So Mike can't just find it emotionally satisfying as he said, motives must be invented out of thin air and then Mike must be accountable to these imaginary motives?  Anybody have anything like evidence for any of these refusal and/or competitive conspiracy theories?

One can still find a level of emotional satisfaction in playing said songs, but a big factor behind playing them can also still be a sense of competition, ya know. The two aren't mutually exclusive. If Brian was not currently touring, nor was L&M coming out, nor was Brian's book coming out, I'm not so sure that these songs would have been played, nor would I imagine that Mike would be much motivated to write a book out of the blue either.

In other words "no", you don't have.

Well, it's called a history of actions that point in that direction. Do we have "anything like evidence", as you like to say, that Dennis did certain things at least in part out of lashing out at/making a statement to Mike, or do we just use an educated guess based on what seems quite plainly obvious?

Are you of the opinion of believing that Mike does not ever do any actions out of trying to specifically compete with Brian, and that Dennis never did things as an act of intentionally pissing off Mike? I bring Dennis into the equation only to prove a point that some things are plain as day with these guys.

I'm sure you won't directly admit what you know inside to be true, which is that obviously the answer is that yes, in both cases there are surely a number of incidents which those types of motivating factors which I listed above have surely sometimes been part of the equation. I do not know why there is some great fear in admitting such. Do you deny such? Or feel free to duck the question, as I'm sure you'll do, based on your own history of actually answering questions posed to you.

So Mike can't just find it emotionally satisfying as he said, motives must be invented out of thin air and then Mike must be accountable to these imaginary motives?  Anybody have anything like evidence for any of these refusal and/or competitive conspiracy theories?

One can still find a level of emotional satisfaction in playing said songs, but a big factor behind playing them can also still be a sense of competition, ya know. The two aren't mutually exclusive. If Brian was not currently touring, nor was L&M coming out, nor was Brian's book coming out, I'm not so sure that these songs would have been played, nor would I imagine that Mike would be much motivated to write a book out of the blue either.

In other words "no", you don't have.

Thinking the only way to get hard evidence is to tie Mike down and, using truth serum, get the real story as to why he's now adding these songs to the setlist. Might be easier to get him to participate if there is a fellator involved

 

So Mike can't just find it emotionally satisfying as he said, motives must be invented out of thin air and then Mike must be accountable to these imaginary motives?  Anybody have anything like evidence for any of these refusal and/or competitive conspiracy theories?

One can still find a level of emotional satisfaction in playing said songs, but a big factor behind playing them can also still be a sense of competition, ya know. The two aren't mutually exclusive. If Brian was not currently touring, nor was L&M coming out, nor was Brian's book coming out, I'm not so sure that these songs would have been played, nor would I imagine that Mike would be much motivated to write a book out of the blue either.

Sheriff, It wasn't a personal attack upon anyone, other than a blunt assessment. A music review. And we all know that all of them are subjective.

Those four clips kind of summed up the paradox to me. Even on one of Brian's most difficult nights, I've never seen his touring band less than nail nuanced, fully textured tracks, such as anything from Pet Sounds. When you've got a truncated set-up such as Mike's solo band -   - I mean BEACH BOYS band, there are fewer moving parts. So what do you think is going to happen when they try to weave a tapestry such as All I Wanna Do? A-for-effort, but the result (that night) was subpar. Kinda like a bar band. It was. That and the fact that Mike's voice has taken a beating these past few years what with all the dates.

BUT...Farmers Daughter and Cottonfields fit the bill, and the touring ensemble fit into those like a well worn set of Hush Puppies. They fit nicely.

I give props to Mike's band for learning these newly-played classic songs, and I think their hearts are in the right place, though I wonder if it's a sense of competition above all else that's motivating Mike to play these songs. Better late than never I guess. Not intended whatsoever as a diss to any musician, but I do doubt that any member of the band would in their heart of hearts dispute that the songs would probably sound better with a greater quantity of musicians onstage, on par with C50, but I am quite glad they are being played, and I give props to Mike for playing them too.

What bugs me is the Kokomaoists who think it's perfectly fine (and not in any way in poor taste or inappropriate for Mike to continually point out) when Mike does interviews for Mike to bring up Brian having issues and not performing at his otherwise optimal level due to excessive substance abuse decades earlier, but somehow the same Kokomaoists will find it offensive for someone on this board to suggest that Mike may not be singing at his own otherwise optimal level and perhaps would have a stronger voice if it was conserved more by less excessive touring, right? I'm just curious how any Kokomaoist on this board could not call this a hypocritical stance.

These are the things that ultimately piss off fans, and increase divisions. It's a no-brainer that since none of those types of things were said by Mike in interviews during C50, that they are being said now out of some bitter agenda; it ain't a coincidence, folks. If more Kokomaoists stopped being blind yes-men to defending this type of interview stuff, and less (how about zero?) fans openly defended these interviews, perhaps we'd hear less of this type of needless sh*t-stirring in interviews, and then we'd have world peace.

I agree with most of the above and it was the sense that Surf's Up and Til I Die were being done for competitive reasons that I found irritating - though if that is not the case then I'm happy to apologise. 

That's infantile thinking. And you are repeating a pattern here: spilling the garbage, waiting for somebody to prove you wrong, and then trying a mild apology. You have no idea, and yet you pass conjecture as fact and leave it to others to prove you wrong.

The "competitive reasons" is a projection of your own feelings (i.e. how you think Mike might act) and is ultimately pointless as long as the quality is good (and that's the issue to be discussed, I think).

BTW, lots of great things in BB history have been done for competitive reasons, and there's nothing wrong with it. I don't want to come after you every time, but you do yourself no favor.

The inclusion of SU on the setlist irritates you who knows for what reason, and you are coming up with faux arguments to battle against it.

Various things being done throughout history of this band for competitive reasons, such as making music to compete with the Beatles, is different from when a bandmate is trying to outdo another one.  I'm all for upping the quality all around, but a certain point the dysfunctional undertones begin to leave a bit of a bitter taste in one's mouth. Yeah, it's easy to say that this is just projection, but I think it's obvious that this is probably not far from the truth.  I will also say that I'm still glad that these rare songs are being played, regardless of motivation.

Here's a question... what would have happened if Stamos, and not Taylor Hawkins, had been the one to sing Holy Man on the POB 2008 reissue?

And what if a young Taylor Hawkins had sang Forever on the '92 SIP instead of Stamos... would it be better regarded?

It's blatantly obvious that 1) Taylor is a better singer and 2) he sounds much more like Dennis

Agreed on both counts. Still, I wonder if there would still have been the same level of Forever '92 SIP backlash, or if that was in part because one of them played Uncle Jesse on a super cheesy show, and one didn't.

He drums along with the BB main drummer usually when he shows up at concerts.

Wasn't Stamos the main drummer on the entire setlist for some shows, and not just filling the role of an additional percussionist?

Sheriff, It wasn't a personal attack upon anyone, other than a blunt assessment. A music review. And we all know that all of them are subjective.

Those four clips kind of summed up the paradox to me. Even on one of Brian's most difficult nights, I've never seen his touring band less than nail nuanced, fully textured tracks, such as anything from Pet Sounds. When you've got a truncated set-up such as Mike's solo band -   - I mean BEACH BOYS band, there are fewer moving parts. So what do you think is going to happen when they try to weave a tapestry such as All I Wanna Do? A-for-effort, but the result (that night) was subpar. Kinda like a bar band. It was. That and the fact that Mike's voice has taken a beating these past few years what with all the dates.

BUT...Farmers Daughter and Cottonfields fit the bill, and the touring ensemble fit into those like a well worn set of Hush Puppies. They fit nicely.

I give props to Mike's band for learning these newly-played classic songs, and I think their hearts are in the right place, though I wonder if it's a sense of competition above all else that's motivating Mike to play these songs. Better late than never I guess. Not intended whatsoever as a diss to any musician, but I do doubt that any member of the band would in their heart of hearts dispute that the songs would probably sound better with a greater quantity of musicians onstage, on par with C50, but I am quite glad they are being played, and I give props to Mike for playing them too.

What bugs me is the Kokomaoists who think it's perfectly fine (and not in any way in poor taste or inappropriate for Mike to continually point out) when Mike does interviews for Mike to bring up Brian having issues and not performing at his otherwise optimal level due to excessive substance abuse decades earlier, but somehow the same Kokomaoists will find it offensive for someone on this board to suggest that Mike may not be singing at his own otherwise optimal level and perhaps would have a stronger voice if it was conserved more by less excessive touring, right? I'm just curious how any Kokomaoist on this board could not call this a hypocritical stance.

These are the things that ultimately piss off fans, and increase divisions. It's a no-brainer that since none of those types of things were said by Mike in interviews during C50, that they are being said now out of some bitter agenda; it ain't a coincidence, folks. If more Kokomaoists stopped being blind yes-men to defending this type of interview stuff, and less (how about zero?) fans openly defended these interviews, perhaps we'd hear less of this type of needless sh*t-stirring in interviews, and then we'd have world peace.

Before All I Wanna Do, when is the last time that any live incarnation of the band or solo members debuted a live version of an actual vintage BB album track (excluding the new TWGMTR tracks) which had never once been played live before? It's been quite awhile, IIRC.

That would be during the BAD tour in 2013, when they did Custom Machine, This Car of Mine, and Ol' Man River.

For Mike & Bruce, it would be Goin' to the Beach, earlier that July.

Cool info. Though I would exclude GTTB since I am referring to vintage songs released on actual studio albums in the past. How about the same question, but just pertaining to the band called The BBs? When's the last time "The BBs" in any incarnation debuted a vintage BB album song previously unplayed by any version of the band/solo?

Before All I Wanna Do, when is the last time that any live incarnation of the band or solo members debuted a live version of an actual vintage BB album track (excluding the new TWGMTR tracks) which had never once been played live before? It's been quite awhile, IIRC.

C'mon, more like...

2012: grrrr… they didn't do Surf's Up!

2015: grrrr… they did Surf's Up! ...without BW or AJ despite them being very much alive and having hoped to continue being Beach Boys

Still, at least they are back on the videoscreens. A touching tribute to their memory. Keep it clean with stock photos of Al Jardine!

Damned if you do (the deeper cuts) and
Damned if you don't...

No amount of effort would please some people...

As Roseanne Roseanna Danna used to say..." It's always something."

There is no effort to be made which would satisfy some people.  

One can't have it both ways.  

Actually, not true at all.  I am quite pleasantly surprised to see these songs added to M&B's set, truly floored at the addition of All I Wanna Do, both are moves in an excellent direction... but the fact is the "having it both ways" thing is really Mike having the BBs name back after C50 (yes, I know BRI allows it). The effort that would satisfy most people would be if the reunion had not ended the way it did, and if these wonderful songs were performed with Mike and Bruce back where they should be, which is onstage with their septuagenarian bandmates and family member(s), while all of these talented folks are still on this earth.

Mr. Positivity should have found a way to be positive enough to positively push through any non-positive vibes he was feeling, taken a brief pause to think it over, and then positively assert that he would not let the reunited BBs slip away as they did in such a positively ridiculously negative manner. So let's not pretend that there's no effort that would have satisfied people. THAT would have positively satisfied 99% of fans! C'mon Mr. Positivity! You can still do it!

Here's a question... what would have happened if Stamos, and not Taylor Hawkins, had been the one to sing Holy Man on the POB 2008 reissue?

And what if a young Taylor Hawkins had sang Forever on the '92 SIP instead of Stamos... would it be better regarded?

C'mon, more like...


2012: grrrr… they didn't do Surf's Up!

2015: grrrr… they did Surf's Up! ...without BW or AJ despite them being very much alive and having hoped to continue being Beach Boys

Still, at least they are back on the videoscreens. A touching tribute to their memory. Keep it clean with stock photos of Al Jardine!

+1. It is ridiculous, and Kokomaoists, don't even pretend it's not.

MIB actually played over the closing credits to Troop Beverly Hills.  How do I know such a thing?  I was teenager (and huge BB fan) when the movie came out. I had no interest in seeing the movie but had to hear the new BB song. One of my friends worked in our local movie plex and sneaked me in to see the end of the movie and closing credits so I could hear the song. Maybe it played at the start of the movie as well, but I've never seen it.

It's also over the beginning animated credits sequence...

So very much. His musical contributions can only be compared to the cultural shift brought on by "Student Demonstration Time." It's that level of magnitude and don't you ever forget it! The way he bashes along while the real drummer gives him a dirty look? That's just sheer jealousy from those guys. They know if he wanted their job, he could have it like THAT.

Is that the worst example of sweatstains on an onstage BB bandmember? Yikes, Uncle Jesse - how rude!

Was Stamos the actual main drummer for some occasional shows in the '90s and beyond?

And has he ever played an entire set of songs with the band on drums, or did he just learn some specific songs to guest on?  I'm curious what the "deepest" cuts are that he learned to play on.

I don’t think I’ve ever seen the movie, but I recall that the opening to the film was included on some old Beach Boys video compilation someone made years ago, and I was interested to find that the version opening the film is an alternate mix and, as I recall, has some alternate vocal takes on some of the parts as well.

This song especially, since it opens a film which has become a real cult hit with lots of kids (ladies especially) who grew up in that era, is somewhat well known, actually. More so than I would have thought. And I'll bet that this (along with SOS) might be the two best known yet most-mistaken-for-not-being-BB songs that the BBs ever recorded.

I just found out that my lady friend has been a fan of the film Troop Beverly Hills for years (probably since the film's release), and she always loved the song "Make It Big". When I recently played her "Make It Big" from Still Cruisin', she could sing along to it and was quite familiar with it, being the title track of the film she loved and saw often as a kid... but she was surprised to find out MIB was a track by The BBs, despite having been familiar with the track for decades.

She then called up her sister (who was also a big fan of the film), and similarly, her sister was a fan of the song, knew many of the lyrics and could sing along with it, but also did not know it was a BB song, and was surprised to find this out. I guess it's because it's less of a "typical" BB sounding song...

I wonder how many other people have had a similar experience with MIB and other BB tracks...

Had Dennis still been around I think he would either have gone it alone or perhaps joined Brian. Of course it would have changed the balance of the Beach Boys votes too. Had Dennis and Al voted with Brian, perhaps they would have had the name. Hard to imagine Mike and Bruce being as successful without the name of the Beach Boys  but perhaps they would have still tried to keep it going.

Dennis sold his vote to cover debts several years before he died. He had no say at a corparate level which is why his estate doesn't get to vote on BRI related issues today while Carl's does.

Slightly incorrect: Dennis' estate sold his vote back to BRI after his death in exchange for a reduction of his debts.

What exactly did that ultimately mean when he sold his vote back? No one party/person at BRI absorbed that vote, right? That vote essentially evaporated then?

Mike in these later years doing setlists with more rarities is kind of a bittersweet thing for certain fans of a certain mindset. But there’s really no way to get into the topic without the two extremes coming out. I think there’s a polite, constructive way to point out the irony of Mike doing thoughtful setlists and stage presentations and singing along to Carl and Dennis, but only on his *own* terms, after choosing to leave Brian and Al. Some people aren’t *looking* for something negative to say. They see a band called “The Beach Boys”, with some great musicians and singers, doing some truly thoughtful, quality setlists, and then, sometimes it’s hard to not think about a few years ago when the guy that wrote most of that stuff, and the guy with the most intact voice, were also there.

People who pine for another reunion have to live with the fact that it probably won’t happen again. But people who are “just about the music” and don’t care how many configurations are out there touring or what they call themselves, *those* people have to deal with the fact that the fallout from C50 will chase Mike down for the remainder of his career, and will, for some fans and spectators, color everything and anything he does under the band name.  

I think one would have to be massively divorced from any subjective thought about the band’s history to NOT see the irony in Mike choosing to leave a willing Brian Wilon, and then doing “Surf’s Up” live without Brian there. (Mike’s predisposition to do or not do the song isn’t a factor; it’s clearly about Brian. Indeed, the C50 lineup rehearsed “Surf’s Up” back in 2012). Whether there’s any point in mentioning these ironies in a thread devoted to Mike’s tour, I don’t know.

On another note, Mike’s setlist is a nice one, and I HOPE that Brian and his band are motivated by this (and/or their own muse) to truly do an awesome setlist for the upcoming tour. Al just recently did a radio interview where he seemed *very* enthusiastic about getting Blondie to do “Funky Pretty” with the band.  

1) Mike's role in nixing catalogue-deep setlists must be revisited.
It wasn't him who held the most vocal opposition against the boxed-set tour. Or so we've been told.

2) It is a bit of a paradox to me that most of those who are vocal about Mike killing the reunion, and shame on Mike for playing songs now that he didn't play with Brian, and what a douchebag Mike is, are also vocal about their wish to see this guy perform next to Brian again. I'm all for a reunion. I traveled 8.000 miles to see a reunion show; but for the haters... isn't Brian better away from the alleged ass-hole?

I for one believe that there is a good person lurking inside the "alleged ass-hole" as you call him, and that he could possibly find common ground and a healthy working and, most importantly, personal relationship with Brian if he himself really, really tried hard enough. Hatchets could still be buried before it's too late. Just IMHO.

Michael is choosing some real winners for this tour. Brian and company need to pull out All I Wanna Do now.

I concur… And Mike should join them to sing his vocals. And they should just reunite again, dammit. Such a no-brainer. Leggo the ego and reunite!!

They also did All I Wanna Do. My jaw was on the ground. Farmer's Daughter too.

NO. WAY. That is seriously awesome, no kidding. I am happily stunned.  Props to Mike for playing it. He should be very proud of that tune.

Please tell me someone recorded this...

I'm assuming Mike sang his original lead parts (just sans the falsetto bit)?

If the Dennis-Shawn relationship had never happened, I can see it. But I don't know if they ever could have gotten past that.

I tend to agree with this statement, sad as it is. I wonder what Mike's feelings were regarding that relationship.

Does anyone think that a cleaned-up Dennis and Mike could have had a non-strained and artistically compatible relationship in the 1980s and beyond? Curious what Kokomoaists think about that. I just don't think it could have been possible, since Denny was so forward-pushing in his art - unless that progressive urge in him would have greatly subsided had he had gotten sober and lived, which I find unlikely. I think that something would have had to give, and that one of them would have exited the band either willingly or not, over creative and /or personal differences - or if not, then there would have been endless head-butting, with both men unhappy working with each other. I'd love to think that Denny could have gotten Mike to never have gone down the SIP road, and gotten more progressive material out of him, but I'm not sure that would have happened. Damn, I wish all the Wilson bros were still around.

Nice that Mike is only doing SMiLE stuff without BW. Thanks for not allowing Surf's up and Cabinessence on the C50....

I think pigs would probably fly before Mike would touch Cabinessence with a 10 foot pole. Do I recall reading that it was difficult to get Mike onboard to be enthusiastic during C50 to sing Our Prayer, but that he did relent for a small handful of shows? And has Surf's Up ever been played by M&B in the US before?

So  HOW did Tex meet Dennis? Seems like he became Charlie's right hand man in pretty short order. How did he fit into that seemingly closed circle of Golden Penatrators?

Lots of conpiracy theorists out there with some crazy ideas of the 'real story' behind these murders. There does seem to be a few missing pieces to the bow wrapped Bugliosi version.

I also wonder if Denny ever followed the Manson case and subsequent aftermath closely, or if he just tried his very best to avoid even reading about it. For example, I wonder if he saw the 1976 TV movie Helter Skelter to see if there were any possible references to him in there (which there weren't, if I recall correctly).

I think 15 Big Ones has some of the best backing tracks that Brian Wilson ever produced and/or arranged. He still had "it" when it came to arranging. The selection of oldies could've been better, and the sequencing has a lot to be desired. That being said, I think the main reason why 15 Big Ones is so criticized is because of Brian's, and to a lesser extent Dennis', lead vocals. Those vocals account for a large part of the album. They are just too off-putting for a Beach Boys album which led to in 1976, including from me, a lot of WTF moments. I've come to accept them but I can see how they turned off the casual fan, and probably lost many, too.

Completely agree.