A bit crap

[b00ts]

I think you're being way too harsh so far.

That is probably true. I've had a tough couple of days.

I am looking forward to the reunion shows and album no matter what - as a dyed-in-the-wool fan, I have gone through periods of listening to BB85 and Still Cruisin', trying to find something good or worthwhile in the group's lesser work. Now I will have a new album from the group - and I expect at least a few good tunes on it.

Overall, though, you seem to be correct that they are taking the easy way out. Why Joe Thomas is involved, I have no idea. I feel the same way about the remake of "Do It Again" - it is beneath their station in the world of modern music to do a remake as their big reunion single. This is also the problem with the non-BW or BB-penned material; these guys are known to us as innovators and songwriters.

Unfortunately, the group's period of innovation was only a little bit longer than their early period of "fun and sun" songs, so we are tilting at windmills if we expect them to play up the image of rock pioneers. The beach stuff sells, and they're going to deliver it in spades.

Plus, in terms of integrity and spirit, I would imagine that Carl is truly missed. Dave seems to have integrity, but he is not in a position to call the shots.

With all of that said, Al and Brian seem excited to go out on tour with Mike and Bruce. We know that they are aware of the artistic stakes with this record. Mike has mellowed out in recent years, and he has compared some of the new material to Pet Sounds. There is still an album we haven't heard and a tour we haven't seen, so let's hope for the best... I know that I will enjoy the reunion in the worst case scenario.

If the Boys give their "wilderness years" some exposure in the setlists and push themselves to make a great final album, I will be very pleased indeed.

[SMiLE Brian]

A question to the OP:  when was the last time The Beach Boys actually did anything that didn't make you squirm?  I have no idea how you could've expected this Celebration tour to be limited of some of the things you've apparently grown to despise (surfing songs, car songs, surfboards in pictures)?  The Wal-Mart deal?  Who the hell cares?  It's not like they're releasing the actual album directly though Wal-mart..it's some promo magazine with a sampler CD.  Big whoop.  

They nearly made the Paley sessions into an album. Retro sounding music that was still artistically interesting. Soul Searching and YSAM are pretty good. I like the live version of Summer in Paradise. I like the Stars and Stripes version of Caroline, No. I like Don't Fight the Sea.

I love the band.

And I don't hate the surf or car songs. I do, however, see them as only a chapter in the lengthy life of an ambitious and confounding band. And a compelling tour could embrace the hits and the arty stuff and reap the band both money and acclaim. And the fact that the band doesn't seem to be seeing it that way is sadly telling.

The Paley sessions made into an album would have been a game changer for the group and restored artistic confidence.

[Wirestone]

THE FIRST TWO THINGS YOU BULLETED WERE

Car songs.

Surf Songs.


So just own what you were saying! Don't play semantics, you're pissed they're playing car and surf songs.  Be a man, don't try to change what you're saying.  YOU DONT LIKE SURF SONGS.  

LOL  Just get with it man.  


BTW, Did you know Mike Love is going to be TELLING JOKES at every show?  Did you know they're all OLD now?  Did you know JOHN STAMOS is going to be there... a Lot?

Just quit while you've still got some kind of imaginary band in your head, man.  You're so confused about this it's just pitiful.

Har. I don't have an imaginary band in my head. I have the band that's existed for 50 years now. The one that recorded Pet Sounds, and Smiley Smile, and Friends, and Holland and Love You.

And I mentioned cars and surf songs first because they were a notable presence in the mini-set. No one would expect them to be absent from a BB50 tour. But I would have sure hoped a mini-set for a national audience would have a bit less pandering.

The point of the Beach Boys, to me, has always been that they embrace the poles of extreme crowd-pleasing commercialism and introverted self-expression. It's not insane, it's not out of line, to expect that the half-century reunion of such a band would embrace and celebrate both.

[Ron]

I've went into it many, many times on this board, and

YES Quantity reflects QUALITY.  

PERIOD.  

You'll have to agree to disagree, because I've heard it all before.  

If you're a musician and you make a song 10 people like, great.  If you're Lil' Wayne, you're better.  Period.  

So Van Gogh hardly sold any art in his lifetime. In fact, it wasn't until about 20 years after he died did his work start to get an audience. So explain to me how his paintings got better in quality?

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

[Ron]

THE FIRST TWO THINGS YOU BULLETED WERE

Car songs.

Surf Songs.


So just own what you were saying! Don't play semantics, you're pissed they're playing car and surf songs.  Be a man, don't try to change what you're saying.  YOU DONT LIKE SURF SONGS.  

LOL  Just get with it man.  


BTW, Did you know Mike Love is going to be TELLING JOKES at every show?  Did you know they're all OLD now?  Did you know JOHN STAMOS is going to be there... a Lot?

Just quit while you've still got some kind of imaginary band in your head, man.  You're so confused about this it's just pitiful.

Har. I don't have an imaginary band in my head. I have the band that's existed for 50 years now. The one that recorded Pet Sounds, and Smiley Smile, and Friends, and Holland and Love You.

And I mentioned cars and surf songs first because they were a notable presence in the mini-set. No one would expect them to be absent from a BB50 tour. But I would have sure hoped a mini-set for a national audience would have done less pandering.

The point of the Beach Boys, to me, has always been that they embrace the poles of extreme crowd-pleasing commercialism and introverted self-expression. It's not insane, it's not out of line, to expect that the half-century reunion of such a band would embrace and celebrate both.

Go edit your first post and delete the bitching about surfing and car songs then, you made a mistake. 

[Wirestone]

Go edit your first post and delete the bitching about surfing and car songs then, you made a mistake. 

Nah.

[Justin]

A question to the OP:  when was the last time The Beach Boys actually did anything that didn't make you squirm?  I have no idea how you could've expected this Celebration tour to be limited of some of the things you've apparently grown to despise (surfing songs, car songs, surfboards in pictures)?  The Wal-Mart deal?  Who the hell cares?  It's not like they're releasing the actual album directly though Wal-mart..it's some promo magazine with a sampler CD.  Big whoop. 

They nearly made the Paley sessions into an album. Retro sounding music that was still artistically interesting. Soul Searching and YSAM are pretty good. I like the live version of Summer in Paradise. I like the Stars and Stripes version of Caroline, No. I like Don't Fight the Sea.

I love the band.

And I don't hate the surf or car songs. I do, however, see them as only a chapter in the lengthy life of an ambitious and confounding band. And a compelling tour could embrace the hits and the arty stuff and reap the band both money and acclaim. And the fact that the band doesn't seem to be seeing it that way is sadly telling.

I get what you're saying and support your intentions.  As we're all Beach Boys fans here, I think it's safe to say that we all hope for the best on the new tour.  We want them to go out there and remind people that they were more than just a "fun in the sun" band.  Whether we like it or not...the proportions between the fun songs and the avant-garde stuff will certainly be uneven.  There is no way around it.  It's just the matter of accepting it.  The people going to these shows are your basic Joe Public.  They have an absolutely huge catalog, and to satisfy both the general public and the people on this board would be utterly impossible.  There is no guarantee they'll be able to tour again in the future...so right now, they have only one shot to go out there and succeed on this tour.  Whether we like it or not, the car and surf songs are going to be a big part of the equation.

[Pretty Funky]

 http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/music/articles/2012/04/20/20120420beach-boys-reunion-tour-phoenix-concert.html#ixzz1sd3KHgjQ


As to what fans can expect, Mike Love told The Republic, "I think it makes a lot of sense to do the songs we're known best for, but then, artistically, I think there will be several songs in the set that hardcore true fans will really like listening to, too, but the general audience will like as well. I mean, there are some great, beautiful songs that can be done. But I think it would be a drag for people to come hoping to hear 'California Girls' and we didn't do it. Or 'Good Vibrations.' "




Ok Mike read some threads on this site to hear what songs the 'hardcore' want to hear!

[Too Much Sugar]

I've went into it many, many times on this board, and

YES Quantity reflects QUALITY.  

PERIOD.  

You'll have to agree to disagree, because I've heard it all before.  

If you're a musician and you make a song 10 people like, great.  If you're Lil' Wayne, you're better.  Period.  

So Van Gogh hardly sold any art in his lifetime. In fact, it wasn't until about 20 years after he died did his work start to get an audience. So explain to me how his paintings got better in quality?

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

Perception can change.  Tastes can change, attitudes can change.  Quality does not.  "Pet Sounds", for instance, was just as brilliant in 1966, when it was received rather luke-warmly in the U.S., than it is in 2012, where it has mass critical acclaim.  My attitudes or anyone else's did not make it a better album.  Ditto with Van Gogh.  

[Wirestone]

http://www.azcentral.com/thingstodo/music/articles/2012/04/20/20120420beach-boys-reunion-tour-phoenix-concert.html#ixzz1sd3KHgjQ


As to what fans can expect, Mike Love told The Republic, "I think it makes a lot of sense to do the songs we're known best for, but then, artistically, I think there will be several songs in the set that hardcore true fans will really like listening to, too, but the general audience will like as well. I mean, there are some great, beautiful songs that can be done. But I think it would be a drag for people to come hoping to hear 'California Girls' and we didn't do it. Or 'Good Vibrations.' "




Ok Mike read some threads on this site to hear what songs the 'hardcore' want to hear!

This is actually why I still have hopes for the reunion. Not because of Brian -- he needs others for quality control. Not because of Al -- he just wants his songs on the record. Not because of Bruce -- he just likes to get along.

I actually think Mike has a good viewpoint on the band's history and legacy. His European setlists prove it. So I actually think he may be a really important factor in presenting a good show. (And make no mistake: I still think he's an ace frontman.)

[rogerlancelot]

It's the members of this message board; we are not the "meat and potatoes" crowd but how large of percentage of Beach Boys' fans are we?

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I think you're both right. You can't make something retroactively suck, but something of poor quality would not continue to sell. It may not be our cup of tea, but if something that's not a novelty hit sells there's generally a reason.

[Ron]

I've went into it many, many times on this board, and

YES Quantity reflects QUALITY.  

PERIOD.  

You'll have to agree to disagree, because I've heard it all before.  

If you're a musician and you make a song 10 people like, great.  If you're Lil' Wayne, you're better.  Period.  

So Van Gogh hardly sold any art in his lifetime. In fact, it wasn't until about 20 years after he died did his work start to get an audience. So explain to me how his paintings got better in quality?

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

Perception can change.  Tastes can change, attitudes can change.  Quality does not.  "Pet Sounds", for instance, was just as brilliant in 1966, when it was received rather luke-warmly in the U.S., than it is in 2012, where it has mass critical acclaim.  My attitudes or anyone else's did not make it a better album.  Ditto with Van Gogh.  

You keep telling yourself that.  Maybe it'll be true if you think it long enough.  

Keep telling yourself that 18 year old girl who enjoys lil' Wayne's music as much as you enjoy the Beach Boys is wrong, and his music isn't quality, because you were born a different day than she was.  Or the other 10 million people who downloaded his album.  Or the Thousands of people at his concerts, etc.  

Keep telling yourself you know quality and they don't  

If you ever get tired of that, come back here, and I'll explain to you : It's all subjective.  

[SMiLE Brian]

Ron, are you a member of the Mike Love fan club?

[Ron]

I think you're both right. You can't make something retroactively suck, but something of poor quality would not continue to sell. It may not be our cup of tea, but if something that's not a novelty hit sells there's generally a reason.

Yup.  Time always tells, but the whole passing off somebody's favorite band as higher quality than millions of others favorite band gets old to me.  If a band sells, generally there's a reason. 

[Ron]

Ron, are you a member of the Mike Love fan club?

ABSOLUTELY!  I love Mike Love. 

[SMiLE Brian]

Ron, are you a member of the Mike Love fan club?

ABSOLUTELY!  I love Mike Love. 

mikelovefanclub.com

[Too Much Sugar]

If you ever get tired of that, come back here, and I'll explain to you : It's all subjective.  

Is that so?  Then what about that statement?  Is your view, which you're objectively espousing to everyone, also not just as subjective?  

[Chocolate Shake Man]

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

It's not just temporal. There will be certain art that goes over very well in a particular location. Does it follow then that's something is quality in one location, but not in another? At the same time there is also the frequent case of an artist's work becoming more successful immediately after their death.

The conclusion here is obviously not that the same art is sh*t is then great. The conclusion is that no one, certainly not you, is in any position to comment on what is good and what isn't given that "goodness" is so clearly unstable and so relative to particular audiences.

[SBonilla]

Car songs.

Surfin' songs.

I love them. I grew up on them.  I want to hear them.

It will be nice if they include lesser known or even obscure tunes in the set. But, I don't want to find myself in a sea of yawners, either. I want the concert to be, as Little Ronnie Dawson sang, "Action packed! Hear me? Action packed!"

[Ron]

If you ever get tired of that, come back here, and I'll explain to you : It's all subjective.  

Is that so?  Then what about that statement?  Is your view, which you're objectively espousing to everyone, also not just as subjective?  

Of course!  I'm not the first, or the subjectively brightest to say that everything is realitive to the observer. 

[Ron]

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

It's not just temporal. There will be certain art that goes over very well in a particular location. Does it follow then that's something is quality in one location, but not in another? At the same time there is also the frequent case of an artist's work becoming more successful immediately after their death.

The conclusion here is obviously not that the same art is sh*t is then great. The conclusion is that no one, certainly not you, is in any position to comment on what is good and what isn't given that "goodness" is so clearly unstable and so relative to particular audiences.

Thank you, you finally got it!  Glad we now agree.  Quantity = Quality.

[♩♬🐸 Billy C ♯♫♩🐇]

I tell you one thing that we should be thankful for...the setlist is probably not going to have non-BB sonds like Duke of Earl. Now THAT was an embarrassment (imho of course)

[Ron]

I'll bet they do some of that... for instance, I wouldn't mind them doing something like "Long Tall Texan" or whatever it was called.  Something about that, I always liked.  It'd probably be pretty stupid, though, as old as they are now.  Subjectively of course. 

[Chocolate Shake Man]

That's a good argument! People bring that one up all the time.  

Isn't it obvious?  Are you really that clueless?

Times change.  Lil Wayne is quality now.  The Beach Boys were quality at one time, but record sales will show you they no longer are.  

Van Gogh was sh*t when he was alive.  Now he's one of the most 'quality' painters that ever lived.  

Times change.  Surely you know this?  Those flowered shirts the boys are wearing in those 80's pictures?  That was the highest quality stuff you could buy at the time! They were all millionaires, and that's what they wore!  

If you wore that now, it'd be ridiculous. Why?  It's out of date.  

Dates change.  Quality changes.  What is quality now will not always be.

It's not just temporal. There will be certain art that goes over very well in a particular location. Does it follow then that's something is quality in one location, but not in another? At the same time there is also the frequent case of an artist's work becoming more successful immediately after their death.

The conclusion here is obviously not that the same art is sh*t is then great. The conclusion is that no one, certainly not you, is in any position to comment on what is good and what isn't given that "goodness" is so clearly unstable and so relative to particular audiences.

Thank you, you finally got it!  Glad we now agree.  Quantity = Quality.

And I'm glad that we agree that quantity doesn't equal quality. Boy, that's easy. When you stoop so low, magical things can happen.