I'm really excited for all this Grammy thing. Who would have thought, even months ago, that this this celebration, with this level of worldwide exposure would happen? The BBs seem to be the biggest Grammy news these days, that these guys, at 70, and given the curve of their recording career, are receiving this level of attention is a blessing for us all.

Do you think that excitement and attention is centered around the Beach Boys or their "special guests"?

"Good Vibrations" didn't lose a Grammy to "Monday, Monday" in '66; it lost to "Winchester Cathedral" by the New Vaudeville Band (astonishingly, the other losers were "Monday, Monday", "Eleanor Rigby" and "The Sound of Silence").

Winchester cathedral is a terrible novelty song.

I think the Grammy voting panel heard a manipulated voice made to sound like a 20's recording and associated that with technical innovation and something "new". When in reality, "Good Vibrations" was actually that kind of record that freaked everyone out, rewriting the rules of making a 45rpm, and a case could be made that Eleanor Rigby changed the way string quartets and strings in general would sound on a pop record by the way Emerick close-mic'ed and recorded them.

I always pictured some tripped-out Broadway spectacle where folks like Carol Channing and Ethel Merman would join Fred Astaire for some kind of top hat and cane performance on Hollywood Palace, doing "Winchester Cathedral" to appeal to "the kids" watching the show. With the June Taylor Dancers, of course.

It's good to read and study jazz and memorize all the dates and names, but that kind of music is what has to be experienced.

I agree and expand the point: all music has to be experience. The trivia is just that, in my opinion. It's all well and good to fetishize the collectables, I guess, but that isn't about music.

Good point, for all styles and genres of music. I also think for as much good as a jazz history course (or any music appreciation class) does to introduce the music, the necessity of memorizing dates and names can possibly cloud the mind a bit, putting memorization ahead of emotional connection. And I've taken my share of these courses, some required for my degree and some out of pure interest, and I really can't think of too many cases where I've personally connected with a song that was played over the worn-out stereos in a classroom or lecture hall as part of the class listening. I always connected more with a piece when I had a copy and listened on my own terms, in my own place and own time.

I'm thankful for taking the classes and getting the education, but I'd also suggest taking the outside initiative and picking up some of these songs to listen as you would your preferred style of music. If something still doesn't quite connect, at least you aired it out on your own terms. It is better than hearing some of Louis Armstrong's Hot Fives and Hot Sevens in a lecture hall with a sheet of dates and names in front of you and deciding on that experience it wasn't something I'd listen to again.

Just my two cents worth of opinion and advice...

I agree..

I'm still waiting for Adam Levine to post on twitter he can't make it

I subscribe to his account if there were even a slim-to-none chance that this would happen.

Maybe there is a Victoria's Secret runway show somewhere in the world he'd like to be a part of this weekend...

I realize it's beating a dead horse in a way, but can someone please explain to me what Adam Levine or Maroon 5 can add to the Beach Boys lineup shown in the rehearsal photos?

At least pick a f*cking band whose sound reflects at least a slight Beach Boys influence, rather than a band who sounds like they wore out more Whitney Houston or New Kids On The Block records than Beach Boys albums. Oh wait, you can't wear out an mp3...my bad.

Hey, by the way, are there any group vocal harmonies on Maroon 5 records? I've played about a dozen of them on guitar through the years...none stand out with vocal harmonies. The KEY component of the Beach Boys sound isn't even in the Maroon 5 universe. I don't mind a few of their hits, they're catchy enough pop, but why them and the Beach Boys?

Foster The People had an insanely catchy single last year, nothing earth-shattering but one which sticks in your mind for weeks. I don't have as much of a problem with them, because it isn't all Hollywood glitz and f*cking fashion shows with their lead singer, but even there I can't see their immediate connection to the Beach Boys or their music.

If the Beach Boys do anything related to "Moves Like Jagger", I'm throwing a bowling ball through the screen...

About that rehearsal picture posted on Facebook, I'm wondering what can that guy from Maroon 5 can *possibly* add to that group of musicians?

My guess now is that the BBs are going to play a song on their own and are then joined by Maroon5 and Foster the People for one or two more songs. Question for the guys here that know how the Grammys work: would that be possible?

I would think the reverse of that would be more likely- the young 'uns come out and sing their Beach Boys tributes and are then joined by the old masters for the finale. But who knows?

But it seems they were rehearsing (among other things?) a setup for just the BBs.

Adam Levine was probably busy picking out his rock star outfit so he'd look good on Access Hollywood.

That's good to hear jazz history is still being offered! Getting past the somewhat stuffy and academic reputation jazz has gotten in the past few decades, if you dig into the actual music and forget the Ken Burns histrionics, you'll find music that delivers everything you could ask for when being moved by a series of notes and chords.

Lester Young and Billie Holliday doing "Fine And Mellow" on television in the late 50's...hearing Lester's one-chorus tenor solo has moved me to tears as much as any other piece of music has done. I don't think I've ever seen two musicians connect like that without saying a single word to each other, it's stunning. It's good to read and study jazz and memorize all the dates and names, but that kind of music is what has to be experienced.

About that rehearsal picture posted on Facebook, I'm wondering what can that guy from Maroon 5 can *possibly* add to that group of musicians?

My guess now is that the BBs are going to play a song on their own and are then joined by Maroon5 and Foster the People for one or two more songs. Question for the guys here that know how the Grammys work: would that be possible?

They might do a medley. Remember this is a production which has had a bad reputation for cutting winners' speeches short, and most performances are either one full song tightly timed or a medley where special guests come out every minute or so and sing a few hooks. I doubt they'll get more than 10 minutes air time if that's what you mean.

Again, I can't see Adam Levine doing anything that the guys in the photo couldn't do better and haven't done better for the better part of 50 years.

Agreed very much with the two posts above.

Keep in mind that Van Dyke Parks has been fiercely loyal and dedicated to Frank Holmes' visual contributions to Smile receiving due credit: financially, historically, and artistically.

About that rehearsal picture posted on Facebook, I'm wondering what can that guy from Maroon 5 can *possibly* add to that group of musicians?

I'm also wondering what happened to Maroons 1 through 4.

Brian was definitely influenced by jazz, he's said it directly and indirectly in interviews. He sat at a piano in one of them and played some close-voiced chords on the piano which sounded a lot like something The Four Freshmen would sing as a turnaround, and he said his dad taught him that on the piano. Factor in his beloved Freshmen records, which he'd learn and transcribe by ear, and that was what taught him vocal arranging - and it was jazz harmony.

Two things about Friends specifically: There were session players on that record, some of the Wrecking Crew like Jim Gordon on drums. Those guys came up in the business learning to play jazz, so naturally those rhythms and "go to" beats were in their blood when a producer like Brian would have them run down a chart.

Second, 1967 into 1968 was a fantastic time for musical styles being blurred and melded together. You'd hear Bacharach, something like Promises Promises with it's big band arrangement and odd meters, then you'd hear something from the Sinatra-Jobim album or something by Jobim or Stan Getz...either way, Bossa Nova was very big. Then going into '68 and '69, the sub-genre of "jazz rock" was starting to be called that by name. Blood Sweat and Tears, Electric Flag, Chicago Transit Authority, any number of bands or artists with a horn section playing with loud guitars and aggressive drums, and using jazz chord changes here and there. I have some old Downbeat articles from that time, they went from either dismissing it or trying sometimes too hard to appeal to the young rock fans who were buying those records and getting their feet wet with jazz that way instead of buying hard bop and Ornette Coleman albums.

(Some of the earliest Chicago Transit Authority shows captured on tape from '68 have them covering Darlin, among other horn-driven songs)

This doesn't even mention Miles, McLaughlin, Herbie, all those guys, which eventually gelled into Bitches Brew...and Hendrix who was getting into jazz right up to when he died. The lines were being blurred, and if there are various jazz sounds on Friends, it's not surprising because the musicians played jazz and the sounds were in the air.

Agreed Ronald Reagan had nothing to do with it, contrary to what the OP stated.  With you that far.  (All along I thought he and Nancy interceded for the BB because of Mike's prior campaigning; I did not know the Patti Davis story - thanks Ed!).

And - probably - agreed that Watt may well not have had the BB in mind when he spoke - or even knew who they were.  I will also accept he wasn't doing the booking of acts himself.  But he was a blowhard, and he DID weigh in about rock groups bringing in the wrong element, though - and thus the Post, and others, figured he had to mean the BB and the Grassroots.  Certainly the White House thought so, like it or not.

PS: and this didn't get him fired.  His wisecrack about minorities and " a cripple" did that for him.

Yes, this Beach Boys incident specifically did not get him fired, and Watt was a blowhard whose comments on other matters did cause problems for the Reagan administration...it was adding fuel to the fire that was building around him. Eventually all that fuel build a big enough fire where he had to go. As I mentioned earlier, he did have a bad habit of putting his foot in his mouth.

It got to the point where his bosses didn't back him up, and that as mentioned earlier was "damage control" practiced by every White House.

The fact that the Washington Post figured he "had to mean" something is what caused the problem. It seemed like all the media ran with what he had to mean, despite him not saying it and never naming the Beach Boys. Read through the other media reports on the story from 1983 onward: They go as far as to put words in his mouth, again printing outright lies and half-truths, and creating another Beach Boys myth that the band had been "banned". It became a cause celebre among rock journalists and radio DJ's (wnew included), who called for Watt's dismissal after the Post article.

It actually worked out for The Beach Boys and Reagan himself in the 1984 election - it was a massive amount of free publicity and good vibrations for both sides, and the Boys played 1984 in DC. Reagan may have gotten untold thousands of votes out of it for the '84 election.

Watt was reacting to the fans at the Grass Roots show, the concert they played in 1982 - if Watt had specifically stated that his memo was about incidents he heard complaints about at that 1982 concert, none of this would have happened.

Again, it's about setting the record straight, whether the characters involved were blowhards or not.

[Vegas crooner Wayne Newton]

Despite some efforts to suggest that James Watt himself did not personally ban the BB from playing the Mall, he still gets the blame properly since he clearly said it was "rock bands" such as the BB and Grassroots who attracted the "wrong element".  Recall that he went on to say, as this article notes:

Starting in 1980, the Beach Boys and the Grass Roots headlined July 4th concerts on the National Mall, the great strip of land dotted by monuments in downtown Washington, D.C. But in a Washington Post interview published in April 1983, Secretary of the Interior James Watt let slip that the Beach Boys would not be invited back that year. In Watt’s opinion, the concerts had attracted “the wrong element.” He told the newspaper, “We’re trying to have an impact for wholesomeness. July 4th will be a [traditional ceremony] for the family and for solid, clean American lives. We’re not going to encourage drug abuse and alcoholism as was done in past years.” Instead, Watt said, that the celebration would be headlined by military bands … and Vegas crooner Wayne Newton.

The firestorm that erupted must have taken Watt, not the hippest of dudes, by surprise, particularly when two of the people rushing to the Beach Boys’ defense were First Lady Nancy Reagan and White House Chief of Staff Michael Deaver. One day after his interview appeared in the Post, Watt emerged from a White House meeting carrying a plaster foot with a hole in it — a trophy given to him personally by President Ronald Reagan — and met the press. Watt said the First Lady had told him “that the Beach Boys were fans of hers, and her children had grown up with them, and they’re fine, outstanding people, and there should be no intention to indicate that they cause problems, which I agree with.” This seems to be the opposite of what Watt had meant when he lumped the Beach Boys in with “rock bands attracting the wrong element.” About 50 arrests had been made for disorderly conduct and assault in 1982, but most were related to the annual day-long marijuana “smoke-in” on the Mall that coincided with the concert.


Read more: Rock 101: The Beach Boys vs. James Watt http://wnew.radio.com/2010/06/29/rock-101-the-beach-boys-vs-james-watt/#ixzz1ljN6EFil

The Wikipedia article on Watt confirms this too.

So maybe Watt didn't know the Beach Boys from the Beach Towels, and didn't himself issue a specific ban or disinvite to them.  But he clearly decided that someone like Wayne Newton and a parade of military bands were what he had in mind for Mall shows, and said so.  That's why he got the heat.

[PS: Now over to the Record Room and their thread entitled "Wait!  Wayne Newton Is Cooler than Bob Dylan!  That SSMB guy is a DUMBASS!"]

Dr. Tim, you've recapped the story adding a few more quotes but I guess I'm the one doing the suggesting:

The "firestorm" over Watt and the Beach Boys was based entirely on what people thought he "meant" or how they read into his comments. You can read between the lines all you want and try to find the hidden meaning, but if you want to take the man at his word, he never once mentioned "The Beach Boys" by name, he or those on his staff at the Interior Dept. never banned the Beach Boys or mentioned them by name.

At the time he wrote the original memo (November 1982), at the time he booked Wayne Newton and the US Army Blues Band for the 4th concert in 1983, and at the time the Washington Post printed comments from him which led to the "firestorm" - again *not* mentioning the Beach Boys in his words - the band WAS NOT BOOKED FOR THE JULY 4th SHOW! As you'll read in my earier post, Al Jardine in the middle of this, when asked if they'd do the show, said they were in talks to play the 4th in Manhattan, and they ended up booking a gig in Atlantic City that year for their 4th festivities.

The Beach Boys did not play in 1982, there is no indication, or no proof, that they were considering playing 1983 in DC, and Watt mentions this specifically.

If folks want to take the words and the story out of context, feel free but it's not accurate. And even if you dislike Watt and many do, there is something wrong about hanging a man with his own words which he *never said*. It's not accurate.

Think what you want, the facts of this are a man got publicly destroyed based on something he didn't say. His comments were on the Grass Roots show in 1982, his reaction and proposal to hire Newton was a follow-up to the complaints he received about that specific show.

That's the truth.

As far as the Beach Boys coming on after Gentry and the orchestra, they had done several "Beach Boys Summer Spectacular" concerts in previous years, where they shared the bill with the Byrds, Jefferson Airplane, Lovin' Spoonful, and others - the gigs are listed on AGD's timeline and Eric Anniversario's website. Those bills are pretty incredible, as far as the quality of bands there with the Boys in 65 and 66.

It also says quite a lot about the stature of the Beach Boys in the mid 60's to have a series of concerts featuring some of the best and most hip bands of the day, all gathering under the name "The Beach Boys Summer Spectacular".

Definitely! They were tops!! Them, Stones, Beatles.....after Monterey you could say perhaps Mamas & Papas maybe took over their spot for the time-being (not in the long-run of course, but at the time in terms of sales etc.....). Monkees, too.

And yeah! My point was more that on this particular occasion with them coming on and not doing the surf-sound thing, rather a more minimalist stoned organ thing could have seemed a bit underwhelming in its sparseness. But you can also hear on the tapes that the teenagers didn't seem to mind and screamed throughout most of the shows anyways ha. I love the Hawthorne Blvd intro though in that one show, classic

Definitely The Monkees! I became a super-fan after MTV rebroadcast the shows in the mid-80's, then the Nickelodeon cable channel ran the episodes every night. For a show that only ran two seasons and had just over 50 episodes, the popularity that continues to this day is pretty incredible. But what amazed me once I started going back to the original media of the day was just how popular they were, especially on AM radio and related publications. Radio couldn't get enough of them, and the funny things are hearing very deep album cuts and even things the radio taped off the TV show when there was a lack of new songs to play! I have a tape of KHJ playing the original "Valleri" which they took right off the air a year or more before the official single came out...such was the demand.

And you are so right about the Hawaii audience, that aspect of the shows really surprised me. I can't quite explain it, but at that point The Beach Boys seemed to be heading far away from the teenage pop music image, with all the serious nature of the interviews, articles, and things like Inside Pop which happened the past 8 months or so...yet in Hawaii you hear the girls screaming and reacting like it was still 1963. I haven't put my finger on it quite yet, whether that means something more than just hearing enthusiastic fans screaming for the Boys.

I don't think that was the reaction from the crowd to the bands at Monterey that same summer, nor was it probably an expected reaction at Monterey from the bands on that bill. Whatever the case, until I figure out what I'm trying to say about that screaming, it was *very* interesting to hear.

I thought the bigger story in this thread would have been the busted myth of James Watt banning the Beach Boys, an event which (man, I'm repeating myself again... )...never happened!

Watt is/was not exactly a sympathetic figure, he had a habit of sometimes putting his foot in his mouth offending both allies and foes with things he said, yet this guy was basically ruined by words he never said directly and actions he never took. His own bosses in the Reagan administration didn't even back him up after the media version of the story became more accepted than what actually happened. They took the side of the mass media, and saw an opportunity to harvest votes, so they hung this guy out to dry...and maybe that was the plan all along, as all presidents do and have done when they have a staffer creating bad publicity around elections.

The fact that a mass media can run an incorrect and inaccurate story again and again so often that it becomes the truth instead of the actual "truth" is a sad commentary on that part of life, of course it's nothing unusual with that crowd.

Again, despite 99% of the reports and stories we have read on the case since 1983, no one banned the Beach Boys. Amazing.

Admittedly off-topic, but the timing of this discussion of Sharia law lines up with a multiple murder case that was just decided in Canada last week. I've been following it online, it's about a man named Mohammed Shafia who was just convicted along with his 2nd wife Tooba Yahya and son of killing Tooba's three teenage daughters and his first wife in some form of an "honor killing" after he felt they had insulted him, the Islamic faith, and his family name by refusing to follow some of the tenets of Islamic law. According to Shafia, a polygamist himself, the daughters were straying from and insulting Islam by not wearing the traditional clothing like the Burka, dating too much, and in general taking an approach to life that was too Western. And his first wife was killed with the teenage daughters because he felt she was the one encouraging the girls.

It's an interesting case, touching on Sharia law, the assimilation of Muslim immigrants into Western societies and cultures, the battles between traditionalism and a more liberal interpretation of Islam and Sharia in North America, the roles and rights of men versus women in Islam and how it is defined in Sharia law versus the Western court systems...

Not editorializing either way, you'll find plenty of that by searching "Shafia honor killing" or any related topics, but it's worth taking a few minutes to read some of the details and debates around it.

Such appearances are listed in 10452, and noted as not full BB shows. More are always welcomed, as is any new or updated info.

What stood out on this one was the article published the day before the rally, advertising that "The Beach Boys" were going to be there for the free show in the afternoon before the actual Bush-Quayle stump speeches. I saw that - and quick checked the gigs list, finding nothing (I assumed it was a full show like the one in 1980) - then a small blurb in other articles from a few days later reported that it was only Mike and Bruce, and they didn't even do a proper performance. They did just a few snippets of tunes or whatever, and changed the lyrics to fit the rally - according to the news report. I doubt anyone bootlegged this 

I'm wondering how many people showed up expecting a Beach Boys show that weekend in October 1988 after reading the local paper, considering a very cynical political observer like me was duped almost 24 years later into thinking it was an actual BB's gig! But it's OK to stretch the truth in politics, so all was well.

I'm directing this specifically to AGD: Do campaign appearances by Mike and Bruce count on your site's Gigs reference? If so, in searching around the net I found an interesting group of appearances by Mike and Bruce who were out campaigning for George Bush Sr. in October 1988. Some of the party organizers had promoted the stop as "The Beach Boys" appearing, when it was only Mike and Bruce. They changed the lyrics for Good Vibrations according to one paper's account: "I'm pickin' up Bush vibrations..." No mention of a backing band, sounds like it was just Mike and Bruce with microphones. Chuck Norris was the emcee.

They were touring California: Merced, Stockton, etc. October 14th to the 16th, 1988...if not more, those were just the ones I saw.

FYI on The Beach Boys and political events around this time (late 70's, 80's):

Jan. 21, 1977 they played at a Jimmy Carter inaugural concert

March 9, 1980 they played a campaign benefit concert for George Bush Sr., running in the Republican primaries against Ronald Reagan.

Jan. 19, 1981 they played at one of the Reagan-Bush inaugural concerts

Jan. 19, 1985 they played the second Reagan-Bush inaugural

Jan. 18, 1989 they played the inauguration for George Bush Sr.

Unfortunately a Google search or 99% of any searches will only produce the reported story, which isn't the true story, at least with the July 4th details.

I'm asking everyone with an interest in this story to re-think what they've heard about it because going way back to 1983, what was and has been reported between the BB's, Watt, and Reagan, is NOT 100% true and it should be noted in the history.

Some articles from 1983 suggest the Beach Boys played the July 4th DC show "last year"...and backed up by Andrew's concert list, they were in St. Louis July 4th 1982 playing a Freedom Fest. They were not in DC and Missouri at the same time. Again, The Grass Roots played DC July 4th in 1982, not the BB's...and the reports of the day ignored that, suggesting there were two shows in DC that day...it's really quite a mess, and simply not true. Very sloppy journalism.

An article from April 1983...April 1983, three months away from July 4th...says Al was unsure whether the Beach Boys would even be in DC on the 4th that year ('83), as issues were being worked out for them to play the 4th in Manhattan. So when Watt says the BB's had not been booked as of late 1982 when he wrote the memo, it would appear he was right: They had not been booked by April 1983 either, because Manhattan wanted them, according to Al! They ended up playing July 4th 1983 in Atlantic City, NJ, not Manhattan after all.

So the suggestion that Watt or his office banned the Beach Boys when they weren't even considered when he wrote the memo in late '82, and had another show in the works months later so they couldn't confirm the 7/4/83 date even then...it would seem to be false. So they came back in 1984.

If anyone should have been upset, it was the Grass Roots and their fans.

Others can do it better, but let me give the semi-abridged version:

A lot of this was blown waaayyyy out of proportion. Leave it to the political scholars to argue that one on the how's and why's, but the version(s) some in this thread are reading isn't 100% accurate.

Ronald Reagan didn't ban the Beach Boys from anything. They played the show in 1981 and again in 1984. That should be the end of the story. But here's the rest:

James Watt was Reagan's Secretary Of The Interior, a cabinet position. One of his duties was to oversee the national parks and facilities, including the concerts held on those grounds. In 1981, The Beach Boys played. In 1982, The Grass Roots played, and Watt's office received complaints about drug use, assaults, and an increase in people treated for drug- and alcohol-related health emergencies and injuries that day. A group of a few hundred people there staged a smoke-in supporting legalizing pot at the show.

Watt is/was an unabashed conservative - apart from hearing reports of both the usual booze-fueled idiots and intoxicated concertgoers making it hard for families to enjoy the show, his solution was to write a memo in late 1982 about "attracting families" and offering "patriotic and inspirational" entertainment at the July 4th concerts in the future, in response and reaction to the complaint and the stats he received about intoxication and assaults at the Grass Roots show. It was his response - agree or disagree, he wanted to make the concert more family friendly in response to complaints on his desk.

According to Watt, he or his staff never mentioned the Beach Boys by name, never banned them or anyone, and says when he wrote that memo, the Beach Boys had not been booked for the concert that next year (1983). What turned into a media firestorm which saw him being called out and his resignation being demanded was based on hearsay and lies, and the assumption he "meant" The Beach Boys despite not naming them because they played in 1981 - ignoring The Grass Roots concert completely. Again, Watt claims his memo (the one reported on in the news of the day) did not mention the Beach Boys, they had not been booked for the 1983 show, and he was responding to the happenings at the 1982 concert where the BB's did not play. And he was almost publicly destroyed once the rock community picked this up from the print media, I believe the Washington Post ran the initial story in print.

Now going through the how's and why's that memo got turned into headlines saying Watt "banned" the Beach Boys from the DC concerts and in this thread how Reagan "banned" the Beach Boys...that's getting into political stuff, left-versus-right, and I don't wanna go there...here.

So what happened? Watt was publicly made a scapegoat, you see footage of him accepting a "foot in the mouth" award from Reagan in the "American Band" video along with a completely phony news voiceover describing the so-called "facts" of the story, along with video of the BB's hanging out with Ron and Nancy Reagan. It was a horrible PR move to alienate a few million potential voters in the year before an election year, especially with a band as American as the BB's, and Reagan and his advisers were trying to smooth things out by becoming strong champions and friends of the Beach Boys as "America's Band". That's politics, right and left. Whether the band goes along with it is their right as a citizen to believe what they choose. If Mike liked hanging with the Reagans, if he found them nice people or whatever else, that's his business. Don't hold it against the music if you don't like Reagan.

What the Reagan White House did with the BB's is called damage control; politics is nasty and they have to protect the guys at the top by throwing underlings under the bus, making scapegoats out of names the general public barely knows.

Am I defending James Watt? Whatever one wants to think - I'm just offering up his version of the story, which I think is crucial to telling the whole story for the sake of history. Maybe Watt is covering his own a**, again judge for yourself after reading more on this.

But Reagan didn't ban anything, let's set that straight and bust the myth, and it would appear the guy who got blamed for it didn't ban anything either, despite news reports which created the firestorm.

If anyone has more insider info or can clarify any points above, please do!

I think the whole Lei'd In Hawaii thing is the most fascinating (and to me, best) parts of The Beach Boys foray into psychedelic culture. If they weren't all baked, and Mike didn't make stupid jokes during songs and sh*t, then they coulda had a cool Magical Mystery Tour-style film. Speaking of that movie, I guess its flop kind of killed off lots of bands ideas for films (Hendrix's one - for which there is even a script, comes to mind). But yeah, I love the old tunes reworked into mellow Smiley Smile style. I get the aesthetic they were going for, and its really cool. The Letter is great. I love the Help Me Rhonda rework. God Only Knows is great. Surfin & Surfer Girl sound cool with the organ. First Good Vibes live performance. I just think stuff like Mike yelling "cool it" and stuff during songs kinda throws the vibe off. Also keep in mind that the act who played right before the organ Beach Boys at this show as Bobbie Gentry with orchestra....this is just conjecture, but I can see her lush set kinda blowing them off the stage. Add to that Bruce bailing and Carl having to play bass, and the hash smoking, kinda don't have them at the peak of their game. If they sounded as good as they did in the rehearsals (or better) live, it coulda been a cool release imo. And to bring things full circle, I've always loved Gettin' Hungry. Its so strange. Why was it credited to Mike & Brian as a 45? The live version is pretty sweet to my ears

The thing about Magical Mystery Tour is exactly how much of an impact was the film in the USA? It was made for TV broadcast in the UK, where it was premiered in black-and-white depriving it of the visual elements that were kind of cool in color (imagine the Sgt. Pepper cover in black-and-white). And Capitol ending up bastardizing the soundtrack tacking on singles rather than having it as an EP as it was released in the UK.

I'm genuinely curious, what was the reaction if any in the US?

As far as the Beach Boys coming on after Gentry and the orchestra, they had done several "Beach Boys Summer Spectacular" concerts in previous years, where they shared the bill with the Byrds, Jefferson Airplane, Lovin' Spoonful, and others - the gigs are listed on AGD's timeline and Eric Anniversario's website. Those bills are pretty incredible, as far as the quality of bands there with the Boys in 65 and 66.

It also says quite a lot about the stature of the Beach Boys in the mid 60's to have a series of concerts featuring some of the best and most hip bands of the day, all gathering under the name "The Beach Boys Summer Spectacular".

I think Brian is holding a remote and not a pack of smokes. For one thing, there is no brand name on the lid, if it were a pack.

Love the captions, keep 'em coming!