Should any of this really be a shock?  This is the Beach Boys we're talking about.  Since when have they ever done anything cleanly?  They've been a musical soap opera for 50 years...why stop now!!

I can definitely see him cutting back on the touring...but he'll make music until he's physically unable.  It's what he does.  This is a man who lives, eats and breathes music.  He's still composing and producing at a high level.  His voice sounds better than it has in many years.  I'd love to see him live once more (obviously)...but as long as he keeps recording new music I'll be happy!  God bless you, Brian!  You are a great example of the resilience of the human soul.

I really looked forward to release of the Beatles game...and it never lived it up to my expectations.  The novelty wore off pretty quickly...and what it came down to (at least for me) is the Beatles were never a big guitar band.  The guitar parts are fairly repetitive...so it became boring very quickly.

Mark Dillon's book let me see this LP in a different light.  I kind of wrote it off for years...dismissing it as too "digital" too "80's" sounding.  However...when you consider the fact that it WAS recorded in the mid-80's...and when you can look past that...you'll find a good record.  The songs are fairly strong throughout.  The singing is great (Carl really shines throughout)...and the harmonies are excellent.  I've found myself listening to this on my iPod on a regular basis.  It's a really, really catchy recording.  If you haven't given it a real listening in awhile...do yourself the favor of taking time to do it.

Absolutely no one would buy that except Beach Boys fanatics who play videogames, which is a VERY VERY VERY small demographic.

Yup.

It would be fun, though!  Imagine the expert level!  Lead on "Don't Worry, Baby"!

It did give me a new perspective into BB85.  For years...I didn't really listen to it because I wrote it off as sounding dated.  I gave it another listen after reading this book...and yes...it does have a definite 1980's sound to it...but it WAS recorded in the 1980's...and once you can get past that you'll find a very enjoyable LP.  I've been listening to it on a pretty regular basis.  The songs are strong.  The singing is strong and the harmonies are great.

I think too often books about the band have spent more time on their personal issues...which are interesting...but I've always wanted to know more about the music: the inspirations...the recordings...stuff like that.  I love hearing the little details that maybe might cause me to see something in a different light. 

Mark Dillon gets a HUGE thumbs up from me for taking a different approach to writing about the band.

If you haven't read the book GET it!

YES!  I absolutely LOVED this book.  He tells the story of the band through the songs...bringing it all (the songs and the band's history) to life.  I've learned little details that I've never heard before...and for the obsessive...that kind of stuff is incredible to read. 

I agree 100%!!  They had some good songs that were not included at the time.  Was this because Brian was on such an oldies trip?  If you were to replace some of the covers (or all of them) with original songs it would have been a far better record.  It definitely could have benefited from some of Dennis' solo compositions from that era.

I think if I didn't know that "Everyone's In Love With You" was about the Maharishi...I'd like it a lot more.  The song is okay to listen to.  I'm glad that Mike has been able to find peace through TM.  No judgement in that regard.  "15 Big Ones" is not a bad record...though I can see how it was a let-down for some listeners when it was released.  It has a lot of Brian Wilson craziness...which might not be for the average fan...but I like it.  I wish they had gone with more originals over covers...but it is what it is.  Brian sounds so manic at times...I love him on "That Same Song"..."way back in time...with just a rhythm and rhyme...Gregorian chants were a real big thing-ahhh..."  I can picture the crazy, beared Brian in one of his robes rocking that out on the piano!!!

Ben Folds has a knack for writing some pretty sad songs...off the top of my head "Fred Jones, Pt. 2" and "Picture Window (co-written with Nick Hornby)" are both quite heartbreaking.

...it's actually not as stomach turning as Mike's pompous "Everyone's In Love With You"! 

What do you find pompous about Mike's "Everyone's In Love With You"?

Maybe I should have used the word "preachy".  I don't know...I don't mind the music...but I can only take so much of Mike's pseudo-hippy TM babble (just a personal opinion...and nothing more).

It was Don Henley, who was reportedly nonplussed.

If it truly was Don Henley then I have yet another reason to consider Brian to be one of my heroes!

If you really want to be hip you should go for the late-70's Brian look with the stringy hair, beard and Messianic robe!

When Brian and the Boys were doing promos for different bands this year, the one that Brian introduced was Fleet Foxes, and I immediately saw him dressed in his robe, long hair and beard, and trying to teach Shortenin' Bread to Robin Pecknold and crew.

Excellent!

If you really want to be hip you should go for the late-70's Brian look with the stringy hair, beard and Messianic robe!

he's nowhere near 300 lbs.

This. I bet he is closer to 230 or 240. No big deal for a man of his age.

My dad is 62.  He's about the same height as Brian.  My dad is somewhere around 230 (I think)...he could probably stand to drop a few pounds...but I think it's pretty typical for an older male Baby Boomer.  Brian was far heavier in the early 80s.  I agree, though, that it could help is back problems if he were to loose some weight.

Agreed!  I hope all goes well!

I think 5 sets would be a lot of sets but it's still a semi good idea

A semi good idea is better than a bad idea!

Interesting to know about the Rush sets.  Yeah, why only pick one album??  Sounds sort of gimmicky.  You're right about the Beatles stereo boxed set.  While I loved the fact that something was finally done with the catalog...I do kind of feel that EMI/Apple could have done a better job.  My biggest gripe was the fact that they chose to release the mono remasters as a separate set...though in "limited" quantities at a higher price...nor could you purchase the mono remasters on their own.  The truth is that some of the remasters sound better in mono and some sound better in stereo. 

They have about double

Good to know.  Rush put out 5 albums per box...plus a DVD.  What if the Boys did six LPs per box...skipping the DVD?

Set 1: Surfin' Safari, Surfin' USA, Surfer Girl, Little Deuce Coupe, Shut Down Vol. 2, All Summer Long
Set 2: Beach Boys Concert, Today!, Summer Days (and Summer Nights!!!), Party, Pet Sounds
Set 3: Smiley Smile, Wild Honey,  Friends, 20/20, Live In London, Sunflower
Set 4: Surf's Up, "So Tough", Holland, The Beach Boys In Concert, 15 Big Ones, Love You
Set 5: M.I.U. Album, L.A. (Light Album), Keepin' the Summer Alive, The Beach Boys, Summer In Paradise, TWGMTR

This leaves out the Christmas Album, Stack-O-Tracks and Still Cruisin'.  We could debate how essential these are.  I'd definitely see the value of a bonus disc in each set collecting the odds-and-sods singles/b-sides/bonus tracks.

Price each one in the $50 dollar range (a bit low?)...but Rush did it for about that price.  Consumers could pick and choose which ones they wanted...or maybe just pick them up one or two at a time so you wouldn't have to outlay so much cash at once.

MacDonald's dislike of "Across The Universe" nearly invalidated the whole book for me.

True.  That was one song I felt he was a bit harsh upon...still I felt overall he took a pretty honest look at the catalog.  I still love the fact that he used a critical eye (even if we all don't agree 100% with some of his opinions). 

How is that better?  That's like a completist's nightmare.  What the Beatles did was take all their core studio material and put it in a reasonably priced box set.  The Beach Boys have never done anything like that and I think it's about time they did.

What do you think would be a reasonable price for a box set containing every Beach Boys master?

Somewhere around $100 to $150 I suppose?

The Beatles' stereo box retails for around $180. Considering that The Beach Boys have at least three times the amount of masters that The Beatles recorded, that is either a very lowball estimate from someone who doesn't wish to pay more than that for a lot of music, or it severely underestimates the band's musical-monetary value in comparison to the Fabs.

Rush recently released remastered versions of their entire catalog...but broke it up into three boxed sets.  I'm not entirely sure how many are in each set...I think it was something like 6 or 7 albums per set...priced around $45 per set.  I pretty good bargain.  Couldn't the Boys do something similiar?  I know they have more LPs (I think) than Rush...but why not break the catalog apart and maybe box 6-7 LPs at a crack?

Play only Lennon's vocal intro, before the band comes in. Then repeat it - it is pretty incredible, and pretty hair-raising too.

It's like nails-on-a-chalkboard to me. I hate hate HATE it.

Back to the Beach Boys...I was doing a recording session while I was in college  , about 11 years ago.  The band's sound was kind of a mix of Weezer and (early)Blink 182.  While they went out for a smoke break, I started listening to the 2-fer of So Tough/Holland. When the band I was working with came back in, they were floored by what they heard. I did not tell them what they were listening to. It actually put a stop to the session for a bit. They didn't realize it was the Beach Boys until 'California' came on. I ended up burning them a copy.

Later on in the day, during my actual recording class, we had some free time. Our instructor let us put on a cd of our own choosing, so we could analyze as a class (specifically, the actual sound of the music). In went the BB cd. Before we hit 'play',  though, I had to hear it from some of the people in there about the f*cking Beatles and how the BB weren't on their level, along with the usual Full House jokes. Set it to 'shuffle'...'Trader' came on. Needless to say, there were some people eating crow that day.

Neat story about turning those people onto So Tough/Holland!  It's such an under-appreciated period in their history.  I think the casual fan thinks they went from Good Vibrations straight to Kokomo!  The LP's from Smiley Smile through Love You (skipping 15 Big Ones)...are so incredible interesting. 

Revolution in the Head does this too, and better (to my mind).
[/quote]

I completely agree.  This is the BEST book ever written about the actual music.  Sure, there might be squabbles about recording dates and what not...but Ian MacDonald did an absolutely amazing job dissecting the songs.

Good points.  They don't get the live credit they deserve because by 1966 they had stopped touring...and before that they were playing in gigantic stadiums where nobody could hear them over the screaming...but it should not be forgotten the years they put in as a working band in Hamburg and elsewhere...sometimes playing for insanely long stretches.  They were GREAT at ensemble playing early on as a self-contained band...and this is something they lost as the egos got bigger and the studio trickery became more advanced.  The "Get Back" sessions were, as we all know, an attempt to return to those early days...but too much water had flowed under the bridge...but if you listen to enough of those sessions...moments appear...truly wonderful moments where they recapture the old magic of four guys sitting together and making music.

Alright, alright...after reading the praise given to Mr. Moonlight I gave it a close listen on the ole' headphones.  I chose the 2009 mono remaster.  It's not a horrible song...and maybe my original mention was a bit harsh...BUT...put into the context of their whole cannon...it's nothing more than pleasant filler.  The Beatles were a good enough band to be able to knock something like this out with minimal effort and still make it sound good...but it's not crafted with the care of most of their original material (even the earlier stuff).  To be fair..."Beatles for Sale" was made under great stress...hence the number of covers.  It seems pretty obvious that the band simply reached into their extensive repetoire of songs to crank out enough songs to fill out the originals.  Like I said...taken by itself it might be a pleasant diversion...but stacked against the rest of their output...it has to be near the bottom of the barrel...but like I said...to each his own.