pop for a show with no members of the band though.  They'd either have to lower the ticket prices or resort to doing fairs, festivals, package tours, etc.

I dunno, nobody much seemed to care outside of hardcore fans when the band lost two of its three core members in 1998. I think some modifications would have to be made, and promoters would see to that on the money side of things. But I think it could happen unfortunately, especially if they hooked promotion into trying to finagle billing Foskett as a "long time member" of the Beach Boys or some such thing.

Yeah, if Mike passed or retired while Brian and Al were still alive, I don't think you'd see Foskett or somebody like that get the license.

The theory here is that once all of the members are gone or retired, then I could see the various estates (especially Mike's and Carl's) going along with giving the license to someone.

If Mike was gone and Brian and Al still around, I don't know if they'd try to take up the "Beach Boys" name themselves. But I think the window of time where it's plausible that Mike would be deceased or retired but while Brian and Al still wanted to intensively tour is a pretty narrow window.

With better BRI management in place, perhaps they'd be able to actually PLAN out some sort of endgame for the band, and what happens after they're all gone and/or don't want to tour anymore.

I don't know, that's probably on them, and Mike Love is too busy to be him you know, rehearsing Summer Of Paradise, rewritting Getcha Back, rerecording with John Stamos, doing his book and of course his endless tour with girlfriend Bruce, consumes lot of time and takes a lot of work to keep the ego legacy going on you know?

I'm pretty sure when things gets close to the end, he'll look over his California Saga band for his business tho

Back on track, I see that Here Today, I'm Waiting for the Day, Caroline No, and You Still Believe in Me are still in Mike and Bruce's setlist as of March 4th.  If they stay in the setlist this summer, I might try to see them if a Baltimore date gets added. 

What are there current setlists? setlist.fm hasn't anything updated for their recent shows

This is the most recent, from this past Saturday

Set 1:
Do It Again

Surfin' Safari

Catch a Wave

Surfin' U.S.A.

Surfer Girl

Why Do Fools Fall in Love

When I Grow Up (to Be a Man)

Darlin'

Do You Wanna Dance?

Kiss Me, Baby

Then I Kissed Her

California Girls

Cotton Fields

Ballad of Ole' Betsy

Don't Worry Baby

Little Deuce Coupe

I Get Around

Set 2:
California Dreamin'

Here Today

You Still Believe in Me

God Only Knows
(with Carl on video)

I'm Waiting for the Day

Caroline, No

Sloop John B

Wouldn't It Be Nice

Their Hearts Were Full of Spring

The Warmth of the Sun

Disney Girls

Pisces Brothers

Summer in Paradise

Help Me, Rhonda

Kokomo

Good Vibrations

Encore:
Barbara Ann

Fun, Fun, Fun

Hahahahahah Pisces + SIP is still a thing it wasn't a one day joke? amazing.

Thanks ;)

I actually like the live versions I've heard of SIP. 

Pisces Brother, on the other hand.  A part of me was really hoping to like it.  Daybreak Over the Ocean gets a lot of hate, but I like that song, so I thought it might be a similar situation, but not at all. 

No Canadian dates  :(

There's a gap in September and October, so they could be added.

Fingers crossed!

"Summer in Paradise" wasn't too bad when it first entered the setlist; it was something new. But it became sort of grating before too long. The environmental message just made Mike and Bruce appear hypocritical due to their own political leanings, Bruce always sounds kinda weak on the bridge, and while the guys in the current band no doubt have plenty of gusto working under Mike, Al in particular as well as Carl always looked bored to tears doing SIP material in concert.

Like Mike says in his book, it's possible to care about the environment and be conservative at the same time. 

It seems like the last couple years, Mike and Bruce have been dusting off deeper tracks of albums that were turning 50.  They did Good to My Baby and I'm So Young in 2015 into 2016.  And now, they're still doing the PS deep tracks. 

I wonder if any Wild Honey tracks will be added this year.  I highly doubt we'd see any Smiley Smile or Friends (2018) tracks added. 

The disparity between Mike and Bruce's stated environmental stances and their politics is a legit issue worth taking them to task on, but I long ago was resigned to that never happening, so it's not a big deal. The Rolling Stone writer last year was the first person to actually ask Mike about a few of these types of discrepancies (such as seething with anger while espousing TM), but it's so rarely going to be asked and even more rarely answered.

The apparent hypocritical nature of the disparity isn't my main issue with a song like "SIP", it's more that they're bringing zero credibility to the issue based on their own voluntary comments regarding their politics. It's not an outlandish argument to make that their political alignment was and is with a party that works against the environmental causes they claim to be concerned about. If they want to just give a shoulder shrug when this is pointed out, that's their business. But then they're not going to be taken seriously when singing "Summer in Paradise" unless we just ignore the words altogether.

If I was a journalist and Bruce (or Mike) brought up the Surfrider Foundation one more friggin' time, I'd take him to task.

Doesn't Bruce sound super flat and tired lately? from what i've seen here and there anyway

Dude poses with Trump and then brings back SIP live, pretty sure you can't get anymore hypocrite than that.

The thing with Bruce I've often wondered is whether he never gets his voice into full "touring shape" in terms of leads because he never does very many. If he rehearsed and sang, say, five songs every night, it *might* actually improve his voice. Or not, who knows.

Depends on the show.  I've heard Bruce sound sort of strained, and I've heard him sound great. 

He needs to retire, gone from a BW falsetto replacement to a stage prop for Mike Love. ::)

 :lol But who's gonna adjust mike stands, clap hands and wear those stupid white shorts when myKe cuts him loose? Fatboy Jeff, huh?

He was exceptional on the C50 show I saw. Disney Girls was spine-chillingly good. However, I've heard other shows from that tour where he didn't sound good at all, ESPECIALLY on Wendy, which was horrible in the clips I have heard.

Bruce has always been in great voice when I've heard him live, but I have heard some clips that were less than satisfactory.

Additionally, that setlist is from a symphonic show and is nearly identical to the setlist with the NSO last summer.

Well guess what?  They just played "California" tonight in Monterey.   Have you ever been south of Monterey?

Am I the only person that finds it really suspicious that JUST that song appeared on setlist.fm the very same day we all were discussing its presence in the setlist?

They are leaving Carl's tribute, but not Dennis'?

They "honor" Dennis with DYWD...it's super weird. I'm not a fan.

How weird

Sometimes Mike will acknowledge it, sometimes he won't and they'll just launch into it with Dennis' vocal and the band awkwardly bobbing along. I've never heard him mention Dennis' death...he just says something like "and here's one from the vaults with Denny Wilson!"

As if anyone attending the show must automatically know the context behind it and the performance, that's just such a lack of professionalism

DYWD with Dennis' vocals was still in the setlist as per yesterday night's show in Napa, CA.
The fact that they don't mention his death is gotta be related to the fact that DYWD is an upbeat song and it shouldn't be setup by talking about death.
I think that's just fine.

Maybe, or maybe it's just because they played in Monterey and the song mentions Monterey.

Why did they stop using "Forever" as the tribute to Dennis? I wondered if it had something to do with John Stamos' performance of the song on Full House and that being the image Mike would rather attach to Denny's most well-known (and beloved for many) song.

Maybe.  It could also be that there are already plenty of slow songs in the setlist and Forever would only work for indoor shows anyway.
DYWD fits on every type of show and so there can be a Dennis' tribute every night.

It just seems very suspicious that the first time The Beach Boys play it live without Al Jardine is the very same day that we are discussing it on this board, especially since Monterey isn't exactly an unusual tour stop for them. They hit the very same theatre last year with seemingly no evidence of it's appearance.

It's our chance to request rare odd songs then.
I vote for Rendezvous.

HA! I see Let Him Run Wild & Little Girl I Once Knew both appeared on the second night, but no Cal Saga. Perhaps they're just testing things out on this theatre shows early in the year. I've never heard either of the first two I mentioned live...would love for them to stick around. Not sure how I feel about Cal Saga without Mr. Jardine...

LHRW was probably the highlight of the show. I'm Waiting For The Day and THWFOS too.

I saw them do Let Him Run Wild at Wolf Trap two summers ago, and it was a great version.  I've never heard either band do LGIOK. 

"California Saga" is there surely due to the Monterey connection. Did someone from the band read discussions here? Who knows? Is it kinda weird for Mike to do an Al song? Yeah, a little bit. But he does a bunch of Brian songs he (Mike) didn't have a hand in either, so I guess it's just more of that.

I believe this *may* be the first time in the 19 years since Al was s**tcanned from the band in 1998 that Mike has performed one of Al's songs without Al. By "Al's songs", I mean one mainly identified with him that *he* wrote, and not as a collaboration with other BBs. I know Mike has done "All This Is That" on and off for a number of years, but that one was of course a Carl-Al-Mike co-write. They've also always done "Al-centric" songs that Al didn't write, like "Rhonda", "Come Go With Me", etc.

Now, my guess is that we'll probably *not* see "California Saga" become a regular in Mike's setlist. His performances of the song in 2012, while professional, didn't seem to ooze enthusiasm.

I suspect it was a one off thing, perhaps prompted by this board...but probably not. When I saw C50 Mike was thoroughly unenthused with anything Al was doing and the two did not miss a chance to jab the other, albeit seemingly on playful terms at the time. Mike did that thing where he basically apologizes for a song when introducing Alan for Cotton Fields & California Saga.

No love lost between those TM "buddies" :-\

Is the Spandau Citadel an interesting venue?  I can't tell if it carries all the historical significance of Spandau, or if it is actually just a wide open field.  I would like to try and catch a show there sometime.  (I decided I would only see M&B if it cost me less than 10 Euros, and that ain't happening anytime soon on this side of the world)

Here'a a comparison of the setlists for the 5:30 PM and 8:30 PM Beach Boys shows at Humphreys, San Diego, on Sept. 23. After the second show I was intrigued by the answer I got when I asked one of the roadies if they had any setlists available. As he grabbed a couple out of the trash and handed them to me he smiled and said, "What's a treasure to some of you guys is just everyday trash to us."

(http://i66.tinypic.com/2n66ixl.jpg)

(http://i67.tinypic.com/21epes.jpg)

SUMMERTIME BLUES, AND WHAT IS DOING WILD HONEY OUTSIDE OF THE ENCORE?

Ok, so I can understand Mike playing Cal Saga (it's a fun song that was a modest hit with a Mike lead)... Even with his Al beef, I can see why Mike would play this.

It's just so strange to see him play Lady Lynda. It sounded great!... But it's just odd to me.

I'm fine with him playing it, I'm actually happy because I love that song and the band played it well. I'm in favor of Mike's band playing any BBs songs, no matter who wrote them. A good song is a good song. And Mike's band does these songs justice, especially with the current line up.

Make no mistake, most of the people who would be bothered by Mike doing Brian-centric or Al-centric songs are folks who aren't likely to attend Mike's shows.

Although, I do think, especially in the UK, some devoted/hardcore fans do go to Mike's shows, and all I can say is that I'm not alone in finding Foskett singing "Surf's Up" next to Mike three years after Mike ditched the reunion as being kind of icky and lamentable.

I have to side with Nate here, as long as they're doing the song justice, I'm fine with it. 

If they did some sort of DIA17 type arrangement with a Brian, Al, Dennis, or Carl song in concert, then, that would be an issue. 

But "Do It Again" *is* as much a Brian song as it is a Mike song.

If the idea is that "if it's a good song, then nothing else matters" then I can't see why *any* given song *selection* (not performance, but the selection; that is, the *decision* to do the song) would ever be an issue.

Hey, Eichenburger does a really good version of "Wheel in the Sky", let's do that one too!

As I've already mentioned, my issue with Mike doing "Surf's Up" and similar things isn't the quality of the performance. I've never been a big fan of Foskett as a lead singer, but I'm sure he did and would sing the song just fine.

Is Wheel in the Sky a Beach Boys song?  No.  Surf's Up is.  So, not really an apt analogy. 

I was referring to the more broad "a good song is a good song" position I've seen espoused from time to time. That's a different position than, I guess essentially "hey, it was technically released under the name "The Beach Boys", so it's fair game."

And the latter position doesn't account for Mike doing solo stuff, or "Celebration" stuff, and so on. What about Bruce singing "Summer Means Fun" or "Hey Little Cobra." Those aren't BB songs. What about "Duke of Earl?"

The point in all of this isn't some technical exercise in reading the byline on the record label. Brian and Blondie doing "Feel Flows" is fine, because Brian never gave Carl s**t for writing it, never blocked Carl from doing the song live, and everybody involved has *unequivocal* respect for Carl and his music. Mike doing "Surf's Up" is different. It's a song he has not actively supported or touted, a song from a project he had an adversarial relationship with (and no, I'm not a "Mike killed Smile" theorist), co-written by a songwriter he INFAMOUSLY confronted regarding his lyrical ability, a song he allegedly didn't want to perform alongside Brian on C50, and a song he was performing *after* ditching Brian, and *after* signing up Brian's right-hand man for his own band.

If you can't see the weird political/contextual issues with Mike Love and Jeff Foskett side-by-side singing "Surf's Up" as "The Beach Boys", then indeed I can't spell it out any more. I would think even someone who *loved* their performance and had no personal problem with it would be able to objectively recognize those aspects.

It's a bit like fans who seemed incredulous about Jeff joining Mike after leaving Brian's band. As if it's just a random personnel move when it fact it was one of the most political moves regarding the band and its members *in decades.*

Oh yeah, no doubt. Politically, this is a mess.

But for the sake of keeping the music alive, and sounding good, I'm for m&b playing any BBs material they choose.

I think you can also argue that it makes both bands better. 

Right.  Right now, I just don't see the point in fretting about the politics of the group.  Granted, it sucks.  But, at this point, it is what it is. 

I wasn't even speaking to what Foskett does or doesn't bring to a live band.

I was speaking to the objective observation of what the move means, and how there are some fans that refuse to acknowledge the painfully obvious, that Mike's choice to bring someone into his band was, in part, a big giant "F**k You" to Melinda (and Brian).

It is what it is indeed......

That's fine.  Like I said, I just don't see it that way.  And I doubt anyone in either band sees it that way. 

At the end of the day, Mike's band is better for Jeff's inclusion, and it opened an opportunity for Matt in Brian's band. 

And that chasm has always been there; fans that are 100% sunshine, tea time at Buttercup Junction about anything any of the members ever do, versus more analytical fans and people interested in studying and documenting the history of the band rather than just passively sitting back for whatever they do.  

But if you're interested in delving into discussions about inter-band politics, internecine issues regarding the band, etc,, then a "whatever, it sucks, but I can't do anything about it" attitude sometimes cuts off the ability analyze the band in that way.

Objectively, a biography of the band would, if it chose to point out Jeff and Mike performing "Surf's Up" in the aftermath of Mike dumping Brian, wouldn't simply celebrate how awesome it is to hear a great song. It wouldn't be appropriate for a biography to say "In an a-hole move, they performed....", but it would be silly to *not* point out the irony of it and what such a move tells us about how these guys think and operate.

Similarly, to simply say "Jeff chose to move on and then joined Mike's band and everything is awesome" would be to avoid the elephant of an issue that is the biggest political maneuvering in eons within the band's ranks.

All of this is not to say we should always dwell on such things. But as student of the band's history, I don't tend to come away from big politics-laden events in the band's history with nothing more than "it is what it is."

And the latter is verifiably wrong. How many band members have you asked about Jeff's movement from Brian to Mike's band?

They most certainly *are* aware of the political ramifications.

I would argue even if one had never heard one peep from the band members regarding the issue, it would still go far beyond straining credulity to suggest the band members aren't aware of what Jeff's move *means.* But members have discussed it, and while they may not all have precisely the same feelings about it or all give it the same precise amount of weight as an issue, they most certainly *are* well aware that Jeff leaving Brian's band and joining Mike's band is a HUGE deal in terms of BB/band/corporate politics.

Of course they're all pros and they're not going to give an interview to a local radio station and air their personal take on BB politics. The few times guys like Darian give interviews, they stay pretty diplomatic.

But behind the scenes, they all know the deal. They know Jeff jumping ship was/is more than just a standard personnel maneuver, both because of the circumstances *and* because of who the person is.

Before you dismiss my opinion as wrong, how many band members have you talked to?

And, since that chasm you speak of has been discussed time and time again, why bother bringing it up, and clogging up a thread that's dedicated to specifically discussing Beach Boys concerts in 2017? 

You're not wrong, HeyJude.

But I think it's important to remember that it isn't better to be a student of the band, or a journalist digging into the band, or an amateur psychologist of the band, or a tabloid dramatist of the band, than it is to be a fan whose only interest is listening to music. They're different activities, different roles, unrelated to one another. Historians might hate the music; listeners might hate the details of the history. It's when people start belittling the other approaches that I think things get out of hand. The more academic approach may well lead to virtually incontrovertible evidence that somebody involved is an asshole, a criminal, even (for a fictional example). But that doesn't require the purely music fan to care in the slightest if all he wants to do is put sound into his ears.

Multiple, and I've talked to journalists who have talked with a number of them as well.

As I said, I'm not even getting into the precise individual feelings/opinions on the issue. I'm simply saying that it ain't rocket science to acknowledge that these guys all *are simply aware* that Jeff's move was a huge, political maneuver *by it's very nature.*

To not acknowledge this would be like witnessing a wife leaving her husband for her husband's best friend and then claiming there's nothing potentially acrimonious or messy about it.

Fair enough. 

That's all good. No disagreement. Im not saying any fan is better than any other.

But I think there is occasionally a bit of dissonance in discussions only because, for instance, a fan that is more of the "it's all about the music for me, not the drama" type then *does* also engage in discussions regarding what amount to non-musical, politics-related band issues/events. There are obviously no rules as to what we discuss or don't discuss. But I've been discussing BB stuff for around 22 years on the internet, and I've often seen discussions of what sometimes amount to pretty dark stuff about band politics and whatnot develop up to a point, and then some fans arbitrarily assert "it's just about the music" when it reaches the point where we have to maybe say this member or that member was a d**k about something or other.

To their credit, there *are" some fans who ignore all of the personal/political stuff and give everybody and everything related to the band ten thumbs up, and also stay *consistent* about that. And I do appreciate that. It doesn't make for much interesting discussion in my personal opinion, but I appreciate and respect the optimism and consistency.

I agree.  And it's not that I don't really care about the politics / history all that.  And I think that has its place, but this thread is specially about reviews of Mike & Bruce concerts.  

Any thread has the potential to get bogged down in this or that, and take some left turns. But in discussing things like Mike's band performing "Surf's Up", or Foskett joining; those are on-topic enough in my opinion. The thread is simply titled "Mike and Bruce Beach Boys 2017 Tour", and the recent discussion developed from discussing a guy who is in Mike's band, and discussing how he arrived in Mike's band and the potential implications/ramifications of same.

That's fine.  And I'm fine with agreeing to disagree. 

I don't even know that it would be optimism. More just area of interest.

I don't count myself in that camp, anyway. I am interested in the goings-on. I just tend to be more detached about it. Keeps the blood pressure in a healthy range.  ;D

That's kinda where I am right now.   Three years ago, I never would've paid money to see the M&B version of The Beach Boys. 

Hey guys, who cares that The Beatles broke up! We had four different solo artists to listen to instead of the whole group!!

Right?!?

I think they should have been forced to stay together despite not getting along. That makes more sense.

Right?!?!

I've not seen one member of either Brian's or Mike's band make a public statement about Jeff's departure--outside of Jeff himself. Actually, I would consider it quite unprofessional/disloyal for another member to comment on it privately or publicly. Honestly, it's between Brian and Jeff.

Too be clear, I'm not saying it wasn't political. But based on the minimal information provided publicly, it basically comes down to "trust me, I've talked to people in the know and they say it was a big f*** you to Brian." If I'm missed the sourcing, please send me in the right direction.

Not quite. More something like "Everybody in the know and everybody not in the know would agree that Jeff's move *has the appearance of* and *is unavoidably by its very nature* a giant f**k you to Melinda and thus Brian."

I'm not arguing what the actual motives in the moves were, nor am I even arguing how any members of the organizations actually feel about it. Rather, I'm simply pointing out that the (admittedly not huge) selection of people who in the past have seemed to claim there is nothing either in practice or implicit in Jeff's move that is the slightly bit political, are ignoring the painfully obvious (or for some other reason are refusing the admit the obvious).

Trying to guess (or analyze based on actual comments from people "in the know") about whether any element of Jeff's move actually *was* motivated by trying to inflict a political/personal wound "on the other camp" is a whole other ball of wax. I personally think there's no way at least part of the motivation on Mike and/or Jeff's part *wasn't* to offer a big F-you to Melinda. But that element of it isn't what I was getting at in my previous posts.

All good points.

And for anyone who somehow doesn't want to admit the Jeff bandmate switch was some kind of F-you thing... does anyone - even those people who somehow think that - honestly think that Mike doesn't truly desire to give an F-you to Melinda? It should be quite obvious from his interviews that he is chomping at the bit to make that clear.

Mike clearly doesn't like her (to put it mildly), but cannot outright publicly say the specifics of his feelings about her, because even Mike, who lacks self-awareness big-time, knows that you can't specifically go trash-talking a relative's spouse by name and specifically say directly bad things about them in public... And OF COURSE, the resulting passive aggressive behavior will leak out, and political maneuvers will manifest as a result of that pissed-offness.  So it becomes a slightly indirect thing, where Mike calls out "others" as opposed to stating those people by name, and then things like Jeff getting a gig in Mike's band.

I'm also not gonna pretend that adding more original BBs members to Brian's tours wasn't at least partially motivated by simliar F-you (towards Mike) instincts on Melinda's part. As HeyJude stated above, at minimum, we have people doing things which give particular appearances. These people KNOW what the appearance is, and aren't just going to do these things while everything is magically hunky-dory. No fan of this band is possibly dense enough to not realize this, amiright?

Again, there are surely other factors at play. Getting more original BB members in Brian's band also helped beef up the legitimacy in many peoples' eyes, especially after having been spoiled with C50. Mike did the next best thing he could do, other than getting another original member in his band... get the longest-term almost-member who's the closest thing to an original member without being one... and getting someone who is politically neutered and cannot throw their weight around or rock Mike's precious boat of having total control over the brand name. Plus, of course, Jeff brings legit talent and tons of experience.   Makes perfect sense. The F-You thing to Melinda is at minimum an added bonus in the equation. 

Mike cannot be controlled since he “is” the BBs.... ::)

If I'm remembering correctly, Jeff joined Mike & Bruce in May of 2014. This was seven months in to Brian not touring at all. In the year after Jeff joined Mike & Bruce (May 2014-May 2015), I think Brian played less than 20 shows. In fairness, Brian was working on No Pier Pressure during this time, but this wasn't exactly a period of steady work.

I don't begrudge anyone looking for steady work. Why don't people claim Darian has abandoned Brian? Again, the dude was looking for steady work with Disney and the Zombies--no hard feelings, even though the band is better with Darian IMO.

Darian is still a member of Brian's band, though.

I guess, but Brian has not been his main priority in the past 18 months. If the Zombies and Brian Wilson are playing the same night, where is Darian's loyalty? Again, not begrudging him, but all of these guys need to make a living.

Priority and contractual obligations might be two different things. I have no idea but it’s entirely possible that doing Zombies shows when they overlap is because of business obligations, not loyalty.

Your scenario would only make sense if The Zombies and Disney repeatedly made public statements sh*t-talking about Brian's wife. Over and over again.

Nope, that didn't happen.

Jeff's current employer, on the other hand...

That's why people aren't questioning Darian for doing some outside work. Your argument doesn't really hold water.

Yeah Jeff’s intent was clear since BW has been touring steadily since 2015...

Look, I appreciate the (mostly) respectful debate on this topic.

My belief (and I welcome opposing views) is that Jeff would have been less likely to leave if Brian had been in the midst of a two year non-stop touring streak like he is currently on. The fact are that in the seven months prior to Jeff joining Mike & Bruce and for the following year after the move, Brian wasn't playing very many shows.

The decision wasn't made in a vacuum and I personally appreciate Jeff's contributions to Brian's career (again, you can feel free to disagree).

Definitely… If Jeff had left in the middle of Brian's tour, that would've been much worse, and indicative of some really bad blood going on. Perhaps Jeff was just ready to move on, and I can understand that he was perhaps in a position that could've been emotionally draining for many years.  He wasn't just a musician, but he had lots of other duties.

But none of that negates the fact that he moved on to work for a person who had been smack talking his previous employer's wife in the media repeatedly. And who continues to do so. You can't make that not the case. It's the truth.  Either that doesn't bother him, or perhaps he shares those same gripes.  Either way, there's no way that this type of the defection doesn't send some sort of message, even indirectly. No way. He knows it. Mike knows it. Melinda knows it. Everyone knows it.

Based on what I've heard and what I've observed, I don't think Brian's light touring schedule in 2014 was a major factor in Jeff no longer being in Brian's band. Did it play any role at all? It's not impossible. Certainly, if a number of *other* factors are at play (and are the primary motivators behind the change), then *also* not having much work to look forward to in 2014 would make it easier for that employee separation to take place.

Strangely, if you go back and read Foskett's one interview on the subject from 2014, he doesn't describe *lack of work* as a reason at all. Rather, he cites feeling overworked and stressed out.

If you don't have access to the contracts involved in either situation (or other agreements however they were made), then it's impossible for you to say where his loyalties are. The evidence strongly suggests he's still Brian's guy, and is one of the only people in the orb of any BB-related touring act who has straddled multiple tour gigs *and* other outside job commitments.

If anything, the fact that Darian has been one of the only members ever in Brian's band to keep *other* commitments yet not be permanently replaced shows how much both Darian and Brian appreciate each other on a personal and musical/business level.

2014 wasn't the first "light" touring year for Brian. It has always been a sporadic gig; outside of 2016 and 2017, Brian has never done a Mike-level all-year touring schedule (and even Brian's '16/'17 schedule is lighter than Mike's). I think Darian has done in the last few years what a variety of the guys have done since joining Brian's band. They do other outside gigs (musical and otherwise) and do their best to schedule around Brian tours. I'm guessing Darian simply had more work scheduled *farther* in advance as of 2015/2016 than the other members typically do. So, whereas say Probyn has been able to forego "California Surf Inc." gigs for the Brian tour (ironically his replacement in *that* band being former guys from Mike's touring band!), Darian has had some commitments that can't be broken.   

I'd actually say that Mike's "smack talk" on Brian *increased* after Jeff joined Mike's band. Mike's super negative talk in that regard saw a pretty big uptick in later 2014 and then 2015 especially.

My personal hunch based on my gut feeling is that those two things may not wholly unrelated. To be clear, it's just my gut/hunch, nothing more. I do believe Jeff is pretty big player in the whole orb/organization now, at least on Mike's side. I also have had a hunch for awhile that Foskett could be angling to take over the BB license when Mike is no longer able to tour.

And also perhaps related (or maybe not), I have a hunch that as much as Jeff mentioned that he's still friends with Brian, they haven't spoken or seen each other since late 2013.

It had been a while since I had read the Foskett post-Brian Wilson interview. It can be found here: http://www.desertsun.com/story/life/entertainment/music/2014/09/22/beach-boys-brian-wilson-jeffrey-foskett/16070181/

If you believe Jeff's timeline, he had left Brian's band before fielding offers from Mike. Again, you can either believe his version, the only person who has gone on the record, or you can believe the chatter.

The other thing that struck me was how Brian describes Jeff's role: "The right-hand man, helps you with the medication, watches you and makes sure (things get done)."

So, if you are to believe Brian, Jeff wasn't replaced as much by Matt Jardine, but Jerry Weiss.

It really does seem like Jeff's professional relationship with Brian had run its course. I personally would extend some grace to a man who had a very difficult job and helped Brian get back on the road.

Again, just my .02

Characterizing Jeff's role with Brian (and the "meaning" of it, the import of it, etc.) is not easy. He no doubt had a difficult job. He was both Matt Jardine and Brian's off-stage right-hand man in some cases (read some of Ray Lawlor's old posts for more background on this).

At the same time, he *sought out* that role. He wanted to be the guy you had to go through to get to Brian. He wanted to be the guy next to Brian. Just like now, he is almost in the "Bruce" role now with Mike. Check Facebook out, there are more off-stage, off-site photos of Mike and Jeff doing BB-related appearances than there are of Mike and Bruce.

I also think (based both on common sense as well as other info/sources) that there's more to the story than Jeff being too stressed out on the 2013 tour. It wasn't a long tour, and recording sessions weren't too torturous around that time.

I do think his "I want to look at castles and walk the streets of cities on tour" sort of thing makes total sense. In Mike's band, it surely is a cushier job, with more steady work.

But as I've often said about that 2014 Foskett interview, I think that while he is under *no obligation* to tell the "full story" or even *any* of the story, I'm also not comfortable characterizing that one interview as the "full story." It certainly, and understandably so, ignores the inter-group political ramifications of his move.

I also think as Howie Edelson pointed out way back then, it's a bummer *for* Jeff that he won't be with Brian as Brian rounds out his career. For all those years Jeff spent with Brian, he *should* be there for the final victory laps, but he won't.

I think this is a perfectly fair thing to say, and I agree.

I also say that jumping to an employer who publicly smack-talks his former employer's wife is an unfortunately icky thing. At best, it's an unfortunate fact that he's now with someone who repeatedly publicly does this. If that doesn't bother him whatsoever, I happen to find that a bit odd.  If he shares those feelings, it would make perfect sense. That's his prerogative, but sad if true.

Marty, do you not see how this is an unfortunate thing, especially after so many years with Brian? It doesn't take away from us appreciating Jeff's contributions to Brian's solo career, and what must have been a difficult job at many times. I mean, I feel pretty confident that privately, Brian's other bandmates would feel that Mike's repeated public comments (especially the totality of steady stream of them) are simply not cool and unfortunate. Jeff, it would seem, crossed the picket line and joined the team making those comments, and to do that means that being surrounded by a boss with that mindset is at best not a dealbreaker to Jeff, or at worst, he is perhaps in silent agreement with some/all of them.

I just think that if he felt those comments were reprehensible and unacceptable, that there's no way he'd work with that employer - even if he wanted to step down from Brian's side for unrelated reasons. Working with Mike was/is apparently more of an important priority than any sort of loyalty to the guy he worked with for so many years - and by loyalty, I don't mean Jeff is disloyal for simply stepping down from Brian's band, but by taking the additional step of quickly becoming the right hand man to the guy who continually sh*t-talks Brian's wife.

To work with Mike in his current capacity means that this is not an unacceptable thing to Jeff, and that's why some people think that's kinda questionable. One can't have it both ways. And yes, I know that Jeff's gotta eat and pay his bills.

In some ways it's not surprising. Jeff was a Mike guy originally when he was brought into the band.  He always did those side gigs with Mike in the 80s and 90s. He did choose to work with Brian ( Jeff stated he had offers from all 3 camps when the BB broke up) and that is admirable. I can see where the job with Mike has much less stress.  Less prestige but less stress. When Jeff was younger, perhaps he wanted that prestige and control being with Brian but simply needed a change.  Jeff has always liked and worked well with Mike so it's not a surprise. I am sure there is more political stuff but certainly thats a part of it.

As for filling Jeff's role, Matt does it on stage vocally, there are support people I'm sure who do some of it off stage, and Al fills the friend/buffer role in a different way than Jeff, maybe even more genuine in some respects.  Perhaps and this is just a supposition: maybe Jeff felt with Al there to be with Brian, he could more easily step away and didn't feel as much guilt.

I'm assuming the third camp before 2012 was Al?

Yes.

I've heard a fan report that Jeff mentioned he had offers from all three "camps" to join circa 1998/99.

I'm a bit skeptical of how firm an offer he received from either Al or Mike.

As Jeff even alluded to in his 2014 interview, even in 2014 he had some issues he had to talk out with Mike before rejoining. Read his mid-90s interview about his 1990 departure to learn more about the issues that may have been at play. Both Mike and Carl are specifically mentioned by Jeff in the interview was having issues with Jeff.

But I'm a bit skeptical that only eight years later, Mike would have been so quickly jumping back into asking Jeff back. On the other hand, he did lose his falsetto guy when Matt Jardine left in 1998 (Matt continued to do some gigs with Mike even after Al's departure), so there was a slot in the band he needed to fill.

Meanwhile, by the time Al was starting his "Family & Friends" band up in late 1998, he of course was going to have Matt in the band doing a lot of falsettos (and leads). So that would have filled the main role Jeff could have. Obviously, Jeff could have still joined Al's band and played guitar and sang higher mid-range parts, etc.

Jeff has seemed to have a pattern of arguably over-inflating his stories/resume on occasion (I still remember his website claiming he was going to get on stage with Paul McCartney at McCartney's show and play with him; that obviously never happened because I was at both Bay Area shows where they claimed it was happening/had happened). His 8 and 1/2 year tenure with the band has often ballooned to 10 or 12 or more years; sometimes they just count from 1981 and say he's been there for like 35 years. Nothing major, but I could see some random talk around 1998 about playing with these guys could morph into all three guys actually offering him spots.

Having met Foskett at a friends home in Princeton NJ 20 years ago when he performed solo for a group of about 30 people, I must say I was not overly impressed with him. He had a huge ego, appeared very self centered, and in general, a bit irritating with his "I'm a really big star" attitude. I just couldn't warm up to the guy....he's talented, for sure, and I have all of his solo CD's......and I think they're really great. But Jeff Fosket the man..........hopefully a lot better than the guy I met that Sunday afternoon 20 years ago in Princeton.

A perfect fit for Mikes group then.

Some talk about Jeffrey..the name he likes to be called.  Want to add he has very poor book keeping skills (money).

 This pretty much sums up exactly what I was thinking.  I highly doubt that Jeff would have turned down an invitation to rejoin Mike's band in 1998.  Even in 1999 when Brian's first real tour was forming, there were question as to if Brian was really going to do the tour.  Brian has been touring very consistently since 1999, but in 1998, the idea of Brian Wilson doing a full touring still seemed somewhat doubtful.  And when Brian did his live Imagination show that was filmed in 1998, asn't it Christopher Cross who did the high vocal parts?  It seems to make more sense that Jeff was offered the role in Brian's band quite awhile after Mike had already hired Adrian Baker.

It is likely that the BR show Saturday night will be cancelled if it hasn't been already.

Yes it’s a shame. They play in Biloxi pretty much every year on the first Friday and Saturday in October, as part of the Cruisin the Coast celebration (thousands of vintage cars cruising the beach highway).
But Mother Nature is being a spoilsport, as Biloxi along with New Orleans will be dealing with a hurricane starting late Saturday.  >:(

I just got tickets to the Hiawassee show. I forgot that they went on sale last jight, but still managed to get 10th row for $55 a ticket. Not bad.

I'm a bit surprised Mike is taking December (and January) off from touring according to the schedules. There's a 12/1 gig, and that's it.

I dunno, maybe he's just doing a bunch of private/corporate gigs or something.

Yeah...usually there's a string of Christmas gigs through theatres around the country...and he typically hits the California theatre circuit or the Florida theatre circuit...seems those gigs are being saved for Mid February to Early March.

I would think now, when Unleash the Love is just out, is when he'd be promoting hard. But I suspect Mike's plans for this album are long range. Probably not expecting a big surge of sales right out of the gate. I think it will be a slow, but steady seller for a couple years at his shows.

Just got back from the Hiawassee show. Setlist was
Safari, Catch, Hawaii, Do It Again (with piped in vocals), surfin usa, surfer girl, getcha back, good to baby, you're so good, kiss me baby, dance dance, Paris, darlin, fools, grow up, be true, betsy, don't worry, deuce coupe, 409, shut down
intermission
Cal dreaming, sloop, nice, kissed her, cal girls, hearts, disney, god only knows, pisces, cool head, unleash the love, wanna dance, kokomo, rhonda, barbara ann, good vibes

encore
st nick, wild honey, fun fun fun

bad cell phone photos and a short clip of st nick at https://www.instagram.com/p/BcMHb4Bllvd/?taken-by=jacobisoutofideas (https://www.instagram.com/p/BcMHb4Bllvd/?taken-by=jacobisoutofideas)

Also, all of the Wild Honey Tour shirts were $15 since the tour is over.

I don't think he should be using Beach Boys shows to promote his solo stuff.  How does he introduce these songs?  Does he make out like they are Beach Boys songs by not specifying they are solo songs? Mike solo songs mean less Beach Boys songs in the set.

I would guess that he says that "he" has a new album out. I hope...

He did say that "he" had a new album out and had the album cover up for each song, which clearly said that it was a Mike Love solo album. I'd rather have more xmas bb's songs, but it wasn't done in a shitty way. Shitty songs maybe, but handled well enough. Mike has his strengths and flaws, but how he's promoting the new album isn't one of his flaws.

So, by that standard, Brian Wilson should only be doing solo material in his shows, since he is not billed as the Beach Boys.

Not really, no.  If Mike was playing solo or as part of EndlessSummer Band then play Beach Boys songs by all means as Brian does and Mike has.  When Brian played with the Beach Boys in the 80s he did a separate set of a few solo songs.  

At least he is saying 'he' has an album out and not 'we'.  FYI.  I have seen Mike quite a few times and would always prefer to hear Beach Boys songs rather than Cool Head and Pisces Brothers.  Better songs and it is a Beach Boys show after all.

The Beach Boys played here in Atlanta last night in a ballroom for a Christmas Party! Why was I not invited? Mike sounded pretty good from the small vids I've seen! What kinda cash does Mike make from a Christmas party? 75,000 bucks?

This is veering close to what I would call "Mott Logic". There is common sense and there is everything else. Common sense is Brian Wilson wrote the songs he performs live, and people come to see the original writer and performer billed under his own name perform the songs. Just like Burt Bacharach doing Dionne's songs at his solo concerts, and McCartney doing Beatles songs. Burt isn't billed as Dionne Warwick or even performing with her in most shows, and McCartney is not billing himself as The Beatles. But they wrote and performed and arranged and all of that...the originals.

Mike has a band of musicians - for which he pays a license for the right to bill them as "The Beach Boys" - playing to crowds who are going to hear Beach Boys songs or songs the original Beach Boys had recorded or performed, like, say, Rock And Roll Music or something other than original BB tunes.

They are not paying to hear "The Beach Boys" play and plug Mike Love solo material.

There could be Mott Logic applied and we'd argue and filibuster in circles for weeks, but this one is so simple we don't need to go there.  ;D

It comes down to whether we think it's OK or not OK for Mike to use The Beach Boys name and license to hawk and promote his own solo material to audiences buying tickets to hear The Beach Boys in name only playing the original arrangements of the hits everyone knows. It seems Mike sees fit to take a sh*t on that notion and do even more of his own solo material instead of BB tunes people are paying to hear.

Lastofmykind posted here the rate of $50K for the BBs and $25K for the Endless Summer Band. (2015) Not sure of his or her source.

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,23188.msg553001.html#msg553001

So was it wrong for the Beach Boys to include some of Carl's solo stuff in their shows circa 1983-84?
I'm glad Mike is playing some new tunes. But there's no pleasing some people. When he was doing all the old songs in his shows, people called it "a traveling jukebox". Now that he is taking a chance with some new material, people are down on that.
I'm actually MORE interested in seeing a Beach Boys show now, knowing that there will be some new music in addition to the old standards.

Wasn't this exact same debate already hashed out on one of the other threads?

Anyway, I've acknowledged many times that unless there are contractual restrictions on what material to play, *any* and can play *any* songs they want. As I've said many times, Mike could do a set of nothing but Abba songs if he wanted to.

But holding up Brian's *SOLO* tour, where he tours under his own name, and comparing it to Mike's *LICENSED BEACH BOYS* tour, where he's using a trademark owned by multiple parties in order to make money (paying his licensing fee in the process), is simply ridiculous.

Whether one agrees or disagrees with Mike playing his solo material in concert, it *IS* different from the pre-1998 "Beach Boys" playing solo material.

In 2017, Mike is using the *Beach Boys* trademark to help promote his solo material. While the band is splintered. While Brian and Al have been "warned" in the last few years about too strongly using "Beach Boys" wording for their tour.

Mike promoting "Unleash the Love" in 2017 during a "Beach Boys" show, after having dumped Al and Brian in 2012, while using the group-owned BB trademark for his own show to make money and promote his solo record, is NOT the same thing as the 1983 Beach Boys doing "What You Do To Me." Not only were the circumstances different in 1983 (there was no "former" BB member on the outskirts of the band kicked out; Dennis's various bootings don't count), but the *reason* for playing a Carl song in 1983 was different as well. I think it most cases the pre-1998 BBs doing solo material was more a case of placating various solo members by letting them promote their solo record for a short while. In *every* case where new solo material was performed at BB shows, the songs were not in the setlist for long.

But again, I'm well aware that Mike can perform whatever he wants in concert (either because his license allows it, or BRI ignores it if the license doesn't allow it). But it's simply ignoring the history of the group to suggest Mike doing "All the Love in Paris" at his 2017 shows is the same as doing a few "Pacific Ocean Blue" songs in 1977 for like a week or two, or letting Carl do his "Soul Train" bit for a song during the 1983 shows, etc.

Let us not forget as well that clearly Al *wanted* to do a song or two from his "Postcards" album on the 2012 BB tour, and he wasn't allowed to. I think they threw him a bone and let him sell the CD at C50 shows, but he talked about doing material from the album on the C50 tour, and as usual, Al was told to sit down and shut up.

There was no license to use the name in 1983-84 (wasn't necessary until after 1998) and the decision was made by the band members (i.e. Beach Boys) to add or not add Carl's songs or anything else in the set. Now it's 100% Mike doing whatever the hell he wants and calling it "The Beach Boys" even though the songs from Mike's solo release have no connection to the Beach Boys whatsoever.

The issue is Mike taking it on himself to use the "Beach Boys" name to promote his own solo material, when fans are paying to see and hear Beach Boys music. The license carries with it responsibility and a certain degree of having to adhere to what the name carries, and at this point it feels like Mike could care less as long as he can use the name as he sees fit and to plug whatever he wants to plug.

Looks like Mike and Bruce may be doing some privates dates during the holiday break to promote the solo album:
http://www.elmoremagazine.com/2017/12/reviews/shows/mike-love-at-the-wooly

"We caught up with Love at a private affair in New York City’s historic Woolworth Building (the original skyscraper), where the Beach Boys band, actor John Stamos, Love’s designer wife Jacqueline Piesen, musical director Chris Stanton and BMG presdent Zach Katz showed up to join the show. Love treated the crowd to nearly a dozen numbers, selecting from both CDs in the Unleash the Love project. One thing became clear immediately: Love hasn’t lost his edge, he’s honed a couple of sharp new ones, too."

Excellent post!

ya know one thing for sure.. Mike Love ENJOYS his life.. And for a guy his age to work as hard as he does when he doesnt have to.. Amazing..  After CW died he was doin some funky gigs for awhile.. In 2000 a week before BW played 2 nites at the Hollywood bowl with 1st tour of Pet Sounds. BB played a park in Pasadena Ca where there was only a few hundred people there with lots of  empty seats.. I was there it was SAD... Now look where he is.. It"s obvious the media likes and supports Mike"s version of BB TODAY.. Im sure c50 helped also.. And it help"s he has rearrainged the band a number of times to what he has now.. the best version of BB band.. And the odd"s were against him.. We pick on him for using BB name.. WELL.. He is laughing all the way to the bank.. Gotta applaud the effort even tho we may disagree..

The best version of the BB band??? What in god's name are you talking about?? Are you saying that the M&B show is the best version of the BB's ever or it's the best that they can currently come up with? Please clarify.

#MottLogic

#genderbasedIgnorantInvective (otherwise known as #NoLogic)

I have always thought of the 2 entities myself to be fair. The Beach Boys, and separately M&B touring Beach Boys Band.

At least I hope this poster is thinking the same.

SORRY.. I thought it was obvious.. The best version of the band since Mike took over the name.. Ive only seen the band a few times since 1999... Everytime the band changes members i go check them out..   And the band he has now is the only one id pay to see again.. I thought the worst version was the 1st one..   So i hope im clear now thx.

What do you mean by that?

Important points:

1. I don't think anybody, including Mike's biggest detractors, have ever suggested he doesn't enjoy his life. That's plainly evident by this plethora of "look at my awesome life" posts on Facebook over the last several years. He does also seem to harbor a lot of anger/sour grapes/bitterness about elements of BB history as well.

2. The degree to which Mike must work "hard" is obviously unknown, but I'm not so sure he would be able to keep up his lifestyle if he just quit touring. So I'm quite prepared to say his current level of work is something he "doesn't have" to do. I'm sure he's plenty wealthy that he wouldn't literally have to keep touring to keep a roof over his head, etc. But I think the financial element of his touring is and always has been a large factor. He's not touring out of altruism.

3. Carl's tragic death was not the reason Mike's early post-1998 shows were not so hot. As indicated in the David Marks/Jon Stebbins book, there were moves to dismantle the band to some degree prior to Carl's death. The book reports David Marks was brought on to replace *Al*, not Carl. It was Mike, according to press reports an interviews, that eventually said he didn't want to play with Al or Carl. So the post-1997 band without Al and Carl was not entirely simply thrust upon him.

4. I don't obviously have attendance/financial numbers on Mike's touring throughout the years, but as soon as he started using the "Beach Boys" name in the summer of 1998, his shows immediately bounced back and he was generally successful in terms of audiences and ticket sales. Even in 1999 and 2000, he was doing fine overall in that regard. That's not to say a show here and there as a fluke might not be sparsely attended. But Mike's show and the BB name bring in money across the board as a general rule.

5. The media at large doesn't care about the touring "Beach Boys" and hasn't in eons. Same goes for the working rock press at large. Mike's band gets the local newspaper fluff pieces promoting his show as it comes into town. But he's not getting regular coverage by the serious, legit rock press. The exception? The C50 tour in 2012. Overnight Mike (and the rest of the band) were A-listers again. Doing the Grammies instead of the Queen Latifah show. Mike chose to give that all up and go back to being Lou Christie.

6. "Laughing all the way to the bank" - Again, I don't think Mike's biggest detractors have EVER suggested he isn't *insanely rich* off of this BB touring thing.

7. What odds were against Mike? He's had everything he has wanted for a couple decades now, just the way he wants it. His production company running BB tours. He has the name. He's his own boss. Nobody to answer to. Al was immediately marginalized post-1998.

I think The Beach Boys realized early on that not all members had to be in attendance for an audience to accept them as The Beach Boys. This is evident with Brian leaving the touring band in the early 60's. However, I wonder when Mike realized that he could play BBs music, and be accepted, by non-hardcore BBs fans, as "The Beach Boys".  I wonder if he had thoughts of this when he was doing his earliest California Beach/Endless Summer Band shows, or if he still had doubts going into 1998. Him bringing David Marks on in 1998 suggests that he felt the need to have a certain amount of actual Beach Boys onstage, but as we saw earlier this year, Mike literally performed a Beach Boys concert without Bruce, where he was the only actual Beach Boy, yet the audience was pleased. In the past, when Bruce was ill, Dean Torrence would fill in for Bruce (presumably taking his vocal parts to some extent, but also to add legitimacy), but as of 2017, I genuinely believe that Mike sees himself and The Beach Boys as the same entity.

I saw Mike (with Bruce and David Marks) about two years ago and at the break he was signing autographs.  I heard an audience member say to the person next to them "which Beach Boy is that?"  They clearly had no idea and didn't seem too worried about who was who.  I think the audience going to Mike shows can be divided into two groups:  fans of the (real) Beach Boys who understand what they're seeing, and people who are not in-depth fans but just want to go to a concert/hear some songs they like.  

Hey Jude........ Every point you bring up i already knew.. I was trying to post something positive and nice for the xmas season.. Im an old fart i grew up with the BB.. So i hope your post was not directed at just me.. And when Mike took over BB name the internet lit up.. How can he tour without any wilson"s and  make it without screwin with the LEGACY.. And be profitable.. Well im surprised how well he has done.. Even tho most gigs are small places and he travels as Bruce said..Walmart style..Ive seen BB band 6 times over 20 years.. Ive seen BW 23 times over the same time period.. So you know who i support.. Just sayin..

Mr. Wilson, I agree. The current Beach Boys band really does sound incredible. Great energy, great vocals, and the setlists are getting better and better. From what I've heard from from those early years 1998-2000, The Beach Boys sounded really rough. Adrian's vocals always sounded really harsh to me, and the drumming was all over the place. I do miss Mike Meros though on keyboards.

sorry

Um yeah, your comment letting us know about how Mike's "laughing all the way to the bank" really warmed my Xmas season spirit.