One could argue that “Runaway Dancer” is either purposely or inadvertently a case of trying to pander to modern tastes/trends in music. But I’d say “Smart Girls” was a far more obvious, and awkward, attempt to pander, and it lacked any humility to boot (“I write hit songs with the wave of a hand!”).

The only thing I’d say “Smart Girls” has going for it is that it has become part of the “Accidentally Funny” Beach Boys collection along with the “Summer Dreams” movie and the lyrics to “Hey Little Tomboy.”

I think when and if the time comes, Matt Jardine should get the license.

Man, wouldn't that be a final slap in the face to poor Al...

Ironically, there was a short period of time in 1998 where Matt Jardine was in the touring band after Al was gone. Obviously a somewhat awkward situation, which didn’t last long. Enter the third iteration of Adrian Baker in the touring band…..

I never trust it when fans or the actual people making the music compare it to something else. It almost *never* sounds “just like” whatever it is they say it does. We all clearly hear different things. Whether someone says TWGMTR sounds “just like Today or Summer Days” or claims Brian’s new album is like “Pet Sounds” or “So Tough” or whatever, I never assume it will, because it almost never does, stylistically or musically. It just sounds like Brian cutting stuff now, and usually has little musical bits that are reminiscent (or lifted) from old stuff. 

The Soundstage show looks great, and Brian looks very comfortable on stage.
 The only quibble I have is that the vocals sound way too perfect, to the point where I was wondering how much was actually live. I guess they fixed too much in post-production for my taste. Our modern age. But I will definitely be watching.

Brian often sounds kind of flown-in or processed on the live video stuff. Most of the footage on YouTube sounds pretty normal to me, though. Al sounds great, not processed, and it looks and sounds genuinely live. All of the stuff, including the guest spots, has pretty beefy backing vocals anyway.

Al sounds really good on “The Right Time” here, less processed (whatever the processing/double tracking/mixing heard on the studio version). The guy is freaking barreling towards 73 and he still sounds like he did 30 or 40 years ago. Any of the BB camps that don’t do whatever it takes to add him on are crazy.   

I remember the first time I saw the footage of Brian “crashing” Stan Love’s press conference. Pretty awkward stuff. Especially the bit (I don’t know if it’s in the footage on that link) of Brian being served with papers afterward. My vague recollection is that a process server literally throws the papers at Brian and Brian looks super pissed and annoyed (and, sadly, probably scared too).

While I would agree that Brian likely wouldn’t want to sit down with popcorn now and watch the footage, he certainly must be open to exploring that era with Landy a bit in terms of being involved with the new L&M film.

The PBS Soundstage thing is looking (and sounding) much better than I had anticipated. Al sounds great. Cool to see Matt and Billy and Ike on stage. Cool to hear multiple tracks with Blondie. And, while I doubt we’ll get it on tour, I have no qualms saying that Ike and Matt singing easily trumps Foskett even in his heyday, and I say that having nothing to do with Foskett’s new band choice. I’ve been saying since 1999 that I thought Matt would work well with Brian’s band. Ike also sounds good (it sounds like we get to hear them both doing falsetto over the course of those clips), and a bit more Brian-esque (as Matt is) compared to Foskett.

If they can somehow afford both Ike and Matt on the upcoming tour, please do it!

Al sounds quite good on “The Right Time.” Yes, he’s clearly reading off the lyrics. I don’t mind. The guy still messes up “Wouldn’t It Be Nice” nearly fifty years later. It’s a new song that he probably hadn’t touched on since cutting the vocal in the studio in, for all we know, 2013.

Trailer really reminds me of Stars & Stripes.

In what way, other than having guest stars? Most of the guest starts were singing new music, not BB covers; other than “Hold on Dear Brother”, which regardless of who is singing it, is about a million times more inspired of a song choice and performance than hearing Toby Keith sing “Be True to Your School.”

But maybe you dig “Stars and Stripes”, so maybe the comparison is favorable.

Just seeing the two full songs and the extended “trailer” with many clips, this show and presentation looks and sounds a million miles ahead of anything to do with the “Stars and Stripes” project, even if one is inclined to not be into any of the guests. Frankly, I’d rather hear even a potentially kind of douchey guy sing “Hold on Dear Brother” with Blondie Chaplin than Brian and Al run through “Barbara Ann” (which, for all I know, is *also* on the TV special!). 

Sebu co-wrote the song, so I'm pretty sure the chorus (and possibly some of the production) is his.

Brian and Joe would not attempt a song like this on their own. It seems clear to me that Brian wrote some of the melody for the verses and did a touch of vocal arranging here and there. Also, because he's an old man, he may have insisted on all the sax. I would credit Joe for a chunk of the lyrics and Sebu for the chorus and beats.

This is all speculation, of course.

This sounds like a good guess on the songwriting. The only other thing I could think of is the possibility that it was largely a Brian song to start, and had a far different arrangement, perhaps just banged out on a piano, and then Sebu gave it the synthetic/beat arrangement.

The parts I like that sounds a bit more Brian-ish are the sort of jazzy chord changes that bridge the verses and choruses. I like those bits the most anyway, whoever wrote them.

The other parts do sound like the “Capital Cities” stuff I sampled on YouTube, production and arrangement-wise. I can see why the Capital Cities stuff would be popular with the current trend/taste in pop music. It’s pretty fingers-on-the-chalkboard to me, at least that “Safe and Sound” which indeed I hadn’t even known was the song I hear seemingly every time I walk through a mall.

Gave the track a listen. I think the synthetic (by design) sound of the track maybe distracts a bit from a pleasant, though simple, song.

The vocals, especially apart from the Brian-heavy beginning, kind of blend together to the point that Sebu isn't super prevalent. If I hadn't heard he was on the track, I'd almost assume it was a Brian track that he just kind of hands over to his group of band backing vocalists part way through the song.

I like the jazzy chord changes in the transition bits.

This is largely out of step with what Brian does sound-wise normally. But I agree with others, one track like this is as an experiment is compelling enough. If he had cut an entire album like this, I'd say it would be veering more towards pandering to a demographic or style.

I also caught the live version on YouTube, and I think perhaps the song sounds a bit better there. A bit less techno-ish (slightly more real-sounding drums for instance), and the vocal parts are more easily discerned. You can tell now (by both sound and picture) where Sebu is singing.

The live clip was also cool since it's the first real look at the Vegas show from December. Cool to see both Ike and Matt in the back. It sounds like their falsetto-ish bits were fitting prominently into the mix. I'm excited to see more of the show.

While we're at it... What are the chances of David joining Mike permanently? Why not?

He has never joined any camp permanently before. Why this time?

I don’t know how far back we’re going, but when Dave joined in late 1997, that was a “permanent” thing rather than just sitting in for a string of shows. It was as permanent as anything can be; obviously one can leave at just about any time. Which Dave did in mid-1999.

As to whether Dave might join up again full time, my guess would be that he hasn’t been asked specifically lately to re-join full time. Rather, it appears as though Mike likes the current format of having Dave at strings of shows (Dave of course appears to like that format as well). I’d venture to guess in some cases one goal is to perk up sales for small groupings of shows (I’m guessing a reason Dave and Al were both asked to play Jones Beach last year). I wouldn’t be surprised if the promoter working with them for this year’s UK shows suggested adding another BB to perk up sales (or Mike suggested it to them).

If they didn’t move to get Dave back in full time when an opening came up last year (instead adding Foskett even though they already had a falsetto guy), I can’t envision it happening full-time now.

I add the obvious caveat that for all we know Dave has been asked numerous times and declined.

I just tried to buy it on Target's web site and got this message "This item is not available for Store Pickup or Ship to Store". So, I am wondering, will this release not be in any stores to just buy off the shelf? Kind of sucks that I can't walk in and buy on it on release day.

I would assume they have those options disabled because the release date hasn’t arrived yet. Once the item has reached its on-sale date, I would guess they will then offer those options.

I believe a lot of online retailers that offer in-store pickup (or ship-to-store) don’t offer those options in conjunction with pre-orders. They usually allow direct online pre-orders (that ship to your address). It is kind of funny, because offering pre-orders for in-store pickup and ship-to-store would seemingly only increase sales. But perhaps they don’t know store-by-store numbers yet. If they offered guaranteed release date delivery (as Amazon often does), then it would be easy to just order it online.

I don’t anticipate this being a huge seller at Target stores. So the only question indeed will be how many copies per store they will stock. One would think that a big chain like that would be pretty consistent. But I’ve heard that on other items like movies (e.g. “exclusive steelbook” packages, etc.), they sometimes will send one store five copies and another 50.

Target stores are pretty ubiquitous in some regions at least. In my area, there are at least five or six Target stores within reasonable driving distance. I would certainly hope at least some of those stores stock enough copies that they don’t sell out if I go try to snag one on release date.

This makes a lot more sense. While Japan bonus tracks are super common, I thought it out of ordinary for the tracks to be offered in Canada but not the US. I was wondering if Best Buy or Target would get the exclusive tracks. Glad there’s a non-import alternative for some US fans at least. It’s also good in terms of product visibility and availability that Brian’s album will now definitely be available in Target stores.

I was bummed that, apart from the “Do It Again” remake, there were never any “bonus tracks” attached to the TWGMTR album. I wonder if Capitol could ever be convinced to do a “Deluxe” reissue of that with some bonus tracks and a DVD or something.

Has this song become a hit by any measurable standards?  Is it on the radio; it it in the charts?  I fear no and no. So what is it's status and function.  I was hoping it was a "hit" but that now seems ridiculous.

The Beach Boys as solo artists have never had much chart action in terms of singles (and the band hasn't for that matter either).

I don't think they expected "The Right Time" to be a hit. It was a teaser, and enticement to pre-order the album digitally. It wasn't even tagged as a "single" on iTunes or Amazon from what I could tell.

Singles charts are tabulted to include radio airplay as well. None of their solo stuff has receive much airplay. Brian had a bit of chart action in '88 with a single or two, and I think Carl had some good regional airplay with "What You Do To Me."

In any event, the only action Brian will see chart-wise would be on the album charts when the album comes out. Considering the amount of promotion it's getting, I think it will easily make it into the Top 200 album charts, and we might even see something in the top 50 or 75. I think #13 with "Smile" was the best he's done as a solo artist. So maybe even Top 40 or 30 or 20 could be possible.

Kiss Me, Baby.

I know it won't happen, but hey, a guy can dream, right?

I don’t think “Kiss Me Baby” is particularly far-fetched. It was in Brian’s setlist regularly in the 1999-2000 time frame (and checking quickly, it was there in 2001 and 2002 sometimes as well, not sure about later years), and they did it on C50.

They actually mixed up the setlist quite a bit in 2013 relative to the number of shows and the length of the shows. 2014 not so much, although they were doing a lot of one-off shows, and of course few shows in total.

I think the interesting thing to see will be how long the setlist is on this upcoming tour, and what they can fit in. They have an opening act on this tour, so I don’t know if that will shorten the show at all (presumably it won’t shorten the shows as much as the 2013 Beck tour). But if you factor in the “core” songs, then new album songs, and a few songs we know they’ll likely do (e.g. “Sail on Sailor” with Blondie there), I don’t know how much room will be left.

It’ll also be interesting to see if Brian works “Love and Mercy” back into the setlist what with the movie coming out.

I'd like to hear Blondie wailing on "Wild Honey"!

That was a cool moment getting to see Blondie sing it in 2013 in Oakland with Brian, Al, and Dave. They did it in a lower key (I think the same key as the “Family & Friends” version with Matt singing the lead), but it was still cool to hear that in addition to the obligatory (and also cool) “Sail on Sailor.”

Hoping this year, with Blondie on the full tour, they’ll at least bust out one or two other 70s tracks like “Funky Pretty” (a cool chance for Brian, Blondie, and Al to trade off on the lead) and maybe “Leaving this Town.” Given its inclusion at the Vegas show, I suppose “Hold on Dear Brother” might be more likely.

I remember back circa 2000 or 2001 or some time around then, Al was scheduled to play the “Pop Overthrow Festival.” He later had to back out (I think there was some court case stuff that he had to attend; though I could be remembering incorrectly), and afterwards some of the stuff he was planning on playing was mentioned. I think “Susie Cincinnati” and “Lady Lynda” were on the list.

Brian did not write Getcha Back.

Just saying.

The Lou Christie thing is well spotted, as is the Sade track. Although the Sade thing had more to do with the arrangement than the actual tunes of the respective songs.

No, but Mike did and he has said that the song was influenced by Hungry Heart.  He has also said that he did not like the Steve Levine production because he (Love) wanted a more "ballsy" sax to make sound more like Hungry Heart and has even said that if someone like Springsteen covered it someday with such a sax it would be a huge hit. Also, I have read Springsteen say that Hungry Heart was influenced by the Beach Boys sound. So there. I know, I know--do I have links? No. But why would I make this stuff up...

I think there are some published quotes with Mike talking about the song. It was apparently also part of the thought process (allegedly) behind having Dave sing "Getcha Back" during C50. I always found the cognitive dissonance of that performance interesting; the guy who left the band in 1963 singing one of their big 80s tracks.

https://m.facebook.com/profile.php?id=203471236350839&tsid=0.7327763473149389&source=typeahead

They should probably try to represent the current lineup a little more accurately...

On top of everything else, that ad just seem formatted poorly. Why did they use the awkward altered version of the BB logo, when there was clearly enough space for "Beach Boys" to all be in one line?

I've always been fond of this one as a publicity photo:



The bird is cool and all, but you see, the thing is, it did drugs back in the 60s. It was once a productive, dynamic bird, but.......

The bird came in at #3 on the charts, and that's not too bad, but it's not the sustained success we've been known to have in the past......

 There is plenty of good stuff to find in every human being.

I think sometimes someone needs to remind Mike of that when he's interviewed, and also reminded that "every human being" is not only himself.

Basically Brian (and Dennis and Carl, and fans/readers) are getting the "TPS Report" treatment from Mike about drugs.



Brian, did you get that memo about how you took drugs decades ago?



Um, yeah, Brian, so I heard you took drugs decades ago....

And of course, Al is in there somewhere too:



"I was told I was allowed to say I was a Beach Boy on my concert posters....."

Things that Mike might regret that are actually ABOUT Mike and not his drug taking cousins.


Letting Murry screw him out of song writing credits.

Nope, that one gets brought up all the time, because it's about wrongs perpetrated by Murry and Brian.

Mike's gripe on that one, as I've always said, is pretty much legit (aside from a few songs where one's definition of what constitutes a songwriting credit might vary).

That issue is like the drugs thing. It's a legit gripe. But it's a case of asked and answered. In fact, the songwriting case was even more firmly "righted"; Mike got his name on the songs. He won the suit. Brian offered no defense. Yet twenty years later he will still bring it up in interviews.

But it's funny, because if, say Al was still bitching and moaning in 2015 about the "Family & Friends" lawsuit or something, the folks who are so incredulous about these inflammatory Mike interviews would be crying foul, and calling sour grapes on Al and saying he needs to get over it.

How could you possibly know what another human thinks? How could you know their motivation?

I would say if interviews can't or don't give us an insight into what someone is thinking, then there's really no point in giving (or reading) interviews or even talking to each other. Seriously, anybody can be *thinking* anything. Some are simply more forthcoming (or transparent) than others, and even then, one never knows for sure what the truth is.

I've known people who talk like Mike does in many of these interviews. I'm not trying to be snarky when I say that I recognize it as a genuine trait. Some people, for whatever reason, are programmed to *NEVER* say something that can be turned around or in some way be interpreted as something negative about themselves. It's not coincidence that many people who are like this also don't realize how defensive it makes them sound; how it makes them sound like they are narcissistic and, in cases where they have nothing but negative things about *others* to make them look good, makes them sound overtly negative about others.

Some people can't just often say something positive about somebody else, and *nothing* else. It has to be qualified by either something equally negative about that somebody else, or something positive about themselves.

Sometimes it isn't even about positive things. Some people are narcissistic in the literal sense, that things have to revolve around them. We all know people like this. You tell them a story about something, and they HAVE to immediately relate it something about themselves. Sometimes this can be hilarious in its excess. "Yeah, so I'm feeling pretty crummy today, I had to do a pretty intense chemotherapy appointment." "Oh yeah, I know what you mean. I feel pretty crummy today too, my allergies are really bugging me today."

Mike clearly isn't programmed to just talk about others, especially other BB's, and he's even less prone to only talking about them and talking about positive, and only positive things. And again, I get it and sympathize to a certain degree. A lot of bad stuff DID happen because of drugs and alcohol, and those issues along with a myriad of other issues, I could easily see making it difficult for Mike to just edit that all out and talk about fluffy, rosey stuff. But you know what? A ton of other people can do it. The other BB's can do it. Al was subjected to drugs and alcohol impacting the band, and he has I'm sure countless political and personal BS tied into the half century of BB dealings. But he seems capable of giving and interview and being asked about Dennis' songwriting, or Brian's, or whatever, and just talking about those guys.

Mike surely didn't act superior with Cal Saga.

It appeared that Mike was pretty tight with them and they seemed on the same page as regards the toll that drugs had taken on them.  

What don't you get when the Wilson children appear to be on the same page, being fatherless for 30 years?

I don't think Carnie or Wendy Wilson still, decades later, bring up Brian's drug use consistently in many, many interviews. I've never seen Wendy or Carnie asked about their own personal regrets, and then skip over talking about themselves and start talking about Brian's past problems.

I was just watching the "I Just Wasn't Made for These Times" documentary; hadn't watched it in a number of years. In those interviews from *over twenty years ago*, Carnie and Wendy seem more empathetic, and seem to have gotten over Brian's past problems more than Mike has in 2015, and I would argue they were more *personally* impacted by Brian's drug use than Mike ever was.

The BB's have lost one member specifically to drugs and alcohol. Carl's death could well have been related to smoking. Everyone else in the band is still alive and presumably clean (though most of them presumably still drink alcohol). Why does it still need to be brought up, *repeatedly*, and sometimes unprompted? I will grant that Mike and the rest of the band may well have known other friends and family through the years who have had drug and alcohol issues, but that doesn't really related to being asked specific questions about the band. I would also say that many other folks have had experiences with friends and family of this sort, especially when it comes to alcohol. There's a point at which, while not meaning to trivialize the subject, I have ask: Who is particularly saying drugs *aren't* bad? There's a point at which it's kind of a painfully obvious thing to mention. "What are your regrets about yourself?" "It's not a regret, but people taking drugs is bad." Really? When these interviews start turning to flogging the horse of decades-old drug use within the band, I actually start to miss the "set end date" interviews.

No I took it you were referring to Mike and presuming he had done something wrong and had an inability to regret it which you found bizarre?  My apologies if I misunderstood you.

I do believe he's done some things wrong, yes, since he is a human being. I don't know if he has an inability to regret it. It was actually you who made the assumption about what Mike believes when you argue that his answer suggests that he "doesn't have a regret about his life and career." If that is the case, and you are the one making it, then maybe it's possible that he does have "an inability to regret" the wrong things that he's inevitably done. But I'm not the one making presumptions here (unless assuming that Mike has done regretful things is a presumption, in which case it would also be a presumption that he breathes air).

Do you. "It seems to me he answered that he really doesn't have a regret about his life and career."  It seems to me like an interpretation rather than an assumption or a presumption.

In these interviews, it reminds me a lot of college. Someone would be asked about a certain specific aspect of a book we were reading, and they would clearly not be familiar with whatever was being asked (whether plot details or themes or the style of criticism), so they would talk at length, but just about something *else* that they *were* familiar with.

Ironically, college professors are apparently much better at catching onto this stall-and-divert tactic that some interviewers are. 

[you]

I was glad to see Mike avoiding the old "Brian/Carl/Dennis did drugs" mantra during his discourse about T.M. Maybe he's finally realized he doesn't have to hammer on that to make his point.

Sorry to disappoint.

http://www.shreveporttimes.com/story/entertainment/arts/2015/03/11/beach-boys-mike-love-opens-career-life/70161422/

That's a pretty awesome interview I have to say. I love this question and answer (emphasis is mine):

TT: "What is the biggest regret you have for about your career and life?"

ML: "It's not a regret, but the biggest thing that impacted our lives is drugs. ... Other than that, I can't complain. Last year we did 142 shows and we've traveled the world and had great success. There's way more positive things to be appreciative of with our group than negatives, that's for sure."

It's like having a job review, and they ask you to name something you could have done better, and your answer is "I'm kind of upset that other people are such a***oles to me."

I'm willing to give Mike the benefit of the doubt and take note of the fact that like folks like McCartney, he gets asked a lot of the same questions, and he's pre-programmed to give the same answers. Like "What did you have lunch for today?" "Transcendental meditation." Or "What's your favorite track from the 70's?" "Well, one we wrote about a decade after the 70s was 'Kokomo'."

Anyway, I get it, it's easy to go into autopilot on these interviews, especially if it's a quickie interview, probably on the phone, riding to a gig or something. But c'mon man, does it really have to so often be something so negative about *other* people, especially when it cost at least one of them the ultimate price of their lives, while one of them has picked up their life pretty well all things considered? You can't start an answer with something utterly negative (not to mention that the whole drug issue with members of the band is pretty well an "asked and answered" sort of issue at this stage), and then immediately go into "Mr. Positivity" mode.