I saw David Marks perform it at a private lost Beach Boys event in London in 2008 with Jeffrey Foskett.

He performed "Our Car Club" for sure, with Jeff singing.   Did he also do "This Car of Mine"?

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=89Ysw6fyhlw

They did indeed, and that's my Dads filming from that show, aha! Were The Ladykillers. 

I saw David Marks perform it at a private lost Beach Boys event in London in 2008 with Jeffrey Foskett.

i've seen all 5 parts about 4+ years ago, as it's been surfacing online for many years. A great show and thanks for the interesting info Stephen! I like Mike Loves backing vox on Darlin.

Apologies if already mentioned.

Katy Puckrick is presenting this show on Sunday:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b07blns7

Listen to BBC Radio 6 a lot and I'm much looking forward to this special Sunday.   

Recently paid £300 for a Rumbo French pic sleeve. I think that's the most I've paid for a Beach Boys-related record (recently, at least). If Shane or Sheriff John Stone want to sell their Kenny & The Cadets 45s, I'd be keen to make a reasonable offer. Feel free to PM.

Quite the collectable. However, I bet the US version is worth a mint!

I invite whoever's reading this to check out my youtube channel, where I'm uploading all of my alternate version of every Beach Boys album. Featured are my own remixes, stereo remasters, alternate versions, etc, etc. I've got over 50 more alternate albums planned from where I am now, such as The Fading Rock Group Revival (also known as Reverberation), New Album, Lei'd in Hawaii, the original versions of Wild Honey and Holland, and even a fully instrumental version of SMiLE! Let me know what you all think, and thanks for checking it out!

https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCYoC5QVm5MFa4rqEiTbhNYw

I've been listening to your alternate versions the past few weeks on YouTube----great stuff!

I'm actually on board for this, why not! The rest is up to you now Mr Love if you read this. 

But 70-100 I would say being the box sets and other stuff I've purchased over the years.

I know I paid, well our executive procedure for my dads band paid £90 for an original "Friends" on mono (mint) for us some years back.

Is this him?



Got it from here: https://www.facebook.com/aljardine/photos/ms.c.eJxNkUESxTAIQm~;UkUQTvP~;F2mo~;~_Zss3iCCgQWQXIlgxBwXPkBPkGt9IA0cMfAHZgP~;jexdHkOAVh5xFLMVFPAG~_4Bea~;IYtYUhEA2UlKs8IEWiPHxK0eUwjqI89hLwBhrJ7mKK~;iZ526ZANjhdGpA60K4cKpfP~_5h66oSwBjhX72~_YN8h2Upg~-.bps.a.1051198674918867.1073741836.136456489726428/1051198741585527/?type=3&theater

But I can't see the face that clearly...

Nope...

Please, please, mods, move this topic to the Sandbox. This is no longer about Brian, or even about music.  It hasn't been since Brian publicly washed his hands of it----and rightly so.
 

A great and modest move, John! It needed to be said and needed to be acted upon. It's not about Brian or his band, let alone music for that matter anymore. It's an off topic discussion now and rightly so

I dedicate this one to John k.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rZ9viXpj9zI

Brian looks a little like Cory Wells in this pic.

Now that you mention it! 

With Jeffrey Foskett on board it's going to be decent.

This is one of my favourites.

There was a falling out between Joe Thomas and Brian and company in mid-1999 or so. Joe missed the Japan tour, Brian felt they were fine without Joe, and Joe was let go from the touring band at that point (and thus Dahl was also gone). Eventually some lawsuits were filed unrelated specifically to touring (not sure what happened with those; I would assume settled). I think this is covered at least a bit in the Carlin book.

They were then stuck with 1999 footage that they wanted to work into that "On Tour" documentary, which ended up coming out around 2003. Why they didn't just shoot footage of a newer show, I don't know. Maybe digitally erasing Thomas and Dahl was cheaper than a new video shoot? Or perhaps part of the novelty was that the 1999 footage was Brian's "first" tour?

As to why they couldn't just keep Thomas and Dahl in the footage, I'm not sure if there were legal reasons (pending lawsuits), or they just *really* wanted to wash their hands of the whole thing.

Ah right. 

I can only speculate, but I think it might have to do how Joe Thomas was exiled at the time. (It might also explain why it took three damn years to get that DVD out.) Steve was part of Joe's crowd -- so I guess he was exiled along with him, although I think it was a mutual feeling there.

Cheers.

[*Quickly off topic here]

Heck, for the Brian Wilson On Tour documentary, both Joe Thomas and Steve Dahl were digitally erased. Not that there were frames of them edited out -- they were actually literally erased FROM the frames.

*Quickly off topic here

Why were they erased if you don't mind me asking?

Thoughts and good vibes to the victim first of all. 

The most important factor in all this, totally agree! 

Well, I don't think it's a coincidence that Scott was never part of the Pet Sounds 50 tour.  So I think they probably knew and let him go quietly.  

Yeah obviously they knew as this crime happened in 2014.

1. Rock And Roll Music 1/5
2. It's OK 1/5
3. Had To Phone Ya 5/5
4. Chapel Of Love 1/5
5. Everyone's In Love With You 1/5
6. Talk To Me 2/5
7. That Same Song 3/5
8. TM Song 5/5
9. Palisades Park 5/5
10. Susie Cincinnati 3/5
11. A Casual Look 1/5
12. Blueberry Hill 4/5
13. Back Home 4/5
14. In The Still Of The Night 5/5
15. Just Once In My Life 5/5

I wonder how Taylor Mills feels about this event, as herself and Scott were not only band mates but close friends. She must be disgusted I would imagine.

Some really interesting questions asked----thanks for sharing!

I add it to saved pages. Of course, I can't see his face and maybe he didn't type the answers but I'd bet Brian smiled answering some questions and it seems he had fun. Several people said New Hampshire - good state based on the articles and NH doc.
Interesting he ignored the question "did you ever have Leon Russell as a
session musician during Pet Sounds or
before that?".

True point.

[Scott's life is over.]

There's no excuse for what we know Scott did, even spinning the best possible scenario for the events.

I can be appalled by the effects of rape and the aftermath (I too have had someone close to me go through this, not that it's anyone's business, but it apparently needs to be said) and still be concerned about the deliberate tone of the article (to which most of us, myself included, reacted exactly as intended) and also have an understanding of the weird non-reality of the touring musician (which is not an excuse, but it is context) and also of how media and law enforcement tend to spin facts.

This is not taking sides, nor is it excusing anything.  It's holding a lot of different ideas in one's head simultaneously and sifting through them and trying to have a fuller understanding of what happened.  We all have things we stand for.  Fairness, entertaining all sides of a question and thinking for myself, even when it's socially uncomfortable or makes people mad, is what I do - anyone who follows me on FB knows this.  Whatever horrible biases or denials people may ascribe to that trait - you're wrong.  I know me and you don't.  And I'm used to people getting mad at me because I won't just jump on board whatever train everyone is on.  I've learned too many times that later more facts emerge and what seemed like a clear picture is a lot blurrier.  I can reach a conclusion for myself in a day, a week, or a month.  And it's very possibly going to be exactly the same conclusion that everyone else has reached already.  But if it isn't, I'm going to be glad I didn't just go "fry him, the monster!"  It's a moral question to me, and so no offense meant, I don't care what anybody else happens to think about it.  A lot of times, doing what you think is right is going to p*ss everyone around you off.  (And the need for/responsibility to have a moral compass in all circumstances is the central question of this event, no?  Since substance abuse, nor peer pressure in another situation, is not an excuse for this kind of act)

No one's excusing Scott.  No matter what happened, even if there were exculpatory facts, he behaved like a pig and an idiot and apparently showed zero concern for the welfare of the woman.  And he's also been convicted so he's lost his presumption of innocence.  

I think everyone who is up in arms about the idea that anybody is "minimizing rape" needs to face one salient fact:  Scott's life is over. If he doesn't win on appeal, he's going to jail for a long time, and face years of monitoring, difficulty getting work or finding a place to live, after he gets out.  If he does, he's still damaged goods and he probably won't be able to work.  So whatever he has done he will be amply punished in full.

I personally hope (assuming that the verdict holds) that it's all true and Scott is a sack of crap, because he is most likely going down regardless of what the full circumstances may have been.  People who might point fingers because some of us are a little concerned with some of the questions around the edges and think that concern is somehow going light on Scott or the topic of rape need to keep that in mind.  Rape is serious business; so are the penalties for sex offender laws in this country, and so are the flaws in the media and in law enforcement.  It is possible to be concerned about all these things, simultaneously, without denying due weight to any one of them.

That's my final post on this topic.  I've been clear; anybody who wants to project something further on it - meaning absolutely no acrimony or disrespect (since I know this is a highly charged, emotional topic with widely differing experiential sets between genders that can frustrate any discussion), but I am very clear that such a projection is a function of your own views and biases, and not mine.

The woman endured a horrible trauma.  The guy's life is over.  That's bad enough.  I don't do pitchforks, tar and feathers. I'm sorry.

Well said.