gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
640829 Posts in 25595 Topics by 3640 Members - Latest Member: greenhorn December 11, 2018, 06:18:58 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
  Show Posts
Pages: [1] 2 3
1  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson - 2018 Tour Thread on: November 08, 2018, 06:39:56 PM
I was thinking about seeing Brian in early December for the Christmas album shows but I am kind of nervous after seeing some reviews of shows this year. Brian did not sound good on a lot of the stuff when I saw him play Pet Sounds a year ago. I'll probably just wait for some reviews of the Christmas shows to come out; hopefully the new material will energize him.
2  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Brian Wilson - 2018 Tour Thread on: May 01, 2018, 03:52:19 PM
Quote
Cousin,
I know what it's like to have the (Wilson) back gene. I am sympathetic and empathetic, as I myself have had back problems as early as junior high. I hope one day we'll be able to do something like this again; great memories. Looking forward to perhaps one day throwing some hoops. Feel better soon Brian.
Love, your cousin,
Mike 

Nice message from Mike on his Facebook, he posted this along with the picture of he and Brian playing basketball.
3  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Beach Boys 2018 Tour Thread on: February 26, 2018, 11:46:06 AM
It's unlikely, no question. It's not *that* unlikely. If Mike in the next couple years runs into some problem rendering some sort of infirmity (or worse), then things might change. That's the only scenario where I could see something along the lines of Brian's band essentially simply taking on the BB name. That window is probably only another few years.

One could only hope that it's sooner than later.
Classy.
4  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Your Top 3 Favorite Solo Albums on: December 06, 2017, 09:30:19 AM
Agree on the above, and tellingly, OCA is OOP now and quite pricey on the used market. 

The physical CD does appear to be out of print (though there are some pretty cheap used copies on Amazon, in the $7-$12 range).

It can still be purchased as an MP3 download, and it's also streaming on Amazon (and this I would presume Spotify, etc., though I can't say for certain).
Itís on Spotify.
5  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Your Top 3 Favorite Solo Albums on: December 06, 2017, 09:29:41 AM
Agree on the above, and tellingly, OCA is OOP now and quite pricey on the used market. 
Yes it is, I LOVE the album cover and am always crossing my fingers itíll somehow get a vinyl release.
6  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Your Top 3 Favorite Solo Albums on: December 06, 2017, 08:35:45 AM
1. POB

2. OCA

3. BW88

I couldnít pick which was better between 2 and 3. I think the best of BW88 is better than the best of OCA but OCA is more consistent in my opinion.
7  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Beach Boys Help Light The National Christmas Tree WITH PROMO PHOTO on: December 06, 2017, 08:26:35 AM
No Pier Pressure has plenty of examples. Nearly every track actually...it's just WAY more subtle and more tasteful than on Mike's piece of garbage.

Ok! Give me one prominent or obvious one! Track, approx time, etc., and I'll listen. That's all I ask.  Smiley

I mean if we're going to bring that up in the context of Mike's latest TV appearance and album, I want to hear where the comparison might be which led to bringing it up regarding a BW album when the topic is Mike's latest music being Autotuned to the point of being obnoxious.
Well first of all, Nate was the one who brought up auto tune, and if you bothered to read his post he obviously said it can be done TASTEFULLY, like on BW albums. You immediately got defensive about them, even thought he complimented the production. As for examples, listen to This Beautiful Day, Whatever Happened, or Guess You Had To Be There. To my ears, itís pretty obvious that there is something different about those vocals compared to say One Kind Iíd Love or TLOS. Brianís voice just sounds different, a little more electronic, whereas they sound much more organic on the two examples I gave. Again, Iím not the only one to have said this, so itís not just me pointing this out. Iím also not disagreeing or harping on Brian or whoeverís choice it was, but to say the album is completely free of it is just naive to me.



I actually own and use Antares Autotune. I know what it does, how it works, how to properly set it and mix it on tracks, and basically the whole ball of wax.

Is that naive enough?

All I'm asking is for an example, either on Gershwin, NPP, and the like. Not an outrageous request by any means.

I know Nate brought it up, which is why I replied to him and asked him the question. But I'm glad it's not just you pointing this out, whatever that's supposed to mean.

"a little more electronic"?  Ok.

Does anything at all on NPP or any of Brian's albums sound even remotely like what you heard on Mike's voice at this tree lighting or on his new album?

If NPP sounds electronic to your ears, on those tracks, how would you describe what Mike's voice sounds like on his new album? Any comparison?

So I ask you who has Mike's photo in your profile and namesake...how is there even a sliver of similarity to bring up Brian's albums, supposedly "all" of which were autotuned enough to warrant a comparisons or mention when the topic is Mike's voice being saturated with Autotune and no attempts made to mask that fact?

if Mike is such a great singer with such a strong voice, why wasn't the Autotune applied more subtly as you say it was done to sound "electronic" on those NPP tracks or any other BW releases?

Keep in mind, the way Autotune works is the more pitchy and off-key a singer is, the more Autotune will be noticeable as an effect moreso than a tool.

As it was the case, perhaps, on the C50 live release.

Maybe Mike is just a very pitchy singer who veers off key more often than not and has trouble in recent years with breath control and nailing pitches other than his "Be True To Your School" schtick.

Just watch any live version on Youtube of Kokomo or even Pisces Brothers from the last 3 years of Mike's touring, any audience recording that hasn't been treated to Autotune, and tell me Mike sings in tune consistently. He does not if those videos are any indication. And he also does not if his "disc 2" of Beach Boys remakes which are bathed in Autotune are any indication, despite Mike having sung those tunes for over 50 years.


Well first of all, you also have Mike as your profile picture. Does that mean I think youíre biased? No. Thatís a silly argument. Second, nobody tried to compare Mike and Brian, or claimed that Mike never used it. You have brought that up yourself, arguing a point that I wasnít trying to make. And in regards to consistent singing, Iím sorry to say but you could the same thing with Brianís live performances. I would know, I was there. To think that anyone of them would be pitch perfect and holding them to that standard is unfair considering they are all 70+ years old. Iím not going to respond to a lot of your post because youíre trying to argue a point nobody was making, which is Mikeís voice/use of auto tune vs. Brianís.
8  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Beach Boys Help Light The National Christmas Tree WITH PROMO PHOTO on: December 05, 2017, 11:11:15 PM
No Pier Pressure has plenty of examples. Nearly every track actually...it's just WAY more subtle and more tasteful than on Mike's piece of garbage.

Ok! Give me one prominent or obvious one! Track, approx time, etc., and I'll listen. That's all I ask.  Smiley

I mean if we're going to bring that up in the context of Mike's latest TV appearance and album, I want to hear where the comparison might be which led to bringing it up regarding a BW album when the topic is Mike's latest music being Autotuned to the point of being obnoxious.
Well first of all, Nate was the one who brought up auto tune, and if you bothered to read his post he obviously said it can be done TASTEFULLY, like on BW albums. You immediately got defensive about them, even thought he complimented the production. As for examples, listen to This Beautiful Day, Whatever Happened, or Guess You Had To Be There. To my ears, itís pretty obvious that there is something different about those vocals compared to say One Kind Iíd Love or TLOS. Brianís voice just sounds different, a little more electronic, whereas they sound much more organic on the two examples I gave. Again, Iím not the only one to have said this, so itís not just me pointing this out. Iím also not disagreeing or harping on Brian or whoeverís choice it was, but to say the album is completely free of it is just naive to me.
9  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Beach Boys Help Light The National Christmas Tree WITH PROMO PHOTO on: December 05, 2017, 09:00:13 PM
Exactly, a normal Beach Boys live show sounds exponentially better than the autotuned bs. I mean, seriously, did anyone hear Jeff's signature BW/BBs falsetto wail at the end of the song was so autotuned that I can't even begin to explain how horrible it sounds. Who approves this sh*t? I just have such a hard time imagining Mike or anyone on his team listening to all of the autotuned BBs product from the last few years, and being satisfied with the sound. For a band that is often regarded as the greatest vocal group of all time, you think everyone related to The BBs (Brian and Mike's respective camps included) would not take any shortcuts to get a "good" vocal sound. We've seen this happening since the C50 live album, and it boggles me. A little bit of autotune (like on almost all of BW's solo records) is fine- hell, as a producer, it's a blessing to be able to fix a bad note or two, but to just coat something in robotic automatic pitch correction to the point where it sounds like a computer trying to impersonate singing! I just don't get it. I don't think it's laziness, but I am just amazed that C50 live album, Unleash The Love, and all of these lip sync tracks are approved by someone!

The storyline is always how in control Mike is of his career, of his touring and music-making, how sharp he is in a business sense, etc. If he's that in control of his life and career, how hard is it to say Mike himself approves and has approved ALL of this?

And - Nice reference to BW's solo records Nate (comment in bold). I assume you've heard all of those albums and personally picked out the "autotune" on each, correct? If so, please inform me where it is audible, especially on BW's albums like Gershwin and NPP, I'd love to hear those examples for myself.


I know you love Brian Wilson, we all do, thatís why weíre here. But donít let it cloud your judgement. You cannot tell me that you do not hear auto tune on NPP at all. Thatís just being naive.
10  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: November 17, 2017, 09:49:22 PM
The autotune is especially baffling because on the songs where there is less of it, Mike's voice doesn't sounds too bad. There's a note at the end of 'I Don't Wanna Know' that he hits that sounded pretty good, and I couldn't detect much autotune or anything on it. If he can still hit notes like that, why was so much used on this album? Overall though, the strength of some of the songs surprised me, and there are some that I could definitely see myself listening to again. Listening to how good some of these songs are makes me wish they would've taken a more democratic or Sunflower-esque approach to TWGMTR. Take some of the best off this album, the best off the released album, and a song from Al and Bruce each and C50 might've lasted a lot longer. I feel the album would be better as well, with these songs benefiting from Joe Thomas/Brian Wilson production. Just a thought.
11  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Paley Sessions Discussion Thread on: November 16, 2017, 06:23:23 PM
Wasn't Melinda also a factor in the songs not ever being released? I've read that she didn't like the material either and in turn pushed him towards working with Joe Thomas instead.
12  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Why all the Mike Love bashing on: October 13, 2017, 05:39:20 PM
I can't answer the poll because it depends. I don't care for this recent cover of Do It Again, nor the 2012 version. Pisces Brothers on the other hand is a simple but beautiful track. I find it funny that a youtube poster named OldSurferDude, whom I call the Mike Love troll, has to leave a  negative comment on any video of a Mike Love song! Maybe  legit feels that way. But I truly believ that if Al wrote Pisces Brothers, the same people would be praising it!

I used to feel the same way, until I realized OSD has been a fan since the beginning and is definitely not some Johnny-Come-Lately who is just piling on. 

For me personally, I always give Mike his due. That's why I get so frustrated, because the man has a HUGE amount of talent that got overlooked because of his other failings , because he's a complete asshole to Brian,and because he makes stupid decisions that overshadow everything. I also dig LBWL. and i'm in the vast minority (and prefer to Imagination by a large margin).

Well, you would be surprised to find that many trolls are older. It doesn't anger me at all. In fact I find it kind of funny actually. I thought Picses Brothers is at the very least harmless and sweet. And yet, you can find his negative comment on youtube! There are plenty of cringe worthy songs by Mike, I agree. But even at his worst, he is better than the awful Kieth Urban. But I don't take the time to comment on all his songs! Lol!!

OK, that does it! From now on I'll promise to always agree with you on your opinions. Honest. I mean shouldn't we all always agree on everything?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
OSD, what are your opinions on some of Mikeís more celebrated songs such as Big Sur, All I Wanna Do, Meant For You, etc. Do you dislike those as much as most of the others or do you like any of them at all? Iím genuinely asking.

Also, all the great lyrics on Wild Honey, and all his wonderful contributions before that which played a HUGE part in what made the Beach Boys great.

I don't think many of us dispute that.

We want to give Mike his due.

It's Mike who makes it consistently hard to do so.
Of course! I know Mike is given credit where it's due by most people around here, I just have wondered whether OSD has a soft spot for any of his post '66 songs since many of them are different from anything he has ever done. I know he has often commented how he dislikes many of his songs but I just want to know if those are lumped in with them. And if they are for what reasons?
13  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Why all the Mike Love bashing on: October 13, 2017, 03:54:39 PM
I can't answer the poll because it depends. I don't care for this recent cover of Do It Again, nor the 2012 version. Pisces Brothers on the other hand is a simple but beautiful track. I find it funny that a youtube poster named OldSurferDude, whom I call the Mike Love troll, has to leave a  negative comment on any video of a Mike Love song! Maybe  legit feels that way. But I truly believ that if Al wrote Pisces Brothers, the same people would be praising it!

I used to feel the same way, until I realized OSD has been a fan since the beginning and is definitely not some Johnny-Come-Lately who is just piling on. 

For me personally, I always give Mike his due. That's why I get so frustrated, because the man has a HUGE amount of talent that got overlooked because of his other failings , because he's a complete asshole to Brian,and because he makes stupid decisions that overshadow everything. I also dig LBWL. and i'm in the vast minority (and prefer to Imagination by a large margin).

Well, you would be surprised to find that many trolls are older. It doesn't anger me at all. In fact I find it kind of funny actually. I thought Picses Brothers is at the very least harmless and sweet. And yet, you can find his negative comment on youtube! There are plenty of cringe worthy songs by Mike, I agree. But even at his worst, he is better than the awful Kieth Urban. But I don't take the time to comment on all his songs! Lol!!

OK, that does it! From now on I'll promise to always agree with you on your opinions. Honest. I mean shouldn't we all always agree on everything?  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes
OSD, what are your opinions on some of Mikeís more celebrated songs such as Big Sur, All I Wanna Do, Meant For You, etc. Do you dislike those as much as most of the others or do you like any of them at all? Iím genuinely asking.
14  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: October 06, 2017, 10:23:29 AM
They need a reality show with Mike and VDP making an album! Evil
For once I'll agree with you, that would be pretty funny LOL
15  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Mike Love - Unleash the Love - Due November 17 - w/ 2nd Disc of BB Remakes on: October 05, 2017, 11:50:32 AM
Hmmmm, not as bad as I thought it would be, nor as bad as it could be. It doesn't sound too much like a Mike song, but if the production and instrumentation are an indication of the rest of the album, it might actually be good. Fingers crossed Grin
16  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Beach Boys recognition in public in 2017 on: September 20, 2017, 03:57:05 PM
I'm surprised Magic Johnson recognized Brian! The biggest star I ever saw in person out of context was at work. I was delivering pool supplies at an athletic center in Dallas. I walked right by Michael Irvin of the Dallas Cowboys! I also cleaned Brad Sham's swimming pool, who does play by play for the Cowboys. I called him once concerning something with his pool and heard that familiar voice! Unfortunately, the connection was bad and he couldn't hear mine. So we had to text.
I also have a story about a famous Dallas Cowboy! I was walking back to the car with my dad after attending a football camp and a car drives by. Someone leans out of the passenger window, yells something ,and throws a water balloon us. I was just like "WTF?" and my dad goes "Holy hell, that was Tony Dorsett!" I think either one of his kids was attending the camp or he was there to help out or something.
17  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: I met Mike Love on: September 14, 2017, 08:47:21 PM
2 things surprise me about leaving this town, the first being that he got a credit on it while doing nothing. Just seems like a strange song to just hand out credits on. The second thing is it being a Carl song, as it sounds exactly like something Blondie and Ricky would come up with.
18  Non Smiley Smile Stuff / General Music Discussion / Re: Jazz on: August 30, 2017, 05:08:58 PM
This is one of my favorite jazz albums: https://youtu.be/xbZIiom9rDA
19  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: USA Today, August 1998 on: August 04, 2017, 01:45:42 PM

Getting off-topic here, but as a relative newcomer to this board, I'd be interested if you could expand on the Al getting sh*t-canned.  What exactly happened, and who was involved (ie was Mike the instigator or was Carl involved and if so, what was the falling-out between Carl and Al?)  I see references to this period but I don't know the whole story.  I have a hard time imagining tension between Carl and Al. 


It's a long story, and I don't think the entire story has yet been hashed out, at least in published/public form.

Short version is that Mike and Al seemed to have a number of "issues" brewing as the 90s progressed, and at some point, as related in the Marks/Stebbins book, Mike wanted to produce the BB tours himself with his company. Al disagreed, Carl didn't oppose it, and that among presumably other things caused a rift between Mike and Al. Apparently this caused some strain between Al and Carl as well, though nothing of a huge magnitude as far as I can tell.

Basically, Al saw it coming and nobody else cared or backed him up. With a setup that would essentially be (I'm guessing) pretty close to Mike's setup now, I'm guessing Al saw that he could more easily be edged out of the touring band if he became an employee of some other company.

Then, also as related in the Marks/Stebbins book, Mike started to track down David Marks to join the band. Contrary to the understandable assumption fans later made that Marks was brought in due to Carl's illness, the Marks/Stebbins books indicates Marks was being recruited as an eventual replacement for *Al*.

Throwing this whole (arguable) coup attempt for a loop was Carl's illness in 1997.

Carl took a break from the tour (and ultimately never was able to return) in later 1997, and soon after David Marks started touring with the band. In true "Spinal Tap" fashion, according to the Marks/Stebbins book, Mike didn't bother to tell Al that David was now in the band. Al's not a moron, and after a few shows where it was clear Marks was not simply "sitting in" but was a full-blown member of the band, this led up to a point where, again according to the Marks/Stebbins book, Al confronted David and basically asked him what was up and why was he back? David was at that point not privy to the machinations behind the scenes that had been brewing with the corporate stuff and Mike and Al and all of that, and David didn't have an answer for Al other than he was there to play with the band, etc. Al walked off and said something like "Well, that's it then. It's over."

What Al probably already knew was apparently confirmed for him at that point. David didn't know it. But Al knew that he was being edged out of the band.

At some point around this time, as detailed in some of the articles from around that time, Mike stated he no longer wanted to appear on stage with Al or with Carl. Ray Lawlor has mentioned that during that year at some point, Mike sent a letter to BRI stating, due to Carl's ailing health, he didn't believe Carl should be on tour anymore and that he (Mike) would quit if this wasn't rectified.

The Mike/Bruce/Dave/Al lineup of the band continued touring through 1997.

Mike, Bruce, and Dave appeared (not billed technically as "The Beach Boys") at a Super Bowl pre-show TV gig in January of 1998. Al was not invited and apparently wasn't aware of the gig until it was shown on TV.

Carl passed away in February 1998.

Al attended one or two "Beach Boys" shows with Mike, Bruce, and David in 1998, shows that presumably had been contracted already that Al was obligated to do, the last one being in May.

By that point, Mike was already back in the road but not yet cleared to use the BB name. I believe he did some 1998 tour dates under some variation of the "California Beach Band" name (not as "America's Band" as was previously mentioned in past years).

Matt Jardine was a member of the touring band through 1997 and actually continued on for a short time after Al was gone in 1998 (one show without Al from May 1998 that includes Matt singing a number of leads circulates on video).

By later in 1998, according to court documents, non-exclusive licenses were offered to all three principal members and Mike pursued one and began touring again as "The Beach Boys."

At the end of 1998 and into early 1999, Al began touring with own band titled "Beach Boys Family & Friends."

David Marks left Mike's band in July 1999.

Al was barred by court order at the end of 1999 from using the "Beach Boys Family & Friends" name.

All of this ironically still doesn't really tell us whether Al was quit or he was fired. I suppose technically the band "broke up", and then reformed without Al and with Mike continuing to move towards getting the exclusive use of the name.

Al being "sh**-canned" is obviously just a colloquial way of saying he was certainly edged out of the band and his exit, at least the *way* the exit happened, was not of his own choosing.

I don't think Carl was involved in Al's exit from the band. His death hastened it I suppose. But Carl being around probably kept the peace as much as it could be. Had Carl died several years earlier or otherwise exited the band, I doubt Mike and Al would have stayed together into 1998 even.

What Carl (and probably Brian) didn't do was put up any opposition to Mike essentially (in my opinion) taking over the band both artistically and logistically/business-wise. I would imagine Al was understandably frustrated with this, but he has never spoken ill of Carl.

What we'll never know is what Carl would have done had he lived and Mike attempted to replace Al with David. Would Carl have gone along with that? I have no idea.
So do we know why Mike wanted to replace Al so badly with Dave? What sort of conflicts erupted in the 90's to make them so hostile to each other? Mike talks about Al a little in his book but basically leaves it at Al seems a little crabby and was an outsider in a family band. Do we have any specifics as to what caused this big divide?
20  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: A little love for Mr. Love on: July 22, 2017, 08:06:02 PM
In looking up some stuff for this discussion I found this quote from Mike: ďHe was taking LSD, which I had never known before. I knew he had been doing various drugs, prior to that and subsequent to that.Ē Mike says this referring to the recording of ĎCalifornia Girlsí. So there was only two months between the recording of the vocal track for CG and the Party! sessions. So it makes no sense to me that now he contends he knew nothing about it during this time yet he clearly jokes about Brian and LSD in the Party! recordings. Not sure what relevance this has to the topic at hand, but I thought Iíd share it.

I think Mikeís record speaks for itself...he has primarily always been anti-drug...even if he did experiment with them it clearly didnít take. And even if he hung around people who were acid heads it doesn't mean he himself supported the act of taking those drugs. Mike, too, hung out with Lennon and McCartney and Lennon was famous for taking acid constantly. The movie Love and Mercy shows Mike clearly uneasy with the drugs being used during that time. I have no doubt he had motivation to change the lyrics partially to regain some co-writer credit, but again, he had a legitimate gripe for not wanting the bandís image to start veering into territory of lyrics that were clearly inspired by drugs. I am sure he thought the backing tracks to ĎCalifornia Girlsí, ĎGood Vibrationsí, etc were off the charts great, and in time Iím sure he knew why things were getting more grandiose and experimental. But Iím sure he also saw what those drugs were doing to Brian and he became more vocal about his refusal to participate.

It certainly puts a different perspective on some of those comments. Anyone who has the Sea Of Tunes "Party!" sessions discs can hear the banter about LSD between Mike and Brian.

Another component to consider, one of a few more actually, is if this were such an issue than how would the Smiley Smile sessions be explained in terms of Mike participating in them? By most accounts, the sessions were full of hash and pot, and you can hear some of that haze on the final mixes...so how did Mike decide to be a part of that scene if his drug stance was so firm as to veto a lyric that had already been recorded and mixed for the PS album? I know that is an often asked question, but he did participate in what was the band's most overt "drug album" after raising such a fuss earlier about the drugs.
Mike made it pretty clear in his book that he used pot just like everyone else (I'm pretty sure, I don't have the book with me). I don't think that just because he's against LSD that he can't smoke pot. They are totally different drugs and he made it clear that he's against one, which he saw first hand how it affected his cousin, and used the other, which is mostly harmless.

According to Mike the problem was also the marijuana regarding this time period (from his book):

ďThe problem, of course, was the drugs Ė not just LSD, but large amounts of marijuana, hashish and amphetamines
I found the quote I was referring to: "We were stoned out of our heads. We were laughing our asses off when we recorded that stuff." I interpreted this as him saying they were having a good time with marijuana included, but it could be out of context.
21  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: A little love for Mr. Love on: July 22, 2017, 04:01:48 PM
In looking up some stuff for this discussion I found this quote from Mike: ďHe was taking LSD, which I had never known before. I knew he had been doing various drugs, prior to that and subsequent to that.Ē Mike says this referring to the recording of ĎCalifornia Girlsí. So there was only two months between the recording of the vocal track for CG and the Party! sessions. So it makes no sense to me that now he contends he knew nothing about it during this time yet he clearly jokes about Brian and LSD in the Party! recordings. Not sure what relevance this has to the topic at hand, but I thought Iíd share it.

I think Mikeís record speaks for itself...he has primarily always been anti-drug...even if he did experiment with them it clearly didnít take. And even if he hung around people who were acid heads it doesn't mean he himself supported the act of taking those drugs. Mike, too, hung out with Lennon and McCartney and Lennon was famous for taking acid constantly. The movie Love and Mercy shows Mike clearly uneasy with the drugs being used during that time. I have no doubt he had motivation to change the lyrics partially to regain some co-writer credit, but again, he had a legitimate gripe for not wanting the bandís image to start veering into territory of lyrics that were clearly inspired by drugs. I am sure he thought the backing tracks to ĎCalifornia Girlsí, ĎGood Vibrationsí, etc were off the charts great, and in time Iím sure he knew why things were getting more grandiose and experimental. But Iím sure he also saw what those drugs were doing to Brian and he became more vocal about his refusal to participate.

It certainly puts a different perspective on some of those comments. Anyone who has the Sea Of Tunes "Party!" sessions discs can hear the banter about LSD between Mike and Brian.

Another component to consider, one of a few more actually, is if this were such an issue than how would the Smiley Smile sessions be explained in terms of Mike participating in them? By most accounts, the sessions were full of hash and pot, and you can hear some of that haze on the final mixes...so how did Mike decide to be a part of that scene if his drug stance was so firm as to veto a lyric that had already been recorded and mixed for the PS album? I know that is an often asked question, but he did participate in what was the band's most overt "drug album" after raising such a fuss earlier about the drugs.
Mike made it pretty clear in his book that he used pot just like everyone else (I'm pretty sure, I don't have the book with me). I don't think that just because he's against LSD that he can't smoke pot. They are totally different drugs and he made it clear that he's against one, which he saw first hand how it affected his cousin, and used the other, which is mostly harmless.
22  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: A little love for Mr. Love on: July 21, 2017, 02:51:42 PM
In defense of Mike, I don't see why being against drug references in music for a band he was a member in is a negative thing. He had every right to fight his case given he would have his name on this album. Mike had likely seen firsthand how drugs had possibly changed Brian. The 'California Girls' LSD story was probably something that wasn't kept a secret from Mike during that time. Jon Stebbins writes in the FAQ book "...for Brian the danger of taking [LSD] even once was genuine because of the extreme sensitivity and apparent instability of his psyche." No doubt by this point Mike had seen Brian on drugs enough (seen his changed behavior on those drugs) that denying support for references to these same drugs was only logical to him.

And by allowing these references in the music it would possibly influence their own fans to take the same substances that were clearly changing Brian for the worse. If anything standing up to the culture that was clearly becoming popular at that time was a noble thing to do.

One thing I have to give credit Mike for is that he is normally commercial as hell and looking for profit (always following trends and rarely treading new ground) yet drug culture was clearly huge after '66 and yet Mike never pushed the band toward those profits. Hell, he basically went the opposite direction with TM. So yeah, it sucks that Monterey never worked out and The Beach Boys were regarded as squares after '66, but I can't and don't blame Mike at all for lobbying to ditch the drug references given all he had heard and possibly seen firsthand up to that point with the drugs Brian was taking.
I agree, I see the fad in the 60's of making things drug related as just that: a fad. I don't think the Beatles are any cooler because Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds spells out LSD. I'm glad that for the most part The Beach Boys stayed out of that drug culture. They walked a fine line between being hip with the drug scene and being "squares," and for the most part I'm okay with that. They had other chances to be seen as cool and mainstream, such as playing the Monterrey Pop Festival. Mike had seen first hand what those drugs that were glorified in some sub-groups can actually do, and I don't blame him for being against it and certainly don't see it as him being stuck up or being a "square."
23  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: ďPisces BrothersĒ makes soundtrack appearance on: July 12, 2017, 12:10:06 PM
I'm torn on this track. On one hand, I love the idea of Mike penning something a) new (novel freaking idea!), and b) sincere. He and the band played that live at a show I attended in SLC a few years ago and it was a touching performance.

On the other hand, the one aspect of Beach Boys/Mike Love history that I couldn't possibly care less about is TM and the Maharishi connection. I just don't care, and am thus quite nonplussed by a track about it.

I can't comment on the lyrics overall, as I can't understand most of them. The English lines are simplistic as always. The music and instrumentation are likewise simplistic and boring. It's not a great song.

And yet I bought the track yesterday when I heard this news. Probably because Mike's concert performance of the song seemed so genuine to me, and I've been longing to see something genuine from Mike for decades.
I feel the same way. People also harp on Brian's Back for being cheesy, but hell at least it seems sincere. Same with Pisces Brothers, we all know that him and George weren't "brothers," but at least he seems proud of an original song and he sings it with genuine emotion. That's a hell of a lot more than we can say about DIA'17 *shudders*
24  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: Quentin Tarantino Prepping New Movie Tackling Manson Murders on: July 12, 2017, 07:21:05 AM
I think Dennis has to make an appearance somewhere, as he gave him and his followers his house pretty much and was pretty good friends with Manson for a while. He also stole his song which angered Manson greatly. Would be pretty cool to get an accurate representation of Manson's association with the band.
25  Smiley Smile Stuff / General On Topic Discussions / Re: New Mike Single on: July 04, 2017, 01:20:33 PM
I can't imagine that anyone is going to like or buy this. In my curiosity, I went to Mike's Facebook page, where of course he's promoting the single. Unfortunately the comments won't load for me. I wonder what people are saying.

https://www.facebook.com/OfficialMikeLove/

Almost all of the comments are actually really positive and encouraging. Weird, I know LOL
Pages: [1] 2 3
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.926 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!