The Smiley Smile Message Board

Smiley Smile Stuff => General On Topic Discussions => Topic started by: Wata on December 24, 2018, 11:12:57 PM



Title: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Wata on December 24, 2018, 11:12:57 PM
(Sorry if this topic was posted before)

So, now that all of the 1968 has been released, I think it's time to talk about next year's possible copyright extension release, which will supposedly cover the Sunflower sessions  8-)

One thing that interests me is whether they go with 1969 alone, or put it out together with 1970 stuff, which is mostly still Sunflower. I hope the latter will be the case.

Another point is whether they go with physical release or just download-only. Sunflower is such a critically acclaimed album, which used to be on Rolling Stone's 500 all-time greatest albums list (and was taken down in favor of SMiLE Sessions), and I hope that will convince the record company of the same treatment as Sunshine Tomorrow.

Here's the list of outtakes for possible inclusion (off the top of my head right now...thanks for Bellagio site):

From 1969...

- Got to Know the Woman (mono mix intended for Reverberation)
- Loop De Loop (original mix with alternate lead vocal)
- The Lord's Prayer (duophonic mix intended for Reverberation)
- When Girls Get Together (track)
- I'm Going Your Way/California Slide
- What Can The Matter Be?
- Raspberries, Strawberries (early version of At My Window)
- Walkin' (it was released on '68 set, but there could be some other stuff, such as the backing track, that they can include)
- BW Backing Tracks from Kalinich album sessions
- Til' I Die (piano demo)
- Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again (piano demo)
- This Whole World (long version, according to "Brother Re-Issues Bonus Tracks" that was talked about on Smiley a while ago)
- Add Some Music (alt. ver.)
- Carnival

From 1970...

- You Never Give Me Your Money (impromptu cover from the Good Time sessions)
- Back Home (demo)
- Tears in the Morning (early mix found on Add Some Music)
- Fred Vail Country Album with BW
- Season in the Sun
- Looking at Tomorrow (original mix for "2nd Warner Brothers LP")
- Big Sur
- My Solution

I also would like to see some a cappella mixes/backing tracks, as well as brand new remix for Sunflower outtakes, and if possible Sunflower itself. It would be very neat to have all the Sunflower outtakes in one place.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Mr Fulton on December 24, 2018, 11:16:55 PM
This set is going to be amazing so many things they could add, the early version of Slip On Through with that alternate backing track is sure to be on there too


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on December 25, 2018, 12:00:15 AM
I think they’re going to keep the years separated, but I think there’s studio stuff we’ve never heard. Of course there will be live stuff and some remixes. I’m expecting the Til I Die piano demo on there. Maybe the Honeys single and a track with Stephen Kalinich. 1970 will have the remainder of Sunflower and Surfs up. 1971 and 1972 may be very interesting if certain takes les have been found, as Brian’s voice had notably Changed by that point (which we heard a bit of of the remake of Passing By)


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Willy Wilson on December 25, 2018, 04:08:54 AM
Was Dennis's sublime 'It's A New Day' from this year?


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Mr Fulton on December 25, 2018, 05:03:06 AM
It’s A New Day was recorded in 71 I think


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Wrightfan on December 25, 2018, 06:12:48 AM
I believe that "Bedroom Tapes" article mentioned that some new material was found that they recorded in Brian's home studio sometime in 1970. Would love to hear that.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: “Big Daddy” on December 25, 2018, 07:20:26 AM
We’re entering the time period The Beach Boys started owning their own recordings (as opposed to Capitol). I wonder if this will affect the copyright extension releases in any way?


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: You Kane, You Commanded, You Conquered on December 25, 2018, 09:05:08 AM
Excited for the Til I Die demo to finally see public release, even though it's not much. Still a very interesting piece.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: mtaber on December 25, 2018, 08:04:11 PM
Off topic, but will we ever hear the 2nd Flame album?


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: CenturyDeprived on December 25, 2018, 08:47:07 PM
Excited for the Til I Die demo to finally see public release, even though it's not much. Still a very interesting piece.

Is the demo the version with the "positive" and "uplifting" Mike lyrics?


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: RJM on December 25, 2018, 08:52:56 PM
I’d like to see a legit release of the BB’s set from the Big Sur Folk Festival.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: You Kane, You Commanded, You Conquered on December 25, 2018, 09:01:10 PM
Excited for the Til I Die demo to finally see public release, even though it's not much. Still a very interesting piece.

Is the demo the version with the "positive" and "uplifting" Mike lyrics?
Nope, it's purely instrumental. Like the Don't Talk demo.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: sensiblechuckle on December 25, 2018, 09:06:14 PM
Off topic, but will we ever hear the 2nd Flame album?

I hope so, because it's going to be the 50 year anniversary of the The Flame self titled album.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on December 25, 2018, 10:32:22 PM
Off topic, but will we ever hear the 2nd Flame album?

I hope so, because it's going to be the 50 year anniversary of the The Flame self titled album.

Damn, already?


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Jay on December 26, 2018, 01:36:05 AM
Excited for the Til I Die demo to finally see public release, even though it's not much. Still a very interesting piece.

Is the demo the version with the "positive" and "uplifting" Mike lyrics?
Nope.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Mr Fulton on December 26, 2018, 02:37:06 AM
Not a demo it’s just an alternative version of Til I Die and it’s only the Brian lyrics that are different


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: wjcrerar on December 26, 2018, 04:38:38 AM
Excited for the Til I Die demo to finally see public release, even though it's not much. Still a very interesting piece.

Is the demo the version with the "positive" and "uplifting" Mike lyrics?
The alternate lyrics were also written by Brian.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Jay on December 26, 2018, 06:47:38 AM
Not a demo it’s just an alternative version of Til I Die and it’s only the Brian lyrics that are different
There is an alternate version of the song, and a piano demo.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Bill M on December 26, 2018, 07:49:05 AM
We’re entering the time period The Beach Boys started owning their own recordings (as opposed to Capitol). I wonder if this will affect the copyright extension releases in any way?

Good question.  I've been wondering about this from day 1 of the CE releases.  Is the whole CE phenom really more of a Capitol thing?  I sure hope not, but I wouldn't be surprised if we've seen the end of this annual end-of-year treat.  Of course, I hope I'm dead wrong.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: HeyJude on December 26, 2018, 12:22:23 PM
Regarding BRI owning the post-Capitol stuff, it's worth noting that while Capitol owns all of the masters and session tapes for most of the 60s recordings (made while under contract to Capitol), BRI has still had veto/signoff power on the release of Capitol-era outtakes.

This is why we've seen the released recordings milked to death by Capitol over the years, whereas they were obviously not able to just unilaterally release outtakes, even concerning tapes they own, of something like "Smile."

BRI has been involved in and signed off on these "Copyright Extension" sets. I don't know who has been more of the prime mover/motivator in getting these released done, but it's certainly not a case of Capitol just doing these releases on their own.

Of course, theoretically post-Capitol material should have either the same or less snags as BRI owns most of the material. I'm not sure if Capitol/UMe still has "first rights of refusal" on all Brother-era material still. Either way, I would imagine future "Copyright Extension" releases of BRI-owned material would either just be direct from BRI, or still through Capitol/UMe (certainly in the case of any possible future physical releases).

Keep in mind, though, that the band members (most of them anyway) become more and more "difficult" when it comes to post-1969 material. This was/is likely one of the reasons back in the early 2000s we never got that "Brother Rarities" set and instead got "Hawthorne, CA", which contained mostly 60s stuff with just a morsel of early 70s material.

The less Brian-centric that material becomes, and the more it involves still-living members, the more possibilities there are for vetoing or having issues. I think these "CE" releases are pretty streamlined at this stage, so I anticipate and hope they will continue. But I'm curious what might be vetoed, especially when we get to the later 70s. Will Mike want the 1977 recording of "Alone on Christmas Day" out there? Does Al want the early version of "Santa Ana Winds" or "Looking Down the Coast" out there? I dunno.

Hopefully, much like "Made in California", all the principals involved will continue to be generally supportive of archival releases, and we might just see specific individual cases where things are nixed/vetoed, etc.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: “Big Daddy” on December 28, 2018, 09:35:44 AM
I’d like to see a legit release of the BB’s set from the Big Sur Folk Festival.

Ode Records may still own the rights to these recordings, which would likely complicate things. “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” appeared on Ode’s Celebration: The Big Sur Folk Festival 1970 LP (and was released as a single).


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: “Big Daddy” on December 28, 2018, 09:37:03 AM
Regarding BRI owning the post-Capitol stuff, it's worth noting that while Capitol owns all of the masters and session tapes for most of the 60s recordings (made while under contract to Capitol), BRI has still had veto/signoff power on the release of Capitol-era outtakes.

This is why we've seen the released recordings milked to death by Capitol over the years, whereas they were obviously not able to just unilaterally release outtakes, even concerning tapes they own, of something like "Smile."

BRI has been involved in and signed off on these "Copyright Extension" sets. I don't know who has been more of the prime mover/motivator in getting these released done, but it's certainly not a case of Capitol just doing these releases on their own.

Of course, theoretically post-Capitol material should have either the same or less snags as BRI owns most of the material. I'm not sure if Capitol/UMe still has "first rights of refusal" on all Brother-era material still. Either way, I would imagine future "Copyright Extension" releases of BRI-owned material would either just be direct from BRI, or still through Capitol/UMe (certainly in the case of any possible future physical releases).

Keep in mind, though, that the band members (most of them anyway) become more and more "difficult" when it comes to post-1969 material. This was/is likely one of the reasons back in the early 2000s we never got that "Brother Rarities" set and instead got "Hawthorne, CA", which contained mostly 60s stuff with just a morsel of early 70s material.

The less Brian-centric that material becomes, and the more it involves still-living members, the more possibilities there are for vetoing or having issues. I think these "CE" releases are pretty streamlined at this stage, so I anticipate and hope they will continue. But I'm curious what might be vetoed, especially when we get to the later 70s. Will Mike want the 1977 recording of "Alone on Christmas Day" out there? Does Al want the early version of "Santa Ana Winds" or "Looking Down the Coast" out there? I dunno.

Hopefully, much like "Made in California", all the principals involved will continue to be generally supportive of archival releases, and we might just see specific individual cases where things are nixed/vetoed, etc.

Great points/info.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: branaa09 on December 29, 2018, 06:33:03 PM
You forgot to include Break Away and Celebrate The News. Surely  we will get Backing Track and Vocal Mixes from these songs!


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Matt Bielewicz on December 31, 2018, 07:03:25 AM
I notice that everyone here is assuming (in a pretty taking-it-for-granted kind of way) that there will BE such a release every year. Don't forget, this archive stuff costs money to research, find, assemble, mix, and release, and if it doesn't make money, or doesn't make ENOUGH money as judged by the counters of beans... it won't happen. Mark Linett and Alan Boyd were making slightly alarming noises about that here as regards the 68 set recently, which I'm guessing might mean that the last couple of sets haven't exactly been burning up the Billboard 100. Just because we've been fortunate enough to get them every year so far... doesn't necessarily mean we'll be lucky enough to get them in future. Of course, I don't want that to happen any more than anyone here... but like local record shops, I suspect it's a case of 'use it or lose it'...

I know there are those in the BB fan community that aren't 'supporting' these sets because they'd prefer physical releases, and don't like downloads. For the record (as if I haven't made it clear enough in the past), I'm no fan of downloads either — not at all. Pretty much the only downloads I've ever bought are these annual BB sets, plus the odd thing I literally cannot get in any other format. But the economics of manufacturing physical release media for these sets are going to stack up even worse than they do for downloads, which in turn makes the bean counters even less well disposed to sanction their release. So holding out on buying these sets on the grounds that you'd prefer (or are just plain waiting for) an eventual hardware release seems unwise to me. Such a release may never come. And if even the sales of the download-only sets aren't that impressive over the coming months and years, even they may stop being released. So frankly, if it's a choice between hearing this stuff as a download or not hearing it at all ever, I sure know what my preference is...


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: PetSmile on December 31, 2018, 08:15:14 AM
Agreed, I would gently and passively suggest that all Beach Boys fans support these historical projects, because, if I may say so, they are essential for Art. To those who are complaining about no physical release, let's not, shall we? Be grateful we are receiving these riches at all; let's generate positivity around these releases, and as I have said, they don't need any negativity around them. I recommend downloading them off 7Digital, a very classy service.

May I also say to Alan and Mark that if you would prefer not to release a set one year for some reason, you might prefer to release all of it at once, that way there is no more injustice around the Beach Boys' legacy. Just a small suggestion, to release it all with a box set, instead of stopping all releases abruptly.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: rab2591 on December 31, 2018, 09:04:49 AM
A couple thoughts:

Bob Dylan (whatever labels are used for the Bootleg Series) does this thing with streaming services where places like Spotify or Apple Music get a "sample" of the boxset. Why not do that exact thing for these releases? If not much money is made with Spotify/Apple Music then why not upload a "sample" album with like 10 tracks, don't include the best ones, and then make it available for download on iTunes and other downloading services? If buying the digital downloads are key to keeping these releases going, then make the incentive greater for fans to buy it - and it's just as easy as going the Bob Dylan route and not making them totally available for free to listen to on Youtube.

May I also say to Alan and Mark that if you would prefer not to release a set one year for some reason, you might prefer to release all of it at once, that way there is no more injustice around the Beach Boys' legacy. Just a small suggestion, to release it all with a box set, instead of stopping all releases abruptly.

I'm picturing a double-sided boxset of Surf's Up and Sunflower...comes with both albums on vinyl, 2 CDs for each album with outtakes, demos, a cappella, and instrumentals. Heck, make a bonus disc of 'Landlocked' - what Surf's Up would have sounded like if Dennis' songs hadn't been removed. These are two of the greatest unknown albums the Beach Boys ever created. If any post-Smile album(s) deserve a boxset it is Surf's Up and Sunflower. Make them into one boxset and DO NOT put them up on streaming services and youtube for at least a year (go the 10 song sample route).

Also, I wonder if the Made In California boxset was the tipping point for Capitol to end the boxset releases for the Beach Boys? For some reason I think it didn't get the greatest of sales. But yet the SMiLE Boxset was on the Amazon charts for a good long while, if I recall correctly. MiC is a terrible barometer of possible boxset success for this band as many of us owned the majority of the songs on that boxset anyways, and thus were more unlikely to buy it (I got it, but it really wasn't a necessity as the Smile Boxset was). And many hardcore fans don't really dig Friends and 20/20 that much either, so it's hard to expect people to shell out money for songs they don't really care for in the first place. But Sunflower and Surf's Up? They are legends in the music community as a whole, making it on Rolling Stone lists and plenty other top-album lists. You've got a goldmine with those two albums, but the people who release this stuff need to be smart about how they do it.

Anywho, those are my thoughts about it all. I think the releases that Alan, Mark, and others have worked so hard on since MiC have been incredible, and I think that they deserve our support. I also think that people who run the finances ought to be shown the possible success of the Sunflower/Surf's Up material, and how it, of anything post-Smile, deserves a boxset.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: CenturyDeprived on December 31, 2018, 09:24:43 AM
Agreed, I would gently and passively suggest that all Beach Boys fans support these historical projects, because, if I may say so, they are essential for Art.  

+1

Please purchase the sets!

Even if you're a BBs fan who is awaiting future releases but doesn't want to spend the money (just because you can stream this set for free on Spotify/Youtube), please purchase this album, it's important!  :)


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Bedroom Tapes on December 31, 2018, 08:20:46 PM
Maybe we'll just get "Beach Boys Central" one of these days!


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on December 31, 2018, 08:22:44 PM
:lol

To put it this way...when it was announced I still had hair and my beard hadn't gone gray yet, and that is NOT an exaggeration!


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: lance on January 01, 2019, 01:11:51 AM
I can't imagine not paying for these and I think the quality of the digital downloads is outstanding. I might by a physical copy AND a digital download if it were available (because I just love the Beach Boys that much).

 I hope to heck we get bonus material through the "seventies" albums. I have derived so much enjoyment from all of the copyright extension releases. I get that there is no promo budget...You know, maybe the fans can help somehow with that?

At any rate, if they don't release it then some bootlegger will release it on the grey market in Europe. I'd rather my money go to Messrs. Boyd and LInnett and BRI than some shady character, personally, but one way or another what's already leaked is going to come out officially, at least.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: PetSmile on January 01, 2019, 02:12:50 PM

Also, I wonder if the Made In California boxset was the tipping point for Capitol to end the boxset releases for the Beach Boys? For some reason I think it didn't get the greatest of sales. But yet the SMiLE Boxset was on the Amazon charts for a good long while, if I recall correctly. MiC is a terrible barometer of possible boxset success for this band as many of us owned the majority of the songs on that boxset anyways, and thus were more unlikely to buy it (I got it, but it really wasn't a necessity as the Smile Boxset was). And many hardcore fans don't really dig Friends and 20/20 that much either, so it's hard to expect people to shell out money for songs they don't really care for in the first place. But Sunflower and Surf's Up? They are legends in the music community as a whole, making it on Rolling Stone lists and plenty other top-album lists. You've got a goldmine with those two albums, but the people who release this stuff need to be smart about how they do it.

Anywho, those are my thoughts about it all. I think the releases that Alan, Mark, and others have worked so hard on since MiC have been incredible, and I think that they deserve our support. I also think that people who run the finances ought to be shown the possible success of the Sunflower/Surf's Up material, and how it, of anything post-Smile, deserves a boxset.

Agreed. I think the reason Made in California wasn't a great success was because it wasn't classy and elegant enough. As for its image, there should have been better album artwork, and a better name for the box set. As for the content, it had too much previously released material on it to buy the whole set, unlike these new releases.

I agree with the idea of a Sunflower and Surf's Up Box Set for next year, that way hopefully the Fred Vail country album will finally see the light of day.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Ram4 on January 10, 2019, 09:57:59 AM

Also, I wonder if the Made In California boxset was the tipping point for Capitol to end the boxset releases for the Beach Boys? For some reason I think it didn't get the greatest of sales. But yet the SMiLE Boxset was on the Amazon charts for a good long while, if I recall correctly. MiC is a terrible barometer of possible boxset success for this band as many of us owned the majority of the songs on that boxset anyways, and thus were more unlikely to buy it (I got it, but it really wasn't a necessity as the Smile Boxset was). And many hardcore fans don't really dig Friends and 20/20 that much either, so it's hard to expect people to shell out money for songs they don't really care for in the first place. But Sunflower and Surf's Up? They are legends in the music community as a whole, making it on Rolling Stone lists and plenty other top-album lists. You've got a goldmine with those two albums, but the people who release this stuff need to be smart about how they do it.

Anywho, those are my thoughts about it all. I think the releases that Alan, Mark, and others have worked so hard on since MiC have been incredible, and I think that they deserve our support. I also think that people who run the finances ought to be shown the possible success of the Sunflower/Surf's Up material, and how it, of anything post-Smile, deserves a boxset.
If the Monkees can have boxsets for all of their albums (including the later ones), I would think Sunflower and Surf's Up could as well. 

Agreed. I think the reason Made in California wasn't a great success was because it wasn't classy and elegant enough. As for its image, there should have been better album artwork, and a better name for the box set. As for the content, it had too much previously released material on it to buy the whole set, unlike these new releases.

I agree with the idea of a Sunflower and Surf's Up Box Set for next year, that way hopefully the Fred Vail country album will finally see the light of day.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: rab2591 on January 11, 2019, 12:24:11 PM

Also, I wonder if the Made In California boxset was the tipping point for Capitol to end the boxset releases for the Beach Boys? For some reason I think it didn't get the greatest of sales. But yet the SMiLE Boxset was on the Amazon charts for a good long while, if I recall correctly. MiC is a terrible barometer of possible boxset success for this band as many of us owned the majority of the songs on that boxset anyways, and thus were more unlikely to buy it (I got it, but it really wasn't a necessity as the Smile Boxset was). And many hardcore fans don't really dig Friends and 20/20 that much either, so it's hard to expect people to shell out money for songs they don't really care for in the first place. But Sunflower and Surf's Up? They are legends in the music community as a whole, making it on Rolling Stone lists and plenty other top-album lists. You've got a goldmine with those two albums, but the people who release this stuff need to be smart about how they do it.

Anywho, those are my thoughts about it all. I think the releases that Alan, Mark, and others have worked so hard on since MiC have been incredible, and I think that they deserve our support. I also think that people who run the finances ought to be shown the possible success of the Sunflower/Surf's Up material, and how it, of anything post-Smile, deserves a boxset.

Agreed. I think the reason Made in California wasn't a great success was because it wasn't classy and elegant enough. As for its image, there should have been better album artwork, and a better name for the box set. As for the content, it had too much previously released material on it to buy the whole set, unlike these new releases.

I agree with the idea of a Sunflower and Surf's Up Box Set for next year, that way hopefully the Fred Vail country album will finally see the light of day.

It is somewhat puzzling that the theme was a school yearbook. Be True To Your School and School Days I think are the only two songs where the Beach Boys explicitly talk about school. And though BTTYS went to #6 on the charts, it's not like it's a vital part of the catalogue. The GV boxset was beautiful with that surfboard look, and I think it probably did a phenomenal job pulling in those casual fans and possibly turning them into bigger fans of the post-surf era material. MiC was a book (instead of a box), and sadly the back of mine has completely warped (no fault of my own), in fact, I wonder if this has happened to any other people here - the back cover panel that holds all the discs is pretty warped on mine, and it really hasn't left the shelf it's been on so I don't know what could have caused this.

I am still very grateful for the MiC boxset, but I hope that the possible lack of MiC sales won't effect the possibility of a Sunflower/Surf's Up set in the coming year or two. MiC and Sunflower/SU are two different animals, and I think, if marketed right, it could be a great selling item for the band.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: lance on January 12, 2019, 03:45:57 AM
"Pom Pom Playgirl."
 I would also say that the lyrics of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "Keep an Eye on Summer"  implicitly takes place in a setting that includes school in the reality of the progagonists.

Then there are Wilson songs like "New Girl in School" (in all its permutations).

 "Surfers Rule" -- the first line is It's plastered on the walls all around the school now

"IN the Parking Lot" explicitly takes place in front of a school.


I think most of the protagonists in the early songs are meant to be teenage kids (even though they were written by young men) and they are obviously trying to capture, even document,  the American teenage culture of the 1960s (and few writers have caught it better than Wilson with Love and his other co-writers. )

The year book thing makes perfect sense to me, honestly. Though I have no skin in this game -- I just care about the music.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: doc smiley on January 12, 2019, 06:27:51 AM
"Made In California" boxset didn't sell as well as expected because it cost too much money for the amount of collectable material it contained. While I eventually bought it (used) I never saw it slip under the $100 mark during the initial release months. There just wasn't enough gems on it that I didn't already have to justify the expense IMHO.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: rab2591 on January 12, 2019, 07:28:09 AM
"Pom Pom Playgirl."
 I would also say that the lyrics of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "Keep an Eye on Summer"  implicitly takes place in a setting that includes school in the reality of the progagonists.

Then there are Wilson songs like "New Girl in School" (in all its permutations).

 "Surfers Rule" -- the first line is It's plastered on the walls all around the school now

"IN the Parking Lot" explicitly takes place in front of a school.


I think most of the protagonists in the early songs are meant to be teenage kids (even though they were written by young men) and they are obviously trying to capture, even document,  the American teenage culture of the 1960s (and few writers have caught it better than Wilson with Love and his other co-writers. )

The year book thing makes perfect sense to me, honestly. Though I have no skin in this game -- I just care about the music.

You are totally right that the early years of this band were inspired by an aura of high-school-centric activities, but it's a career spanning boxset - so maybe 6 songs on the set vaguely or explicitly relate to school, the other 168 songs range from surfing to vegetables to the planets in our solar system.

I do see what you're saying, and it does make sense on some level, I just don't think it was the best marketing idea given that the set covers 50 years of the band and basically 3 of those years had some school-centric songs, and that their basic image is that of America's surf band. I say that, but I doubt I could think of anything better, and I think some of the "ads" and the inclusion of Brian's theory of life paper were really special...and in the context of the yearbook idea made perfect sense to include. So while I find the idea somewhat puzzling from a marketing standpoint, I still do think its a nice set (I have listened to it constantly since getting it the week it came out).


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Cabinessenceking on January 12, 2019, 02:30:05 PM
I don't think it comes as a big surprise that MiC failed commercially, especially considering the expectations of it coinciding with the C50 tour. I believe they expected to replicate the success of the GV30 set from the early 90s with the release of MiC.

I can only speculate why this didn't happen, but possible contenders could be:

- Beach Boys release fatigue:
In the previous two years the Smile Sessions and the reunion album (TWGMTR) had been released, followed by two (blandly packaged) greatest hits compilations. The Smile Sessions was widely anticipated on its release, as was the reunion album. The greatest hit sets failed as well and they compare unfavourably with more successful biggest hit compilations like Sounds of Summer. The MiC set was more obscure and trailed these releases in publicity.

- The release was a complete marketing blunder:
The set has a low aestethical appeal. That bland, bright orange cover. There is no contrast of colours or vividness in the colours used. There is no message in that cover; no Sounds of Summer, no Endless Summer!  That hideous 15 Big Ones logo (aesthetically awful and cheesy) blended into the background and the wave motif didn't work at all. The presentation of this set was inferior to that of the GV30 box in every way. Overall the design of this set is cheap, tacky and does not do justice to the amazing music of the group. This group is going to be remembered as a classic musical act which defined mid-20th century music making, on par with the Beatles and Elvis. They will be remembered for centuries, like we remember the masters of the classical era. The design of this set is an affront to that legacy.

- The music was already available for those wanting to hear it:
Why would a casual listener go for an exhaustive boxed set when the biggest hits are available on itunes, spotify, youtube, etc. Music was not consumed like this back when GV30 succeeded commercially in the 90s.

- The set offered little new for buyers, considering its price:
For the casual listener, there was little incentive to get this set. For the fans the awards of getting this set were relatively small, with a scattering of new unreleased tracks amongst the conventional material we already possess. Instead of offering the really interesting pieces, they put out stuff nobody wanted to hear, like the instrumental track of "Transcendental Meditation".

As I said, these points are just my personal speculation. I believe that to some extent these points could explain why MiC didn't deliver. I hope future releases will be more in the style of the recent copyright extension releases, which have been very respectful of the group's legacy.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: rab2591 on January 12, 2019, 04:06:04 PM
Great post, Cabinessenceking.

- The set offered little new for buyers, considering its price:
For the casual listener, there was little incentive to get this set. For the fans the awards of getting this set were relatively small, with a scattering of new unreleased tracks scattered amongst the conventional material we already possess. Instead of offering the really interesting pieces, they put out stuff nobody wanted to hear, like the instrumental track of "Transcendental Meditation".

This. I remember the inclusion of the Pom Pom Playgirl vocal session track being a real irritant for me - knowing that there are some incredible tracks STILL in the vault and the vocal session for Pom Pom Playgirl made the cut. I still don't get that.

Do we know how the Pet Sounds 50th set did? I feel like we already had the boxset for that album, so I can't imagine that one faired too well either.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: Jay on January 13, 2019, 12:48:02 AM
I'm probably in the minority, but I really couldn't care less about stereo mixes of songs. Unless it was something like Good Vibrations, or an otherwise lost tape. I think that was one of the big problems with the MIC box.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: CenturyDeprived on January 13, 2019, 01:10:49 AM

This. I remember the inclusion of the Pom Pom Playgirl vocal session track being a real irritant for me - knowing that there are some incredible tracks STILL in the vault and the vocal session for Pom Pom Playgirl made the cut. I still don't get that.
 

I think this must have been done because the song is notable for being Carl's 1st lead vocal, hence the historical significance. I feel confident in assuming that if it had been just another dime-a-dozen Mike lead from this era, that the vocal session would not have gotten its own place in this set.

I remember being blown away by hearing the tracking session for this song (was it on the 1964 Copyright Extension release?) because it had more nuance and complexity than it seemed on the surface, and I was especially surprised to hear Mike playing sax at this (for him) late date in the timeline. Kind of the last gasp of any instrument like that being played by a BBs band member prior to the Wrecking Crew taking over those types of instruments.

While it wasn't a complex sax part, I still feel that finding out that Mike played that part was a "wow" moment for me, somewhat dispelling a myth that he just played sax on a couple songs in the very early years.


Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
Post by: BeachBoysCovers on January 13, 2019, 03:05:20 AM
    Do we know how the Pet Sounds 50th set did? I feel like we already had the boxset for that album, so I can't imagine that one faired too well either.

    In the UK, the week after the 50th set, Pet Sounds re-entered the charts at 89, then up to 26, then down to 71, before going out again. However, the 2CD re-release was also at the same time, so it doesn't necessarily mean the big boxset sold well.

    Sunshine Tomorrow entered at 49. Admittedly went straight back out again, but no digital download copyright extension has come into the UK charts.

    Meanwhile, the RPO album spent 3 weeks in the Top 10 and 10 weeks in the charts total. Obviously completely different beasts, but you know some accountant somewhere will be asking why they bother releasing all these extensions that don't sell well and not an RPO every year.

    (and while I'm here reeling off chart figures, Live - The 50th Anniversary Tour went to number 82 for a week.)

    [/list]


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: rab2591 on January 13, 2019, 06:57:09 AM

    This. I remember the inclusion of the Pom Pom Playgirl vocal session track being a real irritant for me - knowing that there are some incredible tracks STILL in the vault and the vocal session for Pom Pom Playgirl made the cut. I still don't get that.
     

    I think this must have been done because the song is notable for being Carl's 1st lead vocal, hence the historical significance. I feel confident in assuming that if it had been just another dime-a-dozen Mike lead from this era, that the vocal session would not have gotten its own place in this set.

    I remember being blown away by hearing the tracking session for this song (was it on the 1964 Copyright Extension release?) because it had more nuance and complexity than it seemed on the surface, and I was especially surprised to hear Mike playing sax at this (for him) late date in the timeline. Kind of the last gasp of any instrument like that being played by a BBs band member prior to the Wrecking Crew taking over those types of instruments.

    While it wasn't a complex sax part, I still feel that finding out that Mike played that part was a "wow" moment for me, somewhat dispelling a myth that he just played sax on a couple songs in the very early years.

    That makes sense. I think it being on the rarities disc just throws me off. That '64 Copyright release is my favorite one they've released. EVERY track on there is gold.

    @BeachBoysCovers, thanks much for the info!


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: lance on January 13, 2019, 07:50:12 AM
    "Pom Pom Playgirl."
     I would also say that the lyrics of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "Keep an Eye on Summer"  implicitly takes place in a setting that includes school in the reality of the progagonists.

    Then there are Wilson songs like "New Girl in School" (in all its permutations).

     "Surfers Rule" -- the first line is It's plastered on the walls all around the school now

    "IN the Parking Lot" explicitly takes place in front of a school.


    I think most of the protagonists in the early songs are meant to be teenage kids (even though they were written by young men) and they are obviously trying to capture, even document,  the American teenage culture of the 1960s (and few writers have caught it better than Wilson with Love and his other co-writers. )

    The year book thing makes perfect sense to me, honestly. Though I have no skin in this game -- I just care about the music.

    You are totally right that the early years of this band were inspired by an aura of high-school-centric activities, but it's a career spanning boxset - so maybe 6 songs on the set vaguely or explicitly relate to school, the other 168 songs range from surfing to vegetables to the planets in our solar system.

    I do see what you're saying, and it does make sense on some level, I just don't think it was the best marketing idea given that the set covers 50 years of the band and basically 3 of those years had some school-centric songs, and that their basic image is that of America's surf band. I say that, but I doubt I could think of anything better, and I think some of the "ads" and the inclusion of Brian's theory of life paper were really special...and in the context of the yearbook idea made perfect sense to include. So while I find the idea somewhat puzzling from a marketing standpoint, I still do think its a nice set (I have listened to it constantly since getting it the week it came out).
    Oh, I agree that it is not indicative of their total output, not by a long shot,  but I personally don't think it is the kind of thing that affects sales, and the fact is, they are known for the songs about teenage culture + Pet Sounds, so I get it. It really is safest to play up that aspect and let people discover the other sides of the band at this point. If it was 1971, of course, I'd say they should play up the other sides more. But my experience preaching the Beach Boys gospels is that most people really don't care about the other sides of the band. It's like, their minds are already made up.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: rab2591 on January 13, 2019, 09:28:39 AM
    Oh, I agree that it is not indicative of their total output, not by a long shot,  but I personally don't think it is the kind of thing that affects sales, and the fact is, they are known for the songs about teenage culture + Pet Sounds, so I get it. It really is safest to play up that aspect and let people discover the other sides of the band at this point. If it was 1971, of course, I'd say they should play up the other sides more. But my experience preaching the Beach Boys gospels is that most people really don't care about the other sides of the band. It's like, their minds are already made up.

    That's why I think their GV Boxset look is the better route to take. Where the Beach Boys are known for surfing, and not really known as a school-related-activities band, I just think it makes more sense to market the former rather than the latter. I think CabinessenceKing said it best about MiC:

    Quote
    The set has a low aestethical appeal. That bland, bright orange cover. There is no contrast of colours or vividness in the colours used. There is no message in that cover; no Sounds of Summer, no Endless Summer!  That hideous 15 Big Ones logo (aesthetically awful and cheesy) blended into the background and the wave motif didn't work at all.

    The GV Boxset was very clear about what it was, and I think it does a good job of drawing people in. So I'm not at all against them using their early years as a marketing tool to increase appeal of a boxset/set. But at least give it some appeal...make it obvious what you're going for at least. You can't even really tell it's a yearbook theme until you open the set up. Again I'll say: I like the set. But put the GV set (surfing) and MiC (yearbook) in front of a casual fan with $100 and I'd bet they would pic the more aesthetically pleasing GV set. Just my opinion.

    I think we both agree that marketing the early years of the band is a good route to take though.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: Jay on January 13, 2019, 09:43:47 AM
    Honestly, I think marketing the early years only(or primarily) is selling the group short. They are so much more than the surfing, fun in the sun image. I'd like to see a commercial or online promotional item with a picture of their long hair, bearded hippy phase.  ;D Seriously though, there is so much more to this band, that the endless  surfing and hot rod shtick is almost an insult. Did any of that make sense? It sounds so logical and clear in my head, but I feel like I didn't say it right.  :lol


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: guitarfool2002 on January 13, 2019, 10:37:44 AM
    Oh, I agree that it is not indicative of their total output, not by a long shot,  but I personally don't think it is the kind of thing that affects sales, and the fact is, they are known for the songs about teenage culture + Pet Sounds, so I get it. It really is safest to play up that aspect and let people discover the other sides of the band at this point. If it was 1971, of course, I'd say they should play up the other sides more. But my experience preaching the Beach Boys gospels is that most people really don't care about the other sides of the band. It's like, their minds are already made up.

    That's why I think their GV Boxset look is the better route to take. Where the Beach Boys are known for surfing, and not really known as a school-related-activities band, I just think it makes more sense to market the former rather than the latter. I think CabinessenceKing said it best about MiC:

    Quote
    The set has a low aestethical appeal. That bland, bright orange cover. There is no contrast of colours or vividness in the colours used. There is no message in that cover; no Sounds of Summer, no Endless Summer!  That hideous 15 Big Ones logo (aesthetically awful and cheesy) blended into the background and the wave motif didn't work at all.

    The GV Boxset was very clear about what it was, and I think it does a good job of drawing people in. So I'm not at all against them using their early years as a marketing tool to increase appeal of a boxset/set. But at least give it some appeal...make it obvious what you're going for at least. You can't even really tell it's a yearbook theme until you open the set up. Again I'll say: I like the set. But put the GV set (surfing) and MiC (yearbook) in front of a casual fan with $100 and I'd bet they would pic the more aesthetically pleasing GV set. Just my opinion.

    I think we both agree that marketing the early years of the band is a good route to take though.


    The GV box set had something in the way of a killer app that can never be duplicated: Roughly 45 minutes of "Smile" music, which up to that point unless you were buying bootlegs for $25 per disc as a consumer and fan, you had never heard in this quality before.

    Rolling Stone magazine - In an issue featuring Snoop and Dre on the cover if I recall - reviewed and rated the GV set 5 stars, and also mentioned how difficult it was after hearing the Smile material on disc 2 to keep listening with the same perspective, if you were going chronologically.

    The fact it had surfing imagery, and included a surfboard commemorative sticker (which my set didn't have), and included "Kokomo" I don't think added to its success or appeal. It was the fact you could get 5 discs worth of the band's music with outtakes AND the Smile material in one set, and it was nicely balanced. The fact that it looked like a surfboard only added to what I'm sure some newer or younger fans who bought it experienced in the way of scratching their head and asking is this the same band...after seeing what the "Beach Boys" were doing as of the early 90's versus hearing the Smile material and other examples of what they had done before the dancing "Kokomo Girls" took the stage and Summer In Paradise was the most current album in the stores.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: ♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇 on January 13, 2019, 10:58:16 AM
    Honestly, I think marketing the early years only(or primarily) is selling the group short. They are so much more than the surfing, fun in the sun image. I'd like to see a commercial or online promotional item with a picture of their long hair, bearded hippy phase.  ;D Seriously though, there is so much more to this band, that the endless  surfing and hot rod shtick is almost an insult. Did any of that make sense? It sounds so logical and clear in my head, but I feel like I didn't say it right.  :lol


    I feel the exact same way


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: c-man on January 13, 2019, 11:32:08 AM

    Rolling Stone magazine - In an issue featuring Snoop and Dre on the cover if I recall - reviewed and rated the GV set 5 stars...


    I think it was Beavis and Butthead.  Same difference?  :)



    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: rab2591 on January 13, 2019, 11:41:56 AM
    Honestly, I think marketing the early years only(or primarily) is selling the group short. They are so much more than the surfing, fun in the sun image. I'd like to see a commercial or online promotional item with a picture of their long hair, bearded hippy phase.  ;D Seriously though, there is so much more to this band, that the endless  surfing and hot rod shtick is almost an insult. Did any of that make sense? It sounds so logical and clear in my head, but I feel like I didn't say it right.  :lol

    Oh yeah, couldn't agree more (and have said so a lot in previous threads regarding this stuff), but from a marketing standpoint your average Joe American knows this band as America's Surfin Safari band, so it makes sense to me to market a career spanning boxset the way they marketed the GV Boxset.

    I am certain that whatever we get for the Sunflower/Surf's Up sets we will see some hippie looking Beach Boys as part of the promotion (if there is any). :hat

    The fact it had surfing imagery, and included a surfboard commemorative sticker (which my set didn't have), and included "Kokomo" I don't think added to its success or appeal. It was the fact you could get 5 discs worth of the band's music with outtakes AND the Smile material in one set, and it was nicely balanced. The fact that it looked like a surfboard only added to what I'm sure some newer or younger fans who bought it experienced in the way of scratching their head and asking is this the same band...after seeing what the "Beach Boys" were doing as of the early 90's versus hearing the Smile material and other examples of what they had done before the dancing "Kokomo Girls" took the stage and Summer In Paradise was the most current album in the stores.

    [Keeping in mind this conversation has been about my view of why Made In California's school yearbook cover probably wasn't the best approach to marketing the set] I just think the tasteful surfboard imagery of the GV set cover is more appealing to your casual Beach Boys listener in the store/online more than the flat orange cover of Made in California...I'm not talking about Kokomo's inclusion or any goodies inside the GV box, just the visual appeal of the outside. From a marketing standpoint it just makes sense to me to market the image of the band that your average American thinks of when they think of Beach Boys...especially when its a box set whose target audience is everyone.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: guitarfool2002 on January 13, 2019, 12:06:21 PM

    Rolling Stone magazine - In an issue featuring Snoop and Dre on the cover if I recall - reviewed and rated the GV set 5 stars...


    I think it was Beavis and Butthead.  Same difference?  :)



    Yes, thanks for the reminder! I saved two copies of RS magazine from the same time, August-September 1993, and still have them. I got the covers confused, the B&B cover from August was the one with the 5-star review for the box set as you said, and after re-reading it just now it is more perceptive and on-point than I remembered (especially for 1993), and some lines I thought were there are actually in other reviews.

    After finding both of them together on a bookshelf, I forgot why I saved the Snoop/Dre issue. Then I looked at it, as it was also the "College Issue", and they had a multi-page spread reporting on Berklee, where I was attending at that exact time, and some people I knew were in the photos. So that's why I saved the Snoop/Dre issue. I got them mixed up.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: lance on January 13, 2019, 12:32:59 PM
    Oh, I agree that it is not indicative of their total output, not by a long shot,  but I personally don't think it is the kind of thing that affects sales, and the fact is, they are known for the songs about teenage culture + Pet Sounds, so I get it. It really is safest to play up that aspect and let people discover the other sides of the band at this point. If it was 1971, of course, I'd say they should play up the other sides more. But my experience preaching the Beach Boys gospels is that most people really don't care about the other sides of the band. It's like, their minds are already made up.

    That's why I think their GV Boxset look is the better route to take. Where the Beach Boys are known for surfing, and not really known as a school-related-activities band, I just think it makes more sense to market the former rather than the latter. I think CabinessenceKing said it best about MiC:

    Quote
    The set has a low aestethical appeal. That bland, bright orange cover. There is no contrast of colours or vividness in the colours used. There is no message in that cover; no Sounds of Summer, no Endless Summer!  That hideous 15 Big Ones logo (aesthetically awful and cheesy) blended into the background and the wave motif didn't work at all.

    The GV Boxset was very clear about what it was, and I think it does a good job of drawing people in. So I'm not at all against them using their early years as a marketing tool to increase appeal of a boxset/set. But at least give it some appeal...make it obvious what you're going for at least. You can't even really tell it's a yearbook theme until you open the set up. Again I'll say: I like the set. But put the GV set (surfing) and MiC (yearbook) in front of a casual fan with $100 and I'd bet they would pic the more aesthetically pleasing GV set. Just my opinion.

    I think we both agree that marketing the early years of the band is a good route to take though.
    Yeah, I see what you are saying and I agree: the GV box had a good design, probably better than MIC. But I also see that they didn't want to repeat it.

    What I actually think I disagree with just about everybody is that the design  really impacted sales. It's just a tough sell to casuals and fan-base folk alike. I bought it because it had 70 new songs, if you count the new mixes. (And yeah, some of those I had already, but it was nice to be able to actually purchase them.)

    But I honestly think that the Beach Boys get right is embracing their early days (from a sales perspective). But Maybe a psychedelic looking cover a la Smiley Smile or Wild Honey might catch the eye of a few folks. But ultimately, I don't think that a $130 dollar box sets are sold because of the look of the box, anyway.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: rab2591 on January 13, 2019, 01:11:08 PM
    Oh, I agree that it is not indicative of their total output, not by a long shot,  but I personally don't think it is the kind of thing that affects sales, and the fact is, they are known for the songs about teenage culture + Pet Sounds, so I get it. It really is safest to play up that aspect and let people discover the other sides of the band at this point. If it was 1971, of course, I'd say they should play up the other sides more. But my experience preaching the Beach Boys gospels is that most people really don't care about the other sides of the band. It's like, their minds are already made up.

    That's why I think their GV Boxset look is the better route to take. Where the Beach Boys are known for surfing, and not really known as a school-related-activities band, I just think it makes more sense to market the former rather than the latter. I think CabinessenceKing said it best about MiC:

    Quote
    The set has a low aestethical appeal. That bland, bright orange cover. There is no contrast of colours or vividness in the colours used. There is no message in that cover; no Sounds of Summer, no Endless Summer!  That hideous 15 Big Ones logo (aesthetically awful and cheesy) blended into the background and the wave motif didn't work at all.

    The GV Boxset was very clear about what it was, and I think it does a good job of drawing people in. So I'm not at all against them using their early years as a marketing tool to increase appeal of a boxset/set. But at least give it some appeal...make it obvious what you're going for at least. You can't even really tell it's a yearbook theme until you open the set up. Again I'll say: I like the set. But put the GV set (surfing) and MiC (yearbook) in front of a casual fan with $100 and I'd bet they would pic the more aesthetically pleasing GV set. Just my opinion.

    I think we both agree that marketing the early years of the band is a good route to take though.
    Yeah, I see what you are saying and I agree: the GV box had a good design, probably better than MIC. But I also see that they didn't want to repeat it.

    What I actually think I disagree with just about everybody is that the design  really impacted sales. It's just a tough sell to casuals and fan-base folk alike. I bought it because it had 70 new songs, if you count the new mixes. (And yeah, some of those I had already, but it was nice to be able to actually purchase them.)

    But I honestly think that the Beach Boys get right is embracing their early days (from a sales perspective). But Maybe a psychedelic looking cover a la Smiley Smile or Wild Honey might catch the eye of a few folks. But ultimately, I don't think that a $130 dollar box sets are sold because of the look of the box, anyway.

    To be fair to anyone involved in this convo, I think just one person implied that it really impacted sales. I will say that it was one of many reasons for it not to do well, but definitely not one of the main reasons...My initial post about the reasons behind MiC's lack of success didn't include the design.

    And honestly design of a product are one of the reasons people pick up a set at a store or click on a link online. So while I don't think it made a major impact, even $130 items need to be eye candy. The SMiLE boxset was a friggin masterpiece of art. It's the best looking boxset I own (and likely will ever own), not because of the Smile artwork, but because of what they did with that artwork. So while it didn't impact whether or not I was going to buy it, I'd bet that someone was intrigued by the 3-dimensional artwork enough to pick it up at the store and get interested in what the contents of the box were. It all helps in the long run.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: guitarfool2002 on January 13, 2019, 01:11:28 PM
    There is an aspect of this which is or could be a really deep discussion, and that is where it touches on the way these things are released and made available in general. It's even been touched on in the book discussion, how some are asking if a Kindle version would be made available, and how the actual physical copy's cost would be much higher due to international shipping concerns and the like.

    The timing was there in 1993 for the GV box set - It was coming in the middle of what I call "Box Set Mania", where the labels and artists were opening their archives mostly for the first time and putting together these lavish CD box sets and fans who were a little older and had more disposable income to buy them were actually going to Tower and other brick and mortar shops and buying them. I remember Goldmine magazine when the Spector set came out had a rundown of what other boxes were coming out, everything from Chuck Berry to Chicago to CSN&Y, some much better than others. Then the labels started putting out the really lavish sets, the "sessions" type of collections where 6 discs might be devoted to how one album was created...and of course back in '94 the talk was of both a Pet Sounds and a Smile sessions project on the way...both of which finally came out.

    But point is, there was a market for it, and people were willing to buy CD box sets.

    When more people connected to the web, and that annoying Napster kid showed up as the face of online music with an algorithm allowing free downloads for those who wanted it, the game changed.

    I'd say comparing the sales of the GV boxset with the MIC boxset may not be a fair contest, mainly because GV '93 came out in a market where the CD box was the primary delivery system for this kind of thing, and where people were still updating their collections from vinyl and tape. MIC, that came into a different world more or less.

    It also doesn't help when the band itself has an image which is schizophrenic at best, and has been for several decades to where a set like Sunshine Tomorrow comes out at the same time a homemade video showing the Love-Stamos-McGrath trio comes out to plug an "updated" single release version of a Beach Boys hit from the 60's, and the band carrying the name barely promotes the archival release over the new remake(s). The lines are blurred to the point where fans have two entities of the same band and music, and one will suffer in terms of the less-invested fanbase deciding what is what.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: rab2591 on January 13, 2019, 01:41:02 PM
    I'd say comparing the sales of the GV boxset with the MIC boxset may not be a fair contest, mainly because GV '93 came out in a market where the CD box was the primary delivery system for this kind of thing, and where people were still updating their collections from vinyl and tape. MIC, that came into a different world more or less.

    It also doesn't help when the band itself has an image which is schizophrenic at best, and has been for several decades to where a set like Sunshine Tomorrow comes out at the same time a homemade video showing the Love-Stamos-McGrath trio comes out to plug an "updated" single release version of a Beach Boys hit from the 60's, and the band carrying the name barely promotes the archival release over the new remake(s). The lines are blurred to the point where fans have two entities of the same band and music, and one will suffer in terms of the less-invested fanbase deciding what is what.

    Your entire post was great, but focussing on these two quoted points.

    The first, I think you're right about the unfair comparison. And I agree that the climate these sets were released in has changed, which makes it more odd that they'd almost emulate the GV set (with updated rarities and mixes and a different look) rather than making a totally different beast. I know there are many differences between the two, but overall the discs follow the same template. Just my opinion. One of too many I've made in this thread :lol

    The second point, couldn't agree more about the band image being all over the place. It's funny that some tend to think that stuff you mentioned doesn't matter, that the 60s music lives on and that nothing the band does these days will affect those things, but the proof is in all the absolute negative press this band gets from time to time anymore. Even when these guys get together the press has to mention the fractious relationship these guys have.


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: Surfer on January 13, 2019, 08:58:29 PM
    I do know someone but not Personally her name is Trisha Campo she can help she knows The Beach  Boys since 1972


    Title: Re: 1969-70 Copyright Extension Release Prediction Thread
    Post by: c-man on January 14, 2019, 07:04:01 AM
    I do know someone but not Personally her name is Trisha Campo she can help she knows The Beach  Boys since 1972

    Trisha Campo passed away a couple of years back.