Someone needs to interview Patti Dahlstrom.

True. Some fascinating info on both Bruce and Tony Asher might come from that interview if she would be willing to go there. 

Were there any other reports of this solo project from Bruce from that era similar to Ann Moses' piece above, or even reports of it in any of the histories? I'm hard pressed to think of any that I've come across, surely none that suggest Bruce actually had a deal with Polydor for at least a single and album as this article said. Even that factor would suggest some tension, as in why would Bruce be on Polydor instead of being offered something through Brother Records, which as we know was set up with the intention of allowing band members to do solo activities, including producing. I thought there would be tension if Bruce said "Hey guys, I'm signing with Polydor..." at the same time the band was invested in getting Brother off the ground.

But what really stands out too is "With A Little Help From My Friends". I went back and listened to that version that was on "Rarities", and honestly I'm hearing a lot of Bruce in the backing vocals. I'm fascinated to know what Bruce played for Ann Moses, and whether "With A Little Help..." was what he played in some incarnation. Especially since I can't recall any other solo Bruce tracks from late 67 into early 68 being referenced too often if at all, and made even more interesting by the fact it was a track included on Beach Boys comps that is the only lead vocal we have from Bruce - period - from this same time frame.

Does anyone else hear "With A Little Help..." with a lot more of Bruce stacked in those backing vocals than the other BB's? It was a track that never fit anyway...IMO.

After that lost/rarely seen 1968 tour film footage showed up here, I went back and looked up some articles from this era and found an NME issue dated March 2, 1968...It's available online and I'll post the link here. It's the music news/gossip column from Ann Moses, where she mentions Mike Love trying to organize the Maharishi tour with the Buffalo Springfield, but it also mentions something else about Bruce which I found fascinating.

I'm *sure* this topic has been covered before, but here it is anyway for further discussion, and maybe some fans were not aware of this footnote in the band's history.

Calling on all who have the details to chime in about the Bruce Johnston solo album, single, and (according to the article) label deal with Polydor as of early 1968.

We've all heard the unreleased "With A Little Help From My Friends" cover since that rarities compilation decades ago. It's funny on YouTube to read old comments debating who is singing lead, how or if the tape was slowed, etc. Then three versions of it come out on the Sunshine Tomorrow release.

OK...So all of that history pegs it as a Beach Boys track, but with Bruce alone taking a lead vocal (which I believe would be the first time he had done so as of 1967/68.

Yet the article also states as of early 1968 that Bruce was going to release "With A Little Help..." as a solo single release on the Polydor label, and that his music partner Terry Melcher would be producing Bruce's tracks to be released on Polydor.

It also says Bruce played a sample of his solo album to Ann Moses over the phone. Was it "With A Little Help..." which is on Sunshine Tomorrow and Rarities, or was it something else unknown and unnamed in the article which Bruce had recorded by early '68 that he could play for someone?

Anyway, just conversation and wondering if there are more pieces to this. Or, if anything else from the Bruce & Terry produced Polydor project ever got recorded and exists beyond what may be known already, and especially what people think of "Little Help" after reading the article.

Unfortunately this is not the first time such sentiments have been expressed, in fact the very same sentiments expressed by CD, Jim, and others here about Mike's various actions and behaviors in the past few decades especially has been brought out many times in discussions here. Ultimately, all that CD, Jim, myself, and others did was lay out the facts as they stand. No spin, no whitewashing, not stretching of the truth, just the facts of what happened. The pathetic part is how some tried to paint anything of the sort as "Mike bashing", "toxic", etc...as in, throw anything that either paints Mike in an unfavorable light or counters what some have tried to portray apart from the truth as "hate", "toxic", "bashing", "derangement", and other similar terms.

What struck me is how the saga of the Beach Boys, of Mike and his bands since 1998, of Brian, of Al, and especially of the C50 details have been written, spoken, hashed, and rehashed so many times over...Yet, here was Ron forming opinions and making statements of fact that suggest something other than a basic awareness of how it all played out, as recent as the events of 2012, and events which have been well documented. It's either being unaware, or choosing not to acknowledge it.

The most inconvenient truth of them all is that Mike had a chance to continue working with the other surviving Beach Boys in 2012, and he and he alone made the decision not to do that. Mike could have kept it plugged in, but instead he pulled the plug. And since Fall 2012 it has been a literal shitstorm of backpedaling, excuse-making, whitewashing, and even having supporters and defenders of Mike's taking to various outlets to reshape the history and accuse people of hatefulness and toxicity...when the real examples of that can be found by them looking in the mirror.

So it's sad, and beyond that it's sad to think how many fans or run-of-the-mill observers who do not have Ron's background in the entertainment business and who did not research and write a book might think events happened other than they really did.

Smiley topic of the year (so far): "Steel Guitar on 'Little Pad'". 

And still no definitive answer as to who might have played it.

Both Al Vescovo and Brian Wilson have said it was Al Vescovo who played it, and listening to the part with a critical ear, it's basic but so well played that it wouldn't sound as perfect coming from an amateur steel guitarist. People who play steel guitar will notice the detail such as the intonation and the touch/technique. The only part that doesn't fit is that no session sheet has shown up with Vescovo's name on it. But when you have the producer and the musician himself both saying the same thing, unless other info surfaces, that's pretty definitive for now.

[They're still playing. There was no Berry Gordy or Motown machine buoying them up, changing band members, owning the group name with interchangeable parts.That is impressive.]

Hey Renaldo! "I'm not fawning over Mike Love" He's the "glue" that kept the band together??? Obviously, you still believe in The Tooth Fairy. He fired Al Jardine twice (the best voice in the group to date) and after Carl passed away. How is that keeping the group together. He fired Brian Wilson!! And, on top of all that, he thinks he is the Beach Boys. Nice slap in the face at both the Wilson brothers and Al who all were infinitely more talented than he will ever be. Get a grip, man.  :

I cant argue with your opinion. But your comment in a way makes exactly my point. The BBs still exist, and the one guy who's kept them there in the public consciousness is for low these many decades is, in fact, Mike Love. You and the knowledgeable and learned people on this site know all the back story of the group, but you exist in knowlegdable rarified air. The reason the band is still alive and still exists to the rank and file out there on Planet Earth is the one and only "Mike Love."
Credit where credit is due.
When I came aboard this project I was one of the multitude. I knew none of what is common history to those of you here. But I knew of the Beach Boys.
They were still alive in the world's view of the music scene, as a group, playing that miraculous and wonderful material. It wasn't just music on the radio, THEY WERE STILL OUT THERE. THE BEACH BOYS STILL EXISTED, STILL PLAYED, STILL LIVED AS A BAND in the public consciousness, ignorant public consciousness perhaps, but they were and even are, STILL THERE.
I was in the music and entertainment business most of my life. That is a rare and laudable accomplishment no matter how it happened. Ask yourself who was the one common denominator the the whole friggin time?
You may not like the answer but there is only one answer.

Ron - I'd to comment on something you wrote here earlier, especially the quote in bold:

The fact that the BB are still around, unlike the Beatles or Jimmy Hendricks, for instance, is a show business miracle in many ways. It's not just the music!
It took a masterful continuity of spirit to keep that Band current. They're still playing. There was no Berry Gordy or Motown machine buoying them up, changing band members, owning the group name with interchangeable parts.That is impressive. Take it from someone who knows and understands the territory.
I'm not fawning over Mike Love. I'm tipping my hat to the guy that was there, day in, day out for 50 years. Hey, Al Jardine. My hat's off to you as well.
Like I said, I have enormous respect for everyone in the book.

Specifically the lines "changing band members, owning the group name with interchangeable parts"

This is EXACTLY what happened with Mike Love after Carl Wilson's passing, starting around 1998 when the vote from BRI gave Mike the option to buy the naming license to tour and bill his tours as "The Beach Boys".

In the past 21 years, Mike has continued to tour under that naming license with changing band members, while owning the group name with interchangeable parts. His various "Beach Boys" bands have existed with numerous sidemen who have come and gone through these past decades, who have also been billed under different titles for Mike's corporate or private gigs (names like "Endless Summer Beach Band" or whatever), and who have run for the past 20 years with one truly original member (Mike) and one who joined in 1965 then came and went several times until signing on permanently with Mike (Bruce Johnston).

That's been what "The Beach Boys" are for 20 years. Mike did exactly what you said the Beach Boys avoided...bought the name, changed band members off and on, and in your own wording, Mike "owned the group name with interchangeable parts". It has only been Mike Love as the sole original member and Bruce Johnston who joined later as the two constants since 1998 when Mike purchased the license to use the brand name.

So how does that add up with what you said earlier?

Adding this: The one time since Carl's passing where there was what I think all fans would consider the real, true, 100% authentic "Beach Boys" on the market and making music live and in studio was 2012 when they did the 50th anniversary (C50) tour and album. This was all surviving members from the Hawthorne days in the Wilsons' music room, plus Bruce Johnston who became a valuable member in 1965, performing together as "The Beach Boys".

Special contracts, exemptions, and even a new LLC was formed in order to make this happen separate from the licenses and contracts which gave Mike sole rights to bill under the brand name.

Fans loved it. The venues became larger, the live touring industry came calling with offers for more, the band was "back" in every sense of the word.  They even scored a top-5 album of 100% new material and no hokey remakes or covers. It was one of the hottest tours of 2012, and it was for many an improbable success story and comeback.

Then, for reasons you'll have to sort out on your own terms, Mike Love decided he didn't want to do this anymore. He went back to playing his low-to-mid level shows with *his* band and Bruce. He left Brian, Al, and David Marks behind...and those three original members decided to tour together on their own. As Brian said in a now infamous interview "It felt like I'd been fired".

So that's the deal, and it's only giving a thumbnail sketch of all that played out.

But needless to say, it isn't the picture you painted in your comments above about how Mike Love kept the band rolling along without issues that plagued other name acts from the 60's era and beyond.

In fact, under Mike, The Beach Boys were and have been exactly the band with the same scenarios of interchangeable parts, changing band members and sidemen, and haggles over name ownership that you credit Mike for not turning the Beach Boys into that. Well, he did, and it did.


PS...If you're tipping the hat to Al Jardine, tip it also to Brian Wilson who has been touring for the past 20 years and just recently saw his "Pet Sounds" tour post better numbers than Mike's "Beach Boys" tour...and Al Jardine has been playing with Brian for the majority of those tours these past 20 years, now joined by former Beach Boy Blondie Chaplin as well.

Speaking of rare clips, I noted this one yesterday.

Glen Campbell and the Beach Boys interview.

https://youtu.be/9KWXFqTgXf0

Great find! Never saw that one before. Shame it seems to have gotten cut off from a larger segment.

Yes, thanks for posting that footage! It makes us wonder how much more of that random B-Roll type of footage exists and hasn't been found.

A few comments: The YouTube channel hosting it should also add the Strawberry Alarm Clock to the title of that vid. For as short of a run as they had, they were pretty visible in 1966-67-68 as a top band in the US, and a lot of people still remember that schtick they did when they destroyed a car in one of their promo videos that I think was shown on Laugh In?

Anyway, Bruce Palmer...when Ian first posted this, I watched the link on a small screen, and after the BB's come out of the plane, I saw what I thought was Bruce Palmer sitting on the tarmac goofing around...I thought, what the hell is he doing there?    Then when I watched on a full screen I saw it was a member of the Strawberry Alarm Clock clowning around with his bandmates.

Note in that same small segment on the tarmac, the big guy smoking a cig is the late Ed King, who just passed away this year. He's the guy who co-wrote Incense And Peppermints and ended up getting shafted on the credits...actually the whole story of the Strawberry Alarm Clock involves the band, who were young and naive, getting duped and swindled out of tens of thousands of dollars by varios managers, agents, etc. Crazy.

Ram4: As far as Bruce Palmer, if I'm remembering the history, it wasn't just that he got deported, but he kept getting busted for dope over and over again, and that combined with other personal issues...didn't the band basically just kick him out? He was a magnificent musician and creative soul, and Neil Young still credits him with being the true driving force of that band, but his behavior and tendency to get busted for dope and miss gigs basically sealed his fate. Am I right on that?


Edit: Wasn't there also a funny story about them trying to smuggle Bruce Palmer back into the US after one of his numerous busts by dressing him up and disguising him as a suit-and-necktie wearing business exec to avoid getting nabbed at the airport? That's the kind of thing, if true, that you wish they had taken photos.

CD - I think the instances of people trying to strip Mike of the credit he deserves are and have been overstated by those same groups who are overcompensating on the whole deal, as you just put it so well. But it hasn't helped that Mike himself has said so much of what he said and overreached for credit or even accolades beyond the norm.

I'm the first to say songs like California Girls, Warmth Of The Sun, and Kiss Me Baby among others are brilliant songs from the Wilson/Love collaboration.

But I'm also curious what you think Mike contributed to Please Let Me Wonder since you mention that specifically.

It's a good question about PLMW… It's possible that the extent of his contributions are what's heard on the early version with Mike on lead vocals, singing lyrics which were eventually changed to the final lyric set.  I find it very, very odd that that version has not been officially released… Baffling really.  To me that song is the beginning of Pet Sounds.  In fact I think I like the song better than any song on Pet Sounds, to be honest.  For that reason alone I am incredibly curious to know what Mike actually contributed to the song, and why the early version has never been officially released (the SOT boot could work as a source if tapes are missing, right?)

In any case, it's absolutely true that any book that is so drastically different from those original posts by Rocky cannot be taken seriously. There's no way anybody can minimize or explain away the dramatic 180 spin and maintain credibility.  Because it wasn't just that negative Mike things were simply cut out, but the additional action of apparently making the book a giant praise Mike fest is just beyond laughable when one compares it to the original Rocky posts on this board.  It's like going from uncensored 1987 gory arms-being-blown-off mutilation chic Robocop to Saturday morning G-rated cartoon Robocop for the kiddies.

I can empathize with anybody involved with a project encountering red lights and being forced to do things because of the threat of legal action. It's essentially like watching Wonder Years episodes with music replacement. No way around it. But something like this  getting heaps of criticism is to be expected, and I can't believe that anybody associated with the book wouldn't completely, 100% understand why the criticism is justified for that very reason.

I get that the author wants to defend the book so that the project can still have a degree of success, but it's essentially like saying "well great care was taken in choosing the songs that we replaced the unobtainable music with, we got the very best soundalikes available!")

That said, I haven't read the book, and maybe there are still some decent parts to it, despite the fact that large swaths of it are apparently to be taken with a grain of salt.

Agreed about the issues with the book. What you said about music replacement reminded me exactly of WKRP in Cincinnati, and how I remember Al kooper saying what a travesty it was to watch the episodes in syndication with the original music replaced.

PLMW is an interesting case, because not only is there the early version that you mentioned, But be sure to check out the later cover tribute version where Mike and Bruce wrote new lyrics to replace Brian's original instrumental Bridge. And if you hear the lyrics, they sound like they are coming from a totally different voice than that which wrote the original. Which would be odd if Mike did have as much of a hand in writing the original as he was awarded credit.

So it is just one of the more prominent cases of asking, well what if someone were to suggest that Brian wrote most or all of those lyrics and Mike did less than he was credited for. A pure hypothetical exercise to consider. And if you hear Brian in those words as well as the music which he obviously did, versus the voices of those who went back decades later and wrote a new section for the song that sounds like it's from Mars versus the original. In my opinion.

And it's true ... if I'm being honest, the board has always been troubled, but the types of conversations that used to be so interesting are now filled with some kind of undercurrent of politics.

Which types of conversations are you referring to?

It's also important to remember how many boards there were, say, 15 years ago and how all of them had various troubles. And note that out of all of them, this one is still active and survived all of that, and whatever reasons caused the others to either fail or wither away. The politics you may be speaking of were always there on ALL of these BB related forums, but starting in fall 2012 it started getting a lot more intense and defined. It's pretty easy to see why given that timeline.

Donny, all personal squabbles and shots taken at this board aside, do you not agree that Mike Love has a history of trying to take more credit for the band's success and legacy than is due in reality, and doing so in large part by bringing up the problems with the Wilson brothers? It feels like he has too often tried to elevate himself by denigrating the Wilsons, and back to the topic of Ron's book with Rocky, that same emphasis on the negative regarding the Wilsons while overreaching on the credit  given Mike seems to be the main issue people seem to have as a negative opinion on the book.

*shots at the board = posters like OSD create an unsavory environment, in which folks are not able to state a simple opinion without him "reframing" it to suggest some kind of brainwashing by Mike Love. I would ask you if you think that kind of post contributes to be type of board you want to see.

And I agree 100% with what you wrote above. But doesn't mean there's not some truth in Mike's position ... he clearly has a chip on his shoulder about it all.

I'll say honestly there are a lot of posts that I think could or should have been worded differently or opinions expressed differently, my own included. But it's not enough of a grounds to charge the entire community with being this or that based on those things you or I may not agree with. It's one of the things that comes with having an open forum, and the option is there to ignore anything anyone wants to ignore, or challenge as you did and have a dialogue about it.


I think the chips on Mike's shoulders are more about issues Mike himself needs to deal with personally than they are about the reality of how many times he got screwed by his cousins the Wilsons,  and Al Jardine, and his brother Stephen, and whoever else he points a finger at on any number of issues on any given day. I do feel, as an opinion, that Mike likes to portray himself as a victim and give himself the accolades he wished he got from the public and the fanbase overall. And in doing so he too often overcompensates and reaches too far beyond reality. Ego. And he also wishes he got the accolades Brian gets (and deserves) especially for the truly classic 60's Capitol years. But the reality doesnt always support what Mike wishes it did.

CD - I think the instances of people trying to strip Mike of the credit he deserves are and have been overstated by those same groups who are overcompensating on the whole deal, as you just put it so well. But it hasn't helped that Mike himself has said so much of what he said and overreached for credit or even accolades beyond the norm.

I'm the first to say songs like California Girls, Warmth Of The Sun, and Kiss Me Baby among others are brilliant songs from the Wilson/Love collaboration.

But I'm also curious what you think Mike contributed to Please Let Me Wonder since you mention that specifically.

Donny, all personal squabbles and shots taken at this board aside, do you not agree that Mike Love has a history of trying to take more credit for the band's success and legacy than is due in reality, and doing so in large part by bringing up the problems with the Wilson brothers? It feels like he has too often tried to elevate himself by denigrating the Wilsons, and back to the topic of Ron's book with Rocky, that same emphasis on the negative regarding the Wilsons while overreaching on the credit  given Mike seems to be the main issue people seem to have as a negative opinion on the book.

The funny thing is that in McCartney's interview from the fall, he doesn't say definitively that the original cut of the film as released to theaters will be re-released...yet the hints are along the lines of the original release was a "downer" so a new edit will be a more fun and happy version?

I'm lazy, so is there word alongside the news of Peter Jackson's work on the project that says the original version of Let It Be will be re-released? Or is it just that Jackson will be recutting a new version from the nearly 60 hours of existing footage?

Whatever the case, I'm confused about just what is coming out...and I hope they do re-release the original edit so people can see it. Wasn't it John or George or both of them who later said fans should see Let It Be so they could get an idea of how dreary and bad the scene really was by 1969 rather than trying to sugarcoat it?

On a similar note, in light of the comments above, I'd like to ask Ron - if he chooses - to offer his opinions on a few of Rocky's comments from previous years:

Doo Dah, you have found the answer why Mike is so angry recently about the songwriting lawsuit from 1994.

He wants the catalog or money from BW when it comes up for ownership changes in under the 1976 copyright act. Actual songwriting credits on those songs be damned.

I'm just saying, it occurred to me last night. What would appear to be ancient history (circa 1992) is not quite so ancient.

BINGO...and Mike will do "ANYTHING" to get the ownership of Brian's Music Publishing Catalogue... "Actual songwriting credits BE DAMNED!  Well said Doo Dah... I take my hat off to you!  This is exactly what Stephen and I were hoping would happen..."TALK ABOUT and EXPOSING Mike!" Melinda Wilson is the "ONE" who really needs to be INFORMED... and made AWARE! She is very bright and definitely has Brian's best interest at heart!

Mike is loveless when it comes to Brian... Money is Mike's God!  He can't write songs so he sues Brian!  Ask Jerome Billet!

:)I REPEAT... MIKE IS CONDESCENDING TOWARDS BRIAN...  THINKS HE'S BETTER THAN BRIAN...    IF YOU ONLY KNEW THE HALF OF IT! DON'T LET MIKE'S FAKE MEDITATION FOOL YA!
iT'S MORE LIKE "SCHEMATATION!"   There's a lyric for ya mike-y... ask Brian if he wants to "USE" that one... KIND OF LIKE "THE SURF WORD MAN" eh! (CURRENT AFFAIR 1994)

Page 2... SNEAKY STAN TAPED IT... and that's not all STAN TAPED... Wait till Mike-y gets an earful of the "SMOKING GUN TAPE"... where Stan tapes he and I talking about...          WHO LIED BEST IN COURT FOR... MIKE

Brian seems to have been surrounded by clowns on that occasion.

The BIGGEST CLOWN is YOUR BOY...mike-y... and then YOU!  He's not paying you enough, chump   Course you're not doing enough!   You both suck      The GREATEST MELTDOWN ever to be filmed... is THE CLOWN mike-y... at THE ROCK & ROLL HALL OF FAME induction ceremony in 1988.   THE BIGGEST FOOL to EVER STEP FOOT ON A STAGE... He will NEVER be able to ESCAPE THIS SELF-INFLICTED SOCIAL SUICIDE...  And he wonders why the whole world thinks he's a CLOWN!       

That's just a sampling. Again, we've discussed it before, but generally the same source who spoke that way roughly 3 years ago in public is not going to suddenly decide Mike Love is the exalted Savior of The Beach Boys unless something really drastic happened in the interim...Call it a "Come To Mike" or "Come To Maharishi" moment? 

Anyway, it's f*cked up.

As to accuracy, I have admitted that we did not come up to the standards of the aficionados on this Site.
As to the "cousin of the Wilson's," we didn't sacrifice anything or avoid antagonizing Mike Love. Whether you like it or not Mike Love is the most instrumental reason that the BB survived all these years. If you love the band then the fact that they are still around is because of HIM. You may not like him for whatever reason, but he is the glue that kept that show on the road, day in and day out, year after year,  period. Have some respect. He earned it. Because we did not choose to investigate certain areas was the publishers choice for the kind of book he would be willing to publish.
That's sho biz. Try getting a book published about rich, powerful and successful people and run into the exigencies of that world before you squawk.

"If you love the band then the fact that they are still around is because of HIM."

Ron, I've tried to respectfully engage in discussions about your book and avoid the pitfalls of name-calling and whatnot, and encourage a dialogue. However, a comment like this comes off sounding ridiculous. If you're stating it as fact, then it's all but "game on" and I'll openly say this is a load of crap and couldn't be further from the truth. If it's opinion, I'll challenge it and my view leans more toward what Jim V just posted above: The magic of this band is, has been, and will always be those glorious records Brian made over 50 years ago that continue to touch and inspire generations of fans. The fact Mike Love is "still tourin'" having paid for the license and rights to bill his band as "The Beach Boys" wouldn't amount to a hill of beans if not for those records Brian was creating back in the 60's which people enjoy. Those records from the 60's are the true Rosetta Stone of this band's history...everything else is icing on the cake. If someone can prove me wrong, please go ahead and engage.

But to make such a statement, Ron, doesn't do you or the book any good because it comes off as ass-kissing to Mike Love, and beyond that it's undeserved. That's my opinion. The fact is as clear as actually digging into the history of the band and seeing why the Beach Boys are legends - And it's not Mike's touring band responsible for that, nor was it Mike's actions over the past 40 years.

Here's some press video of the ribbon-cutting for a Top 40 (radio) Museum in Chattanooga TN, from November 2018. About 20 minutes worth of the ceremony, Mike's speech, Mike talking about the first 3 HOF inductees (Dick Clark, Wolfman Jack, Casey Kasem), and a clip of the band playing Wouldn't It Be Nice later that night in concert.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EOkR8Z9QAts

First thing I thought was "Why is a Top-40 radio museum and Hall Of Fame located in Chattanooga Tennessee?". It's not the first region I think of in terms of the history of Top-40 radio, but then again I still don't fully understand the R&R HOF being in Cleveland other than powerful political lobbying to build it there all those years ago, understanding the Alan Freed connection of course.

Just randomly scanning YouTube I found this video, and learned there actually *is* a Top 40 radio museum! Which is good...if done right, and if it actually gets the history of these amazing years and amazing music and personalities into the public eye. Even though the location is a little baffling. I hope they spotlight more of the giants of the genre like Real Don Steele, Jerry "The Geator" Blavat and Hy Lit from Philly, Dan Ingram and the other NYC personalities on WABC and other stations, Robert W. Morgan, the guys from WLS and CFL in Chicago, etc. A lot of fascinating history to be told in the history of AM Top-40 radio, hopefully this museum will catch on and be a presence.

As far as the clip of WIBN at the end, I don't know if Mike and possibly other band members were fighting colds or sore throats, but the vocals were pretty off that night. Mike sounded like he was losing his voice at the ceremony, maybe it was part of the same thing.

I was just listening to KYW 1060, the news radio station in Philly that everyone listens to for traffic, weather, and school closings when it snows like it is currently...), and an ad for a Mike & Bruce Beach Boys show on July 27th in Atlantic City came on, Hard Rock casino. First I had heard it, or a BB themed concert ad in general, for awhile. Anyway, here's the links for those interested:
https://www.hardrockhotels.com/atlantic-city/hotel-home
https://www1.ticketmaster.com/the-beach-boys-now-then/event/02005637ED669536

What stood out about the billing and ad included that it's being billed as "Now And Then"...anyone know what that title refers to beyond the obvious? For once there was no 50th anniversary tag to celebrate something from 1969, so I guess this tag replaced the 50th tag for 2019.

I did not see on the web links nor hear in the radio ad the disclaimer about Brian-Al-Blondie not appearing at this show as someone saw in another market's promotions.

What I noticed in the radio ad was that the majority of the BB's original music clips were using Brian's falsetto parts as the sound clip - Whether that's coincidence or not, it was noticeable. Considering the ad directed you to both the BB's and Mike's own website for more info, most of the audio heard in the spot was spotlighting Brian's falsetto hooks. I just found that a bit odd considering Mike's vocals would be a more expected spotlight to advertise his shows. Anyhoo...

What is ironic and will play out as 2020 approaches is how there has been no official way to buy or see the original film since the 1980's. Even in 2008 when they almost had a rerelease, Paul and Ringo scuppered that plan.

Now, read this fall 2018 interview from Paul:

https://www.nme.com/news/music/paul-mccartney-let-it-be-the-beatles-new-version-possibly-in-the-works-film-2381386

We know the project was Paul's baby from the beginning. We know bringing in Spector caused major problems.  We know Paul tried to reshape it via the naked project, with mixed results.

In that fall 2018 interview it sounds like Paul might want to make a "nice" version of Let It Be. Veering close, maybe, to reshaping history through editing?

If I remember both John and George wanted to show how tense and bad things were...wonder if this will be Paul's chance to do it his way after the original print has fallen out of the public eye?

From the Beatles' facebook account:

We are proud to announce an exciting new collaboration between The Beatles and the acclaimed Academy Award winning director Sir Peter Jackson

The new film will be based around 55 hours of never-released footage of The Beatles in the studio, shot between January 2nd and January 31st, 1969. These studio sessions produced The Beatles’ Grammy Award winning album Let It Be, with its Academy Award winning title song. The album was eventually released 18 months later in May 1970, several months after the band had broken up.

The filming was originally intended for a planned TV special, but organically turned into something completely different, climaxing with The Beatles’ legendary performance on the roof of Apple's Savile Row London office — which took place exactly 50 years ago today.

Peter Jackson said, "The 55 hours of never-before-seen footage and 140 hours of audio made available to us, ensures this movie will be the ultimate ‘fly on the wall’ experience that Beatles fans have long dreamt about."

“I was relieved to discover the reality is very different to the myth,” continues Jackson, “it’s simply an amazing historical treasure-trove. Sure, there’s moments of drama - but none of the discord this project has long been associated with. Watching John, Paul, George, and Ringo work together, creating now-classic songs from scratch, is not only fascinating - it’s funny, uplifting and surprisingly intimate”.

"I’m thrilled and honoured to have been entrusted with this remarkable footage - making the movie will be a sheer joy.”

Yes, I also heard this news on the radio this morning, and they compared Peter Jackson's involvement with the live project Ron Howard did a few years ago in terms of two of the most successful directors getting involved with unearthing and presenting "new" archival Beatles material for wide release.

It should be interesting. The only issue in my mind is I sincerely hope they don't try to "sweeten" or fix anything, or do all out changes to the mixes as they did the Let It Be...Naked project. I don't mind that project for what it is, but the textures of some of the songs that I'd known for years changed, and it felt like some were sterilized even beyond taking Spector out of the mix. It was a curious listen, still is, but it never replaced the originals or even some of the bootlegs.

So I hope they don't go overboard with the editing (video and audio), and especially with the post-production. It bugs me when something like this is done with the goal of appealing to modern, young listeners and owners of Beats headphones rather than keeping the music true to what it was in 1969 in this case.

What's interesting is some of us have heard a lot (too much?) of these Get Back sessions, and honestly a lot of it sounds pretty dreary, which would fit recording in a huge airplane hangar in the dead of Winter, then moving to a studio that was unfinished thanks to unfilled promises and unfinished work by "Magic Alex" Mardas...I'm curious to see how Jackson and his editing team will deliver these uplifting moments he speaks of in the press release.

Pretty excited to see and hear this in release-worthy quality versus the bootlegs.

[and 1.5 hours were allocated to making mono TV mixes of "Some Of Your Love" and "Goin' On" (yes, the TV special's audio is in mono - and this would seem to indicate either that mono mixes for the other tunes included in the program were made on another day, or simple stereo-to-mono fold-downs were made from rough mixes of those tunes).]

It's an interesting show. In-studio footage includes scenes of the guys talking about and working on the then-unreleased "Goin' To The Beach". For the "live" performance, I seem to recall that local BBFUN members were invited to comprise the audience. At one point, right before the sax solo on "Goin' On", Carl's lip syncing is off; he realizes it, and gives one of his famous "faces". He then carries on, while smiling and briefly nodding at someone off-screen (the director, or someone in the audience), as if to acknowledge it and say, "Yeah, I know - but it's OK". Priceless. Also interesting is that there is absolutely no mention of Dennis; he was ostracized from the band at this point, but you'd think they would have at least acknowledged his absence somehow, especially since they make a big deal about how these album sessions marked a newfound "togetherness" and sense of unity for the band.

January 28th (two days before the onstage video shoot) was a busy day indeed for our Boys, who worked their balls off at Rumbo Recorders:  not only did they spend three hours adding some vocals to "Some Of Your Love" and "Oh Darlin'", guitar and horns were added to one song during another three-hour session, four hours were devoted to tape-copying and editing together the 24-track master of "Sunshine", an hour was spent dubbing cassette copies for the band, and 1.5 hours were allocated to making mono TV mixes of "Some Of Your Love" and "Goin' On" (yes, the TV special's audio is in mono - and this would seem to indicate either that mono mixes for the other tunes included in the program were made on another day, or simple stereo-to-mono fold-downs were made from rough mixes of those tunes). This information all comes from a CBS Records work order.

Many of the rough mixes used in the television program are indeed unique - for instance, the song "Keepin' The Summer Alive" lacks the eventual Joe Walsh slide guitar solo, enabling us to hear Carl's original "place-holder" solo; and "Goin' On" lacks the tympani overdub that was added on January 31st (the very next day after the video shoot). Also of note is that three of the album's songs are not included in the live "performance", and are absent from the special altogether:  "When Girls Get Together" (likely because it was a ten-year old recording, and wasn't well suited for a psuedo-live setting), "Santa Ana Winds", and "Livin' With A Heartache" ("Winds" was not completed in its final form until January 31st-February 1st, and "Heartache" was not tracked until January 31st, with overdubs following on February 5th, 14th, and 17th).  

The quote in bold above brought back some memories, and triggered the thought that so many people born after 1980 would most likely not remember watching TV when it was *all* in mono. No stereo to speak of. TV sets (there's an old term, right?) either had one speaker, or dual speakers that amplified the same signal on both, i.e. mono signals only when it came to broadcasts and cable.

I know there were various tests and experiments done going back to the 50's, where networks would try to simulcast and sync up a TV video broadcast with an FM radio audio simulcast, or in one test I think they even split one channel to AM and another to FM. But the caveat was you had to have all this gear at home, not to mention being in a location where you could receive all of this. Again, all of it was very experimental in nature and would take several decades to actually translate into a true stereo broadcast that people with stereo TV's at home could receive.

If I remember, NBC started running episodes of Johnny Carson's Tonight Show in stereo in July 1984, and that Fall there was buzz around their new show Miami Vice which was set to be their first series and regular broadcast to be available in full stereo. Imagine, nothing consistently broadcast in stereo for the vast majority of viewers until late 1984 and beyond.

Reading this about mixing mono for TV just triggered a memory when we got a new GE television set to replace others which I burned out the tube thanks to a Magnavox Odyssey video game console...It was Summer 1986 or '87 if I recall, and I got home from an event at the local park in the afternoon to see the delivery guys carrying it in the front door.

It was stereo, real stereo, which was the first time we could experience that. However, not all programs even by 86-87 were broadcast in stereo - You could tell because on the display an icon would appear in yellow that said "STEREO", and if it were mono it wasn't there. And at that time, a big deal that never really did much later on was the SAP (second audio program) feature, which would show up as an asterisk if it was available. Not many channels bothered with it, and most times - if anything - it was a Spanish audio track, and again it wasn't much compared to the potential some had for this new tech.

The only thing with the TV was it only had RCA stereo input jacks...no outputs to connect to a receiver or amp for better or fuller sound. It only came through the console's built-in speakers. I still have that TV and it still works. The first VCR we got was around 1989, and due to cost factors even that was only in mono. The hi-fi stereo feature on VCR's added what I remember was a decent increase to the price.

But reading that about mono mixing for TV triggered those memories, and it's amazing to think how long it took TV to start broadcasting in stereo despite FM being around for quite some time by 1984, and the fact that prior to 1984 and even in the next years after people were not able to receive TV programs with stereo audio, and it was all in mono.

Hello Ron, yes you can post those here, no problem.

The Baldwin HT2R home theater organ had a percussion sound available which was 'Temple Block'. The real temple block percussion would produce the clip-clop sound, so if possible someone with a Baldwin HT2R organ could be tracked down and asked to run through the sounds like that "temple block" setting.

I think those percussion sounds were only available on the optional slide-out drawer looking unit that some Baldwins had...I believe Brian's had this option too but I'll have to dig into some photos to confirm. If anyone sees it, it's a little box on the player's right just underneath the manuals of the organ, and I believe you could also assign the sounds to be controlled via the footpedals (?)

I think you guys nailed the origin of that clip-clop sound as the Baldwin. Great call.

At that time, it was common to record instruments flat, without effects.
Producers and mixing engineers wanted to have as many mixing options as possible. It could be that the guitarist didn't use pedals and  that an array  outboard effects such as delay, harmonizer, and phasing were used during mixdown. .... I don't know if I'm thinking of the same part as you...

That wasn't always the case with the guitar effects available in the 60's and 70's...a lot of the players wanted the sound on their part from the beginning of the process as a sonic hook, and to enhance or alter the way they played the part. The old MXR phasers like the Phase 90, and Keef's Phase 100 on "Shattered", they were touch-sensitive and the intensity of the effect would vary depending on how the player was attacking the notes, picking hard or soft. Same with Jimmy Page and his MXR "Blue Box" solo on "Fool In The Rain" - The charm of that pedal was how it could break up into static at any moment depending on the dynamics of how hard or soft you'd pick the notes, just like Page's part. You couldn't get that by a re-amping setup. You couldn't get the same effect by re-amping a clean track through a standalone pedal. It was up to the players too.

One guitarist though who I know 100% recorded direct into the board almost all the time in the 70's, clean, then added effects afterward was Nile Rodgers on all those classic Chic rhythm parts played on his Strat.

What kind of effects are used for the guitars on this "Goin' On" backing track?  I'm thinking phase (I used to own a Small Stone phase shifter - those were quite popular in the late '70s - "Shattered" by the Stones, for instance).
Maybe also a little bit of Leslie on one of the guitars?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ezvbBTXJHts

"Shattered" was an MXR Phase 100 just for the record...  I always thought it was a Phase 90...

"Goin On": At the ending coda and fadeout...I actually think I hear a talkbox on those single note descending lines. (Listen specifically to the notes around 2:46 to the end, and the notes at 3:12...sounds like a Talkbox hitting those notes)

The rest of the track, the guitar is sparse. I do hear a touch of phase. Perhaps a slight Leslie too in one of the later drop-ins. What's tricky sometimes is how the modulation type effects can be so similar, and when parts like this one are kind of buried and nothing really jumps out, it's a tough call.