 | 683328 Posts in
27766 Topics by 4100
Members
- Latest Member: bunny505
| August 09, 2025, 07:16:18 AM |
|  |
Show Posts
|
Pages: [1] 2
|
4
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Aborted 1966 and 1967 live albums?
|
on: August 15, 2014, 06:54:13 PM
|
I was at the Michigan show, in Ann Arbor in October 1966, on the heels of the release of Good Vibrations. It's widely known that Brian made the trip to help the group polish its live version of the song. They announced that the show was being recorded and, at the end, they brought Brian, who did not perform, out to thunderous applause. Equally cool was that the Standells opened the show. Good times.
|
|
|
11
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Sometimes I hate Rolling Stone
|
on: June 28, 2014, 02:44:16 AM
|
That's crazy. The article is spot-on. The truth is that the group's albums sputtered commercially and its concerts played to increasingly more selective audiences in more and more intimate venues and less gate receipts. Capitol, from which the Boys fled to the potentially greener pastures of WB, found gold in the moldy oldies of the 60s, and the group began living in the past, on a gradual basis. First, it pulled out a medley of the old stuff as an encore of the less successful live new material, to let its hardy fans leave on a high note. Seeing how well that played, it gradually took over, and the shows became celebrations of the past, a healthy antidote to the more cerebral and often progressive fare of the day. In a word, they captured fun and made a lot of money in the process, which they liked. RS was correct.
|
|
|
14
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Carnie and Wendy take on Jeff Beck
|
on: June 02, 2014, 06:31:19 PM
|
Or, it could be that Beck, who had a great opportunity to observe Brian, in the studio and on tour, was on the money with his comments. Having seen one of the shows on the tour, his version of things is consistent with what I observed from the fourth row, which is sad, but the truth. I think the guy should stop touring and enjoy his 70s. He's clearly given us more than enough.
|
|
|
15
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Jeff Beck Calls His Tour with Brian Wilson ‘A Bit of a Nightmare’
|
on: May 12, 2014, 03:31:14 AM
|
I think that Brian is not well served by his people, who repeatedly seem to think the way to jump start his projects is to involve other, hotter named artists (e.g., Elton John, McCartney, Clapton, and now Jeff Beck), who really aren't artistically compatible with him, yet force collaborations to create a buzz in the marketplace. Honestly, how many times do you return to City Blues for listening pleasure? The breathless announcement and publicity of the studio work with Beck was oddly reminiscent of a similar prediction from the BW Machine of a "rock and roll album" dream collaboration with McCartney that never materialized. Having bought into the Beck hype to the tune of $200 a ticket only to see an oil and water collaboration when I was led to believe I would be witnessing musical magic was a great disappointment, in contrast to the fantastic show by Brian and company I had seen in Dayton only a few months before. I can only conclude that this is all attributable to Brian surrounding himself with well meaning hacks with poor judgment. The guy deserves better.
|
|
|
16
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Al joining Mike and Bruce for Jones Beach show
|
on: May 10, 2014, 03:10:55 AM
|
I saw this version of the Spoonful at a club a few years ago. They were every entertaining, and it was nice to hear all those great songs done live, but, without John and Zal, it was more like a tribute band, much like the other groups on the bill will be. It has been nearly 50 years since their prime. If you go, do so with diminished expectations. Great music but not what was so compelling back then.
|
|
|
17
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Bruce Johnston - The Re-evaluation and Appreciation Discussion
|
on: April 28, 2014, 06:00:32 PM
|
I think Bruce is a remarkable musician who have been involved in the creation of a lot of classics. He's slowed down a bit, and his decision to tour with Mike as the Beach Boys is not my cup of tea, but, looking at the group members objectively, each of them can be faulted for their activities somewhere down the line. For me, Bruce's contributions to Sunflower put that album over the top as the group's best, schmaltz and all.
|
|
|
23
|
Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Why do The Beach Boys have anonymous bandmembers to the public at large?
|
on: November 15, 2013, 09:31:12 PM
|
Evidence of how fungible the members of the Beach Boys were is that they had no problem issuing an album in 1965, Summer Days, in the midst of their hot streak, without Al on the cover. Yeah, I know about him stricken with the "flu bug." i find it interesting that they took photos during the cover sessions on the boat with Bruce. Can you imagine the Beatles putting out an album at the time without George on the cover? I think the anonymous nature of the group members was a function of Murry's light touch as manager. The emphasis was on the Wilson brothers, his kids. Also, the plain truth is that, unlike the four Beatles, the five Beach Boys were not each dynamic, likable personalities. Didnt make much of an impression on fans.
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|  |
|