The Smiley Smile Message Board

https://apnews.com/ce13032fc0ad4097bf6956e952611baa/The-Beach-Boys-to-appear-in-town-hall-with-SiriusXM-fans?utm_medium=APEntertainment&utm_source=Twitter&utm_campaign=SocialFlow

Interesting...

SiriusXM on Tuesday announced founding members Brian Wilson, Mike Love, Al Jardine and David Marks along with fellow Beach Boy, Bruce Johnston, will participate in the satellite radio service’s “Town Hall” series.

Award-winning actor and director Rob Reiner will moderate the discussion as the Beach Boys answer questions from a group of SiriusXM listeners at the Capitol Records Tower in Los Angeles on July 30. It’s where they recorded some of their early songs.

Beach Boys’ manager Jerry Schilling says it’s historic because they have not been in the same place since their 50th anniversary shows in 2012.

The event will air on Aug. 10 on SiriusXM’s Beach Boys channel.

{sorry if this has already been posted. I looked and did not see it)

holy cow

Someone ask if they will do an impromptu "Their hearts were full of spring" or "Surfer girl". It may be the last chance that the actual Beach Boys could sing together.

Won-won-wonderful!

Great!

Assuming they do actually all end up doing it in the same room at the same time, this will indeed be the first time Brian and Mike (and Brian and Bruce) have been in the same room (that we know about) since September 2012. It's quite possibly also the first time Al has been in the same room with Mike (and Bruce) since the early 2014 Ella function.

I'd like to think this might get them towards working together again, but I doubt it. Schilling has a better shot at it than most. But remember that when they did their first full group function in eons together in 2006 (that time on *top* of the Capitol building), it was another 5-6 years until they actually got back together.

I highly doubt they'll perform together at this event; for a variety of reasons.

I'm also not holding out much hope of great questions considering SiriusXM's vetting process for "Fan Request Line" bits that they've aired so far.

I'm guessing this event will be mostly (much like the 2006 event) about the novelty of seeing them all together again.

My guess is this wouldn't be happening had they not re-hired Jerry Schilling.

I'm hearing they might be doing some type of acoustic mini-set like the Grammy museum thing in 2012. But with almost a week to go anything can happen... or not happen.

BBs reunion! ;D

The short snippets we've seen of that performance definitely makes me want a release of the whole show. And the Rolling Stone accoustic set as well. They sounded so great!



(https://i.pinimg.com/736x/06/82/98/0682985263547b51913f094517101174--brian-wilson-the-beach-boys.jpg)

I put a sticky on this one so it's at the top of the page. Big news indeed! I didn't know Rob Reiner was a fan on the level where he'd moderate a Q&A like this.

If Sirius puts out a press release that this is happening, and the AP for one picks up the feed and runs with it, I'd say there are no doubts it's on.

Here is the Sirius release: https://blog.siriusxm.com/the-beach-boys-to-give-rare-qa-moderated-by-rob-reiner-for-siriusxm/ (https://blog.siriusxm.com/the-beach-boys-to-give-rare-qa-moderated-by-rob-reiner-for-siriusxm/)

If they sing together again, I think I will lose my mind. Even if things go back to Mike/Bruce and Brian/Al shows after this, seeing the guys sing together at least one last time will make me so happy. There's just something so special about having the original members sing together that's so perfect. After C50, I thought the chance of the group doing ANYTHING together was astronomically slim. This is a huge shocker to me.

This makes me wonder if the rumors about the Glastonbury reunion could come true...

The blend is definitely still there (as of 2012). And that blend makes the Beach Boys' special sound

Never thought I'd see the day.

Awesome.

I never lose hope (however remote it may be) that there can be some healing and peace, or at least something of a truce.

I cannot imagine they won't sing a note. That seems way too farfetched. My friend just told me that Billy Joel did one of these shows, and he did indeed sing (and there were other artists present other than Joel who performed Joel's songs there too).

Holy sh*t. This will be the perfect way to go out on

How does one obtain tickets for this?

Hopefully this will not be a one and done thing as far as hearing this, because my account is not current

Hopefully there will be some type of video uploaded to youtube, either professionally filmed, or fan filmed.

Rolling Stone has picked it up and mentions this.

The Q&A will feature fan questions and focus on the Beach Boys’ “SiriusXM channel, their new album, The Beach Boys with The Royal Philharmonic Orchestra and their celebrated career as one of the world’s most beloved and respected bands.”

...so it could tie in with a Glastonbury/ RPO deal.

My prediction is Mike and Brian will be exactly the same as they were in interviews together back in 2012.

Wonder if I can get another Sirius free trial...

The Glastonbury rumors were started by a British tabloid writer speculating about who might play there next year and then asked Mike if he was interested.

I've heard that if one signs out of their account and signs up with a new e-mail address, they can get another 30-day trial, at least on the smartphone app.

The annoying thing about the SiriusXM app is that, in my experience, when the free trial ends, they simply log you out of the account and when you try to log in, it simply doesn't work. It doesn't provide any pop-up notice saying "your free trial is over." So you kind of just have to count out the 30 days, and then randomly soon after the app will stop working.

Thanks to Jerry Schilling, exposure for the band has increased dramatically. Eliot Lott seemed like nothing more than a caretaker.

In addition to the guys performing at this event, what I'd really like to see is another new reunited Beach Boys album - followed by one or more reunited BBs special appearances, or better yet, a full blown tour.

Interesting; that seems to be the most likely scenario if they chose to sing together.

My thinking was that they'd want to save their new "first" reunion musical appearance for something else, something bigger. But if nothing bigger is coming, then maybe they don't view a quickie mini-set as a huge deal.

It looks like both camps are shoehorning this into ongoing tour schedules (especially Mike), so there wouldn't be much rehearsal time.

I'd be curious to know if any ancillary members will be there. I'd be happy with Totten and Matt Jardine (or just Matt if Al and Dave can handle sufficient guitar duties).

As Emdeeh mentioned, the Glastonbury thing was just a case of one paper garbling an interview with Mike and conflating Mike's band with *THE* band in full.

While truly "anything is possible", Mike already has gigs booked into the middle of 2019. I can't imagine any full reunion tour happening before 2020 unless they want to buy off and/or convert a BUNCH of 2019 Mike dates to reunion dates. All of which is getting WAY too far ahead of what's going on, I realize.

But I'm not sure of the logistical/marketing issues involved in actually doing a full-blown reunion show only as a one-off. Mike's band *constantly* touring under the same name creates a constant potential for confusion in the marketplace. But I dunno, maybe a few one-off "reunion" things is how they'd have to test the waters these days.

Or maybe they'll just do this Sirius thing and nothing else. Or maybe it'll just be an interview. Interesting times for sure...

I know SiriusXM archives "events" that can be replayed. I sure hope someone is able to grab this and throw it up on YouTube.

I also hope they have some video cameras there to catch this, especially if they play/sing together.

Stebbins mentioning the possibility of singing piques my interest, that's for sure.

But I could still envision it being interview-only. It could be similar to their 2012 "Google" event:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M9VY3zbCt24

Don't want to belabor the point, but a quick check shows Mike has a bunch of 2019 dates already booked. I don't think Brian has anything firmly in place for 2019 yet. But I think any sort of full-blown tour seems unlikely any time soon, and the clock is certainly ticking.

I think another reunion would have to involve either Brian placating Mike and co-writing some stuff, or simply avoiding that issue altogether by bypassing another album and just doing a tour, and/or just a few shows.

Normally, I'd say there are a bunch of precedents and logistical issues making a one-off reunion show unlikely. But *among* the scenarios that entail the band doing something together, a one-off (or very short series of shows) seems more likely. The person who has most strongly in the distant past expressed distaste for a one-off situation is Al Jardine, who said several years prior to 2012 that he thought it was a waste to go to all the trouble of putting together a show to only do a show or two, and that such a show should be toured. I agree, but Al is rarely listened to when it comes to the full band, so I'd imagine if both Brian and Mike signed on for one or two reunion shows in mid-late 2019, Al would probably go along.

I'd hope for something a bit more elaborate as a true "finale", both in terms of a full show presentation, and something not sponsored by a satellite radio station.

But most definitely, if they did sing at this thing and if that was "it" forever, it would remove a bit of the sour C50 taste. A least a bit.

Quick, someone please get Mike to shave off the mustache for this gig.....   :lol

As long as we'll have another moment like this one (https://youtu.be/M9VY3zbCt24?t=845), I am happy  ;D

I actually prefer Mike's current 'stache to his 'stache + goatee.

Full beard would be cooler though.

Odds that Mike accidentally wears his "Mike Love" logo hat instead of his "Beach Boys" logo hat?

Though not complaining, I’m just wondering why this is happening.  The RPO album is a few months old, as is the Sirius deal. M&B are performing the night before in Illinois then a few days later back out East yet are flying in for a interview? Something they could phone in really.

Is a major announcement coming? (worthy of the group getting together, including David Marks who has not been included in any group project since 2012)

Really, what is there to tell that wasn’t covered during the C50?

Regardless of if nothing comes of it (or if something comes of it), hopefully it at least helps give the band name a little more dignity.

This really is proof that decent management, and somebody like Jerry Schilling in particular, is what's been missing for SOOO long, and is a big contributor to the messes that the band has gotten itself into over the years countless times.

A decent manager could've done SO much. Just look at the Rieley era as another example.

As a longtime fan, first concert 1969, I really could care less. It's over. With the exception of Al this is a vocal group that can't sing anymore. It does make me laugh however when I she how giddy everyone gets at the prospect of a useless Q&A.

Yeah, I didn’t think the 30th anniversary of Kokomo was such a big deal myself.  :lol

If anything further were to come out of this, I would imagine it would just be a tour or a few shows. I can't picture these guys agreeing to do one more album. The RPO thing is selling, probably better than a set of all new songs would.
Whatever. It's just nice that they are speaking to each other again.

Agreed - I don't really see the benefit of another album at this point.  TWGMTR was the perfect last Beach Boys album, in my opinion (with the perfect last song).  Plus, I would be shocked if Mike would agree to another album with Brian in full control again.

didnt realize jerry schilling was back...when did that happen?

And I seriously doubt Brian's people would be agreeable to a Beach Boys album captained by Mike Love.

Blondie Chaplin should be there!
But let's not get too excited about this, guys! Nothing else has been announced. The last two pages are pure conjecture.

A Beach Boys album Captain by Mike love? That would be horrific. Just look at his solo album which is terrible. I can't see this getting done anyway because I just don't see Brian and Mike working together again in a productive environment. Interview them and let it be.

Disagree that TWGMTR was perfect last album. I'd like if BBs finished with sth. better. "Summer's Gone" is just big joke.

While it's fun to either search for some deeper meaning/message to this event, or fantasize about more reunion activities, from everything I've gathered sniffing around the situation, it's mostly over-analysis. It's just a quick little promo bit. That's the "why." The RPO album and the SiriusXM channel are the newest group projects, and I'm guessing this is the soonest in the last few months they could have all landed in the same place at the same time given both band's touring schedules, Brian recouping from surgery, etc. So that's the "why now?"

Major announcement coming? Pertaining to more reunion activities, I'd guess not.

I'm guessing Schilling put together the whole SiriusXM deal (I posted an article from months back that featured Schilling attending a SiriusXM event regarding Elvis), and someone thought it might be worth trying to corral all the guys for the typical sort of events that a group-focused SiriusXM channel has often featured.

I don't think any future projects (or lack thereof) would have much to do with what's "left to tell" after C50. There's no more or less to tell or do today than there was in September 2012. If they do more archival projects, then that project's purpose is self-evident. Similarly, if somehow they do more reunion activies, it would be for the sake/novelty of doing it (and all the other things that go along with it; money for the band members, thrills for the fans hopefully, etc.).

If you happen to be a scholar/historian of the band, the second time in the last 20+ years (outside of C50) that all the guys have been in the same place at the same time is a pretty big deal. More specifically, considering what has gone on post-2012, it's a pretty big deal. As part of the story. Not so much (yet anyway) as far as music and creativity go.

If you have no use for the band anymore and think they can't sing and have nothing left to offer, then you can always keep listening to your 60s records and ignore what goes on in 2018.

This event is clearly at this stage primarily about the novelty and rarity of simply seeing the guys in the same room (the Q&A itself will probably be superfluous for the most part), just as the 2006 event was. It's not Earth-shattering, but it's important in a similar way to, say, uncovering a 1974 photo of Lennon and McCartney together (obviously even rarer of course).

While the RPO album has sold and charted very well in the UK, I'm pretty sure the "That's Why God Made the Radio" album in 2012 sold and charted much higher than the RPO album did in the US. Obviously, it had a whole "50th anniversary" promo machine behind it.

Ironically, considering Mike's hectic touring schedule (gigs scheduled well into 2019), it's not entirely crazy to wonder if, scheduling-wise, it might be easier for all of the guys to record new songs/an album during breaks in touring.

Mike probably wouldn't mind if Brian was listed as "Producer" of the album. I think he could be relatively easily placated by some co-writes "from scratch" (even if it was actually Brian bringing in partially-written stuff) along with perhaps a few of his own tunes.

I would imagine Joe Thomas would be where Mike wouldn't want deep involvement, but Brian has apparently already moved away from such heavy, day-to-day involvement with Joe Thomas lately.

Schilling's name appeared as BRI President last year on the "Sunshine Tomorrow" set. I believe he came in either in 2016 or 2017. It did kind of slip under the radar; I mentioned it when his name appeared on that set last year after having heard some time prior to that that he had come in. For whatever reason, the BBs/BRI never actually "announced" it.

But long-term, Schilling coming back could be the biggest sort of corporate/logistical news in the BB world outside of C50 in the last 20 or so years.

I kind of feel the good management now is too little too late. They Had the opportunity to stay together as a band after Carl’s death which they didn’t. They reunited for the 50th and released the same greatest hits packages. They could have reunited for the pet sounds 50th which they didn’t. They randomly released 2 disc versions of the Party album and Wild Honey (not their best albums in my opinion). And to top it off the just released orchestra crap. So not really sure what the intention is with Sirius and this Q&A. Start releasing what the die hard fans really want! Live shows from the Blondie and Ricky Era.

The "Sunshine Tomorrow" sets were and are revelatory, *just* the type of archival projects they should be doing.

The "Party" set was a bit limp and less interesting; certainly an important historical article for fans and scholars, but I always looked at that set as just another "Copyright Extension" set that they happened to press onto actual physical discs.

Live shows from the early-mid 70s would be great, but I don't think it's specifically 1972/1973 live shows that hardcore fans want above all else (I mean, it's the ONE part of that era that has decent representation via the "In Concert" album). Studio material from the 70s (and 80s) is really at the top of the list, and opening up the studio and live archives wide would be great. This is likely where Schilling can play a key role, because it indeed isn't likely we're going to see another C50-style reunion any time soon.

And regarding Jerry Schilling, and this also plays back into previous discussions of what's going on with the archives and what *should* be put out, etc., let me point out what I can only presume many folks don't know:

It should be noted that Jerry Schilling being considered and voted in as BRI President were both due to several years worth of work behind the scenes by Howie Edelson.

It's early days still for Schilling's tenure at BRI, and already things are improving ("Sunshine Tomorrow", the two epic digital "Sunshine" follow-ups, Schilling getting these guys in the same room!).

Unlike C50 where the sort of inherent momentum of the anniversary seemed (at least in part) to move that project into focus, Schilling must have been key to get all five of these guys back together for this event. It's symbolic, but potentially huge. Meanwhile, we got about SIX OR SEVEN discs worth of archival material last year.

I feel pretty strongly, even if the SiriusXM channel and the RPO albums aren't the items hardcore fans are frothing at the mouth for, those items are strong indicators that Schilling was a smart pick and he can move things in a direction that others in the past haven't. I'm glad Howie worked this behind the scenes.

I'm not expecting big things from this, in terms of recording an album or going on tour.
Perhaps getting together for a Christmas song?
What would make it worthwhile for me is for the get together to go well with no bad vibes, that they leave on good terms. That could possibly help heal a bit of the post C50 stuff.

What are the odds of that?

I'm Catholic. I'll start praying to St Jude (patron saint of hopeless causes)  ;D

I think they're fully capable of being nice with each other and for a joint event to go smoothly. They managed it in 2006, and that was when there was arguably more intense recent acrimony and lawsuits.

I completely misread that as “ praying to Hey Jude” :lol

Praying to me (or the song!) would indeed be a hopeless cause!  :3d

I mean, I do what I can, but that mainly amounts to pontificating and telling the same stories over and over! And lately posting screenshots of the SiriusXM channel.  :lol

St. Heyjude! ;D

:lol

Do we know how long he's been BRI president? Does this date back to September 2012?
I was waiting for that joke; if not, I was going to make it myself.  >:(

Hey, July has gotten better. We've gotten to the point of getting all five guys in the room, whereas it was this at the beginning of the month:

(https://s.abcnews.com/images/GMA/180705_gma_pop4_0811_hpMain_16x9_992.jpg)

Yeesh! :lol

What might make this event go more smoothly is if all the band members shared an actual joint before the Q&A.

Well sh*t then maybe they can do a Smiley SMiLE song then lol

She’s goin bald before a baffled audience... :hat

Otherwise known as Larry, Curley, and sta(moe).  :lol

When's Bruce going to do a Q&A panel as part of a "Hot Doggers" reunion? THAT'S the big question.

Let's hope at least we don't have to hear Bruce go *on and on* about the individual credit scores of each "Wrecking Crew" member......

I'm genuinely curious if Foskett will be anywhere near this....

Stamos didn't get the dress code memo. Not garish enough.

impromptu Woody Woodpecker Symphony jam.

Don't mean to be mean, but that's a rough pic of Mike. Maybe I take back the positive things I said about his handlebar 'stache. While Mike generally looks good for his age, in this pic he kinda reminds me of Dr. Jennings (actor Jeffrey Jones) in Howard the Duck.

(http://i64.tinypic.com/4u6ljo.jpg)

Mike's album is pretty good; certainly not any worse than the stuff coming out under Brian's name in recent years.

That, in a word, is malarkey.

NPP! ;D

With all the facelifts and weekly botox procedures, he'd better look good. The handlebar getup makes him look like the guy on American Chopper which isn't flattering whatsoever.  :p 

Are you fair dinkum?

The good stuff on Mike’s album is pretty good . Problem is, the production is by far the worst on any Beach Boys related album ever released except possibly the C50 live album . The remake of Warmth of the Sun especially is horrific; Ambha Love has a nice voice, so why did in the hell did producer Michael Lloyd add so much pitch correction that Joe Thomas even shed a tear?

I don't see why this would be happening without the pairing of a major announcement...but I don't see a major announcement as an album or tour. I also think anyone that considers for a second that even a fully reunited Beach Boys would be a header during any part of the Glastonbury Festival, is fooling themselves. Besides, as it has been pointed out, Mike's touring is already fairly well outlined through June 2019. But, it is worth noting that he is in the UK in June 2019 as that's where the schedule currently stops. Anyway, I see a major announcement as perhaps something more archival. Perhaps a massive live release or an online resource of unreleased live materials. Perhaps the scrapped box set of the C50 tour that's long overdue. I don't know how many listeners it has attained regularly, but perhaps they're amending the initial Sirius/XM announcement of a limited summer run, and announcing a permanent station for The Beach Boys' channel.

HeyJude also mentioned something that is currently my number one interest (assuming they will perform at least one song together): Where will Jeffrey Foskett be? That's a whole big ball of awkward right there. Say this is their last time singing together as these five Beach Boys...I'd like it to actually be just that. Put Brian or Bruce at the piano to outline vocal parts and have the five sing a simple arrangement of something sweet...just them...warts and all. No sidemen. No Fosketts or Tottens. Mike on Bottom to Bruce's falsetto on top with David, Brian, and Alan in between on something like "Surfer Girl" or "God Only Knows" or "Till I Die". That would be a beautiful thing.

Maybe they're going to announce that the last six years have been an elaborate mind game on us and they've secretly been working on a new album and tour? Stranger things have happened.

Lol that’s not the case but that’d be crazy

That’d be awesome. I’d imagine it’d be Surfer Girl

This.  Right here.  Heck, I'd be even more tickled to hear Brian on the high parts, warts and all.  Maybe he can still do it.

He could still do it during the C50 tour. He occasionally would go for(and hit) the high notes on Good Vibrations, but Jeff almost always sang over him.

As I mentioned, M&B are performing the night before in Illinois.

Please, don’t even think that what could be the last time these 5 do together is an unrehearsed version of anything. I don’t want to hear it. It would be a train wreck and remain forever as there final performance. Just NO!

I’m all for some career live boxset, film, bonus RAH final C50 show etc. Capitol surely have an interest here providing the iconic venue. Let’s see Monday.

Maybe they do this to celebrate the "Breaking the band" episode about the Beach Boys... You know, "the good times never have to end"

It could very well be to announce an archival Friends set.

When did Hulk Hogan join the group?

If they end up singing In My Room would be a good choice as the high part is doable for Bruce .  I prefer no others singing especially Foskett who always sings over them and altering the blend

I'd like to see them do "Add Some Music."

That's also a great choice. I also can't tell if the previous poster was being sarcastic or not about "Friends"...do you really think Mike and Bruce would make public appearances plugging that? They barely touched "Wild Honey" and Mike is all over that record. Plus, David Marks had absolutely 0% involvement.

Well considering the other Hot Dogger is Terry Melcher, and he is dead, that might be tough.

Well, it hasn't stopped "The Beach Boys" post-Dennis/Carl (and Al, and Brian), so you never know.  :lol

Didn't Dean Torrence continue using the "Jan & Dean" name in some form after Jan's death?

Some amount of the *material* on Mike's album is okay, meaning scattered tracks on the first disc of "original" material.

But the second disc is awful, some of the tracks on the first disc aren't that great, but more importantly, it has the WORST production of any BB-related product EVER. I've been living with this album for awhile now, and have heard it butted up against a myriad of other BB and solo material on the SiriusXM channel. I now feel quite confident in saying it's the worst production, and the worst *sounding* album in the BB and BB-related catalog.

The Adrian Baker-helmed stuff sounds better (SiriusXM is pretty regularly spinning "Ballad of Ole Betsy" off the NASCAR album, and even *that* sounds like a warm, fuzzy, analogue dream compared to "Unleash the Love").

Say what you want about Brian's solo material; I'm not always enamored with it and his fans *can* be overly-forgiving. But when we're talking about "Unleash the Love", it's not even close. The worst of "No Pier Pressure" has better production. "Run James Run" sounds *wonderful* compared to "Unleash..."

Even *prior* to "Unleash" being released, I was saying it wouldn't have been bad to hear a few solo Mike tracks from that 2004 collection (which ended up re-recorded on "Unleash") as part of the 2012 BB set. I think Al singing "Too Cruel" would have been interesting. A few other Mike tracks from that cache of material would be worth hearing. Indeed, that 2004 set, *as-is*, presumably in rough mix/unreleased form, sounds WAAAAY better than "Unleash." Better performances, better production.

Having constantly heard "Unleash" tracks on SiriusXM, I'd say the autotune is far more egregious than even the C50 live album, where it only sounds prominent on some tracks. As I've mentioned, on "Unleash", there are times where Foskett is so autotuned it starts to sound like a moog synthesizer.

Regarding the motive/reason/strategy behind this "reunion" event, I think it's a case of overthinking it if one is assuming the event must portend some big announcement.

From everything I've heard sniffing it out, it seems to have come together relatively quickly, and I'm being told it's just a case of doing a little promo event for the SiriusXM channel. I think the only weird thing is that Schilling has the skill/pull to actually get all the guys there for the event, whereas *maybe* in the past a radio station or the ramshackle "management" of past years may have just assumed it would be easier to just make this another Mike/Bruce promo event (such as the TV promo appearances Mike and Bruce made in the UK in recent months).

They may take this event opportunity to announce anything they might have in the works. I guess they could announce some 1968-themed archival sets, but even if they do, I'd tend to doubt this event was concocted *in order* to promote such sets, as they've been doing archival sets for years now without joint group reunion appearances.

But I wouldn't assume this event must mean some huge, secret thing is in the works.

It's simply a SiriusXM promo event, and it's a potentially good sign for some sort of potential for things going forward. But that's about it. Again, they all got together in 2006 and those that were there like Stebbins said the guys truly seemed to get along and exuded a "group" vibe that was (and is) pretty rare to witness. But even then, nothing much happened after that for a number of years. Al did a dozen or so gigs with Brian in late 2006/early 2007, and then it was all quiet until 2011/2012.

Just to throw this in: I'm pretty sure Matt will be around for this event in one form or another.

I think he has used the name "The Jan & Dean Show featuring Dean Torrence" or something like that, which I must say is lame. I get WHY he'd need to do that, but unlike a "Jeff Lynne's ELO" type thing where it's describing a different version of a band, Jan's name is right in the name, and it makes his absence all that much more obvious.

The ironic thing about Lynne's new moniker "Jeff Lynne's ELO" is that it makes it sound like one of those off-shoot band names where a former member only has partial naming rights or something (e.g. "Joey Molland's Badfinger"), when in fact Lynne fully owns the ELO name and is presumably adding his name mainly to re-assert his own name, and perhaps also so that people know it's the legit version and not the "ELO Part II" band from the 90s or the subsequent off-shoot "The Orchestra."

Matt being there with the five main guys would not only be the best musical decision, it would *feel* right, as Matt was essentially a de facto full-fledged member in all but name in the 90s, even more so than Foskett was in the 80s.

Jude, agree 100% about Matt, and his rightful place alongside the originals nowadays. He sounds much better in the blend than Fosket, doesn't sing over the others like Fosket, and has Beach Boy blood in him. And he does a stupendous Job! Let's hope Matt is there.

+1

I think Matt being there (on stage anyway) would also only happen if they do in fact perform a song (or songs), and I would guess that's still up in the air.

From everything I've been able to tell, I would expect either a *very brief* set of one or a few songs, or none at all. Looking back, they did five songs at the Grammy museum in 2012 near the end of the reunion tour. I'd be surprised (pleasantly, assuming they pull it off well) to see even that long of a performance.

Mike and Bruce will presumably be flying in from a gig in Illinois the night before, leaving (again, all guessing) the morning of the 30th for any rehearsals/soundcheck.

Just a thought, but if they were to perform with just the 5 Originals then it might be a good idea if Al sang the lead. He clearly has the best voice of all of the remaining boys and the others could sort of do low Harmony behind him. If they were really interested in sounding the best that they could that might be a good way to do it. Kudos to Al cuz it would give him some center stage time as well. Though Doctor Love would probably never go for it

Matt is the best choice for any singing .

but Matt's not a Beach Boy. Heck, if we're going to include the kids, let's get Wendy and Carnie in there, too.

Not the same thing, obviously. Matt toured for around a decade with the Carl/Al era Beach Boys, and also recorded with them. He has also of course toured regularly with Al and Brian. He was even with Mike in 1998 for a bit after Al was gone.

Having Matt there wouldn't be about having a BB offspring there. It would be about having their best touring band falsetto singer.

There are only three or so people I'd say achieved that rare status of near-Beach Boy or sort of defacto Beach Boy: Billy Hinsche, Foskett, and Matt Jardine. Foskett and Matt tend to fill the same ancillary vocal role, so I'd go with Matt.

I'll take Matt everyday over Fosket. Matt sings better and blends better, Foskett just over powers the others, like he did on TWGMTR. The most prominent sound on that collection was Fosket's voice. No thank you.

Unfortunately (for us), Al is a humble dude and doesn't strong-arm his way in these situations. His voice has been criminally underutilized in just about every setting in the last couple decades. He should have sang more on C50 (and for God's sake let the guy pick a few songs for the setlist); he surely would only get a few leads had he ever re-joined Mike's band, and even in Brian's band, while they understandably can't lean *too heavily* on other lead vocalists for a "Brian Wilson" show, I wouldn't mind more leads (and especially some deep cut leads) from Al in that band. Even in Brian's band, Al's competing for leads with Darian, Matt, and Blondie (all great vocalists, so it's all good).

Any one-song of two-to-five-song set the guys might do at this upcoming event would surely lean on the expected hits (Surfer Girl, Surfin' USA, California Girls, etc.), where Al would likely not get any lead unless they do Rhonda.

<<I think he has used the name "The Jan & Dean Show featuring Dean Torrence" or something like that, which I must say is lame. I get WHY he'd need to do that, but unlike a "Jeff Lynne's ELO" type thing where it's describing a different version of a band, Jan's name is right in the name, and it makes his absence all that much more obvious.>>

"The Jan & Dean Show" name legally goes back to 1978.  Dean gave Jan permission to use "Jan & Dean" for his solo tours early that year provided he was billed as "The Jan & Dean Show featuring Jan Berry."  At some venues, including the shows I attended at the Decatur, Illinois "Macon County Light Company" in March of 1978,  the billing was simply "Jan & Dean," on the marquee and in newspaper ads, which caused audiences members to periodically shout "Where's Dean?"  Band members usually replied that Dean was out in their RV.  Later that Spring and early summer, Jan actually toured with a fake Dean.

Toured with a fake Dean? That's class, right there.  ;D

I could add some more snark, but it's too easy...some would say certain Beach Boys have been touring with fake...oh, never mind.  >:D

Here's more of Jan & "Dean":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2b2H3YjjFaY

To be honest, a fake Dean isn't exactly a bad thing. The real one is a bit of a jerk-off.

It's not sarcastic at all. I don't see what is hard to believe about it. All of the surviving members are going to do an interview. Not just Mike and Bruce. There has to be a reason. It must be something big.

Yeah it seems crazy that this came out of the blue like this.  Perhaps something has been in the works for a while...

This might seem like a dumb question, but has it been confirmed that they'll be doing the interview/Q & A in the same room together?

Foskett is not a beach boy but he sure as heck sang lead like he was.

This link was shared earlier in the thread:

https://blog.siriusxm.com/the-beach-boys-to-give-rare-qa-moderated-by-rob-reiner-for-siriusxm/

It starts out with Mike hearing the shower going and walks over and opens the door and Brian's there. It's all been just a dream since 2012. LOL.

Glastonbury looking very likely now

in your dreams

I'm amazed Melinda is allowing Brian to do this.....my guess is, this was just done for publicity for the SiriusXM Channel, and the current album. No tour is coming, no new album, no performance at the event.

Just tossing this out there. Any chance Brian could be announcing his retirement end of the year? That back surgery must have been a b!tch and possibly a wake up call.

He’s earned it.

He has also stated over and over and over again that he has no intention of retiring. For better or worse, I think Brian will be on stage until the last possible moment.

I suspect Melinda‘s role in this is pretty minimal. Any acrimony between Mike and Brian since 2012 is largely from Mike’s direction. Otherwise, though, I think your comments are spot on.

Nothing will be announced. Nothing is coming of this. This is simply an appearance on satellite radio.

and i'm biased, cause I was more of a heavy duty fan during the Foskett years, but I love his singing. Never got why any BB fans wouldn't. Of course it didn't help his popularity when he left Jesus Christ (Brian Wilson) to go work for Satan (Mike Love).

And then there were fans like me who didn’t like his voice or his penchant for singing over Brian before he even left to join up with Mike .

Well, at least you got the myKe luHv part of it right.  :woot

Doubt if this is anything more than just a plug for Siruius and the new album. Can't see Melinda being in favor of another reunion tour with ML at this point, as well as touring with Jeff again, hard feelings or not. Could be a train wreck, not needed at this point in time for Brian.

Brian, Al, or Blondie (and Matt) most likely don't need that bullshit at this stage in the game.

Another point to consider is how Mike for the better part of the past 5 years has had not much good to say about the 50th reunion experience. Not even rehashing or kicking the dead horse over the reasons why it didn't continue in 2012, but so much of the focus is on the other members' willingness to reunite now while fans have read and heard multiple revisions, changes, and backpedaling from Mike himself as to the reasons why he went back to his "lean and mean" M&B touring operation versus doing more shows with Brian-Al-David...From all of that, does it sound like Mike had a good experience with the 50th tour and album? So why would *he* now be so eager to get back together if that's what some fans are suggesting, if his experience was as negative as he's been saying for 5 years?

I would think that this event, in and of itself, is as people have mentioned more to promote the Sirius and RPO projects.
However, assuming Schilling is driving the bus here, and he is getting all members of the band to participate, one might be somewhat optimistic that he may be leading them down a path of future collaboration.

For a channel that will only be around for the Summer, it seems like typical Beach Boys timing to promote it at the end.

I'm here getting all excited for a reunion and you guys kill my excitement

Where I live, summer lasts a whole 'nother month, and then some (even if you're only counting 'til Labor Day)...

singing over Brian?

By this bizarre logic, Jeff went to hell.

Are we gonna have a crack Smiley Smile correspondent on the scene at Capitol records for the meeting this afternoon?

I hope we'll get some pictures before the airing. Don't want to wait until August 10th or even later. It'd be cool to add a third one to these "21st century Beach Boys" group shots:

(https://images.ecosia.org/QKdX0eRZheIFIqlrdqmWJoY6ivo=/0x390/smart/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.abc.net.au%2Freslib%2F200803%2Fr234487_941287.jpg)

(https://cdn.cnn.com/cnnnext/dam/assets/120425075215-the-beach-boys-grammys-2012-story-top.jpg)

Uh, yes. Excuse me, “doubling “.  I always hated when him and Brian would sing the same parts, because they’d almost never blend well and would almost invariably both be off key (and usually Foskett would be much louder). The current set up works much better.

There's a thread on bw.com to select a question to ask Brian at today's gathering.

https://brianwilson.websitetoolbox.com/post/from-bw-com-admin-ask-brian-a-question-9807223?trail=15#5

I'm sure the Powers That Be thought this was a good idea at the time; you never know which Brian is going to show up on any given day. If the Brian that is terrified of being on stage shows up, you simply mix his voice down and bring up Jeffrey.

Why is Rob Reiner moderating ? :lol

No pics I can find yet, but here's someone's pass for the show:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4I_daBXQh/?hl=en

And this:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4HaBGjKch/?hl=en

And possibly this:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4JCRTF9-o/

Possibly tonight:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4NXIOjyIt/?hl=en

Is that a certain ex Brit poster walking past?  :lol

Possibly the stage:

https://www.instagram.com/p/Bl4Rl4oH7L6/?hl=en

Heres a picture!

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jqtmzP3WJCWn7d5GRgHc2w2KB-NALpEV/view?usp=sharing (https://drive.google.com/file/d/1jqtmzP3WJCWn7d5GRgHc2w2KB-NALpEV/view?usp=sharing)

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/fr/cp0/e15/q65/38178390_2086959668240719_8351877027367747584_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=9ccefb61a6a7cc0488173e5362cccaf3&oe=5BD991C7)

I'm sorry but the stripe shirts are lame

Well if that doesn't illustrate division, I don't know what does.

This is VERY weird.

It's possible they're still at dress rehearsal stage, but yeah, weird dress code mismatch...

It almost makes me wonder if David is rejoining Mike's group.

Thanks for the updates  ;D

What is going on? ???

Those have to be the Mike Love Tribute shirts those three are wearing that were being peddled on the Kokomo website . They look ridiculous with matching shirts
Mike looks like he meditating on the spot and poor Al is in the buffer seat

Is that "Kokomo Brands" bottled water?  ;D

Bingo.


Bingo times 10.

Mike hawking his shirts. Nice touch.  ::)

Tough crowd.

It is a radio show remember. What they are wearing is irrelevant. Mike possibly bought along one for each of them and Brian and Al don’t want to wear theirs. Their choice.

(https://s20.postimg.cc/3wdqxnrbh/IMG_3186.png)

Needs a caption, stat!

I want to make a joke but honestly I'm just happy that Brian and Mike are probably sharing a laugh and having a good time together.

My analysis from looking at pictures:

- Mike and Bruce arrived first together with family
- When Brian arrived he jetted into the first chair he could see.
- Mike sat next to him talking
- For the interview they were assigned seats. But they couldn't move Brian to his assigned spot.

‘...so I’ve booked this room.’

I presume that is Rob Reiner to Brian’s right, not Stamos or Jeff. Or is that RR in front? Doesn’t look the same from the side.

Yupp that's the host

From a few descriptions on Instagram of the event, I don't see any mention of singing. Which makes sense, as that stage setup seems to be for speaking.

Rob Reiner minus a beard? Ok. But who is in the seat on Brian’s right then?

(https://s20.postimg.cc/3wdqxnrbh/IMG_3186.png)



Brian and Mike wanted to do a few bars of ‘Cell Block Number 9’, but Dave wasn’t keen.

You know what? Me too.

Me three.

The matching shirts indeed look kinda odd. I like the way it looked when they wore them in the 60s. But here they look ill-placed. The Pendleton shirts in 2012 looked better, if they wanted to wear matching outfits:

(https://pendletonblog.files.wordpress.com/2012/10/beach-boys-in-their-pendletons-2012.jpg)


Thanks for the pictures! No one got hurt. That's a start!  :-D


I see there's another seat to Brian's right. Who's place is that?






 :lol

"Brian, you'll never meet girls with that shirt..."

Brian, I'd like to clue you in on a great investment opportunity with "Kokomo Brands".....

Me four! Warms my heart to see them together.

Grating to see this used as an opportunity to hawk the shirts. Most people are only going to hear them anyways, so why even bother wearing the merch to this?

That said, amazing to see them all together.

(https://media.gettyimages.com/photos/host-rob-reiner-brian-wilson-al-jardine-mike-love-david-marks-and-picture-id1008039974)

Awesome.  But man, do they look dusty...

Where's Bruce -- on the end next to David?

Brian always looks happy to see Mike

Yes, and he's the only one adjusting the mic

I think the lighting in the Getty photo was a bit harsh. This makes them look a bit better:

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38086067_2087359664867386_2856213600425476096_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=c7300ec7b89e842d9963ac8a4396874a&oe=5C0C08E6)

Great words from David:

https://www.davidleemarks.com/news/tmz-paparazzi-other-things

That awkward moment when Al and Mike realize they've been drinking from the same water bottle.......

What’s with Mike’s Hulk Hogan mustache?  :lol

Great to see them all together though.  Brian looks good.

Great pic of Bruce (?) and Brian from Dave's website:

(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/993219_1ee97c9fd25c4be49f8717540791b139~mv2_d_2009_2009_s_2.jpg/v1/fill/w_500,h_500,fp_0.50_0.50,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/993219_1ee97c9fd25c4be49f8717540791b139~mv2_d_2009_2009_s_2.jpg)

Is that Bruce he is hugging ? Looks like Dave is standing .

Bruce apparently (standing/hunching) hugging Brian (sitting). It's from Dave's website/blog post where he also obliquely teases an update on his "Lost Beach Boy" book by mentioning the last decade has been epic. Not sure what else has gone on beyond his publicized health issues, the C50 reunion, and the very recent kerfuffle reported by TMZ. Whatever it is, he's holding the stories for the book update. Should be interesting....

From the way his sleeves are rolled up, it appears to be Bruce he's hugging

He has had it all year. I guess clean shaven vs. goatee (and the occasional full beard) got boring for him after 20 years.

I think you're actually right based on the sleeves....

(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/993219_a34b7630f2fc4d65b0cbf4e93602de3b~mv2_d_2039_2039_s_2.jpg/v1/fill/w_500,h_502,fp_0.50_0.50,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/993219_a34b7630f2fc4d65b0cbf4e93602de3b~mv2_d_2039_2039_s_2.jpg)

Bruce, Rob Reiner, Archie Bunker, and David Marks.....

I'm not even the most violently opposed to wearing a striped shirt, but I have to say Dave looked cooler earlier in the day when he showed up in his own clothes:

(https://static.wixstatic.com/media/993219_eeb7b99349cd412aac192bf4dcee2aaf~mv2_d_3024_4032_s_4_2.jpg/v1/fill/w_250,h_333,fp_0.50_0.50,q_90,usm_0.66_1.00_0.01/993219_eeb7b99349cd412aac192bf4dcee2aaf~mv2_d_3024_4032_s_4_2.jpg)

They probably scheduled this to take place after Brian's surgery and rehab.  They also had to coordinate with Mike & Bruce's touring schedule. 

I haven't been one that's begging for a reunion, but this is a really sweet photo. Maybe the best thing for these two is just to have lunch occasionally. Reminisce, have a laugh, and no time to get into the pettiness.

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38118639_1648169025309600_9004337633995784192_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=6a1baa0e393d799c42017bb4f5b04475&oe=5BDA888D)

(https://scontent-dfw5-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/19c4f594f03db7debc8b1e4c3b27d834/5C0ECB2B/t51.2885-15/e35/38081845_974389632731943_1633895045042012160_n.jpg)

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-news/brian-wilson-mike-love-and-surviving-beach-boys-put-bad-blood-aside-for-rare-interview-705085/

(https://scontent-lga3-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/08881e25d6a7c87d39879b9ef506698b/5BF2F82E/t51.2885-15/e35/37862571_241711566456737_2597722058867605504_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/fa70b57271216d0754fc03e46a9745f7/5C124A36/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37606941_2132883703389685_7090738702137163776_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/a9e0c2817b2e9c59564b0898e39057d3/5C091596/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37244529_1400273516773327_4016068552342634496_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/96aeeec6f1643de0889f6b5eeea3d079/5BF572E0/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37623345_245370052740708_4103351131135016960_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/e3d8e80f86fa6a5cae03b1eac35ab8d6/5C10C7FC/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37681546_429703854185803_6177154890050043904_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/01e894a3f82076baa88bdb563c543d5d/5BF41E04/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37527263_239993603310379_6746074839422861312_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/2a36c41844c3e3e5f4be2ceb131b7e6c/5C0282E0/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37816291_798448610545145_8709395864637931520_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/61b3c306b7573e2bccd34e6b80421e9b/5C0F32D2/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37258129_1770633026346504_221368696109531136_n.jpg)

(https://scontent-cdg2-1.cdninstagram.com/vp/da07e7b2af28fe442c1c426a21672964/5C11B9B8/t51.2885-15/sh0.08/e35/s640x640/37751126_363978020804157_3470107311995879424_n.jpg)

Hi, Rodney!

Haha, I just spotted that! Rodney on the ROQ was in the house! That's cool.

I don't want this to sound the wrong way, but from the various social media pics that were leaking out, I was beginning to wonder if those posting and shown in the photos were actually invited guests, or if they were looking for the studio where auditions were being held for the next season of "Big Brother".  ;D

Is it just me or does the Sirius XM banner give a weird blurry look to all of the photos. Almost like I should be wearing 3D glasses.

It's because of the striped shirts!

“Beach Brother” coming this fall! ;D

https://gumroad.com/l/mRwVf (https://gumroad.com/l/mRwVf)

Looking at more photos coming out, and seeing Getty Images now has them for distribution too, the visual and optics of those shirts does stick out even more. It's an odd visual to present, and it's just opinion but it does put a dividing line into the event. As if anyone didn't know one was there anyway. Now the press wires and PR from the event puts it on full display.

But seriously - Those shirts are the Mike Love tribute shirts being sold at the link above. They even have pictures of Mike on the cuffs, so when you roll up the sleeves as David did, you see photos of Mike.

Really? That's my reaction. Tacky. A schtick. Distracting from what the event actually was. And if anyone starts getting on Brian and Al for not wearing them, remember that those shirts have nothing to do with the Beach Boys in their present form. Especially with Mike's photos in the lining and the cuffs.

Just my 2 cents.

Has a famous band, where the entire band regularly wore "band uniforms" as a thing, ever done a press conference or a planned-out event, where some members simply just didn't wear that uniform, while multiple others did?

This is pretty nuts from a visual and "what does this really mean when we read through the lines" perspective! Bizarre. Is it a powerplay maneuver that was planned out, sort of the next stage of Mike and Bruce's "Beach Boys" omnipresent hat logo, that asserts THESE PARTICULAR GUYS ARE IN THE BAND CALLED THE BEACH BOYS? Maybe yes, maybe no. But it's hard to think that it meant absolutely nothing to the guys.

I know not long ago, there was a thread on this board where it came up that Carl came super late to a BBs gig during the striped shirt era, and was the lone non-striped-shirt wearer on stage that night... but that was by accident simply because of how late he was running, so I'm not counting that. Plus it wasn't multiple members not wearing striped shirts.

I'm thinking this might be a first in the history of famous uniform-wearing bands.

Right. Does Mike want a reunion because he wants to spend time with his family or because he wants to make money? I get it-- both. Understandable, but the shirt thing comes off as a --as you said--tacky ploy. He's using the reunion for self-promotion because he knows more people will pay attention with both him and Brian in the same room.

It is distracting. And these photos are now circulating so the general public can see what's going on. It is nuts, and it didn't need to be that way.

I guess some would suggest Brian and Al should have worn Mike's shirts to help promote Mike's line of Mike Love tribute shirts? Because that striped shirt worn by Mike, Bruce, and David sure as f*** has nothing to do with the Beach Boys.

It's a distraction.

It wouldn't be The BBs without something weird like that happening.  

I should add there were a few C50 shows where 2 of the guys happened to have simultaneously wore the same paisley shirt, but that was surely just a coincidence, and those shirts were anything but iconic uniforms for the band. That was more like the I Love Lucy episode where Lucy and Ethel buy the same dress. This is something else entirely. Again, even if nothing was "meant" by this visual divide, it just makes for an awkward distraction.

The 2012 wear was iconic in its own right! :bw

I sorta agree. But someone should have shown the band members the Lucy and Ethel buy the same dress episode on a DVD on the tour bus to help clue them in to that fashion no-no!
Maybe if onetime Desi Arnaz Jr. bandmate Billy Hinsche had been on C50, he'd have educated the BBs on that, so that fashion faux pas could have been avoided  :lol

(http://i64.tinypic.com/10hov4o.jpg)

(http://i66.tinypic.com/2h4luep.jpg)

(http://i68.tinypic.com/k1ovx2.jpg)

Regardless of how much any of the guys were or weren't thinking about what they were wearing, the "optics" of the situation as far as drawing a line between "factions" was almost comically prevalent. So much so that the Rolling Stone article this morning specifically points out that very division. (Though they only point out the visual difference; nobody seems to be reporting on the stripes shirts being Mike-branded shirts).

As objective as I can be, Brian and Al had about 27 good, solid reasons to not wear those shirts. And we obviously don't even know if they were offered shirts, or if they were even told the three other guys would be wearing the same thing.

It doesn't *seem* based on available pics and reports that the shirts were even a thing to the guys, at least during the event. You never know what goes on behind the scenes. If Mike's "branded" shirts got some eye rolls behind the scenes, I wouldn't find that particularly inappropriate.

I dunno; I can't imagine, say, the circa 1995 "Threetles" all showing up to an "Anthology" press conference in Apple-branded 1964 Beatles suits (or '65 "Day Tripper" jackets, etc.). An occasional nod to the past can be tasteful and cool. McCartney wears Beatle boot-type things or skinny ties sometimes. He'll wear a Nehru-jacket sort of thing sometimes, etc.  

But the only time the post-Beatles Beatles ever strapped on an old Beatles suit or their Sgt. Pepper uniforms were for goofy music video bits and things like that.

the shirt issue really spoils the event, visually, so at least we have radio to thank for (reminds me of a song title)

something more important this brings to mind is late George Harrison and how he'd describe his former Beatle years as "a shirt I used to wear but don't anymore"

Three guys wearing the same Mike Love tribute shirt, AND baseball caps. Two guys wearing regular street clothes, no hats. At the first public "reunion" of this band in 6 years.

Someone, anyone: Try to tell us that wasn't intentional.

And yes, now RS points out what anyone can see in the photo.

Tacky and unnecessary.

Pete Townshend probably told them to do it.

https://youtu.be/gj7ZbfKZ090

Who wore it better?
The striped shirt thing reminds me of going to conferences and getting company t-shirts. Some of us avoided wearing those ugly things.

Jeez Al you could have worn a salmon colored shirt tooo!

As that photo from 2012 shows, Mike, Bruce and Dave wear the ball caps all the time. It's their thing.

Now, on to my grand shirt theory.

An earlier post noted that Brian threw the seating arrangement out of order. It probably the case that Brian was supposed to sit in Dave's chair, so the look would have been No stripes (Rob) -- stripes (Dave) -- no stripes  (Al) -- stripes (Mike) -- no stripes (Brian) -- stripes (Dave). That also would have seated Brian and Mike next to one another, in the center. Brian's back and reluctance to move simply threw it off.

Another clue? The photo gallery Dave Marks posted suggests he wasn't wearing that striped shirt when he went into Capitol for the day. The stripes were brought in just for the event.

They could have all worn matching "Beach Boys Family Reunion" t-shirts instead!  :lol

Without getting into the potential motives of the wardrobe choices, I'll just say that Mike, David and Bruce look ridiculous. If only one of them (doesn't matter who, take your pick) decided to bring out the old-style striped shirt and wear it last night as a nod to the old days that probably would have been kind of cool. Three old men in matching striped shirts and caps?  Not so much.

Geez, I hope the shirts were brought in just for the event. You  don't think they go to the grocery store and DMV with those shirts and caps, do you?

Shirtgate.
Mike probably brought 'em for everybody, and Brian and Al took a pass.
Anybody wishing this event didn't happen, because of the fact that 3 members wore the same shirt?

Do you think shirts were brought for Brian and Al to wear? If so, how silly is that to expect them to wear shirts with Mike's image on them when they are shirts the Beach Boys are associated with? Hawking Mike's line of shirts is tacky as hell.

For the next gathering, Brian plans to bring this shirt and ask everybody to wear one:

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/15179074_1793051577631531_3352348943693699095_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=9859491427aa07b74d40dcae1e4fdd37&oe=5C03CAB5)

I said it before and I’ll say it again, they should have worn striped shirts over the 50th. Or at least for the promotional pictures. Instead of wearing the horrible plaid shirts. Looked like a bunch of old ass hillbilly lumberjacks.


Oh and 6 must be the lucky number, they reunite every 6 years. 2006, 2012 & 2018

Wait, so this event *wasn't* for a tribute band?

(http://www.whiskyagogo.com/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/08/703_V1.jpg)

(https://d1bdhkmqqz901h.cloudfront.net/980x662/smart/http://www.tribtown.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/10/2016/07/55d154bee121c.hires_.jpg)

(https://www.boothbayregister.com/sites/default/files/2016/07/field/image/%21cid_4FC790D5-0597-4680-943D-6B7968B0A308%40cogeco.jpg)

(http://www.australiannetworkentertainment.com/Images/the_beach_boyz745.jpg)

(http://media.ents24network.com/image/000/047/327/073b553c1644cd16afb4aece96f78ff6ad0a8fa0.jpg)

(http://www.ppes.com.au/uploads/band-photos/large/beach-boys-tribute-band-show-perth_1478815317.jpg)

(http://www.careyandpaulgroup.com/photos/tribute-bands/beach-boys-tribute.jpg)

(http://www.indiehoy.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/06/beach-boys-bands.jpg)

(https://www.wingilariver.com/sysimg/catch-a-wave-beach-boys-tribute-vee-quiva-hotel-casino-entertainment-events-vee-quiva-event-center-catch-a-wave-beach-boys-tribute-image.jpg)

(https://s3.amazonaws.com/gigsalad_media/g/good_vibrations_beach_boys_tribute_las_v/5860438d72298_300_sq)

(http://www.mitchelloperahouse.com/wp-content/uploads/Beach-Boys-Tribute.jpg)

(http://rumpleskilton.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/Beach-Boys-Tribute-band-1.jpg)

Ha at least these guys know enough to wear the short sleeve shirts!

A few interesting new details here:

https://www.billboard.com/articles/news/8468014/beach-boys-siriusxm-town-hall-recap


Reunited Beach Boys Catch a Nostalgic Wave During SiriusXM Town Hall Taping: Here Are 7 Highlights

7/31/2018  by Melinda Newman   

The event marked the first time the band had been together since its 2012 50th anniversary tour.

More than 55 years since they last recorded there, the Beach Boys gathered in Capitol Records’ vaunted Studio A on Monday night in Hollywood for a SiriusXM Town Hall.

The event marked the first time the five members -- Brian Wilson, Mike Love, Al Jardine, David Marks and Bruce Johnston -- have been together since their 50th anniversary shows in 2012. They gathered in celebration of their SiriusXM channel and The Beach Boys With the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra, which came out June 8. A number of selections from the album, which features the Beach Boys' original vocals set to new orchestrations, were played during the evening, with Wilson acting as the ultimate producer -- raising his hand to cut off the tracks after he’d heard enough.

Though all were collegial, complimentary and polite, if not warm, toward each other onstage in an interview moderated by director Rob Reiner, the decades-long division between the two camps -- Wilson and Jardine tour together under Wilson’s name, while the other three tour as the Beach Boys -- played out more subtly in that Love, Marks and Johnston all wore matching blue-and-white vertically striped shirts, similar to what the band wore in its early days.

Among the night's highlights...

Wilson revealed that his songwriting process begins with chords. “At the piano, I’ll play chords, play, play, play, and then, all of a sudden, the melody comes.” Added Love, his cousin: “No one was more masterful at chord progressions than Brian.”

Wilson was the band’s first drummer, before younger brother Dennis got the gig. He plays snare drum on the Beach Boys’ debut single, 1961’s “Surfin’.” “When I rented the gear, I forgot to rent the sticks,” Jardine recalled. “So in rehearsal, [Brian] used his finger, then I went back and got some brushes.”

The band’s vocal masterwork, “Good Vibrations,” took six months to record. “It was challenging for me to teach the guys,” Wilson said. “It was a little more of a masterpiece.” Joked Jardine: “It felt like six years.” Love dictated the lyrics to his now-ex-wife on the way to the studio. “She transcribed them as I was driving to the studio.” Glen Campbell is among the musicians in the famed Wrecking Crew collective who played on the song. “When I heard the final mix, I said, ‘This is either going to be No. 1 or our career is over,’” Johnston said of the kaleidoscopic track. Jardine reminded Wilson that he didn’t want “Good Vibrations” on Pet Sounds, instead wanting to save it for Smile.

Speaking of, Johnston had some thoughts on the band’s great unfinished concept album from the ‘60s, Smile, which Wilson eventually abandoned after it was mired in band discord and studio complications: “I would have made it your solo album on [now defunct classical label] Angel and we would be invited to be the vocalists on it with you because it was way up there in your head. Everything was great.”

The Beach Boys and the Beatles had great respect for each other, deeply influencing each other’s works, but they never collaborated, much to the Beach Boys’ dismay. “I thought we were going to,” Jardine said. “John [Lennon] and George [Harrison] came to my hotel room back in the '60s, and on our way to do a show in Paris, I thought they were going to discuss some music with me, and [instead] they taught me transcendental meditation. That would have been a great collaboration.” Johnston recalled playing Pet Sounds for The Who’s Keith Moon and two of the Beatles, whom he said took the vibe of “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” for “Here, There and Everywhere” as they began work on Revolver. Reiner told a story about McCartney walking into a Wilson show just as Wilson started playing “God Only Knows,” which McCartney has said is his favorite song. “I heard he started crying,” Wilson said of a live performance of the song.

After 50 years, the band members are still discovering things about each other. Wilson said that the lovely, melancholy “In My Room,” on 1963’s Surfer Girl, was more reflective of his co-writer Gary Usher’s feelings than his own at the time. “I didn’t know that,” piped up Jardine. “I assumed it was Brian Wilson’s personal story about being secluded and lonely and feeling those feelings we all have.” Johnston revealed that to him, “The most incredible song in the whole catalog from a writing point of view is ‘Warmth of the Sun.’ Perfect song, perfect recording.” Love added: “I went over to Brian’s house. He’d moved out of his family home,” he said of composing the song, which was started the day John F. Kennedy was murdered. “He came up with the haunting melody and I came up with the words. We recorded it maybe a month and a half later. It was mystical. President Kennedy had been assassinated. It was powerful.”

Among the family and friends in attendance to support the band were Brian Wilson’s ex-wife, Marilyn, who told Billboard how much she was enjoying the Beach Boys channel, in part because it was playing songs from The Honeys, her '60s girl group signed to Capitol and produced by Wilson. “Thanks to [SiriusXM senior director of music programming] Lou Simon, I’m hearing our music on the radio in America for the first time. We got played in Europe, but not America.” Also there were Carl Wilson’s sons, Justyn and Jonah, and Blue Note Records head Don Was, who produced I Just Wasn’t Made for These Times, the 1995 documentary on Brian Wilson.

The Town Hall begins airing on the Beach Boys’ SiriusXM channel on Aug. 10.

--Additional reporting by Fred Bronson



Here's one from the LA Times:

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/music/la-et-ms-beach-boys-town-hall-siriusxm-20180725-story.html#

Beach Boys founding members reconvene for harmonious gathering in Hollywood

by Randy Lewis

Time heals all wounds. And in Hollywood, having a new project to promote can undoubtedly facilitate the mending process.

Thus, nary a hurtful nor discouraging word between Beach Boys founding members and periodic adversaries Brian Wilson and Mike Love was heard Monday night during a taping for a satellite radio show.

Sirius XM brought the two together in a public setting for the first time since the disharmonious end of the group’s wildly successful 50th anniversary tour in 2012, when Love, who holds the legal rights to use of the Beach Boys name, quashed efforts to extend the reunion tour and instead returned to his scaled-down Beach Boys touring group minus Wilson and fellow original members Al Jardine and David Marks.

The promotional aspect was twofold: to draw more attention to the satellite radio service’s new Beach Boys-dedicated channel and to spotlight the recently released album “The Beach Boys With the Royal Philharmonic Orchestra,” in which songs from the group’s repertoire have been overlaid with orchestral accompaniment by the English orchestra.

The album concept is similar to two collections of vintage Elvis Presley studio tracks that have had commercial success, especially overseas. The connective thread among the projects is longtime Presley associate Jerry Schilling

Actor-director Rob Reiner moderated the hourlong session at Capitol Studio A in Hollywood, where the Beach Boys once recorded, engaging all five longtime members who were on hand: Wilson (whom Reiner introduced as “The Genius”), Love, singer-guitarist Jardine, guitarist Marks and keyboardist-singer Bruce Johnston, who joined the enterprise in 1965.

The exchanges between Wilson and Love found both at their most cordial, Love saluting his cousin for melodic and harmonic creativity and Wilson coming across as moderately more conversational than he often is during interviews, a process he regularly treats with the same enthusiasm as a tax audit.

Jardine provided some of the most illuminating anecdotes from the band’s storied history. Regarding the recording of their first hit, “Surfin,’” Jardine noted that as vocally accomplished as the group — also then including Brian’s brothers Carl and Dennis — was in its early days, it had no instruments other than the Wilson family’s piano.

Of the “Surfin’” session, Wilson noted that “I had a little drum with a brush.” Jardine explained that after renting other instruments, “I forgot to rent the sticks for the drum. So I had to go back to the store and wound up getting some brushes.”

In addition to questions of his own, Reiner facilitated queries from audience members, most of which were Beach Boys 101 subjects such as “Did you live the lifestyle of surfing, cars and girls?” (Wilson said, as he often has, that Dennis Wilson was the only real surfer in the group, and that it was Dennis’ suggestion that Love write a song about the then-emerging sport that put the band on the road to pop music history.)

Marks said he also tried his hand at surfing, confessing, “I wasn’t very good. But there were girls at the beach, so I kept showing up.”

During a discussion of the Beach Boys’ delve into music traditions, Marks pointed out that surf guitar hero Dick Dale recorded a version of the Bahamian folk tune “Sloop John B” several years before the Beach Boys took it on in 1966 for their “Pet Sounds” album.

Jardine also jumped to answer in at one audience member’s question that temporarily stumped Wilson and the others: Was there anyone you would have wanted to collaborate with that you never did?

Jardine piped in: “The Beatles. I thought we were going to collaborate with them. John and George invited us to come to their hotel room when we were doing a show in Paris. But when we got there, they taught me Transcendental Meditation. But I think we would have had a great collaboration.”

The town hall session is slated to premiere Aug. 10 on the Beach Boys’ SiriusXM Channel 4 and will feature three of the songs from the Royal Philharmonic album: “Fun, Fun, Fun,” “California Girls” and “Good Vibrations.”

Near the end, Reiner asked, “Why do you think this music has lasted as long as it has?” Love responded: “I’d say it’s love,” Reiner elicited chuckles from the audience of about 100 as he quipped, “You mean Mike Love or just love in general?”

“The love of getting together and singing those harmonies,” Love continued. “Without thinking about any money, and about any fame or any record position on the charts, it’s the sheer joy of getting together and doing those harmonies together. That’s the essential ingredient.”

If even mainstream media outlets are picking up on the "Beach Boys 101" nature of the questions, it's probably good to temper our expectations regarding the actual Q&A itself. I already have, but even I'm surprised how basic some of the questions were.

But such is the nature of these events. I didn't expect someone to ask about the C50 tour.  :lol

The Billboard description is interesting; multiple media outlets are (for better or worse) picking up on the flashing red light that was the mis-matched shirts. Leave it to the Beach Boys to create some weird minor controversy nobody could have envisioned. Shirtgate indeed.

Billboard is of course incorrect that David Marks is a regular touring member of Mike's band.

While it's important, to be clear, that we shouldn't indeed overanalyze the shirts, I'm a bit surprised, even if Brian couldn't move to another chair, that they didn't swap some other guys around to avoid making the already-painfully-obvious conflicting wardrobe camps a bit less visually obvious.

If these had been generic striped shirts, then it would be easy to just assume some organizer thought it would be fun (or funny) to have them all wear striped shirts. But one can't be faulted for connecting Brian and Al *not* wearing the shirts with the fact that they're part of Mike's signature line of shirts, complete with Mike's image being sewn into the inner lining apparently.

This story has been told by Mike a couple of times. What confuses me is, if they had a vocal session that day and Mike only came up with the lyrics while driving there, which lyrics were they supposed to sing originally?

Yep, sounds like nothings  coming from this

Why didn't they include Blondie Chaplin in this?
After all, he was an official Beach Boy (even if it wasn't for a long time) and has been an important part of Brian's shows for years.
Ricki Fataar seems to be more or less retired, so I understand why he's not there. But Blondie should have been there!

If the purpose of this was after all the hoopla, to simply promote the symphonic record, which Blondie doesn't appear on, why would he be there?

You don't say.

Yeah that seemed a little revisionist to me

It's nice of him to say and I have no reason to believe that he didn't have that thought at the time, it's just a little funny to see now.

It's hard to say Ricky has retired... he tours constantly with Bonnie Raitt.

Maybe Brian preferred to sit next to Al. Also that picture where Bruce is hugging Brian has Brian and Al already sitting so perhaps the other 3 came in after and Bw and AJ wanted to sit next to each other

Not apparently at all - Reality. Pictures of Mike are in fact on the inner lining of the sleeve cuff for one, so if you roll up the sleeves as David Marks had done for the event, you look down at your hand and see photos of Mike Love on the material.

Again I'll ask simply - Is the thought that those shirts were brought in for Brian and Al to wear, and if so, what kind of half-assed thought process would someone go through to assume Brian and Al would wear Mike's shirts that not only take the image away from the Beach Boys' association with those striped shirts, but also have pictures of Mike in them and are being hawked during the only time they've been together in 6 years?

Unreal, all of this.

I'll just come out and say it, or repeat it as that's the case. I've been seeing more wire photos and various shots of the event coming out and being republished.

The image of three band members in matching Mike Love tribute striped shirts and caps and two guys in normal clothes looked ridiculous. If this was the Love team's attempt to market Mike's shirts, or send some subliminal message out on the press wires, it looked silly and cheap. And what no one is mentioning either is how host Rob Reiner had separate off-stage photos taken, one with the three guys in stripes and one with the two in normal clothes. Couldn't figure that one out as it was a group event. But it looked silly.

My 2 cents.

I agree, it's very hard to see it otherwise. IMO it feels like some sort of subliminal attempt to assert control over the brand and mark his territory, so to speak. I find it hard to conceive that the choice was made from anything but an insecure place.  As if to remind everybody of who's boss. Maybe Mike isn't completely doing this consciously. I dunno. He's seemingly unstoppably hardwired at this point to remind everyone of his role in the band, as if that's his Sara Connor 1984 mission, that maybe he just does this stuff on autopilot.

That said, I'm genuinely happy to see Mike and Brian putting their differences aside and enjoying each others' company for a little bit. I think that's a genuinely good thing for them as human beings, and as family. And that's the most important takeaway of the whole thing. No doubt.  

While I may be bitching and moaning about the clothes, I don't want to overlook the significance of there being some sort of olive branch. That must be good for every band member's soul on some level. But it is possible to feel really genuinely good about them having reunited, however briefly, like this... and to also feel like there's an awkward aspect that was unnecessarily introduced with the shirts. 

GF - as far as public perception and brand weirdness goes, all your points about the splintered factions being exacerbated by the shirts are valid.  I don't want to be a downer at a time like this, but I also find it difficult to simply overlook that... and it's very hard to avoid feeling that it's an unfortunate that choice was made with clothing with regards to what it symbolizes.

Nobody should be feeling like the band is split apart from each other and splintered into different groups at a rare time when they come together. This should be a "holy" moment in BB-ville. Doesn't mean they have to all wear matching shirts that are embroidered with the text "we all love each other and want to record new music together" if they're not ready for that... but simply *not* having three of them dressed in the iconic outfits while the others aren't would suffice for more normalcy and less distraction.  

It's such a no-brainer to not muck things up with an awkward partial iconic shirt presentation.  Which is why I will circle back to the thought that it feels hard to think the clothes on some, but not all the band members, to not have been a planned stunt on some level, so to speak. And hey, maybe Mike offered Brian and Al a chance to wear these shirts too, but if they didn't all want to wear them, he shouldn't have worn them either. It'd have been better taste to not make Brian and Al look like the odd men out.

Maybe Mike and Bruce just need to finally give in and get face and neck tats with the logo, because I think the hats and shirts might be insufficient reminders. They can start with henna tats, and if they like 'em, they can take the full plunge  :lol

They look like they're ready to go hunting.

Brian: "I'm gonna shoot some Deer!!!"

Al: "oh dear God...."

Oh deer


(Pun intended 😁)

Ahh, the Pendeltons! Now *those* were cool shirts, and Pendelton did it right be reissuing the original board shirt that the band wore in their earliest promo photos as a "Beach Boys" edition of that shirt. I always wanted one - quite expensive for a flannel but it's the only one with that specific design. I was in a shop on vacation that had Pendelton shirts on sale, but they were not the Beach Boys edition board shirts, and they were made in China...I think Pendelton has some that are made outside the US but I thought the more upscale shirts like the BB edition were made in the US. Still neat flannels, but not the one I wanted. Anyway...

Pendelton did it right because it was a "Beach Boys" edition and marketed as such. Not specific to a single member, and no individual band member tried to take ownership of what is - to fans - an iconic shirt in the band's history that some fans might want to wear and own.

As someone says, "just sayin'".

I'm being honest in saying that the first thing I thought when those first photos started appearing, before hearing a word of the interview or event itself, was what is the deal with the shirts. I'm not the only one judging from comments on various outlets, including RS coverage of the event. It was an odd visual for sure, and it kind of dampened the vibe for me.

That said, it is a very, very cool thing to get all the guys together this way. So I'm even a little more surprised at this whole matching shirt deal, where it looked like 3 against 2 at an event supposed to be about coming together as a band again.

Sad. But par for the course.

Also, Mike and Bruce need to ditch the overly-dressy leather shoes (especially with the TruckNutz™-esque tassels, yeesh!), and just get a bit casual with some sneakers. The "I'm a rich dude" shoe look is a bad match with the rest of these outfits, either paired with Pendletons or striped shirts.  Mr. Blackwell would have a field day.

I don't follow M&B's fashion choices during their shows, so I have to ask - I know Bruce often wears shorts when he performs live... he doesn't ever dare wear those tassel dress shoes with shorts, does he?

Does it really matter who wore what? The fucking Beach Boys were together again for a few minutes. Did anybody here think we would ever see a picture of Brian and Mike together, and laughing and enjoying each others company?

I agree actually but you gotta admit, it does look off at first glance especially since those are Mike Love branded shirts. That said at the end of the day it was heartening to see them laughing together

Stars and Stripes vol. 2

This is perfect and will not be surpassed. Close the thread now.

BTW re: the striped shirts

I didn't realize that Mike and Bruce's group is currently wearing them. At least they were here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G9_s9bDVD-0

$248 for the shirt? Is that correct? Wow...I'll pass. One other note from the recent video, Mike sounds terrible on Rhonda, really makes one appreciate Al all the more.

I don’t know what his obsession with singing Rhonda now . He went 50 years without it . It’s not a good song for him
To do. It doesn’t fit his voice well.

The whole shirts thing is tough. They're doing essentially a *radio* program, and it sounds like the actual Q&A aspect isn't particularly substantive. The radio bit hasn't even aired. So all we have is some pics of them to chew on. It's the first time they've all been together in almost six years, and some nasty stuff has been said (mostly by just the one guy) about some of the others during that time, and "political factions" within the band's organization have arguably (or maybe not even arguably) become more solidified.

So their shirts are "just shirts", but I think the outward "optics" are a real thing to talk about, and certainly one of the only things to chew on at the moment.

The fact that two of the three big media outlet reports of the event specifically honed in on the painfully obvious "divide" that their dress was emblematic of, tells me the "shirt issue" isn't entirely superfluous. It's a real thing, even if in terms of actual substance, not *as* big of a deal as it might seem.

To me, this event and the "shirt issue" are pretty darn emblematic of how I would expect these guys to undertake such an event. It's absolutely unavoidably heartening to see them all in one place, and to see them cordial if not super warm and fuzzy (to loosely paraphrase one of the articles). And, at the same time, they're regularly known for throwing some wrench into things, sometimes huge sometimes tiny. The shirts thing isn't a huge deal, but these guys aren't *that* dense; they had to know all the things we're batting around (that it's tacky to wear Love-branded shirts; arguably tacky to wear any striped shirts; that Brian and Al wouldn't want to wear Love-branded shirts, that having the two "factions" so loudly contrasting in dress would be, AT BEST, visually awkward and an easy "in" for media outlets to snark about the divide, etc.).

This reminds me a bit of some of the C50 interviews. It was nice to see them all together, and interesting to see them interact on topics you would never have imagined (did anyone think we'd ever hear Mike reference Brian's Gershwin album in an interview?), but it was also obvious that, while they do have a Beatlesque "spark" when they're all together, they also have some awkward, stilted stuff still going on, such as probably laughing too much, a bit self-consciously so, in interviews during C50, sometimes for instance when Brian offered a maybe slightly funny non-sequitur or something.

I haven't watched this latest video, but I noticed when Mike took the lead over a few years ago, he kept it in the same key (same key Al sings it now) instead of lowering it. If he's so insistent on singing the song (which I would gather might be a belated case of wanting to sing one of their few #1 records), dropping the key a bit would help immensely.

Mike's band did an event some months back (maybe in the UK?) where they wore the striped shirts. In the few discussions I saw, it was just referenced that they were doing a sort of throwback thing. What wasn't known at the time is that Mike is indeed launching a line of signature shirts. Not sure how he managed it, but he managed to make an already-tacky decision to have a band wear matching uniforms in 2018 even *more* tacky by making it about a branding thing.

Not the same thing as Dennis wearing "Beach Boys" shirts on tour in the 70s and 80s when it totally seemed more a case of living a the wild rock star lifestyle and just turning up at the gig and needing a shirt.

I also don't think wearing the old striped shirts as a one-off kitschy throwback thing is a horrible idea. Let's remember that Al (and only Al) did this back for the band's "20th Anniversary" gig on December 31, 1980. It should be noted, of course, that I believe Al had actually dug out a legit, original striped shirt from the 60s. He was not introducing an Al Jardine Signature Striped Shirt.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DSYwj6QXcAIZ5ss.jpg:large)

I think I saw somewhere, that Mike's shirts are priced at $249.00? That's a pricey shirt!
Maybe package it up with a ticket and a meet and greet. Bring a tailor on tour and you get a custom alteration backstage while meeting Mike.

I would love to know if Mike brought shirts for all
Of them and Brian and Al said no to wearing them or Mike just brought them
For him Bruce and Dave

Brian and Al looked great with the 21st century BBs look... :bw

I wish Blondie were there also. I hear Sail On Sailor daily on the Sirius Channel.  I also hear  Holland and BB Live cuts. Blondie in my mind is every much as big a part of the mid BB period as David was the early times. And my guess is that David would agree. Im certain that having Blondie on the C50 tour was a monetary decision, but not having him at the interview in my opinion was just another example of The Beach Boys making an A Plus opportunity a B plus.  I  also would pay anything to see Blondie in Mikes Striped shirt!

I do agree Blondie and Ricky should have been apart of the 50th Reunion Tour billed as "Special Guests".

You just won the internet.  ;D

Hypothetical: Flip the script and both Al and Brian show up wearing these shirts yesterday, while Mike, Bruce, and David are sporting normal street clothes.

(https://cdn.ontourmedia.io/fanfire/images/product/large/BWI/BWI80162.jpg)


In that case, I suppose no one would notice, including the media outlets writing about the shirts, and anyone noticing and commenting would be called a hater. Right?

Boss shirt though! ;D

As we know, it's not really about shirts. It's about one member of the band using the reunion as an opportunity for self-promotion. Also, to be disappointed about that decision is not to miss the importance of the reunion and the joy in seeing Brian and Mike smiling at each other. We can have two thoughts at once. We can have complicated opinions about Mike.

By the way, I love that Brian shirt. Hadn't seen his merch in a while.

There shouldn't be a "but..." in any of this. The surviving members of one of the greatest groups on earth have come together once again, against all logic and odds, and all anybody on this board can talk about is the evil Mike Love somehow cashing in on this and making a quick buck. This board embarrasses me at times.

Because that’s what he tried to do/ did. 

That's not "all anybody can talk about"... I for one have repeatedly said that it's a wonderful, truly wonderful thing for the band to have come back together for this, and that it's hopefully a healing moment on some level for them.

That doesn't mean that somebody can't *also* think that the shirt thing is a little weird, too. And I don't know (nor can I say) if the "quick buck" thing was the motivation, only that it should have been obvious to Mike that only some members wearing shirts which are THAT iconic presents the opposite effect of a unified gathering of a "band". If something kinda rubs somebody the wrong way, they're allowed to talk about it.

But I agree that people shouldn't lose sight of the fact that it's super rad that they got back together (despite the shirt weirdness).

What if KISS reunited and did a press conference, but only 2 or 3 of them were dressed up in the iconic makeup, but the other(s) weren't? Wouldn't that be weird (and talked about), despite people also being glad they reunited? Or would that be a case of "let's not talk about the fact that some of them are dressed in the iconic makeup, while others aren't... let's sweep that under the rug and not talk about it ever"? Please answer this; I don't know how anyone can say that a KISS situation like that would just be ignored without a "but". It would be weird! C'mon.

Consider this scenario for a moment, if you will: What if The Beach Boys as a collective unit have come together to announce and support their friend and partner, Mike Love, in having his own line of Beach Boys related clothing? What if Brian himself gave his full approval and blessing? Would that change anybody's tune?

Well if they actually all talked about the shirt thing, joked about it, and said they were supporting Mike's line, it would make a little more sense, and it would less weird if Brian/Al said they were knowingly supporting Mike and added that they just simply decided to wear their street clothes just because they're more comfortable in them. It'd still be bizarre, but maybe it'd make more sense if they were upfront like that in your hypothetical scenario.

But you didn't answer my question about KISS.  What if KISS reunited and did a press conference, but only 2 or 3 of them were dressed up in the iconic makeup, but the other(s) weren't? With no band member mentioning a peep about the difference. Would that not strike you as weird?

For me, the shirts aren't a huge deal and I still love seeing them all pictured together. We're all mature enough to know, especially after C50, that they may give off more cordiality than is rolling around in their head. That is, a pic of Brian and Mike smiling and exchanging stories is cool, and I don't think they're "faking it", but it also doesn't mean they're totally cool and it's only people "around" them fueling the acrimony. There is of course that too, sometimes.

I don't think Mike handing out signature shirts is really some huge cash grab. Few even *know* they're Love signature shirts. I dunno, maybe the audio of the event will reveal Mike actually plugged his clothing line, which would be pretty ridiculous. But I'm guessing he didn't do that. So I don't care about that stuff particularly.

There are two separate but somewhat related issues that the shirts thing actually does raise. One is simple optics as I've said many times. MAJOR kudos to Schilling for getting these guys to be in the same room. I don't think even the hardcore fans always understand how HUGE of a minefield anything to do with BRI can be. But there are always limits to how much these things can be managed, and *if*, say, Jerry Schilling noticed that the "optics" of the appearance were a bit off, it probably would better to leave alone for fear of blowing it up into an even bigger deal.

Separately from the optics is how one can't honestly *not* notice how this visual epitomizes the divide that continues between these camps (and I guess Dave is the free-floating guy who probably noticed that Mike and his family were being kind to him, and accepted the offer to wear one of his shirts). It isn't directly about striped shirts. It might as well be Brian and Al wearing "Smile" shirts and Mike wearing a "Kokomo" shirt, or whatever.

Did the shirts thing really impact the event? It doesn't appear so. Did the guys in the band notice and maybe/probably grumble/eye roll behind the scenes? Quite possibly. These guys are both absolute pros at a lot of things and also stunningly bad at handling other things for people who have been in the industry for almost 60 years. But one thing I think they're well-equipped to deal with is ignoring things that could cause snags and just getting on with the show. *In the moment* that is. Carrying that sort of ethos into something like, say, continuing a reunion tour, is obviously beyond the grasp of at least one of these guys.

In terms of perception/optics as a whole, of course not. A *direct* sales pitch at this particular event would have been far worse as far as being tacky. As it is, most have no idea those are Mike's shirts.

Now, more broadly, they ALL should be cross-promoting EVERYTHING the way the solo Beatles camps do with Apple. Not so much at an event like this, but Brian should be plugging Mike's shirts and whatever other memorabilia, Mike should be promoting Brian's "Playback" CD, Mike should be promoting Al's "Postcards", Brian and Al should be promoting, however painful, "Unleash the Love." But that doesn't happen.

Since the reunion, we learned these guys have trouble actually working together/being together professionally. So folks like myself have long been calling for essentially running BRI and the individual camps the same way the solo Beatles/estates have come around to promoting Beatles and individual products. Yes, this kind of means acting like Brian and Mike and Al are dead and their estates are happy to cross-promote. It's essentially a case of "if you guys can't be together, at least let your OWN company help you improve the brand and make more money together." It looks like Schilling may finally be getting them to do this a least a *little* bit with an event like this.

I think that the KISS scenario would play out exactly the same way. The hardcore fans would be elated, and the jaded fans of Ace and Peter would blame either Paul or Gene for refusing to allow the other two to wear the makeup, thereby insuring that they wouldn't really be fully "reunited". Now, if it were Paul or Gene not wearing the makeup? I'm not really sure how that would play out.  ;D

I think this ignores the nature of discussion boards. If there's no "but" and we just take each event for what it is, then it would be case of posting the pics of the event, confirm they all showed up, and then close the thread.

They haven't been in the same room in almost six years, and that decision to not be together was very deliberate and informed by very specific things. So when they're back in the room together, *everything* is going to be talked about. What they wore, what faces they made or didn't make. Whether Al actually got to talk or not. Who arrived with whom and when. What was overheard before and after the event? Small talk? Asking Brian to write songs? Al telling Bruce he parked in the wrong reserved spot?

The shirts thing isn't of epic proportions. But it isn't *not* a thing either. Mike and Bruce (and Dave) all dressing in matching outfits while Brian and Al wore whatever is a pretty big giant flashing sign that says "not on the same page" or "differing visions" or "two divided camps attempting to be together", or whatever phrase one wants to use.

It would be like Ringo and Paul showing up in their Sgt. Pepper uniforms for the 1994 "Free As a Bird" sessions while George just showed up in regular street clothes. It can't *not* be noticed and noted. And indeed, outlets that *don't* micro-analyze this stuff like we do, including Rolling Stone and Billboard, immediately took note of the marked camps outlined by dress differences.

Okay, to be CLEAR, I'm doing this mostly for s**ts and giggles and I'm NOT suggesting the shirt thing is of epic proportions. But the most rudimentary of 10-second photochopping indicates to me that the shirts thing still would have been *pretty* noticeable had they swapped chairs. Maybe a little less noticeable, but I don't think the obvious appearances to media outlets would have been completely ignored:

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38171785_2139745429680871_2653278672022142976_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=0a14ed1942cee82ae5106cdfd70f5a50&oe=5BCAE72B)

And hey, it could have been far worse (or better?):

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/33993658_2077041225951292_3420523731334725632_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=074ae0c0bd4b9e7eec7538f9288b679a&oe=5C084856)

But it would still be "embarrassing" to be on a KISS message board where some members point out the difference (and weirdness) in some members being in makeup (and some not)?

Bottom line is that yeah, I get that fans shouldn't be unenthusiastic about the BBs reuniting. We should all be happy that they are in the room together *above all else* because it means they are having some sort of positive human connection on some level. That's a good thing. It's historically significant and it makes me very happy on some level.

But nobody should be shamed for having the "audacity" to also express that it's a perplexing, baffling thing to see the divide as clear as day just in the optics. It doesn't mean that people are "only" seeing the weirdness in the situation of the band reuniting.

We can be happy to see them together and also we can't unsee the weird parts either, and those who point it out shouldn't have their "buts" policed. Unfortunately, there are way too many legit "buts" in the history of this band (per Jack "Nostradamus" Rieley's famous and almost always correct quote)... it's a reminder how this band, that we all know and love, always find a way to do something weird and clunky, unlike a band like The Beatles which were able to somehow be much more wise in the things they did under their name. Such is life, but I won't be an ostrich and not point out and laughingly gripe about when member(s) of the band do this kind of stuff.

The 2018 shirt snafu is like having "Bull Session with Big Daddy" at the end of Today Side B. Just when things were finally going so well, there's a WTF distraction moment that most people wish wasn't there. Like HeyJude said, it's not the biggest deal in the world, and maybe I'm overly bitching about it, but it is unfortunate that it couldn't have been avoided.

So as nobody as mentioned it, I will. Mike turns up with a shirt for Brian and Al. Just how hard is it for a 76 year old in a wheelchair to change after undergoing major back surgery? Legit question.

For a good analogy, it would have to be Ace and/or Peter not in makeup: original members not currently in the band. But we’d also need a non original member (eg Bruce) in makeup. With Eric Carr deceased, that leaves an in-makeup Vinnie Vincent with Gene and Paul. And Vinnie would look SPECTACULAR in costume these days!

You know what else? I bet Brian’s reaction would be pretty similar to Ace’s: laughter.

You would expect Brian and Al to wear a shirt which they wore 55 years ago as Beach Boys,  but which is now being marketed as a tribute to only Mike Love, and which has photos of only Mike and not his bandmates sewn into the lining?

Sure. Bad back or not, that's absurd.

If someone had Beach Boys tribute Pendelton board shirts for all to wear, that would be different.

This board is funny. Talking about striped shirts for 12 pages.

Anyway, I couldn't care less about their shirts. I'm just glad that Bruce is wearing long pants.

Let's say this was the case. In an ideal situation, Mike, after realizing that perhaps it's hard for Brian to change into a different shirt, could perhaps think to himself that maybe he (Mike) himself could just then and there put the kabosh to *any* of the members wearing those iconic shirts, so as to avoid any of them being the odd man/men out, and avoid the divided optics. It's not that hard!

Those striped shirts are ICONIC. It was a BIG DEAL when the band stopped wearing them. It said something then and it says something now. The band in 1967 clung to wearing them past when they should have, and in hindsight, I'm sure that they knew the idea of The Beach Boys wearing striped shirts wasn't inconsequential. If it were inconsequential, why didn't the band ever intentionally go out onstage with some wearing them, but not others?

I'm sure Shirtgate 2018 wasn't some "evil scheme", but it should have been obvious to whoever the person(s) with the idea to have the shirts worn, that it's an all or nothing situation, with either all of them wearing them, or none of them. It's not rocket science to have decent taste for (at minimum) the purposes of optics and perception.  I don't in any way think it's the end of the world, and it doesn't make Mike "evil", but I also don't see how people can think it was a solid, perfectly smart and sane decision.

I'll also put this out there: let's say Carl was still alive, and this same reunion happened. I just can't see half the band wearing striped shirts, and half not. I think Carl of all people would have stepped up to point out it's just a bit "weird" and erodes the "togetherness" perception of a band reunion for something of such an iconic nature to be done in a divided way like that.

Anyone agree?

Let's hope that if there are any other reunion activities, that Shirtgate 2018 doesn't happen again.  I'm all for the band bringing back past eras (especially if they would all grow out full 1970s beards again), but for them, the striped shirts are so iconic as to be almost sacred; let it be an everybody or nobody wear them situation.

Side note: I know that at various times during the band's existence, there were rogue members who had unique fashion choices which differed very much from the other members onstage:

-In the 1980s, Carl wearing a snazzy suit, while the other members wore embarrassing shorts
-In the late 1960s, Mike dressed in guru robes, while nobody else wore anything of the sort
-Probably a bunch of other incidents I'm forgetting.

But in this instance, at the 1st Beach Boy-related reunion since Brian having publicly stated his sadness at his ability to "be a Beach Boy again" having been taken away... it just seems unnecessarily foolish to do anything that could remotely be construed as visually divisive.... where the guy who "kept the band name" goes out of his way to appear more "Beach Boy-like" than the guy who publicly expressed sorrow for feeling like he'd been fired at the hands of the guy who's wearing the shirt.

Anyway, it's all just weird but par for the course I suppose. I can never quite understand what these guys do, especially Mike.

Frankly I find it a little weird that some others here don't also find it a little weird... although I get if people don't want to think of the weirdness and just focus on the goodness of them being together, and that's ok, I can respect that too.

The question is why is Mike branding shirts as his own and taking ownership over something that was an iconic Beach Boys stage shirt? If such a shirt were to be done as a Beach Boys tribute, that would be different.

I wonder if Al Jardine had branded the same shirt, and had images of himself sewn into the shirt showing him as a Beach Boy, would there be legal action taken against him.

Anyway, it looked silly at the appearance. And major music press and reporters picked up on the visual of division no matter how inconsequential some suggest it is.

 You nailed it!

In all honesty,  yes fans are happy to see this. But how many variations of "I'm thrilled to see this" are people expected to say? They did the appearance,  we will hear it August 10th. Nothing earth shattering was revealed yet in reports of the discussions. But we got 2 major music publications mentioning the shirts.

So that's what is being discussed by those who want to discuss it.

I think the shirt thing is kinda weird, but is being blown out of proportion.

For all we know, Mike and Bruce showed up wearing the shirts, and also brought them as gifts (maybe he even brought other gifts too, who knows), and David decided to put his on?

Or maybe Mike wanted the group to wear them, Brian said he didn't feel like changing his shirt, and Al went along w/ Brian?

Yeh kinda weird that Mike Love brought along "Mike Love" shirts ... but on the other hand, they are striped shirts and the Mike Love element is kinda hidden.

I also don't get how the shirts are showing the "divide" when David is wearing one, but he's not in Mike's group. In fact, didn't he last tour w/ Brian & Al?

The biggest issue I have is likely the same one Murry would have: PLEASE TUCK IN YOUR SHIRTS, GUYS !!!

Whoa, whoa, whoa, Donny, slow your roll. You're making entirely too much sense.

1 - With the Beach Boys involved, what isn't blown out of proportion?  ;D

2 - Bring gifts to a 1-hour satellite radio press event? That's odd. But if so, care to guess what other items Mike brought?

3 - Mike wanted Brian and Al to wear shirts looking like what they wore 55 years ago, yet with Mike's image all over these and labeled a "tribute" to Mike with no photos of other Beach Boys, and BB's song titles sewn into every stripe on the shirt...songs that Al sang or Brian wrote/produced/sang...oh wait, I covered that one already.  :)

4 - Weird indeed. But again, this is Mike and the Beach Boys. And the songs are stitched into every inch of the stripes, so it's not hidden, and the cuffs have Mike's photo, and...Well, you get the idea and I agree, it was weird.

5 - I believe David has played as a guest at Mike's shows well after he did his last show with Brian and Al.

5A - The "divide" was picked up by the writers at Rolling Stone and Billboard who mentioned it regarding the shirts in their coverage of the event. They noticed it with no skin in the game.

6 - Exactly! And "SING FROM YOUR HEART".

Yes, perhaps Mike wanted the whole group to wear them, but I don't see how it'd been a big deal for him to just scrap the idea of *anyone* wearing them if two of the guys didn't want to.
Again, would only 3 out of 5 Beach Boys gone out on stage regularly in the '60s wearing striped shirts? That just wasn't done, and for good reason. Because it would look silly, don't you think? Why do you think a fashion split like this wasn't done back then?

Whether the "divide" was intended to be emphasized/implied or not at this reunion event is sort of besides the point. This is a *famously* divided group, one of THE most famously divided. Brian went out of his way to publicly state in the LA Times how hurt he was to be edged out of the touring group. It's a well-known thing (BBs group divide) and simple measures should have been done to avoid recalling it to people. Why do something like this which (even inadvertently) could potentially visually imply that divide? You do this with any group that has a very iconic version of their look, be it KISS, Beatles (Ed Sullivan suit era), etc, and split their looks in two between the members, and it's gonna be just as weird.

Not the end of the world, just a bit of a boneheaded move.

I hope they make more music, and more importantly find peace between each other as human beings.

I’d expect nothing. I asked it as someone 20 years younger without back issues. Please don’t imply I am taking one side over another.

Mike's 'never say never' comment in the Rolling Stone article gives me hope

Obviously, it's far easier to get back together for a one-off interview than it is to record or tour, but if things were so acrimonious, why bother? The Sirius channel is two-thirds complete - voice overs had been provided. The album is two months old - permission had been granted. This, understandably, led some fans to wonder what the bigger reason was for the reunion. My point is, oddly enough, that should give fans hope. They could have easily said 'No', but they didn't. In a way, it kind of feels like they just got back together for the heck of it. Perhaps we shouldn't be surprised next time they surprise us? :)

That's Mike's standard answer to questions about a reunion. He said it in 2006 (and we know that there actually was a reunion six years later) and I think he also said the same after he basically ended the 2012 thing. I'm not saying it won't happen or that he is lying. Just wanted to put it into perspective as the standard answer it is.



So, did anybody attend the meeting? Jon Stebbins? Any comments on how it was? I loved Jon's description of the 2006 meeting

Mike brought shirts for Brian and Al, but when they told him they didn't have the $250 apiece that Mike was asking for them, he took them back.  :-\

A friend who is not a huge BB fan texted me the photo, knowing I'm a fan. She wrote, "This photo is hilarious. What's with the shirts?" So...yeah. That's what she noticed. Nothing about the significance of the reunion. The shirt thing is not a huge deal, but it's just another one of those weird missteps this band tends to make that contribute to people thinking the band doesn't understand PR.

(Of course, she's also aware of the Beach Boys' dysfunction, having seen them live in the 70s. She said Brian was mumbling onstage and making no sense, and one of the others had to stop him by starting a new song. That's her main memory, along side great music.)

I think the "overreaction to the perceived reaction" is causing things to get kind of skewed. Bringing up and discussing the shirts thing doesn't mean one is obsessed with it or that they think it's a huge blight on the band's history.

But, I think the most ridiculous attitude is throwing one's hands up in the air and saying "I don't see *anything* worth noting about those shirts *whatsoever*." These are probably the same people who thought Jeff Foskett jumping from Brian's to Mike's band in 2014 had *no* political implications.

In both cases, one can argue whether there were any divisive group politics involved in the actual events/decisions. What can't be argued against, in my opinion, is that if you're familiar with the band's history, these events have the APPEARANCE (even *I'm* tired of over-using the word "optics") of being charged/motivated/informed by group politics.

Foskett jumping to Mike's band? Absolute F-you to Melinda and Brian.

The two well-known and divided factions of Beach Boys showing up in the most visually loud different dress possible outside of Brian wearing a "Smile" shirt and Mike wearing a "Kokomo" shirt? Absolutely comes across as an awkward (or ironic, or embarrassing) visual to accompany the event.

That's all not even getting into whether they look like tools wearing such shirts (regardless of who designed them); I'm no fashion expert. I think once there are multiple members all wearing the same shirt, it certainly seems pretty dorky. I mean, even in the 80s and 90s they all wore *different* Hawaiian shirts, etc.

And that's also all separate from the shirts being Mike's brand. To me, the main potential issue on that count has more to do with the subtext of the event. Mike wasn't trying to "sell his shirts." It's more just an ironic aside that, much like wearing "Beach Boys" and "Mike Love" hats, Mike often seems to like branding himself with, um, himself. If it also turns out Brian and Al turned down the shirts, that would be an additional irony.

I mean, with all the "what about/what ifs", how about this one? Would Mike have worn a Brian Wilson-branded shirt with pics of Brian and Melinda in a warm embrace sewn into the lining?

The band is certainly at a weird place at this late stage in their career. Things are kind of simultaneously more strained/estranged and less so compared to, say, 10 or 15 years ago. There aren't any lawsuits, and they are making appearances together. That shows some level of or ability to put negative stuff aside. But they are also even *more firmly* entrenched into their "side" (apart from Dave, who is kind of a free floater though more often than not skewing towards Mike just in terms of appearing with him), with clearly less desire (at least on the part of Mike) to do any part of his job by committee or at the behest or decisions of anybody else. Also, while no lawsuits have flown between members post-C50, Mike's interviews and comments about Brian (and the Wilson brothers, and sometimes even Al) have become *more* inflammatory and potentially offensive and judgmental.

So, the group meeting is a cool thing to see and certainly isn't a *bad* sign; but I wouldn't assume anything more or anything more harmonious is in the immediate offing. I'm always open to being pleasantly surprised.

Nailed it.
+1

You state this pretty definitively. Was this the case? Not questioning you, just asking. I remember Jeff saying he was completely burned out, presumably from the many hats he had to wear in Brian's employ. But he also said he loved Brian and hoped he understood. And since his most marketable skills (presumably) are playing Beach Boys songs, and also presuming the man needs to eat, taking a job in Mikes band, seems rational and not motivated by F$%^ing Brian. And Mike would be picking up a valuable asset to his crew, with whom he had spent time as part of the 2012 band, and who actually recruited Jeff way back when.

So I'm interested in how it was orchestrated as an absolute F-U to Brian. What info am I missing?

Al posted on FB re Town Hall:

 "... thanks to everyone involved - hopefully this will lead to bigger and better things!"

He was completely burned out so he left to join a band that played more dates.

I don’t think that’s quite fair, because he also went from being Brian’s main assistant/handler/whatever you want to call it to just being a band member. He mentioned in one interview how it was nice to be able to have more time to enjoy each city on his own as opposed to add’l obligations with Brian. I got the impression that was what he meant by burned out.

Exactly, I don't think it was the actual touring, but all the other responsibilities he had, whereas in The Beach Boys, he isn't doing as much heavy lifting, I assume.

The point of my post was specifically to address *not* why things were orchestrated, but rather to address how things *appear*; the perception/impression they *undeniably* leave. *That's* the way in which I would argue Foskett jumping from Brian to Mike's band was *without question* a big F You to Melinda and Brian. I was referring to people pretending to be (or even more stunningly actually being) incredulous about someone pointing out how much of a political maneuver jumping between those two bands would *always* be, regardless of the intention.

Having said that, it's also true that Foskett's story didn't wash too much in my opinion. As Billy said, Jeff claimed to be stressed out and overworked, but jumped ship to a band that, especially pre-2016, was doing WAAAAY more dates than Brian was.

I have no reason to doubt things Jeff mentioned in the *one* interview he gave on the subject; I have no reason to doubt he was bummed missing out on sight-seeing in cities and not having to worry about anything but just playing and singing on stage. But the trade off was doing a TON more dates. Mike's tour is pretty close to a 12-month gig. There are gaps of a few weeks here and there, and in some years he has taken a full month or two off. But pre-2016, Brian was never doing anywhere near even 100 shows per year let alone the 150-175 that Mike does *every* year.

As was pointed out back then, back in 2013, neither Brian's studio sessions nor live dates were exactly excessive. He did a few dozen gigs that year, and Brian's sets on most of the 2013 dates were extra short sharing the bill with Beck.

Further, going back to Jeff's time with Brian, by *all* accounts, that was a role Jeff *sought out.* He totally wanted to be the guy you had to go through to get to Brian.

Pick up this thread from back in 2014 at this spot and then continue on afterwards; Howie Edelson offers some keen, and balanced and fair observations about Jeff jumping to Mike's band:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18293.msg476418.html#msg476418

So again, I was talking about the *optics* of Jeff's departure. But I also agree with Howie's posts from back then; I think jumping to Mike's band was conceived by both employer and employee as a deep belly wound to the other side (Brian/Melinda).

As it turns out, it isn't just sour grapes in pointing out that Brian's band truly is better off now; Matt Jardine is the best falsetto guy Brian's band has ever had, and someone can go all the way back to 1999 to find me posting that I had wished Matt was in Brian's band. No knock on Foskett. Matt's just a better fit.

Even if we buy that idea (I'm skeptical; I don't think it's a complete fabrication or anything, but for the reasons mentioned in my previous post, I don't fully buy it), it doesn't address the political nature of Jeff jumping to Mike's band. Even if Jeff had no other motive than getting a new job (and as Howie mentioned in his posts from back then, a guy like Foskett doesn't exactly have a million similar job openings to choose from), I have no reason *not* to believe that Mike signed on Foskett as a big giant F-You to Melinda more than anybody else. Just my opinion. But again, going back to Howie's posts, Foskett jumping bands in 2014 was arguably the biggest political maneuver in the BB world since the band fired Brian in 1982 to get him into rehab/detox.

Also, as I've said a few times, separately from anything to do with why or how Foskett jumped bands, my *opinion* based on my own deductions and talking to some other folks is that Foskett may just be angling to take over the "Beach Boys" license once Mike is no longer able or willing to tour. Don't know how likely that would ever be to happen, and a lot would depend on who is still around and the circumstances of such a succession of events.

But it's worth noting that Foskett didn't just join as another dude in Mike's band. Check out Mike's Facebook page; Jeff basically became somewhat of a Bruce/Stamos status stand-in. Numerous events where there are only two members of the touring band present: Mike and Jeff.

Also, and again this is only *my opinion/hunch*, I find it interesting that Mike's negative rhetoric towards Brian and Brian's "camp" seemed to amp up after Jeff joined Mike's band.

Nice to read; but it's always worth remembering that Al has always been the most (almost obliviously) hopeful about such things. When I met him in 2005, he had just got out from under a bunch of lawsuit stuff and was finally able to call himself legally a "Beach Boy" again, and he was already talking (unprompted!) about reuniting with the other guys.

Even when it was *painfully obvious* Mike had one foot out the door before the reunion tour even ended in 2012, Al was at that Grammy Museum event in September *still* trying to talk Mike into continuing.

But yeah, I can't *not* hope it leads to something bigger and better.

Ok, so it's a hunch, not an absolute. Thanks for correcting.

Nothing to correct. I think it's pretty darn implicit in characterizing an action as being "a giant F You" to someone that such a thing isn't provable. Short of Foskett giving an interview saying "yep, I felt it was the right moment to stick it to Brian and Melinda", there's no way to prove what the motive was.

My opinion is that any fan that actually knows the history of the band and these guys, and is honest with themselves and doesn't want to have, for lack of a better term, a sort of "mob wife" mentality about what actually goes on behind the scenes with these guys, would see that's it *painfully obvious* that Jeff leaving Brian and joining Mike has "political maneuver" written all over it. It doesn't mean there weren't other mitigating factors as well.

Here's a question, Juice Brohnston... do you think Melinda perhaps conceived having a larger quantity of actual Beach Boy members (Brian, Al, David, Blondie) on a Brian Wilson tour (when compared to the band touring as "The Beach Boys") as anything but a "F you" to Mike, or do you think that's farfetched?

I think with the bad blood that occurred around that time, it's not logical to think that the sides weren't doing things to intentionally "stick it" to the other. That goes for both sides. And if that wasn't the entire motivation for such maneuvers, it stands to reason that wasn't exactly something that would have *bothered* Melinda.

Yes, just to be clear, doing the 2013 "BAM" tour was *totally* also a salvo fired at the other side. It fizzled pretty fast for a variety of reasons (the Jeff Beck aspect I think being one), but it was certainly devised with some post-C50 group politics in mind. Not that I minded as a fan; they were essentially trying to keep the C50 tour going as much as they could.

Personally, the thought has never occurred to me. Al was going to stick with Brian. Bringing Blondie in was a cool move, especially when it makes sense to divvy up the vocals in that band. Dave seems to move around pretty freely.

Well your absolute isn't an absolute. I think that is 100% absolute.
You may feel strongly that his actions were politically motivated, I'm not sure to what end. The guy seems to have really worked hard with Brian to get him back to a permorming artist. And it is not a huge leap to believe that, Jeff acted in what could be called an extra-ordinary capacity to Brian, and that that type of work could burn you out after 15-20 years, and maybe he just wanted a change but wanted to keep playing music. And Mike offered him a job. I'm not saying that's absolutely the way it went down, but it's certainly plausible.

You can't say with 100% certainty that Jeff joining Mikes band was an absolute f-u to Brian. That's all. I thought maybe you had some definitive proof which is why I raised the question.

Whoa, awesome! Thanks for posting.

You really saw nothing political about Brian, who pre-C50 had been touring *on his own*, had only done about a dozen dates in 2006/07 with Al that, supposedly, didn't end too well, and had never toured with Dave or Blondie, all of a sudden in 2013 taking *three to four* Beach Boys out on tour?

If some fans want to keep the blinders on about any of the stuff that goes on behind the scenes, that's totally one's prerogative. But then you're probably going to meet a lot of confusion and corrections from other fans/experts if you remain incredulous but insist on actually delving into the topic of political maneuvering and band names and band lineups and all of that.

Do you also think there was nothing political about Dennis's 1977 "Pacific Ocean Blue" tour being kiboshed?

Do you think there was nothing political about a big hunk of the touring band being let go in 1977/78?

Do you think there was nothing political about BRI supposedly sending people to Al's gigs in 1999 "searching" for fans who were "confused"?

Do you think it's a total coincidence during the band's 1980 Good Morning America interview that some of the other members look like they want to either strangle Dennis or run away as far as possible?

Do you think there was anything political about Jeff Foskett leaving the touring band in 1990, or do you just think it was a normal case of moving on to something else? Oh yeah, that's right, Foskett himself in the mid-90s gave an interview explaining in stunning detail why he was let go from the band.

I'm all for taking a step back and not immediately thinking the worst of these guys or jumping to elaborate theories. But it's also silly to assume there's no context to anything to do with this band's history outside of what they choose to say or not say publically.

With all due respect, thinking there would ever be a way to *prove* that an action is a "giant F you" to someone is more of a head-scratcher than not believing it's a giant F-you in the first place. It's a totally colloquial term; outside of Jeff actually holding a press conference in 2014 announcing joining Mike's band and then saying out loud "F--k you Melinda and Brian!", such a thing OBVIOUSLY isn't provable.

Again, let me repeat: I believe it's a 100% absolute that Jeff leaving Brian and joining Mike GIVES THE APPEARANCE of a giant F-you to Mike given the band's history, and I would tend to not heavily trust or weigh the opinion of any fan or proclaimed "expert" who refused to acknowledge as such.

What can NEVER be said to be an absolute is the ACTUAL MOTIVE for the move, on either side. That part of it is opinion/educated guesses/deduction, etc.

Well, Rob Reiner is obviously a fan, but he's more interested in his own https://twitter.com/InvestigateRU...There's so much going on right now that we all need breaks and Brian's creations heal...But I'm glad that there are BB/BW experts who enjoy debating all the musical/history details and adding their comments here...

As far as all the Foskett commentary, does anyone know exactly how much time he actually spent as Brian's assistant in the last years and how much time he was spending planning his future and courting core BB fans with his time and free tickets? Just curious. I wasn't there, clearly...

Honestly, no. Maybe I think more of Brian and Al then you do, but I think the real motivation was that they were stoked about C50 and wanted to keep going, so they primarily were motivated by wanting to play together. I don't think the deciding factor was, let's stick it to Mike. "I'd rather be at the Deli, AL, but I'll suck it up and do 80 shows, just to piss Mike off"

No blinders here, I love a salacious gossipy tale of backstabbing and revenge. And several of the events you go on to itemize surely had those qualities.

What I wanted to know was what proof you had to say Absolutely, that Jeff going over to Mike's band was a FU to Brian. Ya didn't have any. That's ok. I was just curious to hear it if it existed.

BTW it's been a while since I read the interview about Jeff leaving back in the day..but I seem to remember it was brutally honest and not real sugar coated, which might leave me to believe him when he discussed his departure from Brian's group.

It's a little tough to separate "brutally honest" from "self-serving" maybe? Have you heard the comments since? I have no idea if it was an FU to Brian. I doubt Jeff is thinking about anything aside from his career. Fair enough, and more reasonable.

Getting closer  ;D

I think as highly of Brian and Al as anyone. I also believe they're human, and I also actually pay close attention to the history of the band, and talk to fans, scholars, insiders, and so on.

I'm *almost* jealous of a fan that can exist in blissful ignorance as to any of the myriad of post-C50 political maneuvers/comments from both sides (and after 2013 mostly just Mike).

But my thing is, if you want to not pay attention to it and feel that everything they do or don't do should get seven thumbs up, then cool. But it's going to be very difficult to then delve into discussions like this that *specifically* entail various amounts of backroom politics.

And again, the "giant F you" thing, I have no idea why anyone would ever think such a thing would be provable. I'm amazed someone asked and didn't immediately understand the nature of such a characterization.

It's not too dissimilar to the possibly-apocryphal "Don't f**k with the formula" line. Like many of his supporters, Mike tries to glom on to the idea that the specific quote is technically incorrect, that he never uttered those exact words. But that's OBVIOUSLY not the point. I'm all for historical accuracy and it's always important to *not* actually offer that as a confirmed quote if it can't be confirmed. But the overarching point is that that totally has been a fair summation/approximation of the sentiment Mike has expressed many times in interviews.

Similarly, I've never contended Jeff Foskett actually said "F--k you, I'm leaving you for Mike" to Melinda or Brian.

Regarding Jeff's mid-90s interview versus his 2014 interview, it's ALL ABOUT CONTEXT. For his 2014 interview, he was currently employed by Mike and obviously wanted to keep his job. In the mid-90s, he was not employed by anybody related to the Beach Boys, was a few years out from having been fired, and there was no prospect for any solo tours to rejoin. It was far easier for him to be much more forthcoming and not leave anything out in that mid-90s interview. I appreciate his honesty in that mid-90s interview. I don't believe his 2014 interview was nearly as forthcoming and seemed to have large gaps. I don't think what *was* there in that 2014 interview could be characterized as lying in any way. I just think the whole thing smelled like an incomplete story, and we've laid out a bunch of his head-scratching stated reasoning in recent posts.

You're getting closer to reading and understanding what I've been writing this entire time? I hope. Otherwise, it's getting into troll-ish territory. "In my opinion" of course. 

Yes, I think it's important to highlight that when we're getting into guessing actual motives, a big part of the "F you" aspect has to do with Mike, perhaps more so than Jeff.

I think the whole thing was a giant and PAINFULLY OBVIOUS F-you to the Brian camp. I think actively so on the part of Mike, and perhaps somewhat more passively so on the part of Jeff.

Also, and I hate to drop incomplete stuff out there, but from some folks I've talked to, the "departing Brian's band" part of the story, totally separate from anything to do with Mike, has not been told nearly in full.

Also - if somebody in the intimate world of this band does something that GIVES THE APPEARANCE of a giant F-you (even if that's not the main goal/specific intent of the maneuver), there's no way to truly think that this person was so incredibly unaware as to be 100% oblivious of how their would/could come off.  

So what we have in all probability, at minimum, is somebody doing a move that knowingly would/could give an appearance of being an "F You" to someone else, but going ahead and doing it anyway (unless you want to take the unrealistic stance that the person is so sense as to have no idea of how it would come off).  So much of what these guys do is laced with passive aggressiveness anyway, so I find it doubtful that that this didn't come into play... but if one wishes to think about things in a rose-colored glasses mentality, then so be it.

I'm not pointing this out in any sort of judgmental way on any of them, just purely of matter of discussion. I can understand that there were/are all sorts of resentments between these guys over all sorts of reasons (publicly known or not) that could have impacted their choices, and could have made them go ahead and do something anyway, in spite of knowingly doing an action that would look really, really bad in the eyes of many.

I seriously doubt the majority of M&B/ Brian Wilson concert goers could name or care about the sidemen playing in front of them, and likely don’t know the names of the actual Beach Boys. Who goes to what group when and how matters not a dot to the audience.
I can still remember after a show in 1992 a ‘fan’ telling me Carl Wilson was the father of Carnie and Wendy. That was news to me, and presumably Carl.  ::)

Going to say this once... a certain person who has since been proven to be full of sh*t used to always say that the quickest way to burn bridges was to break confidentiality. That charlatan may have lied about many things but in this case he was right on the money. “Juice”, some of us “ may” have additional proof but couldn’t say anything. Just a theoretical of course 🙄

From Mike :

"Monday night was nothing but love, gratitude, honesty and joy. It has been nearly 6 years since we were all together and the reality of what we have created as The Beach Boys, and how it’s impacted so many fans all over the world, came to life once again. It was truly special and unforgettable. Thank you to the Sirius team who warmly embraced us and were responsible for bringing us together in celebration of our new Sirius XM channel. I especially enjoyed my time spent with my fellow Beach Boys: David Al, Bruce and Brian. The night was all about LOVE! Thank you for such a successful and meaningful evening. Peace & Love, Mike."

Ahhh but Hey Jude, I am paying attention to it. That is why when you said that Jeff going to Mike's band was and ABSOLUTE F-U to Brian, I was very curious as to what it was that made it absolute fact. You have now made it clear that in fact it is your opinion that it was absolute. A little thing perhaps, and I can see how in this day and age facts may seem unimportant, but that's all it's about. Fact vs. Opinion and framing statements as such. You have clarified that it's your opinion, as opposed to provable fact. And I know you have mentioned several times that you don't understand why anyone would think "it could be provable" - well I would think that, if you stated it as absolute and then followed up with some information that supported it as such. See what I am saying? That's what I was asking. Just asking, with genuine interest if there was something out there that showed that Jeff (and Mike) were absolutely motivated primarily by wanting to F*$k over Brian. I'm not here with blinders on, just wondering what you had to support the statement, and contrast it to Jeff's public comments on why he left.

Closer to opinion than fact, correct.

Totally respect that Billy, but that's where, as a poster, you have to be careful. I think in some instances better to say nothing, than to say I know this is true because someone told me so, but I can't tell you anything else. It's a fine line for sure. I've heard some crazy things from band members first hand. And there is an impulse to run over and talk about it here or elsewhere, but as you say, or to paraphrase AGD I guess, bridges can be burned.

Now maybe we should get back to the real purpose of this thread. Showing how Mike gave Brian an absolute F-U by bringing everybody shirts  >:D

Would it not strike you as odd behavior if Brian had brought shirts that had Brian's (and Brian's only) face and name embroidered on them, promoting the *Brian Wilson* tour, and expected the other just recently un-estranged band members (especially including Mike) to wear them to a full band "Beach Boys" reunion activity?  Please kindly address that.

Brian would NEVER ask Mike to wear them to a Beach Boys reunion event, because it would be a ridiculous thing to ask. Surely you must know this is true.

With the history of sour grapes that this band has, where Mike has publicly poo-pooed Brian's solo material repeatedly (going back years, from BWPS to NPP)... it'd still be a perfectly cool and not-at-all in weird taste thing for Brian to do... to expect Mike to happily wear them at their 1st reunion in years? C'mon. Let's be realistic here.

Presuming you think that Mike innocently brought shirts for all the guys to wear, and that this is what actually went down... it shows a somewhat clueless and predictably clunky maneuver by Mike whose outcome could have been predicted (Brian and Al might think it weird to wear those shirts for a number of understandable reasons, and would simply just not wear them). Again, while I do believe that this shirt thing is not the biggest deal in the world, I'm posting in this thread not to beat a dead horse, but (and I honestly don't mean to be insulting by this), I find dismantling arguments to be somewhat of a hobby, and by nature I have somewhat of a debating type streak... I find it more baffling to understand why some people wouldn't agree it'd be a weird thing for Mike to expect the other guys to wear the shirts given the group's history, and even recent context of Mike shitting on Brian's solo product repeatedly.

That alone has got to make it a weird thing for Brian to want to associate himself with Mike Love Solo Product. It may sound funny, but yes, shirts included. Regarding promoting other bandmates' solo product, I think Mike has "made it weird" by shitting in the soup one too many times (sh*t talking about Brian's solo material) to the point that it's baffling if Mike just simply expected Brian to promote his solo brand of shirts. And this doesn't even begin to touch on how the iconic nature simply of the band wearing striped shirts (regardless if they were Mike branded or not), and how that potentially plays into things too.

Do you think when the band decided to all stop wearing striped shirts in 1967 that it was no big deal for them? I'm sure they talked about it and came to some sort of consensus. Maybe a group vote. Most people in hindsight agree they wore them for a year or two too long. I'm sure people like Rieley had convos with them about how the shirts perhaps had some sort of meaning and context, and meant something - good or bad. Bottom line, it's not innocuous, like if Mike had designed some brand of plain tan shirts without his own name brand, and devoid of any iconic BBs-related stripes, and had just brought them for everyone to wear. It's understandable that if all 5 members were to wear those shirts again, it's going to be a thing for them ALL to discuss. Just bringing them and expecting everyone to go along with it makes no sense, but it apparently does in Mike Love's world.

However... if Mike and Brian had any sort of history of repeatedly patting each other on the back FOR EACH OTHERS' SOLO ACCOMPLISHMENTS, with Mike wearing Brian Wilson Tour 2005 t-shirts to M&B Beach Boys shows, and Brian wearing "Mike Love" hats and doing social media posts talking about the greatness of Mike and Mark McGrath's collaborations... then it would perhaps be out of line for me to call out Mike's actions as weird for bringing a Mike Love Solo Product shirt for Brian to wear to a Beach Boys reunion event. Then it would be expected.  But that is not reality.

Matt Jardine: that is all....

Regardless of the shirt stuff, this is a nice post to read.

OSD mode: The night was all about (Mike) LOVE! >:D

What are you talking about? This is neither opinion nor fact, just borderline trolling. You don't agree with the stated opinions in recent posts. No need to troll under the guise of "clarifying" that Jeff Foskett didn't literally publicly tell Melinda "F**k you."

I had the same thought. I guess I've been on this board too long!

 :bw's incredible music is the reason there's still a slug like Mike Love still crawling around. Those incredibly self serving myKe luHv shirts are a product of a pathologically diseased egomaniacal mind. It would be a completely different set of circumstances if those shirts had the entire group emblazoned on them. Fortunately, we're witnessing a rather pathetic situation which sets the lovester far apart from any rational thinking being. It would almost be worth the absurd pricing of that shirt to set it on fire and put it on you tube.  >:D

With everyone else smiling and Mike's dead looking expression, that says a lot. You know, the pic at the session. Jumped out at me. Nothing new.

Can someone provide a link to Jeff’s interview?

It's the second return when you Google search "Jeffrey Foskett":

https://www.desertsun.com/story/life/entertainment/music/2014/09/22/beach-boys-brian-wilson-jeffrey-foskett/16070181/

Not sure, but I think the previous poster may have been looking for a link to the 90s Foskett interview, which requires more digging but can be found here:

http://web.archive.org/web/19990221115314/http://www.new-surf.com/interv.html

The interview seems to have been done around 1998 after "Imagination" was released, but before Foskett rejoined Brian. This would have been when Foskett was still full-time with Papa Doo Run Run (my recollection is that he stayed part time with them for a little while after beginning working with Brian in 1999, but I'm not sure when or if he fully left Papa Doo Run Run). And as I mentioned previously, I appreciate Foskett's honesty in this circa 1998 interview. Some pertinent parts concerning his 1990 departure:

AMP: One last Beach Boys question…why did you leave in 1990?

FOSKETT: I was asked to leave by Michael and Carl. I know that during the past several months there has been some discussion over the internet on my departure, and I will set the record straight now. I was having an affair outside my marriage that was causing a great deal of turmoil in the closely-knit BB organization. All the wives traveled on the road at one time or another, and seeing me with someone other than my wife made them suspicious of their husbands. Not a good scene. My ego was way out of control. I think Michael thought that I was holding back money from the side gigs that he and I did with the Endless Summer Beach Band, and so he was unhappy about that, and Carl was unhappy with my ego and my affair. They did the right thing by letting me go; right for them and definitely right for me. I needed to straighten up and get back into "the real world." I did, and my wife and I will soon be celebrating our 11th anniversary.

AMP: Jeff, I appreciate your honesty…

FOSKETT: John, there have been so many contrived stories regarding me using Platinum American Express cards and other false statements that I am happy to tell the truth. There are so many "authorities" on the internet that really know absolutely nothing!

To be honest, I totally forgot about this. The Foskett interview with the Desert Sun is so infamous, I automatically think of that when people ask.

I wonder if Brian and Jeff speak anymore

I've heard some pretty wild accusations myself, and have also heard them rebutted by others who would know.  You're probably safe if you assume we won't be hearing this stuff anytime soon publicly, thank heavens.

Juice Brohnston, curious if you had any thoughts on this (admittedly overlong) post of mine above?

Would it strike you as odd if Brian tried to get Mike to wear Brian Wilson solo custom shirts to a Beach Boys event, and the 1st reunion event after a long period of interpersonal strife over the band and who's in the band? And let's say that if Mike passed on wearing the shirt, then Brian would still wear it, and additionally get other BBs to wear them too, leaving Mike as the odd man out? That would be a normal, to-be-expected thing, and those fans who expressed that this is a really weird thing should be called out as complainers/haters, or something of the sort?

Honestly just trying to understand the logic. Because based on thinking that Mike's shirt thing was 100% hunky dory and not a bafflingly odd decision, I'd have to think that for consistency's sake, you'd have to give Brian a total pass on this hypothetical scenario, and not think it odd in the slightest.

I'll reiterate that just because I find this action of Mike's with the shirts to be odd, questionable and a bit unfortunate, it doesn't take away from me being happy they got together and are possibly, maybe working towards some sort of future projects. I'm simply a bit hung up on the idea that people can bend themselves into a pretzel to make the above situation *not* weird in any way, shape or form. I don't get it.

Although I stand to be corrected, Mike has over the years stated he hasn’t listened to Brian’s albums, didn’t read his biography, nor watched L&M. If I was Brian I wouldn’t have worn his crappy shirt either.

Absolutely! ::) Additionally, and I'm sure I'm in the minority on this, but I honestly hope myKe luHv never gets the opportunity to ever work with, write with, nor perform with Brian ever again. This jackass had his chance but because everything had to be on his terms, it fortunately didn't happen and walked away from C50. He does not deserve to be associated with Brian in the least and I hope that d'bag eats his heart out from now until his dying day.

Glad to see David set the record straight about the shirts over on Facebook.

Me too. Yeah it did look off but Dave is a straight shooter from everything I’ve heard so as far I’m concerned, case closed.


Edit


For those who don’t have David on Facebook... basically the shirts were a gift, dressing room was upstairs and not easily accessible to Brian, and  Al got there late. Reiner had wanted everyone to match .

So that’s that. I admit I got wrapped up in the furor too but I have no issue admitting I was wrong.

Yup everyone got shirts . Brian and Al didn’t wear them for reasons Dave wasn’t sure of . I also learned that Dave will definitely be with Mikes band for any future appearances he chooses to make .

Actually he said he would be happy to join Mike anytime, and he “can’t speak for the others”

I read that Al said he hopes this leads to bigger and better things. Brian seems to have not ruled out working with Mike. Interesting.

Stranger things have happened...

The Pet Sounds final tour started in March 2016 and is still going. I still think it would be great to sign that off with a few Beach Boys performances.

As this is what David says, I'll stand corrected.  I would really love to have my first instinct be to feel that there's no weird motives, but many historical incidents and decades of ugly quotes have made it hard for me to gravitate towards that being my initial line of thinking.  Maybe they really will put bad stuff behind them this time. I'd be shocked, but I'd be very pleasantly surprised; truly I just want them to be happy and decent to each other firstly... and then, hopefully make great music.

Here's David's full post :

I am now settling into our hotel in Spain and catching up on all the comments from my last post. I‘m blown away by all the love, thank you! You really know how to make a guy feel good.

I heard about some of the less than positive things (not on my page, thankfully) about last Monday’s reunion that I thought were pretty silly and wanted to address them while on the subject of gossip and blowing things out of proportion.

For the record: Mike and Jacquelyne Love were kind enough to bring us each our own Robert Graham signature shirt as gifts. It was nothing more than that, a gift. I chose to wear mine because it was a thoughtful gesture from the Love’s - and Rob Reiner was pro matching shirts. I can’t speak for the others, but the dressing room was upstairs and not easily accessible for Brian, and Al was running late. It’s not a conspiracy nor was it a statement about “teams.”

On Monday we were one team, THE BEACH BOYS.

That said, I am happy to suit up in a stripped shirt and join Mike onstage anytime. (But not until September, I’m going to enjoy a much-needed month in Europe with my Lion mask first. 😊)

That was the one!  Thanks!

I think these pictures weren't posted before, if they were, please excuse me. They were shared on facebook by the Beach Boys' account and seem to come from Mike's site.


(https://scontent-frx5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38060867_1897753443636821_7329047221708521472_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=2bf654d74d36692d38f6572867dffd3c&oe=5BCFA23A)

(https://scontent-frx5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38297919_1897753706970128_6231381102724907008_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=936ae71f01d2833169ace2a2339632a4&oe=5BCFC5C7)

(https://scontent-frx5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38222531_1897753956970103_129453849059524608_n.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=2180868bb9cd000a43385d0bdcbe2719&oe=5BCD4189)

(https://scontent-frx5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38191979_1897754360303396_2750610804272267264_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=b9e0d43ac8970badf8a2d45ecb9d839c&oe=5C099E7D)

(https://scontent-frx5-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/38071388_1897754573636708_3670674588137684992_o.jpg?_nc_cat=0&oh=dcda43a3f481c3416c39d524e52abc81&oe=5C0B6470)

I saw that too. Here is the relevant part of David’s post.

(http://i39.photobucket.com/albums/e200/walruswasrob/Mobile%20Uploads/2018-08/BA8B661D-E6C3-42DA-9EA2-DDA401F7EDE3.jpg) (http://s39.photobucket.com/user/walruswasrob/media/Mobile%20Uploads/2018-08/BA8B661D-E6C3-42DA-9EA2-DDA401F7EDE3.jpg.html)

BW was over the Striped shirts by 1965...

Exactly. And myKe luHv has never gotten over himself.

Except for when he wore the striped shirt in Hawaii in 1967.

Except it was wrinkled and untucked, point is that BW is over that period...

That's assuming a lot. Or maybe you were there as things were being negotiated, and saw Melinda cave to every demand of Mike's.

Well, there he goes again. Lonely Summer being Lonely Summer again only this time with a cap with Mike Love emblazoned on it.  ::) ::) ::)

Well, I guess all you guys can get some rest now.

My point being, Mike gave it to the other side on a number of issues; the backing band was mostly Brian's; the album was mostly Brian's songs, Brian's producer, Brian's musicians. Was that not enough for the Mike haters? Maybe he should have agreed to NOT be a part of the reunion, just like Brian, Al, David and Bruce go out as the Beach Boys without Satan, because, as we know, that's who Mike Love really is.

Uh, Brian's backing band was far better than Mike's. You bet they were Brian's songs. Love, as the record buying public well knows, is not, nor ever will be a competent tunesmith. Mike did not have a producer handy(and please don't mention Bruce)so because they were mostly BW's songs, it would make perfect sense to have his own producer. As far as myKe luHv being Satan, if he's not, he's the closest thing to it.  >:D

Caveat: the C50 tour wouldn’t have sounded as good without Scott Totten and John Cowsill ( and would’ve sounded better with Christian Love rather than Foskett)

I couldn't agree more about Cowsill and Totten. They bring so much energy and dynamics to each and every show. They are both up there in terms of the greatest players in The Beach Boys band. I think Christian Love is a great singer, but would have been weak on Brian's falsetto parts. Maybe replace Foskett with Matt Jardine, but I don't see too much of a difference with those guys. Both stellar falsettos, Jeff just has sounded a little more rough these last few years, But I can't complain- he's still a great singer.

How sad that such obvious hatred and toxicity can pass by on this board without being dealt with. *sigh*

If the remaining members decide to reunite again, I would say that the band must include at least Scott Totten sharing lead guitar with Dave, John Cowsill on drums and occasional vocals(lead on Wild Honey if Blondie isn't there), and maybe Matt Jardine. Of course, it would be ideal if Blondie were to participate as well.

He has his reasons, some of which you already know especially in regards to the reunion.

Now I will defend Mike’s talent pre Kokomo til the end of time but you gotta remember OSD has been a fan of the band pretty much since day one and has had much first hand experience.

I could have worded the post a bit differently. It was a bit more hostile then I meant it in my head. I just think there is a difference between criticizing a person, and being downright hateful. I'm going to say right now publicly that I have nothing against him as a person. I just think that an occasional post slips by when it shouldn't.

I do realise that OSD in a long time fan. But should that matter? We are all Beach Boys fans here. Some older than others. But we all love the same band.

Oh yeah true. I watch posts like that closely and if it were to cross a line I’d handle it and have done so in the past.. these are valid criticisms in regards to not wanting another reunion to happen because of the way love handled his end at the very end, which you know was f***ed up. He’s basically saying he doesn’t want them to reunite. I actually do want them to IF certain things are hashed out. So this was a valid criticism , even if I don’t entirely agree.


As far as being a long term fan his opinion on Mike is based on experience that lasted a lot longer than either one of ours.  It’s not that his opinion is more important it just is based more on experience than ours

I love this... the most exciting music newsbit for me and many others here is five old guys sitting in chairs somewhere, not even singing a note :D. <3 the Beach Boys!

Do we know what time this will air on the 10th?

Uggh, I don’t want to prolong the shirts discussion, but I don’t see David Marks’s post as really contradicting much of what people have been saying.

Yes, if someone was arguing an elaborate conspiracy theory or something, Dave’s post seems to reinforce that, from his point of view, the whole thing was fun and the clothing issue is not even an issue. I’m glad to see his post and see the event from his point of view as he described it. Would *love* to see recounting from all the guys. Yeah, even Bruce I guess.

But Dave’s post doesn’t contradict the main (read: simple) points that were made.

Dave mentioned that, on his end, no delineation of “camps” was intended or expressed based on their shirts. Fair enough, and in my previous posts I always conceded that I highly doubted there was some nefarious motive involved in wearing the shirts.

What Dave doesn’t even address is his post is how the shirts issue *appeared.* And again, while I don’t like to be cynical and assume the worst, I’ve been a student and fan of this band and its history for DECADES and DECADES, and *whatever the actual motives*, you simply cannot argue that the two current “camps”, who have been at odds in very specific, measurable ways, showing up in obviously clashing “uniforms” does not *appear* to underline that divide. And to Dave’s credit, it doesn’t appear he speaks to what the *appearance* was to outsiders or the media or fans. I’m not a big fan of all fan commentary that isn’t glowing to be lumped together as “silly” and whatnot, but whatever.

Dave does say Reiner was “pro” matching shirts. I’m happy to just disagree with Reiner there. Three matching shirts and two that don’t result in two major media outlets pointing out how the mis-match was emblematic (even if inadvertently so) of the ongoing divide between camps. Five matching shirts would have avoided that, and would have made them look like total dorks. Again, just my opinion. Rob Reiner is a fine guy, I have no problem with him. But he’s not a PR or image consult for BRI, and whomever normally *would* be serving that function was, I’m guessing, simply hoping all five guys would show up and be in the same room, even if Mike wore a garbage bag and Al showed up in his pajamas. All totally understandable.

Dave confirms in fact what most suspected; Mike showed up and gave Dave the shirt as a gift. Dave doesn’t mention that they’re Mike Love signature shirts, and for all I know he didn’t and/or doesn’t know. I’m all for Dave wearing whatever he wants; I dig that he just wore a shirt and doesn’t give a s**t about the politics. It’s the same reason he toured with Brian, and then showed up at the Mike Ella gala, and then probably not coincidentally was not invited on the next subsequent tour (and yes, I know Al did the Ella thing and then continued with Brian, but that involved some musical chairs and politics for another time).

He calls them “Robert Graham” shirts, which I think is burying the headline a bit that they’re part of a “Mike Love” line of Graham shirts.

Dave views the shirts as a kind gift, and I love that he tackles that issue with positivity. It does indeed require some cynicism (albeit cynicism fueled by being realistic about the band and its history) to point out that, at best, bringing a gift of your own signature line of shirts is arguably a little tacky (and the shirts were probably comped), and at worst, well, something a bit more cynical or passive aggressive on Mike’s part. And let’s be clear, Dave doesn’t know what Mike’s motives were either. He doesn’t know *all* of them anyway, he’s happy to take it on face value and see the motive as Mike giving a nice gift. Which I think is totally his prerogative.

What if Brian had showed up with five “Love & Mercy” shirts? Would Mike have worn that? And if he hadn’t, would it have been out of line to say group politics could have at least tangentially been involved? I don’t think so.

But in any event, the idea that Dave’s statement is some sort of smoking gun that should bring an end to discussion of the “shirts” is silly. Dave took the shirt as a gift (which we all guessed was the case), doesn’t care what the “optics” of the clashing shirts indicated (which is cool for him, but doesn’t negate what those optics actually are or could be), and apparently doesn’t definitively actually know how or why Brian or Al didn’t end up wearing the shirts. He speculates Brian not easily moving around the building and Al showing up late may have been an issue. But frankly, whatever did go down, I don’t think Brian and Al would have worn those shirts, for a number of reasons. Understandable reasons in fact. If Brian or Al end up giving an interview and saying “oh yeah, I totally would have worn Mike’s signature shirt, I just didn’t get there in time” or something like that, then I’ll buy it. Otherwise, I have no problem and don’t blame  *anyone* in the equation for the concept that maybe they wouldn’t have wanted to wear the shirts.

One always has to remember that Dave not being directly embroiled in 40+ years of BRI politics means he has the benefit of being able to be the free-floater who is friendly with all camps. Heck, he even does side gigs with Al. But what it also means is that he either chooses (for his own sanity) or isn’t deeply entrenched in those politics. There’s a reason Dave gets along with everybody and some of the other guys don’t. And it isn’t *all* because Dave is a cool guy (though that’s certainly one reason). He doesn’t have the shared history that Brian, Mike, and Al (and to a lesser degree Bruce) have of lawsuits, political back-biting, airport tarmac showdowns, conservatorship hearings, more lawsuits, fighting over money, drug blow-ups in Australia, bad real estate deals, 37 managers, and the list goes on and on. That’s not to say Dave doesn’t have some residual political/financial stuff to do with the band. But there’s a reason you don’t see David Marks mentioned a ton in Steven Gaines’ “Heroes and Villains” book; he wasn’t there or involved for those 10,000 clusterf**ks over the years. As indicated in his book, he had his *own* struggles, but some bad thing that happened to him in 1981 doesn’t have anything to do (typically) with the other Beach Boys. Not necessarily so for the other guys.

I think this is overstating Mike's concessions a bit.

First of all, Mike got 4/7 of his then-current touring band into the C50 band, and a fifth member (Bonhomme) as tour manager. So 5/7 of his own band made it into the C50 band. More importantly, one his guys (Totten) was co-musical director. And it certainly appeared that Mertens was more on the arrangement/musician side as far as being a co-director, with Totten often if not usually *leading* the entire band on stage for rehearsals/soundchecks.

Mostly Brian's songs on the album? Mike wrote or co-wrote 1/3 of the album: Four Tracks. How many co-writes did Al get? Oh yeah, zero.

It also should be noted that Mike signed on to the entire reunion project knowing there was limited time to get the album done, and he also had to be aware that Brian and Joe Thomas had done the work of securing a record deal with Capitol, and did so by presenting them with Brian/Joe songs. That's what *Capitol* wanted. That's what Capitol wanted at the front end of the project, and then when they recorded more than 12 songs, it was Capitol who chose the 12 (Bruce has mentioned this).

Several of Mike's musicians are on the album as well, and on the tracks where they aren't, Brian's musicians aren't all over those tracks either, because they were backing tracks cut in Nashville with session guys (Chad Cromwell, etc.). Again, it's probably a good think they had some backing tracks already in the can so that they were able to finish the album before the tour started (though the album weirdly came out a MONTH into the tour).

Mike absolutely did sacrifice for the C50 tour, and until he blew it up at the end, he was a major HERO of the tour. Anybody who knew anything about how his touring setup had been working could easily guess that for C50, he was probably making less per gig than he would be on his own with the way it was set up. Now, the other guys also made concessions (Brian ceding a pretty good amount of control to Mike over the setlist, allowing Mike's guy to be co-musical director, and Al pretty much not getting a say in much of anything other than getting "California Saga" into the setlist for a couple months on and off).

I think it was Howie Edelson who, in the midst of our discussion back in 2014 about Foskett being arguably "poached" from Brian's band (and the same arguably done with "Ike" the following year), rightly pointed out that maybe Brian should have poached Totten and Cowsill for *his* band!

Sorry to single out this one point, but I've seen this analogy numerous times now and I think it's off-base. This was a Beach Boys reunion. What's the main characteristic of Mike's signature shirt? Yep, the blue and white stripes. Compare that to a "Love & Mercy" shirt or any other Brian solo shirt that has nothing to do with the Beach Boys. I agree that Dave's comments and Mary Ann Jardine's comments don't silence all such commentary (e.g. the mismatched appearance), but Mike's shirts aren't all that out of place at a Beach Boys reunion. Certainly not to the same extent a "Love & Mercy" shirt would be. It's not like Mike brought in "Unleash The Love" shirts for everyone to wear at a Beach Boys reunion. My thoughts on the entire shirt fiasco is, yes, it's the first thing I noticed when I looked at the group photo. It certainly deserved a mention and a discussion. Still, I consider it a footnote. That seems to be the perspective of those involved (that we've heard from).

It may not be a shirt with "Love and Mercy" written in giant letters, but it's still very much a "Mike Love" shirt being that his face (and only his face) is stitched into the shirt. In particular: being as it has certainly been a undeniably "touchy" aspect throughout recent years with regards to who is in the "BBs" band... these shirts are basically the statement MIKE LOVE IS THE BEACH BOYS in shirt form (what "band" t-shirts only have 1 member on them??)... and especially after Brian and Al felt pushed out of the band not so very long ago, it just feels tacky for the guy who pushed them out of the band (or if people want to get technical, the guy who made them feel like they were pushed out of the band) to bring those recently pushed-out guys shirts as gifts to wear at a reunion activity.

I'm glad David and Mary Ann are seeing things in a nice light, and I applaud them for just trying to make peace and at least publicly try to smooth things out. Truthfully, and I mean this very sincerely, I'm not trying to sh*t on their thoughts, nor the reunion, just by having my own opinion. I'm glad they don't see any deeper meaning. It doesn't mean that in the light of the history of the band, that the appearance (as HeyJude pointed out) isn't nevertheless just a bit off-putting for many fans (and publications) in light of the highly negative and egregiously inflammatory things that Mike has said about any number of Brian projects that "excluded" Mike.

Does a Beach Boys shirt with only Mike's face on it not somehow exclude Brian too? This may sound like a funny conversation, and it sort of is of course... but still, how is that comparison off-base? There's some truth in it.  If Mike didn't repeatedly say such negative stuff about "Brian content" countless times, this conversation would probably not exist. This is a shirt by the guy who made the biggest friggin' deal in the world in interviews, over and over and over and over again, about how it was SUCH a terrible and insulting thing for him (Mike) to not be completely included in aspects of the band in a manner that he (Mike) saw fit during the last reunion. So yeah, Mike wants everyone to cry a river that he did was not properly included as he should have been, and that TWGMTR was too Brian-centric (leaving out Mike), but then it's fine for Mike to expect Brian to wear a Mike shirt that takes the iconic brand fashion imagery and puts only Mike's face on it.

I think some people are simply bugged at Mike's inconsistency of what he has historically, repeatedly gotten publicly outraged at, when they see his actions. There's really nothing much more to it than that.

There's noooo doubt in my mind that if Brian had done the same thing (let's say Brian had a line of Brian Wilson striped shirts with only Brian's face taken from a 1960s Beach Boys photo, and asked Mike to wear it), that Mike would've have found a way (either right then and there, or years down the line) to make a big public hissy fit about being slighted, and to complain about Brian (or Melinda) having the chutzpah to expect Mike wear a Brian Wilson solo shirt to a Beach Boys reunion.

Honestly, anyone defending Mike in this discussion, please refute this. I'll expect crickets, just as JuiceBronston ducked out of my prior line of questioning.

Side note: if Reiner was “pro” matching shirts, that would surely mean Reiner wanted everyone to have matching shirts (or no one); I'm sure that if the "idea" of the band wearing matching shirts was mentioned to Reiner, that it would seem like a potentially nice idea on the surface, but no way in hell Reiner was somehow pushing for the idea of some members wearing matching shirts and some not.  Nobody in their right mind would think that was an ideal situation.

Also - none of this means that more great reunion activities are "tarnished", and I wish the band collective good vibrations from here on out.

The "Love and Mercy" analogy isn't perfect, but I think we're not looking at precisely the same thing. I wouldn't call striped shirts "out of place" at a BB event. I might say it's tacky or goofy or not the ideal projected image if you're trying to move the band away from mostly oldies radio and the AARP crowd, etc. But they're not out of place.

I haven't been speaking so much to the *justification* for striped shirts in general being worn. Indeed, they've randomly worn them over the years (both as a nod to the past as Al did at that 20th anniversary gig in 1980, and I guess just because it's in their closet?).

I'm speaking more to the seemingly incredulous expectation that Brian and Al would want to wear Mike Love-branded shirts. I'm not even saying whether they should or not, or whether they would want to or not. I'm simply saying it's not out of line to say it's quite possible that Brian and/or Al wouldn't want to wear Mike Love's signature line of clothes for a BUNCH of reasons. Mostly to do with the Love-centric nature of the shirts, and perhaps secondarily as a general image/style/taste/preference issue as well.

I don't think it's out of line to say that either or both of the following are true: Mike was oblivious to the issues that might arise out of bringing his signature line of striped shirts to such an event (e.g. some might think they look like dorks, all matching shirts might look dorky, three wearing them and two not would look weird, etc.), and/or bringing the shirts and offering them to Brian and Al (*if* they were offered) was a possibly passive aggressive move in the same way that Brian gets invited to Mike's surprise birthday parties only for Mike to *lament* Brian not showing up on Facebook. Yes, I'm suggesting it's *possible* (and I stress only possible) that Mike brought his shirts to this thing and offered them to Brian and Al knowing Brian wouldn't want to wear Mike's line of clothes. Same with Al. Remember, Al is a guy who has been legally harangued on and off for nearly 20 years for how he calls himself a "Beach Boy." Brian was SUED for a freebie CD that used a pic of the Beach Boys. So maybe, while Mike's shirts are no doubt (I can only assume) totally free of any trademark issues, they might not be so enthusiastic about wearing something where Mike is absolutely cashing in on the BB image.

That being said, maybe also it would have nothing to do with the Mike Love signature nature of the items, and maybe Brian and Al don't want or need someone else picking their clothes. Especially for a largely *radio* event. I mean, my personal take is that those shirts don't look like super-duper comfortable, especially in a casual event on a stage under lights, etc.

Backing up, I think your sentence near the end is accurate: The "first thing jumping to our minds" thing when seeing the pics of the mismatched shirts is really the main area where it deserves a mention. But, as is often the case on these boards, that simple observation is met with a weird level of incredulity, some folks saying "they're just shirts" and claiming there is ZERO in those pics as far as imagery loaded with band politics. So then those that see the OBVIOUS connotation implied with the pics are forced to counter, and so on and so on.

At least, for me, the incredulity (e.g. "I don't see ANYTHING weird about those pics" or "No, Jeff Foskett leaving Brian's band and Mike's band isn't loaded with any politics at all!") is the problem, at least when we're talking amongst relatively knowledgeable fans who know the band's history. I'm willing to not immediately be 100% cynical. But that means the "thumbs aloft" fans that say "three touring bands are better than one!" need to also face some realities with this band as well.

Thank you - it's nice to have some balance here, something that gets lost here usually because of the hatred for Mike Love.

The funny thing about how I've been known to harp on how tragic the crumbling of C50 is, is that that implicit in what I say is that Mike is integral. If I didn't care about Mike or didn't firmly feel that the "whole is greater than the sum..., etc.", then I would have been happy to see Brian go back to his own thing, especially with Al added.

But, even today, assuming everybody wanted to be there, having all of those guys together is the preference, no question.

Now, the realities of the situation in recent years have dictated that, given Mike's negativity, it's undoubtedly better for Brian to be touring and generally creating around and with people who *don't* have a grudge against Brian (or Melinda, or Al, or whatever). And, while the end of C50 was something hastened and fate sealed by Mike, it's undoubtedly better for him to be doing whatever it is he wants to do (e.g. not having to answer to anybody in his day-to-day job).

5PM ET/PT, and I'm not sure if that means west coast gets it at 5pm or 2pm. Do they really run two feeds?

Either way, one-off stuff like this is often archived and able to be played back via the app later on.

" ... you gotta remember OSD has been a fan of the band pretty much since day one and has had much first hand experience."

BFD. So have I. Just because someone has been a long time fan of the band does that mean that individual has free reign to pollute the Smiley Smile board with incessant hate filled posts? Not to mention that such posts reduce the level of discourse on the board since they often come across like they were written by an eight year old.

Here's Board Rule #2: "Debate is fine; when it crosses into personal attacks, it becomes a different matter."

I'm all for debate, and over the years Mr. Love has certainly been deserving of reasoned criticism, but I don't understand why these non-stop toxic posts are tolerated.





 

Thanks!

I interpret rule 2. as “personal attacks against fellow posters” more than personal attacks against the band members. Especially since a former board moderator has made hateful comments about Brian Wilson while he was still a moderator.

That is how it is meant to be...however there is a limit and certain things are off limits. There has been action taken in the past if that line is crossed. This didn’t hit that, much like that baseless comment about Brian made by another person in another post.

Hmmm, did you just somewhat violate rule #2?? Sounds like a personal attack to me but no big deal. Fortunately, at this board, we're still permitted to post our opinion on topics which is what message boards are all about. The other good thing is that if, as you say, you're somehow offended, I believe you have the option of ignoring my posts from now on. But remember one thing-I did not insult you as you did me. Furthermore, I have always championed the band and there were many years when it was not such a cool thing to do. If I come down heavy handed on the luvster, it's because of his abhorrent behavior not only to Brian and Dennis, Al, and yes Carl as well, but what he's done to totally water down the BB legacy and attempt to launch his accomplishments as being more essential than Brian Wilson's and that's not going to stand while I'm breathing. He may be a multi millionaire and that's fine but anyone with half a brain knows that without his cousin, he would not be where he is today and it's about time he showed a bit of humility toward that fact.  :bw

Good gravy already, the whole Mike ended C50 thing is bogus. BRIAN 'S WIFE ended it with the "no more Wilson dates" email: that is a fact.

In the past I have avoided responding directly to any of your posts since your comments typically fall into trolling territory, and it’s not good board etiquette to feed a troll.

At least you’ve cut back on the frequency of those idiotic woots.

Like you, I defended and promoted the band through the lean years, and as you did I purchased Sunflower when it was first released, back when most people wouldn’t even bother to give it a listen because wasn’t cool to like the Beach Boys.

But concerning your posts - I don’t get it. Just about every damn time Mike Love is mentioned in someone’s post, you feel compelled to pollute the board with hateful comments about Mr. Love, and it’s really getting old, man. Did he f*** your girlfriend or wife? If so, my condolences, but it’s time to get over it. Otherwise, how about responding to a post mentioning Mr. Love only when you can offer an intelligent response mentioning a specific transgression of Mr. Love's that relates to the topic under discussion.

And, for a change of pace, since you’ve been a fan since day one, one would think you might have some worthwhile comments to offer on issues not involving Mr. Love. As it is, your fixation with and apparent need to constantly comment on Mr. Love comes across as bizarre, to put it mildly.

In summary — it’s time for you to meditate!

Oops, sorry, lost my head!

But seriously, at least take a chill pill and calm down.

Actually I would like to read some of the stories about the shows you went to back in day (in a different thread) I would’ve liked seeing them around the 20/20 era; there are videos posted on YouTube and I’ve been watching a lot of them.

I see that coming up a lot. Has anybody actually seen the email or is it bard completely on hearsay?


Anyway I am looking forward to hearing this broadcast. I am on vacation so I will be able to hear it with no problem whatsoever. This year seems to be turning to be quite the year in the Beach Boy universe and I am so exited!

Agreed on all point, but specifically the fact that much of said messages from the individual in question are in fact against board rules. I backpedaled a bit the other day to keep things peaceful, but I do have to agree with you. 

I agree to disagree. There was worse said about Brian. Now if he was directly attacking Mike it’d be different. He’s just saying he doesn’t want mike to work with Brian because of his past actions. Now if he said he hoped something would happen to Mike I’d have a major problem with that

Good point about Brian.

Guys, we all need to take a step back. This is just a f@cking band. It's not worth becoming the purpose of your life. They made fantastic music, you might like or agree with certain memebrs or you don't. That's about it. If this becomes more than a hobby for you (as long as you are not professionally working for/with them), you should start worrying. No need to get into hateful debates; it's really not worth it. You could do much more worthwhile things with the energy you put into that.

^ Agreed. We sometimes take things too personally. I myself have been guilty of it

That's BULLS**T, with all due respect. Six years later and a few people are still peddling this story. It's ridiculous.

Anybody that has paid attention to the entire C50 debacle knows that e-mail has zero to do with why MIKE ended C50. Wanna know how I know? Because Mike's OWN BOOK provides a LITANY of things he didn't like about the tour, MANY reasons why *he* didn't want to continue. Suggesting the "no more shows for Wilson" alleged e-mail was *THE* reason C50 didn't continue would imply then that Mike has EVER said "I wanted to continue, but the e-mail was the reason I didn't", or something alone those lines.

That has never happened. Mike has never expressed a desire to have continued the reunion, or to continue it in the future, and has in fact provided across MULTIPLE interviews as well as his book, a laundry list of gripes about the reunion. Too many musicians, too many singers, autotune being "snuck" onto the soundstage, the tour not making enough money (conveniently it is never addressed as far as any up-front cash advance Mike and/or Brian may have received), the tour not playing "vital smaller markets", "sobering" tales in his book of Brian being "inert" at interviews, and characterized the tour as "one of the most stressful things that I or anyone in my band had ever been through."

Does that sound like someone who's ready to keep going but for a little e-mail from Melinda Wilson?

By Mike's own words and deeds, and to his *slight* credit, he has never backed away from acknowledging that it was HIS decision to not to continue. Indeed, in his book at the end of the (stunningly brief) section on C50, he *acknowledges* that Brian loudly proclaimed that he (Brian) wanted to continue the tour. Mike's attitude is essentially "oh well."

So just a heads up, the "Brian's wife ended the reunion" stuff isn't going to fly here. We all know our stuff when it comes to C50. It's well-trodden territory for six years now on this board.

The actual e-mail has never been published; Mike mentions it in his book. I think the headline on that one is that it's perfectly plausible in my mind that the e-mail does exist and was sent. But it's a literal red herring. It had zero to do with the demise of C50. Going back to my previous message in this thread, Mike has not been shy about expressing a litany of reasons he had issues with the C50 tour, and he has always freely admitted that by the end of the tour, Brian DID want to continue and Mike *chose* to go back to his own thing.

By the time that e-mail was allegedly sent, I believe the reunion was already dead as an ongoing, "in perpetuity" thing. The alleged e-mail was the equivalent of shooting someone after they've already died of a heart attack or something. And, again, assuming the e-mail is legit and in proper context, *all parties* including Mike agree that Brian changed his mind and wanted to continue by the end of the tour.

Al Jardine also wanted to continue, but of course he is comically ignored and is not even mentioned in the C50 section of Mike's book beyond a mention that Al was on the tour. I don't believe Mike pointed out in his book that not only did Brian want to continue, but so did Al.

No mention of Al nearly *begging* Mike during the Grammy Museum event in September 2012 to reconsider and continue with the full band.

See, even the "no more dates for the Wilsons" thing I think is kinda nonsense. I always kinda took it to mean, "no more dates on this leg of the tour," since, ya know, everything Brian had said during the tour signaled wanting to do more with The Beach Boys. So, just my take.

 :beer

You cannot say definitively that the 'email' didn't play a part in the end of C50. It also would be naive to say that it was the only reason, or even the main reason for the end of the tour.

The thing that, in my opinion, gives Mike justification for ending the tour, was that, by everyone's admission, it was supposed to be a set number of dates. 50 I think, which was extended. That doesn't mean it's a bummer that it didn't continue. And it doesn't mean that Mike didn't end the thing for what could be described as 'selfish reasons'

I think Bruce was probably keen on getting back to the M&B format as well.

But, we were treated to a great tour in C50. I don't know that it could have gone on forever, but who knows. Here's a question, could Brian and Al have tried to convince Mike to carry on. Could they have given him more money, Found ways to entice him to carry on? Maybe Brian could have taken a moment at every show to thank Mike for his contributions and state there could have never been a Beach Boys without him. Could they have done more, if they really wanted the show to go on?

One of the more curious aspects of the "no more shows" alleged e-mail is that in the *lengthy* letter Mike wrote to the LA Times at the end of the tour, where he went through a laundry list of reasons and justifications, he *never* mentioned the e-mail.

With all due respect to all, I question the deduction and reasoning skills of anyone that *actually* thinks Brian's alleged e-mail has anything to do with (let alone being the *main* reason) the reunion ending. It's *patently obvious* that Mike made the decision based on a list of reasons (many outlined in interviews and his book), and at some point well after the end of the tour and after a lengthy letter to the LA Times, brought up one alleged e-mail as if it had anything to do with his decision.

To be fair, I *think* Mike tries to make the connection in his book by implying he hadn't made a firm decision about ending the reunion, was constantly getting offers for "his version" of the Beach Boys, and then once he got the alleged "e-mail", he reacted by then starting to book his own shows. He even seems to imply, in my opinion, in a more recent interview, that he thinks the e-mail was some sort of weird reverse-psychology attempt. He mentions that he (Mike) believes that they (Melinda and Brian) wanted Mike to react to the e-mail by saying "are you crazy? shouldn't we keep going?" He (again, in my opinion) seems to imply the e-mail was just a ploy to get Mike to grovel and ask Brian to reconsider. What's interesting is that even though I don't particularly buy that the alleged e-mail was such an elaborate ploy, Mike *admits* that he reacted by *not* doing anything to try to save the reunion, and instead booked his own gigs and seemingly never looked back.

But even taking all of that into consideration, he has NEVER ONCE expressed an active desire to continue the reunion. All of this "set end date" and "it was Melinda's e-mail that ended the reunion" stuff would make *some* sense *if* Mike had EVER expressed anything but happiness over going back to his own thing, or if Mike had ever expressed true disappointment over the reunion ending, or expressed ANY sentiment along the lines of "*I* wanted the reunion to continue, but was prevented from doing so, and therefore I'm very disappointed and still wish we could reunite." But no, none of that. It's patently obvious Mike would rather be doing his own thing. Mike owns his own decision more than the small number of "defenders" seem to.

Only a few times did anybody ever seem truly bummed the reunion ended. Brian in his LA Times letter, after which he seemed to move on. And poor Al, who was still trying to talk Mike into reconsidering months after I think the decision had probably already been made.

Howie Edelson called it way back *in* 2012; the "set end date" stuff is total BS. They could have made it work had they wanted to. Mike (and Bruce) didn't want to. Bruce was indeed happily telling everyone BEFORE the tour even started that it was a finite amount of shows.

I've always found it hilarious how a few people use the "set end date" argument in the same sentence in which they acknowledge the original "set end date" of 50 shows was extended. NOBODY who is truly familiar with these guys, these camps, this band, can deny that had Mike and Brian (and Jackie and Melinda) made it happen, the reunion could have continued. For 25 more shows, for another year, or in perpetuity.

I've already gone over the alleged e-mail ad nauseam; EVERY PIECE of available evidence points to the e-mail being a non-issue. *Especially* Mike's own words. Anybody truly believing that e-mail (the one Mike didn't even mention in interviews/articles in 2012 post-tour) had any impact on Mike not wanting to continue the reunion is ignoring reams and reams of evidence, most especially Mike's *own words* on the subject.

The only thing, and even this is based only on Mike's own words, that the alleged e-mail impacted was apparently giving Mike justification *at that particular moment* to start booking his own shows. I'm actually not even convinced he hadn't *already* started working on booking his own shows post-C50. It's only my hunch, but I think plans were in place for him to go back to his own thing *before* the reunion even started. Again, look at Bruce's *pre-tour* comments warning everybody that after the final scheduled date, there would be no more shows with all five members.

Even Mike's own story of using the alleged e-mail as a justification to start booking his own shows rings hollow to me, because almost everything he says before and after that point in time strongly suggests he didn't like numerous aspects of the tour. Using the e-mail as an actual reason the tour ended *also* contradicts Mike's own equally ridiculous "set end date" reasoning, which implies the tour ended because, I guess, it stopped with the last date.

And again, Mike himself *fully acknowledges* that at some point well before the end of the tour, Brian DID want to continue, which *also* renders the e-mail moot. Even if Mike had to do his own shows that he had already scheduled (which is a spurious assumption at best, as any "Mike and Bruce" dates could have easily been rebooked/rescheduled/bought off, etc.), he made NO move to saying "okay, let's get the reunion back together for the end of the year", or "for 2013", or anything else.

That's some solid logic and reason in HeyJude's comments about C50. It's been hashed out so often, and various talking points like "set end date" and a lone "smoking gun" email have been refuted by facts including Mike's own comments on the matter, that it is odd to see the clock being turned back yet again to the lone email theory to explain Mike's decision.

As mentioned, there have been numerous reasons given by Mike and others around him since his first public comment that centered around not wanting to risk overexposure in the marketplace, supplemented by a mention of The Eagles which led to a public rebuke from their camp. And along with that, a notion that some players in the concert booking business had advised Mike against overexposure...and later suggestions that fans wanted to see Mike's lean-and-mean lineup versus C50...would that be the same players in the concert booking business who were putting bigger offers on the table for the C50 lineup to book more shows?

Then there was the issue which seemed to appear after "set end date" and "No More Wilsons" ran their course, that of the tour not making enough money or spending too much money to be profitable. Hmmm. The numbers were already run on that issue, decide for yourself.

But if the email is still such a smoking gun, be-all-end-all kind of answer, consider this:

What, if any, emails or correspondence came before or after this one email that's still being cited as *the* reason? In other words, what was the context that led to such an email if it were such a major factor? Maybe if someday "50 Big Ones LLC" and/or BRI make public the correspondence and the actual messages sent and received, we'll get an answer a la the sealed JFK files. Until then, trying to hinge the fate of what was one of the most talked-about tours of 2012 on a single email with no context seems more than a little odd.

And again, territory previously mapped out, but if the issue was Mike getting a green light to book his own shows again, what shows did he proceed to book? The most notable were Nutty Jerry's which turned into a debacle that led to the show being canceled anyway over the confusion it caused, the charity gig at a California winery featuring John Stamos that was almost the day after the final UK C50 show and where some audience members thought they'd be seeing the C50 lineup, and some random show outside the US that I'm not sure ever happened.

So when Mike got the greenlight so to speak based on this one email, what did he end up booking at that time?

So many valid points. Taking away the money, the biggest reason the reunion couldn’t continue for me is this. Mike would sooner do 173 shows a year as M&B than 73 shows as The Beach Boys. It’s basically his touring DNA.

For those who are interested as far as when and how Mike may have been booking "Mike and Bruce" shows for post-C50, it's worth noting that word first leaked around *June 15, 2012* of rumors of Mike booking South American dates for his band. My guess is these would have been the 10/26 and 10/28 shows in Chile and Argentina that were for some reason cancelled.

In any event, less than two months into the C50 tour, and over three months before it was over, word was breaking of rumors of Mike booking his own shows for later in the year (and one might guess that by the time those "rumors leaked", it was something that had occurred days if not weeks prior.) That doesn't smell like someone who has any intention or desire to "see how it goes" at that point and possibly continue the reunion.

And even the money issue used as yet another reason a few years after the fact seemed like a red herring. Everyone in the industry saying the tour was a success must have been wrong. But again, the numbers were crunched and the numbers are there for everyone to see and judge whether or not C50 was a financial failure.

This reply can lead to a whole list of associated topics, but mostly I'll repeat what I've said many times before and opine that a lot has to do with Mike's wanting to be the spotlight and not share that identity as "leader" of the band with anyone. His shows offer that chance, where C50 did not. Maybe his mindset has changed since 2012.

But what also sticks out is how Mike went out with his tour setup after C50 and took along with him some of the popular elements of C50's stage show, including the giant video screen, tributes to Carl and Dennis (although even those changed to allow 'Forever' to be a Full House song rather than a Dennis/BB's song when Stamos was there), and from 2013 onward the use of "50th Anniversary" in the tours' billings and marketing.

Some might say no big deal, "oh, but Brian did that too with Pet Sounds 50th", etc etc etc. But for someone who didn't want to continue the real C50 activities, Mike took with him some of the elements from C50 to use as his own, including the headline "Beach Boys Celebrate 50th..." attached to marketing the tours. Just worth noting.

Maybe this does or does not refute some of the points being made about Mike and booking these shows...but isn't it ironic or at least worth noting that these shows that were so important for Mike to book in June or whenever it happened ended up not happening anyway? Just take a look at the gigs that actually happened in 2012 going into early 2013 after C50, and how many took place. Were the shows that did take place of any major consequence whatsoever that if necessary they couldn't have been postponed or moved? And that also assumes more shows were on the table to possibly extend the tour...but when that hypothetical extension would happen would be worth noting too.

Issue though is the immediacy of this June 2012 event and how it was portrayed as a green-light for Mike to get to the all-important business of booking gigs for the remainder of 2012...gigs which didn't happen?

Again, old ground that has been covered, but when issues like this magic-bullet email are brought up in such a definitive way, it opens the floodgates for the facts of what actually did play out to be offered in return.

Video on Facebook

https://www.facebook.com/siriusxm/videos/10156677082955929/UzpfSTgyMTYzOTQxMzk6MTAxNTY1Nzg1MTcyNzkxNDA/

A few more clips here.

http://blog.siriusxm.com/beach-boys-reunite-for-the-first-time-since-2012-for-siriusxm-town-hall/

Nice clips so far! The Sirius link has more to watch from YouTube.

I would love it if Sirius made a video of the full event available on their YouTube channel after the initial broadcast runs.

I would love it even more if they could somehow corral the guys together for more of these.

But so far, the one letdown is that there really hasn't been anything revelatory in the answers or info given. It's pretty much what most fans invested beyond the greatest hits comps would have heard. Here's hoping the full hour will go a little deeper in the guys' answers. I like that Reiner is asking the questions as a fan.

Well at least one person has their facts straight.

(https://i.imgur.com/4YGU0AN.jpg)

 :woot :woot :woot :woot

A moderator trolling a fellow board member? Hmm.

Does it mean troll must get nice thoughtful reply? It makes sense that guitarfool replied in similar style as Lonely Summer/ Matt Etherton's troll posts. When it's been explained & clarified by HeyJude & the like in great details that email isn't the reason C50 ended, Lonely Summer just goes backwards & agrees with Matt Etherton's "fact" (they didn't even back up that "fact") whose post got said explanation & clarification. If you wish to defend trolls, fine.

Don't drink the Kool-Aid.

Your short one-liners don't add anything to discussion. I brought valid points in reply & instead of doing the same, you post sth. like you did just now.

Don t drink the Kool-Aid is an American expression. Guitarfool was basically saying "that's bs" to the idea that Brian's wife had anything to do with the end of C50.

GF2002 on point!

Jay’s valued input is more than “one liners”.... ::)

Jay is adult, can answer about "one-liners" without your help. I'm sick beyond by the "spokesperson" roles people take here & elsewhere. & by the time you said that thing, Jay read & replied already to my reply. It's over, you know?

Otherwise, the point stands - Lonely Summer's troll post got picture post back. Makes sense, not sure what's difficult to get it.

Yes, I'm going to quote myself to make a quick "addendum" to my post above. I meant to say that I took GF's quotation of Lonely Summer's as "trolling", as a few people here seem to have an issue with him.

But to be fair, heyjude tried to explain yet again the “email” story to lonely summer and Matt Etherton. Yet the koolaid of AGD misinformation stuck with them..,,

*EVEN* if one believed that the alleged e-mail had some sort of impact on the end of the tour (despite REAMS of evidence to the contrary from folks including Mike himself), to assert it is a FACT that "BRIAN'S WIFE" sending one e-mail was the one and only reason for the end of C50 is, frankly, either troll behavior or such a gross lack of understanding of the history of C50 and of this band that one should refrain from discussing the topic until they become educated on the topic.

As in, simply reading MIKE'S OWN BOOK will give you MANY other reasons why the tour ended. The main take away after reading the book was that Mike made it EXPLICITY clear that he didn't like many if not most aspects of the tour and the reunion in general and got the hell out of there as quickly as he could. Really, his book, while having in my opinion some conflicting reasoning, actually offers some pretty strong clarity on why Mike didn't want to continue. To suggest the alleged "Wilson e-mail" ended C50 ignores MIKE'S OWN WORDS.

There ONE reason and one reason only in my opinion to make the ridiculous assertion that "the e-mail" caused the end of C50, and that is either to blindly (in my opinion) defend Mike Love (thus owning up to things even less than Mike himself does), and/or to attack Melinda and/or Brian. Or again, a GROSS and FUNDAMENTAL lack of understanding and knowledge of the C50 project and the band in general.

Lonely summer's been saying about how Brian is this, Brian that, various negative comments on & on & on ad infinitum. Now he just simply confirms it's "fact" when Matt Etherton blames Melinda that C50 ended due to her email. & that's AFTER posters, including HeyJude, explaining with great detail that it's rubbish. So, troll post gets similar troll-like reply. Makes sense? No? Better question is - why do you care? It's not like Lonely Summer is your best friend or sth., yet it's like you defend him or what. Everybody can defend themselves. If Lonely Summer will be deeply upset by that red-faced round chap pic, he'll reply himself to it.

I have to say, having been on this board for 13 years and having been "interwebbing" on BB boards for over 20 years, I'm surprised how often someone posting a snarky picture is somehow seen by some more as "trolling" than sentences and paragraphs of clear trolling language.

As in, literally if the post had been, in text, "don't drink the Kool Aid" instead of the actual picture, seemingly less hackles would be raised.

Posting a pic like that is snark, but the message is basically on point. A few people are borderline-trolling with assertions about an e-mail ending the 2012 reunion, after SIX YEARS of most likely probably over a MILLION words written on the subject on this board, not to mention dozens of interviews, numerous books including two "autobiographies", and so on. NONE of these sources assert that one e-mail ended the reunion. The one person who most strongly raises the e-mail as in issue is Mike, and in his book he NEVER asserts that the e-mail was the reason the reunion ended. He does imply the e-mail was the impetus for the TIMING of when he started booking his own shows. That's all. I frankly am somewhat skeptical of even this assertion, but even if we take it at face value, he's not asserting everything was just fine and dandy until that e-mail came in. Indeed, in his book, he describes events BEFORE THE TOUR EVEN STARTED that nearly caused him to QUIT the tour before it even started.

So yeah, there's a point at which a few people trying to assert one e-mail was the sole cause of the end of the reunion is either knowingly trolling or, if simply due to a lack of being educated on the topic at hand, I guess sort of "unknowingly" trolling?

Either way, it's a spreading of misinformation that goes *well* past a case of "we'll just have to agree to disagree."

Why is it assumed that Bruce prefers the M&B band over reunion band? I recall him saying to a member of this board when asked what he missed, he listed his bandmates. Does Bruce make more with the M&B band than he did with C50?

2HeyJude: I didn't get that cutesy dork-faced pic a la monolithic's ava' as snark. Too cute picture. Is there sth. I missed? But everything else, since you called these posters trolls, why did you reply with detail to Lonely Summer if you know very well he will not change his opinion? Let's not feed trolls.

I'm not sure that saying he prefers one over the other is the best way to put it.

I would say that his posts in early 2012 prior to the C50 tour starting did seem to be very oddly jubilant (in my opinion) about the idea that there would be *no more* shows with all members after a specific date. I never saw him post "I hope we keep the reunion together permanently" or anything along those lines.

He made some comments, during the C50 tour if I'm recalling correctly, that weirdly kind of implied Brian's guys couldn't "keep up" with a hectic touring schedule, sort of bragging that his typical "Mike & Bruce" schedule was as and in fact more hectic. I remember thinking what a dumb comment this was considering how LITTLE he adds to the shows in either format. It's like, those other guys are doing all of the musical heavy lifting outside of Dave's guitar.

I don't think anyone knows if Bruce's salary was more or less on C50 compared to the M&B tour. My guess is that C50, being a more prestige event playing to generally larger audiences with a higher ticket price, easily could have paid Bruce out more *per show*, but remember that C50 was 73 shows while Bruce probably typically does 150-ish shows per year with Mike.

Yeah, I can't really particularly try to speak for the original poster about what the precise point of the Kool-Aid Man pic was. I'm not even sure it was meant to convey "don't drink the Kool Aid." I think it was just a snarky reference using some irony or sarcasm. That is, in the old Kool Aid TV commercials (and more modern callback references to those old commercials), the Kool Aid man bursts into a room, often destroying a wall, and simply says "Oh yeah!"

I think it's a pretty specific sort of irony/sarcasm that one either gets or doesn't get.

This is getting way too meta for this board, but here's a joke using the Kool Aid man motif from a super old episode of "Family Guy":

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Il-FKVnEnDg

But the email certainly deserves discussion if one wants to form an opinion of the end of C50. Mike (as per his book) is having all kinds of problems with Melinda. He has his back up from the beginning, feels he isn't given his proper place in the studio. But he is apparently supposed to be 'in charge' on the tour side. He claims Melinda starts interfering in the process, and he almost walks before the tour even starts. As it rolls along, Mike is finding several issues with, what mostly seems to be, exorbitant tour expenses from Brian's 'camp'

So when the first email comes, (and I think it's important to note that two emails are discussed), which seems to be in response to an offer in Israel, Mike mentions it as, I suppose, some justification in booking new dates. Now he also mentions a second email. The first was sent June 1, the second email, some 20 days later. Days! Not minutes or hours. If there was no further discussion within that 20 day period, I could see Mike believing that there would indeed be no more shows.  If Mike is claiming that when Melinda wrote back to ask him to disregard the original email, that it was somehow too late to reverse the wheels in motion, well that seems questionable. But, as has been discussed to death here, the reason(s) are pretty clear why the tour didn't continue. Mike liked his own setup better. Emails, studio snubs, tour expenses, in the end he was going back to M&B. I'm glad he stuck it out for as long as he did, we were treated to some great shows.

What's funny is that I posted *three* posts about C50 after the discussion veered off to C50 and some misconceptions about it, three posts with both legit facts about C50 and a few questions to consider based on what actually ended up happening, and posting an image of Kool-Aid Man becomes the takeaway!  ;D

However someone wants to interpret the image, interpret it as such. But when actual facts and words are ignored or do not register on the radar, a cartoon can sometimes be an option.

Another point that everyone is ignoring is what did the emails immediately before and after the "magic bullet" email actually say? It's funny how one out of a string of emails gets pulled out referenced, yet none of the others before or after are referenced or quoted.

So what was said/emailed/written before and after "No More Wilsons"?

Answer that and we'll be able to have a discussion with all that was potentially on the table when it all unfolded.

All the “email” talk was from a discredited historian who was VERY lucky to only be banned from SS....

It felt like from that initial statement Mike gave to the press about not wanting to risk overexposure, the list of reasons given out via messages, interviews, and even fan forums which are called "unimportant" or whatever seemed to get longer over the years. It felt like - and this is just my opinion - when one reason was waved in our collective faces along the lines of "set end date" and that reason didn't stick, another one would come out. And that's what I outlined in a previous post, where it seemed a few years after the fact all of a sudden the profitability and expenses of the tour became an issue that no one had mentioned for at least a year prior, when all the talk was of email and "set end dates".

And again, it's not a case of randomly putting this stuff into discussions - When someone brings it up, it will (and should) be addressed, especially when said "facts" are not quite factual or do not tell the whole story.

Again, the basic question surrounding that email comes down to what was in the emails before and after that one everyone cites? It's odd that only the supposed transcript of a single email in what was an important email chain if it did in fact alter the course of the future touring plans has been presented. Where are the rest, what did they say? We've been asking that for years at this point.

I just re-read this entire section of Mike's book again.

The "no more shows for Wilson" e-mail certainly deserves a mention when discussing C50 and its demise. And that's about it. Even if you use Mike's book as the *sole* source of info on C50, it's *patently* obvious that the e-mail has nothing to do with his attitude about the reunion, and had zero impact on his choice to not continue it. The e-mail is essentially one bit of info of something that happened; Mike doesn't even give it much context in his book and doesn't describe whether he should have maybe followed up for some clarification (but in a much later interview, he delved into that topic, more on that in a moment...).

Looking again at Mike's book, one point I haven't even been mentioning (and which, prior to the book's publication, Mike also never mentioned as far as I'm aware) is that Melinda only three weeks later said to disregard the previous e-mail. As had been the case up to that point, Mike himself doesn't express that he made ANY overtures to anybody about wanting to continue. Before, during, and after the tour, by his own words, he describes the project in resoundingly negative terms other than the music being made on stage. He literally calls it the most stressful thing he's ever dealt with. Really?

Back to how Mike could have or should have responded to such a non-sequitur e-mail, or how he thought they may have wanted him to respond, let's turn to the January 2018 MOJO interview with Mike:

So we received an offer
to perform in Israel as part of the 50th Anniversary
tour. It was quite lucrative. Before I had the chance
to even review the offer, Melinda Wilson responded
in an email and very clearly and succinctly said, “No
more shows for Wilson.” At that point there were
a ton of offers on the table
for my version of The Beach Boys, but we hadn’t
confirmed any of them at that point. So when
we received Melinda’s email saying, “No more
shows for Wilson,” we didn’t go back to them
and ask, “Oh my God, what are you thinking? We
should continue to do this” – which is what I
think they hoped we would do – we honoured
that email, we got on the phone with Terry
Rhodes of [concert agency] ICM and said, “It
looks like Brian’s done, we have to start booking
dates, as Mike’s Beach Boys are obligated
contractually to tour.” It’s very clear.

Does this sound like someone that's doing ANYTHING to try to make the reunion work? It smells very much like he's chomping at the bit to get back to his own thing, and a took a five-word e-mail without much context and didn't bother to follow-up AT ALL. (I'm setting aside the highly dubious reasoning that he was obligated to book tour dates; the existence of the C50 tour PROVES that any such obligations can be waved and/or substituted with reunion shows, especially considering three of the four BRI voting members were part of the reunion tour). 

He even spells out *precisely* the reaction I think most fans would have wanted anybody in his position to have, which was to ask *some* sort of follow-up question and express that it's crazy to not continue.

In fact, as I mentioned back when that interview was posted, *Mike's interpretation* of the e-mail seems to imply, in my opinion, that he thought the e-mail wasn't even necessarily true and that it was some sort of power play or reverse-psychology attempt to make Mike actually fight for continuing the reunion. Again, just my interpretation. The bottom line is that most any normal person with common sense who had *any* reason or desire to continue the project at hand would have asked SOME SORT of follow-up question. By his own words, Mike did not. As I also mentioned back then, for all Mike knew, Melinda was saying no more shows because Brian was ill or injured or had some issue. Mike apparently didn't write back with anything like "Oh, geez, the reunion is going so well. Is Brian okay? Why doesn't he want to do any more shows?"

Even after reading the book's quote, there are points to put the microscope on and clarify, for those who wish to do so or take what's in that book at face value. Too much of a task to pull out each one, but the ones most glaring should stand out to anyone who has followed this.

Briefly, so Mike suggests a "ton of offers" were coming in for his M&B lineup. The vagueness of that should jump off the page. As seen with Nutty Jerry's, which was the only booking of note that we saw evidence of because it played out in the local press, they thought they were booking "The Beach Boys" as in C50 lineup when they had a chance to book The Beach Boys to play a show. It turned into a debacle.

As far as a show in Israel, I wonder if this was the show which mysteriously got canceled a few years later, with still no explanation why it officially got canceled to this day. Some Israeli press reports and comments published at the time suggested fans were buying tickets thinking they'd see...wait for it...the C50 lineup with Brian and Al, and when it was clarified that it was Mike's lineup, fans were upset. That's just what was in the reports at the time (which were posted here BTW as it unfolded), and again no official reason why the show was scrapped has ever been offered. But I wonder if reasons extend back to June 2012...

Anyway, that's one diversion out of many.



HeyJude: You don't even need to try guessing what the context was. It's the most basic logic to note that no specific emails are cited except the one that Mike and others around him have been waving for years as ultimate proof of what happened and why it happened. Has even a single sentence of emails that came before and after that one ever been posted? No. And that's why guessing what was in them is kind of a fool's errand...if context did anything to bolster what Mike's points were in the book, there should have been more offered than a single phrase in a lone email, which people then try to hinge the fate of an entire multi-million dollar tour employing dozens of staff and crew onto.

Context is everything. So where is the context of these emails? We're just supposed to believe that a tour of this magnitude got from Point A to Point Z on the back of the phrase "no more Wilsons".

One interesting point that I believe highlights Mike was much more interested in *exiting* the reunion than under some immediate pressing obligation to book a ton of his own dates quickly is this:

Regarding Mike being required to book his own shows back after C50, it's worth actually looking at his tour schedule for the remainder of 2012 and into 2013.

From September 30, 2012 through the beginning of February 2013, Mike booked...wait for it.... NINE shows across EIGHT venues.

He dumped the reunion tour in order to play these shows:

September 30 - The Legacy Concert for the Children, The Santaluz Club, San Diego, CA
October 5 - Extraco Events Center, Waco, TX  
October 6 - The Backyard, Austin, TX  
October 12 - Beau Rivage, Biloxi, MS
October 13 - Beau Rivage, Biloxi, MS
December 21 - New Orleans Bowl Friday Night Concert, Champion's Square, New Orleans, LA (Free Show)
December 28 - Pike's Peak Center, Colorado Springs, CO  
December 31 - Mystic Lake Casino, Prior Lake, MN (2 Shows)

Nothing in November 2012, nothing in January 2013. Only FOUR shows in February 2013. Even assuming maybe he booked a few private/corporate gigs we don't know about, and even taking into account at least three canceled gigs (two in South America, plus the infamous "Nutty Jerry's" gig), I somehow doubt BRI had a requirement that both *forced* Mike to book shows, but then also allowed for such a *light* tour schedule.

This is just my total guess/gut feeling, but it kind of smells like Mike just started booking a hand full of shows to essentially create a plausible reason to say he couldn't do more reunion shows (See? I already have my own shows booked!), and also to start getting his foot back in the door and re-establish his band as the going "Beach Boys" touring concern.

Look at that schedule. THREE shows between mid-October 2012 and February 2013. They could have *easily* booked some year-end reunion gigs to try to cap the whole thing off on better terms (and that's just assuming they still wouldn't continue the reunion on any sort of even semi-permanent basis). As was bandied about some time back, even just one or two year-ending shows at the Staples Center or something could have easily been done.

I didn't remember Mike's tour schedule was that light right after C50; that's quite interesting.


Yes, this makes so much sense. It explains those oddball bookings in Summer/Fall 2012, and it just seems like what he would logically do.

You know, I would love it if the original five surviving members of the group were to sit down together and do an interview specifically about the 2012 tour. Just put it all out in the open. The good, bad, and downright ugly aspects of it, from each individual perspective. If course, we all know it would never happen. But man, that would be one interesting conversation.  ;D

Spot on

Here's some archival material to consider along with what's already been posted. If some of the links don't work, please point that out so they can be read/seen.

If we're talking about the dates, as in June 1st and then "20 days later" in this comment from "Juice" 'The first was sent June 1, the second email, some 20 days later. Days! Not minutes or hours. If there was no further discussion within that 20 day period, I could see Mike believing that there would indeed be no more shows.'

Consider that Mike first announced the shows in South America during a phone interview while riding on a C50 bus with the newspaper La Tercera which is in Chile.


A rough translation of the original "La Tercera" article which was already shared and circulating in the South American press on June 22, 2012:

"The Beach Boys returns to Santiago in October without Brian Wilson in the group

The band has already closed a deal to be presented at the end of October at Movistar Arena. Despite the reunion tour, they will only be led by another of their history, Mike Love.

The Beach Boys once again puts Chile on its road map. But, just like the previous two, he does it with certain nuances around his past and his present. If the announcements of 2005 -recital that was canceled- and 2011 -for a private event- presented a band that in those days led only two historical members, Mike Love and Bruce Johnston, this time the trip will also be with restricted contingent.

The Americans have just closed an upcoming South American tour for the last quarter and have already agreed on a concert for October at Movistar Arena, tentative date for the 26th. It is their first show for all audiences in the country. Of course, and although in December made the meeting and tour of its most important cast official - with Love and Johnston with Al Jardine, David Marks and Brian Wilson - the current reunion tour will not go through Santiago. In concrete terms, the group will only come with Love as a leader and without Wilson, the symbol and brain of Californians.

This is confirmed by Love himself, on the phone with La Tercera from the bus that takes them across North America in his current journey: "Yes, we are planning to go to South America. But those recitals will not be part of the reunion tour. " Consulted if it will be the same show that was offered in November of last year in Espacio Riesco, for a financial services firm, the artist responds with a concise "exact".

One point: the live return of the men of Pet Sounds (1966) marks dates until September in Oceania and England, all with Wilson in the set. Although his cousin, Love, prefers not to delve into the reasons why the soul of The Beach Boys will not be part of some sections of the course, there is room for lucubration. For example, since 1965, Wilson decided to leave the tours with his classmates to concentrate on the masterpieces that would be dispatched during the second part of the 60s. In other times, the singer also resigned on stage due to his problems with drugs and their psychiatric problems. In fact, he has never had much empathy with the respectable: although the reviews of his current tour, which started in April, have been praiseworthy, they have all emphasized that the musician responds to his historical profile and feels distant and distant. The coordinates for your local appointment will become official in the coming days.


And this published June 22 in Peru's "El Comercio" newspaper which was cited in a Guardian article June 27th:

Friday, June 22, 2012 | 13:14
The Beach Boys confirmed a tour of South America
Mike Love, vocalist of the Californian band, announced a visit for the month of October, but without the presence of Brian WilsonThe Beach Boys, the legendary Californian rock band, will visit South America. This was announced by Mike Love, vocalist and composer of the group, in an interview with the Chilean newspaper "La Tercera".

In a telephone conversation with the aforementioned medium, Love clarified that the concerts will not be part of the reunion tour of the band, so it will not be attended by Brian Wilson, perhaps the most emblematic member of the group.

As you remember, The Beach Boys have 50 dates around the world to celebrate their 50th anniversary in music."

A link to the original La Tercera article and phone interview: http://diario.latercera.com/edicionimpresa/the-beach-boys-vuelve-a-santiago-en-octubre-sin-brian-wilson-en-el-grupo/ (http://diario.latercera.com/edicionimpresa/the-beach-boys-vuelve-a-santiago-en-octubre-sin-brian-wilson-en-el-grupo/)

And a cache archive of the June 22, 2012 El Comercio article: https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2FdypxK_h1oJ:https://elcomercio.pe/luces/musica/beach-boys-confirmaron-gira-america-sur-noticia-1431754+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us (https://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:2FdypxK_h1oJ:https://elcomercio.pe/luces/musica/beach-boys-confirmaron-gira-america-sur-noticia-1431754+&cd=6&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us)


News of the Nutty Jerry's booking was published in a local paper on June 20, 2012:

The Beach Boys Coming to Nutty Jerry's In Winnie October 6
Craig Hlavaty | June 20, 2012 | 2:00pm

If you missed the reunited and augmented Beach Boys a few weeks back in the Woodlands, you will have a second chance to see the band on October 6 out at Nutty Jerry's in Winnie. Yes, it's a long drive, but this tour is worth seeing.

As Rocks Off confirmed from Nutty Jerry's PR, this will in fact be the lineup that was at the Woodlands on June 8. There was some question to whether or not this would be Mike Love's version of the group that tours sans Brian Wilson.

Tickets are available here on the Jerry's site. While you are there, why not snag your America tickets?

Speaking of Wilson, the pop architect turns 70 years old today, so be sure and play Pet Sounds or SMiLE super-loud, or softly, whichever you prefer.

The Beach Boys are touring behind their first new album in decades, That's Why God Made The Radio, and their current setlists have been having upwards of 45 songs on them. In a recent interview with guitarist Al Jardine, he commented that he hopes that the band's dynamic can lend itself to more touring, at least every two years. It looks like they are in fact making a go of it.

In the current issue of Rolling Stone the band talks about their shaky but working relationship on the road and in the studio. Fun fact: Michael McDonald scares the sh*t out of Brian Wilson.

Followed by news of the cancellation and confusion published June 25, 2012:

Beach Boys Not Coming To Nutty Jerry's After All
Craig Hlavaty | June 25, 2012 | 4:30pm

Last week I told you about an upcoming Beach Boys date out in Winnie at Nutty Jerry's. The show sparked my interest since I was still on a B-Boys high from their show in the Woodlands earlier this month, and I was happy that the Houston-area was getting another go-round with the group.

But today the venue issued this press release, effectively cancelling the date:

    Due to a misunderstanding with the Beach Boy's management and a local booking agent, the October 6th Beach Boys concert at Nutty Jerry's has been cancelled.

    The group that was scheduled to perform at Nutty Jerry's is not the same lineup as the current "Beach Boys 50th Anniversary" tour.

    As a result Nutty Jerry's did not feel that we could advertise the show as the "original" Beach Boys. Nutty Jerry's regrets the misunderstanding and any inconvenience to our loyal customers.

The release went on to give information about refunds and also teased another concert announcement for that same October 6 date.

You know what they say about things being too good to be true. For my part, I did confirm with Jerry's front office last week that the band coming to town was the one that played 46 songs at the Woodlands, but as you can see things quickly changed.

The best I can tell is that the version of the Beach Boys that was booked for Nutty's was the Mike Love version which was touring before this year's reunion run, with all surviving members in tow, including Brian Wilson. Once myself and others inquired about the distinction, someone must have figured out the difference and balked.

And now according to Rolling Stone, this is a thing that Love has been doing the whole time during the reunion shows.

This current Beach Boys tour is only listed as far as September 28 at Wembley Stadium.

Link to June 20 2012 article announcing Nutty Jerrys gig: https://www.houstonpress.com/music/the-beach-boys-coming-to-nutty-jerrys-in-winnie-october-6-6500272 (https://www.houstonpress.com/music/the-beach-boys-coming-to-nutty-jerrys-in-winnie-october-6-6500272)

Link to June 25 2012 article canceling Nutty Jerrys gig: https://www.houstonpress.com/music/beach-boys-not-coming-to-nutty-jerrys-after-all-6777328 (https://www.houstonpress.com/music/beach-boys-not-coming-to-nutty-jerrys-after-all-6777328)

By June 27, other media had picked up these stories and had begun reporting about Mike booking gigs while touring as C50.


That's just to put more information from June 2012 on the table as these stories broke and people found out about them via the press reports linked above.

The key is still the context of the "smoking gun" email, as in what was sent before and what was sent after.

But it is also worth noting that in one of the South American newspapers, as of June 21-22 2012, the tour was still reported as 50 shows. Which was the original plan, until it was extended due to demand.

So when exactly was it extended, or when was the decision made to extend it? Because if by June 22nd a news report in South America still had it as 50 shows, either they were late to get the updates (if there were any), or the so-called "set end date" wasn't quite set in stone when Mike announced the booking of shows in South America for October on a phone interview to South America while riding on the C50 bus.

If it fits, it fits. If not, well...let the discussions begin. But context is key if the whole shebang is pinned on an email from June, and this is just some context after the fact.

There's no doubt in my mind of this being true. Kind of reminds me of when watching a true crime show... somebody commits a crime, but they go out of their way to try and create and alibi stating they were present elsewhere that night, to diffuse anyone from thinking they could have had motive and opportunity to commit said crime.

It feels like Mike just throws any excuse to the wall to see what will "stick" for his not wanting to continue with C50. Why is it soooo hard for people to just agree that his actions seem to reflect him having giant ego, and that he ended the reunion because he couldn't stand losing control, after having gotten accustomed to full control as M&B? Admitting that this is the truth is not saying he is an evil, horrible person; on the contrary, it's just being realistic about the situation.

With all this talk about trolling, it's hard for me to see posters who duck out of a back-and-forth conversation (the minute they can't refute an inconvenient truth) as anything but trolling, whether it's intended to be trolling or not. Even if trying very hard to not see this as trolling, it's just plain rude at best. I predicted crickets, and I was correct.

As someone who saw the tour in May and I then again in late June I can tell you the tour picked up steam as it went . May was good but late June they were on fire . I think it is very plausible Brian changed his mind between June 1 and June 20 based on how the tour was going. It’s amazing that there couldn’t have been a follow up discussion. They saw each other every day , Mike couldn’t have asked Brian?!?!

Thing is, if Mike had a bug up his butt about losing control and not being "the star" to a degree of his liking... then the bigger the C50 tour got, and the better they sounded would only become more of a threat to him, if it could potentially endanger his ability to go back to M&B, should the public get too accustomed to C50 being what should be expected at a BBs show.

I feel like Mike wanted C50 to fail once he realized the parameters weren't to his liking, and once he felt those parameters  weren't gonna change.

Instead reports clipped from a Chilean newspaper based on a phone interview Mike gave while riding the C50 bus was their notice given...

And asking again, when specifically (or how) was the tour extended from the original "set end date" of 50 shows? Because that newspaper report from June 22 still listed a plan of 50 shows.

And as of June 22, when all of this news of Mike booking shows started to break (albeit in South American papers), despite Mike's book stating there were a "ton of offers" coming in for his M&B lineup at the time, there were three...and all of them ended up not happening. The October 2012 Heart O’ Texas Fair & Rodeo Waco gig was written up in mid-July 2012 and the article stated it still wasn't clear which band members would be there, but said it was not part of the reunion tour.

Yet we're supposed to believe all fingers point to one email. Sure...

That is it in a nut shell. The “email” is a red herring. And did anyone *cough*Andrew*cough* ever explain why “Wilsons” was plural? Perhaps Al was considered a Wilson, or maybe the holograms demanded a pay hike?

Now that I think about it... the whole "no more shows for Wilson" email being used repeatedly by Mike as the reason C50 ended seems quite a bit like how Murry fired David Marks. David, presumably in a moment of passion, let out the words "I quit!"... and Murry - who'd been salivating for such a moment - went "a ha!" and never would let David back down from that, with Murry then trying to paint the narrative in a way that David was a quitter who'd made a singular decision from which there could be no wiggle room for further discussion, and that everything from that point on (and retroactively) was to be blamed on David being a "quitter".

It just seems like Mike was extraordinarily happy to receive that email (or to become aware of its existence months later, as I seem to recall people surmising might have been the case) since it could help legitimize what he wanted to do anyway, that being ditch 3/5 of the band so that he could regain total control. I just don't know why fans and Mike himself can't just own that. There's be a hell of a lot less bickering if this was just admitted to.

- delete please -

Makes sense from a timeline perspective. If Brian and Melinda bailed early June, Mike could have started booking shows for M&B right away, and by the time of these interviews, new shows would have been lined up under The Beach Boys Love License?

When did the tour go beyond 50 shows, any idea? Obviously they were working on this before the June 1 email, if the purpose of that email was to inform Michael that Brian wasn't carrying on.

When was the tour extended beyond the original 50 gigs? What emails came before June 1, between June 1 and 20 when the nutty jerry's gig was announced, and what emails came after June 20?

As it stands, the entire deal is hinging on a single email. Does that sound like enough to affect an entire corporation? Does the fact Mike didn't play any significant numbers of gigs despite saying tons of offers were coming in for M & B suggest it wasn't as cut and dry as is being said?

So many questions.

Part of this, as you are quoted as saying below, is just how Mike rolls out his tours. It's never an announcement of a full slate of shows.

"Also, if one has followed Mike's tour and scheduling habits over the years, they will have found that Mike never really "announces" a tour. He never unveils a tour schedule. It just sort of continually exists and is updated on an ongoing basis. It takes a few months into the year for summer tour dates to fill out. " -Hey Jude

Yep and no definitive answers, really. Mike's chimed in, have we ever heard rebuttals?

Yes, and you're taking my comment about Mike's *typical* touring procedure out of context. That comment, from another thread and on a different topic (namely Mike's *current* touring), pertained to his typical rollout for a given year.

Additionally, my comment quoted above about his tour rollout pertained to *how* tour dates were announced and *when*. I was *not* speaking to the total number of tour dates. During that September to Febuary timeline discussed in the current thread, a total of nine shows is *very atypical* of any recent Mike tour schedules.

2012 was obviously unique, and normally I wouldn't scrutinize too heavily that Mike just did some scattered dates in the latter half of 2012 into early 2013. However, it was Mike and Mike alone who consistently referred back to a pressing need if not requirement to continue to tour, and he often used "I had already booked my own dates" as a reason (however bogus) for ending the reunion tour.

He had dates booked at the end of September into early-mid October. So if there were so many offers, and he was *required* to endlessly tour by BRI, why was there a 2-month-plus gap between October 13 and December 21?

Again, between mid-October 2012 and the end of January 2013, he did *three* shows over the span of about three and a half months. That's not only atypical for Mike's touring routine, it completely contradicts his stated pressing need to continue to tour (and seems to clash with the implication that offers were just flooding in for his edition of the band) and clearly shows there was plenty of leeway to continue with more reunion shows.

I fully understand all of the variables. By the second half of 2012, he would certainly be getting plenty of offers for 2013. If he truly didn't start booking *any* of his own shows until June of 2012, then the second half of the year would not be as jam packed as a typical latter half of the year of touring for his band. But if he was pounding the pavement and snagging tons of bookings, and if he truly was *immediately* required by BRI to go back out, I don't buy again, as I've said, that BRI would both *have* an immediate legal requirement for him to book shows without any break, but then *also* allow him to book so few shows.

Again, my total guess of a takeaway is that he first and foremost didn't want to continue the reunion, and everything else is a justification for the reunion ending instead of just simply and plainly stating what his words strongly indicate, which is that it wasn't about a legal requirement to book his own shows, it wasn't about needing to "give it a rest" to build up demand, it wasn't about an e-mail (later retracted by Mike's own admission). It was about Mike quitting the Beach Boys in September 2012; of disliking Melinda more than his desire to continue working with Brian and the other guys as a fully reunited unit.

Yes. Brian wrote a letter to the LA Times. Brian's book discusses the reunion. Also, Al has discussed it in numerous interviews, and has done so very plainly and simply. He discussed being disappointed that Mike didn't want to continue.

By EVERY MEMBER'S account, *by the end of the tour* Brian, Al, and David wanted to continue the reunion. Mike did not. Bruce never really specifically individually chimed in but obviously stayed glued to Mike and has never lamented the end of the reunion.

From MIKE'S autobiography at the tail end of the (few) pages covering the reunion:

"He (Brian) wanted the tour to continue, and he said so loudly and often, but you can't change the melody once the score's been written."

Whatever *that* means.....