I agree with the earlier poster who said that the song sounds unfinished. I would also use the word filler. The production is pretty weak as are the lyrics (no clunker!).

What is the process for the final song selection? Must the vote be unanimous? Can one member's veto kill a song? Just for the sake of discussion, what if Al Jardine said (and I know this would never happen), "Surfin' U.S.A. has been on every greatest hits package for the last 45 years. Everybody has it. I don't want it on another comp..." Would his wish have to be taken seriously and could the song be nixed because of one dissenting vote?

The unreleased songs presumably can be nixed by a single band member.

Capitol could include anything else they wanted to though I would guess.

An entirely hypothetical question: would you rather have it half-assed now, or wait a little while and have it done properly, or at least better ?

Why should it have been half-assed at all? My point was that the record company should have planned from the beginning for it to have been available and completed well in time for the Christmas market. It's not like the idea of a 50th anniversary suddenly jumped out on them after all...

The one thing I would say is that while the box-set may well appear next year, it is absolute lunacy for them to have allowed it to miss the Christmas season. From a sales point of view they might even be best of postponing it until next October/November.

Okay, fair enough.  But a lot of film buffs would still know All Summer Long from its being in American Graffiti.

More people would know it from The Simpsons.

I can't say I listen to any of them very often but...

1, POB
2, BW88
3, Imagination
4, LBWL
5, Youngblood

Little Deuce Coupe sample.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/videos/beach-boys-take-little-deuce-coupe-for-a-spin-20121119

Sounds ok!

Sorry but this sounds utterly soulless and empty. Partly due to the lack of crowd noise and partly because the performance sounds too perfect to be genuinely live.

I think In the Still of the Night is indeed a great song/production. Absolutely love Brian's use of synth strings here but then again I'm a big fan of Chapel of Love as well...

I honestly don't think that anyone could objectively make that claim though.

15 Big Ones blows Surfin' Safari out of the water. It's OK, Had to Phone Ya, Chapel of Love, That Same Song, Back Home, In the Still of the Night, Just Once in My Life - all great songs.

Sorry and I know that the word 'great' is overused but In the Still of the Night? Yikes.

15BO and Love You is worse than Surfin' Safari? That's insane.

15BO is worse that Surfin' Safari.

Lahaina Aloha (horrible drums aside)
Much of the LBWL album
Kona Coast

On another note I've heard some alternative lead vocals for 'Honkin Down The Highway' and I always thought it was Dennis in the beginning of the song. Then the voice became very unlike any of the Beach Boys and I wondered if it was some fan trolling me by adding his own vocals. That is confirmed to be Billy? May I ask why he was considered for a lead on that song?

No idea why Brian chose him originally (maybe just because he happened to be there?) but Billy has said it was Landy's decision that his vocal should have been replaced.

[Pretty Woman, I Saw Her Standing There]

A couple of queries...

I can understand 1998 onwards being covered only briefly but will the book discuss in detail the split in 1998 which led to America's Band, the lawsuit etc.?

Also, will the book mention any and all rare songs added to the setlists eg. Pretty Woman, I Saw Her Standing There etc.?

They played those?

I believe so. The first pre98, the second post.

A couple of queries...

I can understand 1998 onwards being covered only briefly but will the book discuss in detail the split in 1998 which led to America's Band, the lawsuit etc.?

Also, will the book mention any and all rare songs added to the setlists eg. Pretty Woman, I Saw Her Standing There etc.?

Oh believe me, I know adding Al to his band would not make any business sense for Mike whatsoever. That's not disputed. I think what some fail to acknowledge is that in a possible scenario where Al would want to join, and Mike was not interested in sharing profits, that would make Mike, in some fans eyes, as a total d**k
I would also disagree with the idea that Mike "developed" a successful business out of the touring band in the last 14 years. He certainly maintained it, and exploited it, but it was an already-successful, already-established touring enterprise many, many y
Mike pays for the right to use the name, because the name is what sells the band. I would imagine even Mike would agree with this. His new statement, while eloquent, has a slight tone as if to say he's still there fronting the band because nobody else will step up to do it. That may have been partially or largely correct at various points in the past, but now all the guys are willing to work together with Mike.

I don't think that Al joining the M& B band was ever a realistic option. Mike spent most of the 90s trying to kick Al out of the band which is why David Marks was hired. Al has understandably said insulting things about Mike (and Jackie) since and I've never heard him say that he wants to play 100 shows on the county fair circuit with M&B. Again, I can't see Al being happy with the 'keeping the costs down ' or the setlists. It would be a completely different proposition to the reunion tour.  As it would probably make touring less pleasurable for Mike  and Bruce and it would be a bad business move it is naive to think it could happen.

In any event, I also feel that the situation is not the same now, so it doesn't matter much. Al and Mike are no longer on the outs the way they were in 1998. It's frustrating now, because back in 1998 it at least functionally made some sense for Al and Mike to not tour together since there was some sort of falling out at that time. That Al was not in Mike's band may have been a self-fulfilling sort of thing (by that, I mean that Al is edged out, then they have a falling out, and then of course it's even less feasible for them to play together), but it made sense in 1998 or 1999 that these guys had to be apart. Same thing with Brian, he seemed to have next to zero interest in playing with Mike and the Beach Boys in general at that time.
But now there is even less reason for them to be apart, because they established that they can play together and do it well, and have a desire to continue. That's why this "this is how it's been for 14 years business" doesn't make any sense.

Honestly I'm genuinely not sure how you can possibly believe that the last 14years isn't relevant.  Over that time Mike has developed a very successful business out of the touring band and has played with band members who he seems to get on well with. It's clear that Mike enjoys that lifestyle.

It's nice that Mike complimented Al's singing but he did that in the Goldmine interview way back.  It doesn't mean that suddenly all of their issues have disappeared. The band members agreed to put their differences aside for 1 tour but. I think recent events have shown that those differences haven't disappeared.

The reunion was a business decision( as Mike says partly down to the record company). Bringing Al back into the touring band wouldn't make much business sense for Mike as for 14 years they have sold tickets without him. I think it's fairly obvious why Mike would prefer to have Christian on rhythm guitar. Do we honestly believe that Al could tour with Mike in the 'keep the costs down ' mode and not complain?

I think he means that the more music you listen, particularly often complex music genres such as jazz and classical, the more your taste develops. Like he says, it doesn't mean that you can't enjoy early hits and more "easier-to-like" songs, but that it might make you require more of the material you listen to.

One of the reasons why I think a lot of modern music suck, is because it seems like the artists haven't taken the time to listen and analyze 'older' (being that 'Surfin U.S.A. or Pet Sounds) material, and thus creating 4th and even 5th generation bleak copies of music that have already been done.

The way I see it, the perception of music is a learning curve, and each subsequent genre/artist/etc you listen to, will inform your taste some how. Your preference may vary, though.

A person's taste changes over the years obviously. But that can be for better or worse.

[Preference]

Not meant as a offence, but I believe people who are better educated and have been exposed to (undeniably) higher quality of music such as classical and jazz genres will inevitably favour the glory that is Pet Sounds, Smile and the latter period. People who have not been exposed as much to 'good' music will inevitably favour the surf and car hits. I'm not saying that one cannot like the other.  Preference however is a different matter, and I do believe my idea holds some water. Most on this board for instance can enjoy the early hits, but prefer the post-1964/65 period. I do believe those people would qualify under the 'criteria' i set.

Sounds like guff to me. And rather pretentious guff at that.

Please Let Me Wonder wasn't on the setlist I was using as an example, and I don't think they've done it in quite some time. Surfer Girl and In My Room don't really have lead singers, and Bruce doesn't do any more on those in Mike & Bruce shows than in the reunion shows. Kiss Me Baby is, I believe, shared between Mike and Randell.

Bruce sings the 'We could ride... ' section of SurferGirl. Obviously Brian sang it this summer.

He also sings the first line of in my room and is much more prominent

No he doesn't. Taking this set as an example -- http://members.tripod.com/~fun_fun_fun/9-25-09.html -- it's a set of about the same length as some of the shorter reunion shows, and he sings lead on three of them out of thirty-nine (Do You Wanna Dance, God Only Knows and Disney Girls), although Christian sometimes takes the lead on GOK. When I saw them last year he sang lead on two songs out of 25 (GOK and Do You Wanna Dance), and on the UK tour in 2008, when they did 52-song sets, he sang lead on Wendy, God Only Knows, Disney Girls and two lines of Here Today.

Surfer Girl, In My Room, Please Let Me Wonder.  His vocals are prominent on these songs. Kiss Me Baby was done as a duet with Mike I believe.

As much as I dislike Bruce's politics, and as much I think he's a bit of a flake, his participation in the reunion shows was needed. Not only was his performance on Disney Girls usually a highlight, he was an important part of the harmony blend. Now, on the M&B shows, though, he seems somewhat superfluous.

He has a lot more to do in the M& B shows though. Singing the lead on half dozen songs.

It would be slightly surprising if Mike did have issues with the tracklisting as many songs that he has a writing credit on ought to be certs for the set. Obviously the classic songs with Brian but also rarish tracks like It's a Beautiful Day, Rock n Roll to the Rescue, Somewhere Near Japan (45 mix), Summer in Paradise( UK version) etc that weren't included on the previous box. As he allowed the first box to be released then there shouldn't be an issue now.

I'd like to believe that as well. But I get the impression that Dennis' own bad behavior overshadows his artistic accomplishments... At least in Mike's mind.

The evidence doesn't back that up though does it.

Dennis 's songs were included on the previous box set, Hawthorne, Endless Harmony, Summer Love Songs etc. without a problem. No reason there should be one now.

Interesting to read that review and I guess after they've had the chance to rehearse a little the band should be back up to speed. I would be a little surprised if they didn't add TWGMTR to the setlist at some point as it must be fairly well known right now.

Any band calling itself The Beach Boys would have to play the hits though, the promoters would demand it.

If Brian wants to tour again in a non reunion mode then he should go out as himself anyway. I'm sure Al and David would be happy to join him if required.