This was superb!  Well done and can listen to Howie all day--fantastic insights!

Did anyone grab this?  Mind PMing me if you did?

An end of an era for sure!  Both will be greatly missed.  Will be extremely difficult shoes to fill but hopefully a good team steps up to take the band home for its final stretch...

Anyone have an HD capture of his by chance..?

The vocals here are labeled "rough" yet the latest videos of Brian's performance are heralded as "great"?

So predictable.

I assumed Bruce's keyboard was a prop but this is what I was told by Scott Totten ...


"Bruce's keyboard is always on.  His keyboard is the main sound in DARLIN and the chorus and bridge of VIBES."

Yes, Scott told me the same exact thing. I have watched Bruce's keyboard intently during those songs and others from many viewpoints and at many different concerts and as a pianist myself, I will say with the utmost confidence that the only song he plays EVERY time, is "Disney Girls" on the cheesy 80's EP sound. I have also picked it up occasionally on "Don't Worry Baby" and have seen him give starting pitches for "Their Hearts Were Full of Spring" with that keyboard. That is it. I've never seen or heard anything to indicate playing on "Darlin" or "Good Vibrations". His hands are all over the place...and he is CONSTANTLY obsessed with the mix and signaling to the sound guy which makes it even funnier. The only other speculation I can make, is that he sometimes plays vocal harmony parts that are doubled only for in-ear monitoring and not in the house mix, which would explain why his playing seems out of time and inconsistent.

Cool it. It's obvious that Bruce's keyboard is his personal accompaniment. Just like when a guitar player prefers to play guitar while singing. Is Al Jardine also faking it just because we can't hear his guitar?

Man the hate towards Bruce and Mike on this board is ridiculous.

Alright, Some guy uploaded a ton of short videos of Mike signing massive amounts of albums... Pretty nice of Mike if you ask me. I bet he signed over a hundred. Anyway, some interesting things came up. An album by The Beach Boys and Jan & Dean sparked Mike's interest, on the 73 live album the guy asks if Blondie was on that record to which Mike replies yes, but doesn't say anything else, Celebration comes up... You can watch the videos, some interesting things come up......

But in the final video, something really sparked my attention. The guy talks about Mike making an appearance at an event, to which Mike hesitates and says "well....ummmm...Honestly," and the video cuts off.   (watch the video here if you like ,  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cA_0sxrtEXg)

In my opinion, Mike doesn't sound too thrilled at the idea of Bruce coming along. Is this because it brings the attention off of him? If Bruce came, it would be seen as "The Beach Boys" or "Two of The Beach Boys" instead of "Mike Love". And maybe Mike doesn't like the idea of the spotlight being taken away from him, which we know is certainly plausible. But let's play devil's advocate, and say that Mike's ego isn't the case. Is there any chance that Mike & Bruce offstage and offscreen aren't particularly fond of each other and have a sole business relationship? That seems plausible to me. But maybe I'm just a cynic.

Maybe I'm reading into all of this too much... But if anyone here has any insight, I'd be curious to know what Mike might have said.

No. Mike just doesn't want to entertain/commit to any invitation from these used car dealer hacks.

I haven’t read through the whole thread so I don’t know if anyone else has said it but man, Dennis’s vocal on “All I Want to Do” is far superior to Mike.  Should have put this version on the original album! https://youtu.be/5OK0rEvqHDQ

I'm curious to know the reasoning why Mike was chosen as the lead vocalist over the original Dennis vocal.  Mike's is sorta interesting, unlike anything else he's ever done, but objectively I just don't think it's as strong as Denny's, and I wonder if Denny just didn't have the self confidence to release that type of vocal for himself at that point, or what the reason was.

Well, actually Dennis is struggling to get this song right. Mike's voice (or technique) in that range is much fuller and strong, so I can see why he got the lead on that. While I like Dennis', it is certainly not as direct and in-your-face as Mike's.

I'd been meaning to say something like this as well Rocker. While I think having a Dennis lead on "All I Want To Do" is freaking awesome, it has made me re-investigate the song, and I have to say that Mike Love is the right singer for it. I think if one is able to try to forget its that litigious, money grubbing goofball you realize that his voice really cuts through on this cut in a way Dennis' voice didn't. It'd be like having a breathy Carl lead on "Heroes and Villains" rather than Brian's lead in my opinion. It just wouldn't work. Or at the least it'd be really different.

Agree with you both.  Fascinating to hear the new Dennis lead vocal.  His vocal sits very nicely on it--the feel and weight of his voice--everything clicks together.  But does it have the full punch this song needs?  Mike brings a palpable kinetic energy that I think locks in the song.  Had the key been lowered a step or so maybe some of those high notes would have worked better for Mike.  I do like Mike's "babaayy!" on the choruses. 

I'm glad I have both versions now and I'm sure I'll now always think about "the other cool version" whenever I'm listening to either one of them.

One thing that has always bugged me is the fact that the group didn't seem to take their concert performances seriously in the 60's. Sure, they had some great moments. and were a great live group when they wanted to be. But if you listen to the "A Vocal Element" bootleg, somebody is always laughing or making a joke, or even talking during a song. It seems like they didn't really become a serious concert act until Blondie and Ricky joined the group.

That's the thing that stood out to me too while listening to this set.  Each performance is littered with at least one member goofing around and throwing off the performance.  Listening to the recordings now it is as if the band had no qualms if the audience heard them at all.  I can see this behavior making sense with The Beatles because the room was filled with one continuous roar of screams thereby drowning out the music completely---but here?  The crowd at the BB shows are for the most part (save the one or two weird 'screams" here and there) are quiet and attentive.  Was this just the band's awkward way of handling being nervous on stage by making it all one big joke? 

On the flip side of all this, I found the live recordings to be quiet an eye opener.  Fascinating to hear them translate these intricate compositions down to a 5-6 piece arrangement.  Their garage band roots coming through very well.  Pretty much each performance of "Graduation Day" is a good listen.  It seemed like the only song they kind of respected in the set.  By the way, who played the rhythm guitar on that?  Carl or Al?  I'd say Carl...?   Also on a few performances, there was nice tickling of the ivories by Daryl Dragon, I think?

Funny to listen to the various performances of "Barbara Ann" as well.  The bit "tried Mary Lou...tried Al Jardine" had apparently run its course by the end of the tour.  It got a big guffaw early on but by the end I think you can clearly hear Al say "Aw, come on!" after Mike does it again. 

Great---thanks Hey Jude!

Sorry but is this the only thread with discussions for these releases?

I think so

 very weird. I just got through finishing both releases and was hoping to comb over everyone's comments but I guess this didn't make as big a splash as the physical release of sunshine tomorrow?

Sorry but is this the only thread with discussions for these releases?

Not to veer too far off topic here, but does anyone else (including you, KDS) notice the continually predictable nature of the fact that virtually anyone who defends Mike Love on a continual basis (I respect that you have some nuance to your opinion, even if we disagree a lot), just *happens* to be a Trump supporter? Go through any FB page where you see people defending Mike in a steadfast way, and like clockwork, they almost all have American flags as their profile pics.

I mean, instance after instance of virtually everyone who goes out of their way to defend Mike in a major, ongoing way, seems to have that political view, more or less. I just find that interesting and I think there's something that this says psychologically about personality types. I'd frankly like to see a research paper or documentary made about this subject, because I find it incredibly fascinating. Not trying to be insulting to you, KDS, I am just saying it's clearly doesn't seem to be a coincidence for whatever it's worth.

I think certain people want to excuse certain types of behavior more than others, and that's interestingly reflected in both rabid Mike defense as well as political views. I'll bet this coincidence is probably in sync about 90% of the time.

We don't have to talk politics in this thread anymore; it's just more about me dissecting why some people are prone to defend Mike, and there are some commonalities here that I think can't be ignored.

Sure we can suggest that there is a correlation with a group of people defending/excusing Mike's behavior as they do with Trump as you illustrate in your post but I think it also demonstrates a group of people who refuse to go with the rest of the pack.   Trump supporters vs everyone else and Mike-defenders vs Brian-supporters (everyone else).  I see parallels in the two groups.  The two scenarios are obviously worlds different but the mechanism that fuels both groups are one in the same: our innate human tribalism.  Is anyone right or wrong?  I feel both parties are right..and wrong.

The commonalities probably should not be ignored, yes.  But I think we should be looking at it from a larger perspective to reveal the humanity of it not just revel in the division between the groups.  Obviously this is a conversation bigger than this thread...

Feel better Billy!

Was the dispute between Dennis and Carl about having "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again" close out the album?  I happened to listen to "Surf's Up" last night and tagging on WIBNTLA at the end is a nice way to end the album but really takes away the drama of ending with the epic "Surf's Up."  WIBNTLA was at that moment, Dennis' epic.  Tough to put two epics one after the other like that.  In the end, I think Carl made the right decision on what song to close out the album but I wish Dennis could have seen that too.  His song might have actually been best to close out Side 1 and would have been just as effective.

Apologies if this has been posted before but I just came across this.  Take a look at the performance below.  At first it seems like an odd pairing but watching Mike and everyone in the band's reaction towards Roth--they all appeared floored by his performance.  It's clear from Roth's enthusiasm that the song has a special connection to him (besides that he recorded his own version of it).  It's clear he's a mega fan as he shares his early history with the discovering the band's music at the beginning.  Roth's performance is over the top but man is it fun.  Watch everyone in the band--they're all tickled by Roth.  At the end, Mike appears quite impressed and pleased with Roth's performance.  Watching these two work the same stage, I see a strong connection between these two front men; I think Mike recognized that. 

I think it'd be cool if Mike would allow more duets with famous musicians/singers. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ei32FDTCPsM

[some]

When Brian isn't touring, how much time does he spend at his piano each day playing or writing? And how does that compare to the '60s? I seem to recall him saying in an interview that he plays for half an hour per day these days but I can't remember exactly.

I'm interested in how much time great songwriters like Brian, Lennon, McCartney, Dylan, etc spent / spend per day playing and writing.

Sometimes, Wilson wanders upstairs to his music room, but he gets easily discouraged. "I can't write a song to save my life," he says. "I sit at the piano and try, but all I want to do is rewrite 'California Girls.' How am I gonna do something better than that? It's a f***ed-up trip."

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/features/brian-wilsons-better-days-20150622

Brian is getting older so that obviously accounts for the writers block but surely some of the medication that Brian is on must interfere to some degree with his natural ability to be spontaneous and creative, no?

I'm sorry if this has been covered but would anyone know who is in the room with Brian as he is tracking "Darlin?"  He starts solo then bass and drums eventually join.  He refers to Carl at one point...which instrument, if at all, is he playing?

If I remember correctly (and I may not so bear with me) Carl plays the drums on the original run through of Darlin and Hal Blaine plays them on the final recording mixed over top of or completely replacing Carl's drum track. If anyone knows more information then me please fill in the blanks haha

You are correct! Here is c-man's post:

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18127.msg470901.html#msg470901

Thank you both!  C-man references an online sessionography...where can I find that?

I'm sorry if this has been covered but would anyone know who is in the room with Brian as he is tracking "Darlin?"  He starts solo then bass and drums eventually join.  He refers to Carl at one point...which instrument, if at all, is he playing?

[because some people are unable to grapple with reality.]

I think that many people react negatively to anyone ever saying anything about racism

Correct but only when racism is manipulated into the conversation as it is in this discussion.

I'm not going to edit myself pointing out racism and misogyny because some people are unable to grapple with reality.

Just don't get defensive when people talk about racism. Don't assume they are calling. You or your band racist. And don't tell them they shouldn't talk about racism because some people don't like it when people talk about racism.

These are very patronizing things to say.  

In the same vein:  don't assume people who question you are trying to "edit/silence" you.  It's a shame that discourse is labeled now as an act of aggression or intimidation.  

I agree with the root of your position but I take issue with your conclusions.  I wish you dialed down on the hyperbole and took a more sensitive approach to such a sensitive topic.  

Saying now that the Beach Boys music and all of Motown, Stax (and basically all music from this and any period before or following) is rooted in institutional racism is a statement that is just downright dishonest and once again, intellectually irresponsible.  Anyone who proudly makes those statements is most likely not looking for a discussion.  So then, that's that.

[Why can't people read an analysis of music in the light of racism without freaking out that the musician is being called racist?]

A lot of American folk is rooted in the poverty of the depression. One can analyze a folk musician's music in that light without being taken as asserting that the musician was impoverished during the depression. Why can't people read an analysis of music in the light of racism without freaking out that the musician is being called racist?

How does one not "freak out" when the words you choose literally imply that position:

there's nothing The Beach Boys could have done short of being born in a different time or place to avoid the statement that their music was rooted in institutional racism.

This is an example of 2+2=5.  

The music itself could not have been "rooted" in institutional racism because the music was rooted in Brian's garage, based on The Four Freshman harmonies and Chuck Berry rhythms.  That is a literal explanation of where the music was born from.  What you are trying to blend into the discussion is something else entirely.  

By this logic, all the music from Motown and Stax was also rooted in institutional racism.*


*Unless, that doesn't count because only whites were the aggressors of institutional racism because of their privilege.  Another example of irresponsible over-generalizing.

I think it's pretty easy to tie aspects of The Beach Boys music and career arc to the institutional racism of the time.  And I think their early music comes across as "white" just as much as it comes across as "California".

Please elaborate. 

[does]

I think that if people remove their guilty imaginings from the topic, they will find it's not bothersome in the least. When one analyses any art form, the context of the culture, economics, politics, etc of the time and place come into it. None of you mind a "California" or a "baby boom" or "middle class suburban" or "postwar" or an "American" or "1960s" or "Vietnam" or "drug culture" contextual analysis of Beach Boys music, do you? Would you be up-in-arms about how "unfair" it is to analyze Beach Boys music or its influences or impact in the light of these aspects of their surroundings? Discussing Beach Boys music in light of the institutional racism or their surroundings is no less valid.

But most of the conclusions being made regarding this discussion are intellectually irresponsible.  To come to the conclusion that The Beach Boys' music is deeply rooted in institutional racism solely because the music came from a period of intense racial turmoil in America is not sound reasoning.  We can successfully tie the music to all of the factors you mention ("California" or a "baby boom" or "middle class suburban" or "postwar" or an "American" or "1960s" or "Vietnam" or "drug culture") because those characteristics comes through in the music very clearly.  What does NOT come through in the music is any reference of say, "keeping America white" or "celebrating segregation" or the naivete that the world is perfect as it is and nothing should change.  None of those messages comes through even remotely.  What does come through, as another poster mentioned, is the idea of love and togetherness among people.  That message is most definitely there in the music.  It may not be a radical enough statement for people in 2017 want to accept but it was their statement, nevertheless.

Agreed completely.

Now what I want to know is what would The BBs had to have done back in the '60s for someone claiming  that The Beach Boys' music is deeply rooted in institutional racism to come to a *different* conclusion other than confidently making such as statement?

My guess is that they would have had to have written a song specifically about the subject or at the very least very clearly been quoted denouncing the events of the period.  Anything less would not change any 2017 spectator's views because the golden rule appears to be if you don't voice your views you are automatically grouped with the other group that is doing the harm--without question.

Technically, the one song that comes to mind that even remotely comes close is "Student Demonstration Time."  

America was stunned on May 4, 1970
When rally turned to riot up at Kent State University
They said the students scared the Guard
Though the troops were battle dressed
Four martyrs earned a new degree
The Bachelor of Bullets
I know we're all fed up with useless wars and racial strife
But next time there's a riot, well, you best stay out of sight

The song is by no means supporting segregation or being white--especially that lyric in particular.  The song is a criticism of what's happening and comes off as fearful, pinged with sadness.  You can't get anymore of a statement from the band than that.

[does]

I think that if people remove their guilty imaginings from the topic, they will find it's not bothersome in the least. When one analyses any art form, the context of the culture, economics, politics, etc of the time and place come into it. None of you mind a "California" or a "baby boom" or "middle class suburban" or "postwar" or an "American" or "1960s" or "Vietnam" or "drug culture" contextual analysis of Beach Boys music, do you? Would you be up-in-arms about how "unfair" it is to analyze Beach Boys music or its influences or impact in the light of these aspects of their surroundings? Discussing Beach Boys music in light of the institutional racism or their surroundings is no less valid.

But most of the conclusions being made regarding this discussion are intellectually irresponsible.  To come to the conclusion that The Beach Boys' music is deeply rooted in institutional racism solely because the music came from a period of intense racial turmoil in America is not sound reasoning.  We can successfully tie the music to all of the factors you mention ("California" or a "baby boom" or "middle class suburban" or "postwar" or an "American" or "1960s" or "Vietnam" or "drug culture") because those characteristics comes through in the music very clearly.  What does NOT come through in the music is any reference of say, "keeping America white" or "celebrating segregation" or the naivete that the world is perfect as it is and nothing should change.  None of those messages comes through even remotely.  What does come through, as another poster mentioned, is the idea of love and togetherness among people.  That message is most definitely there in the music.  It may not be a radical enough statement for people in 2017 want to accept but it was their statement, nevertheless.

Their music was a celebration of white life in California that was often built on the rhythms of black rock & R&B.

You would probably enjoy the the article discussed in this thread:  http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,24451.0.html

The Beach Boys' music was a celebration of life:  relationships, growing up, being in your room, being bugged at your old man, getting a new car, liking a girl and trying to ask her out, breaking up with a girl...   These are stories that everyone faces in their lives---regardless of their race.  That's why they wrote them--not with the pure intent of it only being served ONLY to a white audience. 

What is more racist:  The Beach Boys ONLY creating music stemming from their white heritage or celebrating, creating (and often acknowledging/crediting) the music being made by the black R&B artists that they genuinely loved? 


-----
Everyone is worried about what a Trump inauguration will do to the band's legacy but going by some of the comments here and what another poster said about how his students see the band---their legacy is already bruised.