I doubt the labeling has anything to do with being able to use the BB name or not, but rather because the track appeared on Al's solo album and is, officially speaking, an Al Jardine solo track. And since he's still actively promoting his album, I imagine he would want it that way. So this becomes a little bit of a cross promotional tool, promoting both the BB AND "A Postcard from California". Actually, I'd have been more shocked if the label HAD credited the song to the boys.

I can think of a million reasons why this wouldn't be relevant (it really doesn't explain a damn thing and doesn't create any kind of chain of custody), and so I am hesitant to post this, but didn't Brian record in Iowa in '73?  Iowa's next door to Minnesota....

I hate to add more fuel to the speculation fire, but since you brought up Iowa, I thought I'd throw this out there. I googled this Paul Bramsen Sr guy from St. Paul, and it appears he's 63, putting him in his mid twenties around '74. He's lived in Minnesota his whole life except for a stint at Drake University, located in (cue dramatic music)... Des Moines, Iowa. That said, it's probably just a coincidence since he likely would have graduated well before Brian was in the neighborhood circa '73, but it's still interesting.

I should also mention that it doesn't look like this guy has any professional experience in the music industry, or anything related, for that matter. Jay, have you heard anything back from Mr. Bramsen Sr. yet?

[Add Some Music]

1 - But it wasn't the title of the first Reprise album, rather the single: the album was set to be simply Add Some Music.

2 - Good point, although I'm sure import copies made it over to the US pretty quickly.

Some things they seem to know well, other simple stuff they fall down on. Most confusing... but still a fake.

it was available as an import around late 72 early 73. i got a copy then. it had ads for it in the major music mags back then.

Ahhh, I see. Thanks for clearing that up, this place is a wealth of knowledge.

But then again, if they're making up stuff anyway, why not just make up a date and throw it on there??

Because he predicted the existence of the "internet" and knew some day his fake concerts could be easily debunked. This troll is playing it safe.

He's a smart little S.O.B., ain't he?

OK... so if these are pukka tapes... the labelling is beyond pointless. "St. Paul remote" - when ?  "Summer concert" - when, where ?  "Concert LA/NYC" - when ?

Everything about this shouts "faked".

Hmm... I couldn't make out the "LA/NYC" label earlier, thanks for pointing that out. It does seem odd that there are several ambiguous, non-dated concerts in the collection. I would think someone so careful about labeling would have the dates and show venues listed on the tapes... were they legit, that is. But then again, if they're making up stuff anyway, why not just make up a date and throw it on there??

Anyway, I zoomed in on the photo and have a couple of other quick questions...

1) One of the boxes says "Add Some Music To Your Day". Would a fan in the early 70's have known this was the original title of the first Warner Brothers album?

2) Another box is labeled "London". I'm assuming (dangerous, I know) that this refers to the December '68 show released as "Live in London"... Would a U.S. fan in the early '70s be aware of this British release (since it wasn't given a stateside release until '76)?

No major revelations here (sorry!), but here are a couple of things I noticed:

• As Bicyclerider said earlier, the boxes are a little too uniform. All of the lines below "The Beach Boys" pretty much line up all the way across the top row of tapes. Also, the album names are pretty well centered in the space below the aforementioned lines. Someone was fairly careful and meticulous (OCD?) about the labeling of the boxes, certainly not a sign of the Beach Boys handiwork. As a matter of fact, I'm not sure the words "careful" or "meticulous" have EVER been used to describe the Boys' handling of their recorded works. Given the uniformity of the boxes, I don't think it would be much of a stretch to say these were all made about the same time.

• I'm having a hard time reading some of the boxes, but it looks like anything that's not an actual Beach Boys album is in a white box (except for the yellow 'Vegetables' box), while the full albums are all in yellow boxes. That said, if there were actual tapes in these, then it's probably safe to say the white "Brian - Dumb Angel" box doesn't contain a completed album (though we already know that, since one never existed), but rather a compilation of recordings or demos (like the white box next to it that says "Misc. Beach Boy Material").

• I almost completely buy into the whole "this is a fan display with nothing actually in the boxes"... except for the whole St. Paul thing. That's really bugging me. I understand why a fan might make a "Dumb Angel" box for their display (heck, I  made up a Smile jewel case for my CD collection), but why would someone make a phony tape box for a show that was never released in any way? (BTW, anyone know if that '74 show would have been recorded?) It just seems too isolated, and too random an item for someone to make up. Maybe if there were lots of other remote recordings in this collection, but it seems that everything else corresponds to a known live album. I would also consider the possibility that the St. Paul box were a fan recording, but the "Remote" term leads me to believe it was done with a professional remote recording facility. Is it possible this Rolle or Bramsem guy lived in Minnesota and/or was involved with the show in question?

• Again, I can't make out all the boxes, but it looks like there's nothing from the Boys' catalog after '73 (please correct me if I'm wrong). I don't see 15 Big Ones or Endless Summer, so I guess the latest thing in this collection would have been the '74 St. Paul box (though, according to AGD's site the St. Paul show took place about a month after Endless Summer was released). So can we infer that this photo was taken between July of '74 and July of '76 when Big Ones was released? Not sure... maybe this guy just wasn't a fan of anything post- In Concert.

• Anyone make anything of the fact that the albums are in reversed order? Maybe this is just personal preference, but when displaying something chronologically, I always go left (earliest) to right (latest). Hmmm... maybe it's a British thing   

So what does all this mean? Who knows... but I think the "St. Paul" box alone deserves a little more investigation before we can close the case on this one just yet...

Here's the link:
http://www.billboard.com/news/beach-boys-lost-smile-album-to-see-release-1005070202.story#/news/beach-boys-lost-smile-album-to-see-release-1005070202.story

If the band used a click track (basically a recorded metronome) to record the drums to and used the same bpm setting, both tracks would be the exact same speed which would make flying in and syncing the vocals a very simple task. I can't say for certain if or how often the boys used click tracks, but it's a pretty standard practice.

As for why Carl didn't like the material, that's something we'll probably never be able to answer. I, too, can't imagine why anyone wouldn't absolutely love SS (especially considering some of the then-recent songs the Beach Boys had released), but if there's one thing I've learned hanging around these forums, it's that for every track someone swears by, there's someone else who would be happier if it had never existed. Likewise, every time a track is pegged as complete rubbish, someone else will chime in saying how much they love the song in question and how they listen to it on a daily basis. The moral, I suppose, is that some songs just appeal (or don't) to people for reasons that can't necessarily be explained on paper. Music's not an exact science, but that's the beauty of it. Having said all that, I would venture to guess there was just something about the material that, sadly, didn't appeal to Carl. If it were simply the Was produced track, I think he would've just moved on to the next song (or used the Paley track), not walk out on the sessions altogether.

Yes, it's "sis boom bah", apparently a pretty common cheer back in the day. It's used in this classic Bugs Bunny clip:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YOuDjdN2csw

Don't you love the internet? You can find pretty much anything...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j1EPXBQV3yM

I'm pretty sure that's not beer causing Brian to act like that....

I think it's "been" posted that this video isn't really "for" Rolling Skating Child. Is there "some" expert opinion, as to whether they're "really" performing the song in "this" video?   perhaps someone who "was" actually at this "show", as I wasn't.

Certainly not an expert opinion here, but it appears to me that they aren't actually performing RSC in this clip. I can't tell if it's Carl or Al singing the "round and round and round she goes" part, but at 0:14 seconds, Al leans back from the mic and isn't singing. At the same time, Carl is focused on playing guitar and doesn't have his head up to the mic, so that would exhibit A in the case of the erroneous sync. Exhibit B would be at 0:34 as Mike's singing "so many guys want a girl like mine". It looks like he's not singing in the video as we hear the word "mine", but even if he were, wouldn't that last word be a little less audible since he kind of drops the mic and looks to his left?

Ok, perhaps it's not an open and shut case. The quality of the footage makes it hard to tell exactly what's going on, but those are my observations. Maybe someone else can provide more conclusive evidence, one way or the other...

Look at some of the other examples that are available now, like the Beatles volumes, the Pink Floyd volume...mine will be a similar format but will retain my writing style. It will be a very detailed look at the whole career, with tons of in-depth analysis on the music and the history. Think reference book, but done so in a series of 30 to 40 essays or chapters, plus various lists and session info etc... I've been working on it (on and off) since mid last year, I'll be working on it for another month or so, then we go to the editing process. Should be available in the late summer. Lots of cool photos and memorabilia images of stuff from my collection too.

I hope to be involved in some other 50th related things too, but for now this FAQ book is the only thing I've going that is a confirmed and scheduled release.

Jon, thanks for all of your hard work. I loved 'The Lost Beach Boy' and am looking forward to adding the FAQ to my collection...

Jeremy, thanks for the interview and article. In all your years of Beach Boy fandom, did you think you'd be the person to finally break the news of Smile's release? A surreal experience, I'm sure. Again, thanks for the read... and for bringing a little excitement to the week.

Is there stuff that has been heard that has not appeared on the countless bootlegs over the years? Are the Durrie Parks acetates for real (been confirmed) or is that an urban myth? How about the Al Jardine "Heroes & Villains" acetate? Is that any different than what we've already heard?

The Durrie Parks acetates have been confirmed to exist, though their content and playability are big question marks. As for Al's supposed acetates, I think the fact that he doesn't have many (any?) details about this release would suggest he hasn't been very involved in looking for/providing material. That said, I suppose it's entirely possible he gave whatever he has to Mr. Boyd years ago and said have at it... We shall see.

Sophistication can take time to penetrate. Pet Sounds is too good to be anything but timeless, but for many it took a while.

Well put. I believe there was a thread several months ago where a couple of people, lucky enough to have been around in '66, said they felt let down by the album, only to fall in love with it in the years that followed. As Mr. Stebbins so eloquently put it, "sophistication can take time to penetrate", but expectations can play just as much of a role in how an album is initially perceived (that is, what we think we're going to hear, as opposed to what we do eventually hear). If the sun is shining and you're anticipating a 'Fun, Fun, Fun' but get 'Caroline, No' instead, that could easily be seen as a let down, but time and separation from expectations tend to make that disappointment look pretty silly.

It's also worth noting that, in many accounts of the time, Capitol receives the blame for Pet Sounds' relative chart failure (often citing a lack of promotional efforts, release of 'Best of the Beach Boys', etc.), but I think it's just as significant, if not more so, to note that there were real feelings of disappointment among the fans.

I've been searching for this thread on and off throughout the day to no avail;

Can anyone link me to the thread where (I think) Steve Desper talks about how we can trade in (plus a small sum of $) our CD copies of Surf's Up and Sunflower to get his mix of the albums?

On page 9 of the Stephen Desper thread, he retracted the offer after his fee for the service was called into question (legally speaking). He said he wanted to consult with his lawyers before re-instating the offer, but I don't think it was ever brought up again. Perhaps the word from the legal men wasn't so good...

Here's a link to that page if you'd like to read it in his own words:
http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php?PHPSESSID=f2d7fac54b8f3191ff2fdc111c982094&topic=1203.200

Wow, fascinating indeed. Please tell me someone is going to rip this stuff before it gets taken down...

P.S. Calendar Girls was recorded between August and September of '78 (per Bellagio).