Details on the new greatest hits albums and remasters

[Wirestone]

I think the hits comps just seem really ... um ... unnecessary. Sounds of Summer and Warmth of the Sun are each fabulous, each has more songs than the individual discs of 50 Big Ones, and each are just excellent overall. They're not that old, they've sold a bunch. To my mind, just tweak one or both of those to include new tracks, and package them together if you must have a two-disc set. But otherwise you have a situation where a record company is taking the twofers, the boxed set and the hits comps out of print, and replacing them with album reissues that are more expensive, have no bonus tracks, and with shorter and arguably inferior hits collections.

Hmm. I've kind of talked myself out of being enthusiastic about this.

You have it correct in every way.

I hasten to add, I will probably buy most of if not all of these reissues. But to me, the only way this doesn't feel just the slightest bit opportunistic is if we know for a fact that the rest of the catalog is coming, that none of the old bonus tracks will be consigned to oblivion (i.e., a past masters kind of situation), and that the eventual box is really fabulous.

Everything so far has been handled with class, so I hope for the best. But this is just a step along the road.

[Ron]

...but it's definately opportunistic.  No doubt about it. 

[Dunderhead]

I won't be getting any of these until the box set is announced. What's with the "Rebooted" title? A play on words? Will the box be nothing be "bootleg" material, rarities and unreleased tracks?
I'm not terribly interested if it's not. If it's just all the standard albums plus a bonus disc or something I'll probably skip it and just download the tracks that I want from Amazon.

I'm sort of burnt out on the Beach Boys though. Not their music, I've actually been listening to that a lot recently, just all the promotion and marketing and hype. I don't care about a box set, I don't want a box set, all I want it the music.

[monicker]

This is all really great, exciting news, but that cover is so insulting. Capitol and capitalism will go to the grave insisting that the Beach Boys can and should be reduced to their first two years as a band, a surf group, period. It’s pathological at this point. I’ve never, ever seen anyone or anything continually belittled and boxed-in like they have over the decades. Even Christmas Harmonies has a damn surfboard. Just in case, for one brief moment, you might forget that they were/are a surf band. Also, don’t forget that in the overall scope of the group's career, Smile does not exist. Neither does Love You. Kewl.

Their name is The Beach Boys. Lends itself to surfboards. The idea of a band named The Beach Boys being taken too seriously is kinda funny, if you think about it.
I think surf culture and surfboards are pretty boss, myself. Being linked with them isn't a bad thing.

I get that they’re named the BEACH BOYS, i managed to catch that part. This seems to be the go-to response now for this topic, which seems to always miss the point (i suspect on purpose to be glib)--it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative. Obviously the surfing motif is the angle that sells, so it’s been used for decades, there’s nothing new here, but that doesn’t mean it should just be accepted because it’s standard practice. It undermines the vast majority of the music and the group’s legacy simply because it’s an incredibly narrow representation, done so to make more money from the band. How is it okay to represent the entire history of the band by only truly accounting for the first two years when they were kids? Where’s the surfing on Little Deuce Coupe, Shut Down Volume 2, All Summer Long, Today, Summer Days, Pet Sounds, Smile, Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, Friends, 20/20, Sunflower, Surf’s Up, So Tough, Holland, 15 Big Ones, Love You, M.I.U., L.A., etc.? Would it have made sense to have surfboards on those album covers too? Where’s the surfing on anything other than the first three records, which span NOT EVEN A FULL YEAR out of FIFTY YEARS? Taking these two new Greatest Hits releases, on the 1 disc version, there are 3 out of 20 songs that are about surfing: 15%. The 2 disc version has 4 out of 50 songs: 8%. Yet there it is: a gaudy, stock-image-like photo of surfboards lined up on a beach. Isn’t that cheapening the band’s overall career? This is the best way to go about representing the band? To, without fail, do this EVERY TIME? From their very own record label? It’s like we’re caught in an infinity loop. Yes, i get that most of their early music is about escapism and glorifying a simpler life, but there are other metaphors and images that could be used instead of the very specific surf imagery that is used year after year after year. This sort of one-angle dumbing down of a subject in general is a social disease, certainly not just with the Beach Boys.   

Just my two lousy cents.

[Dunderhead]

And for that matter, why exactly does "Beach" = "Surfing"?

[runnersdialzero]

it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative.

AW YEAH

[Dunderhead]

it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative.

AW YEAH

I don't get it

[The Shift]

What would the perfect image be that represented the band's 50-year output?  They gotta pick something…

[Wirestone]

[The Shift]

No need to get catty…!

[runnersdialzero]

it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative.

AW YEAH

I don't get it

I was agreein' with him to the max. He nailed it. ^_^

[Alex]

This is all really great, exciting news, but that cover is so insulting. Capitol and capitalism will go to the grave insisting that the Beach Boys can and should be reduced to their first two years as a band, a surf group, period. It’s pathological at this point. I’ve never, ever seen anyone or anything continually belittled and boxed-in like they have over the decades. Even Christmas Harmonies has a damn surfboard. Just in case, for one brief moment, you might forget that they were/are a surf band. Also, don’t forget that in the overall scope of the group's career, Smile does not exist. Neither does Love You. Kewl.

Their name is The Beach Boys. Lends itself to surfboards. The idea of a band named The Beach Boys being taken too seriously is kinda funny, if you think about it.
I think surf culture and surfboards are pretty boss, myself. Being linked with them isn't a bad thing.

I get that they’re named the BEACH BOYS, i managed to catch that part. This seems to be the go-to response now for this topic, which seems to always miss the point (i suspect on purpose to be glib)--it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative. Obviously the surfing motif is the angle that sells, so it’s been used for decades, there’s nothing new here, but that doesn’t mean it should just be accepted because it’s standard practice. It undermines the vast majority of the music and the group’s legacy simply because it’s an incredibly narrow representation, done so to make more money from the band. How is it okay to represent the entire history of the band by only truly accounting for the first two years when they were kids? Where’s the surfing on Little Deuce Coupe, Shut Down Volume 2, All Summer Long, Today, Summer Days, Pet Sounds, Smile, Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, Friends, 20/20, Sunflower, Surf’s Up, So Tough, Holland, 15 Big Ones, Love You, M.I.U., L.A., etc.? Would it have made sense to have surfboards on those album covers too? Where’s the surfing on anything other than the first three records, which span NOT EVEN A FULL YEAR out of FIFTY YEARS? Taking these two new Greatest Hits releases, on the 1 disc version, there are 3 out of 20 songs that are about surfing: 15%. The 2 disc version has 4 out of 50 songs: 8%. Yet there it is: a gaudy, stock-image-like photo of surfboards lined up on a beach. Isn’t that cheapening the band’s overall career? This is the best way to go about representing the band? To, without fail, do this EVERY TIME? From their very own record label? It’s like we’re caught in an infinity loop. Yes, i get that most of their early music is about escapism and glorifying a simpler life, but there are other metaphors and images that could be used instead of the very specific surf imagery that is used year after year after year. This sort of one-angle dumbing down of a subject in general is a social disease, certainly not just with the Beach Boys.   

Just my two lousy cents.

Actually, there was surfing on MIU..."I wanna go surfin' where I dig it the most in Hawaii..."

[Ziggy Stardust]

Well that changes it all now, doesn't it..

[monicker]

What would the perfect image be that represented the band's 50-year output?  They gotta pick something…

There is no perfect image. Who said anything about the perfect image? Yeah, they gotta pick something. So something has to = surfboards nearly every single time? Hey, what about a car? Didn’t they write just as many songs about cars? Wait a second, they’re called THE BEACH BOYS, they can’t make songs about cars! That doesn’t have anything to do with surfing or the beach and they’re called THE BEACH BOYS! What’s going on here??? Once you pick a name have a name picked for you when you’re teenagers just starting out, you must stick to that theme 4 lyfe.

Seriously though, what about a design (using the band name and title) that does away with the problematic idea of using a photograph to try to capture 50 years of a band’s career? Something well designed, tasteful, classy, and even colorful and eye-catching. You’d think a group who revolutionized and forever changed popular music in composition, arranging, production, and vocal performance/harmony deserves something of quality rather than making their releases look like soda ads, no? What, Greatest Hits packages by The Beach Boys can only sell if they have these dumb covers, if they keep shoving a one-dimensional, grossly oversimplified image of the group down the public’s throat? Do The Beetlez continually get reduced to the first year of their existence? Hey, it’s those mop top bubblegum guys with matching suits that have a harmonica on every song! Do they ever for that matter? Has it happened to them even ONCE?

[The Shift]

Yright, of course, and no-one uses pics of insects on Beatles covers either.

Think I'm just accepting of the fact that the label has done this kind of thing forever and ain't gonna change so there's little we can do but sit back and enjoy the music, which is what it's all about.

The Appeal to the Great Spirit would be the best bet for me but it was used on Ten Years of Harmony and the gaudy use with the 50th anniversary hasn't lit my fire.

A Frank Holmes charicature of the band might work but also harks back to stuff they only did for a few months out of their 50 years. The cover of TWGMTR ain't brilliant but it deals with the issues we're rattling out here. A contemporary photo of the band probably wouldn't cut it.

[Luke_Barshack]

I think that the greatest hits packages were a bit of a wasted opportunity – and I’m not usually much of a cynic.

I saw this as chance to consolidate the Beach Boy’s career achievements in the mind of the public.

To best honest, I was hoping for two discs, in chronological order, that hit most of the milestones.

I hate to mention them in the same sentence as the BBs (again), but it’s something that Apple have done with The Beatles’ back catalogue very well.

You have the ‘1’ standard hits package, and then the red and blue compilations that hit most of the key career beats in – and this is key – chronological order.

In my opinion this creates a clear narrative of the band for the collective public consciousness. People have a general idea of each ‘era’ and pick up ANY Beatles comp, you can roughly follow that path along with the music.

In my opinion, BB comps have been packaged and re-packaged so many times, in so many different ways, it confuses the narrative of the band and leans too heavily on a particular audience, usually the surfer/hits side of things.

It was wishful thinking, but I thought these hits packages could be the final word on The Beach Boys wonderful career, sending a clear message to the record-buying public as to how the BB story unfolds.

To go from ‘Kokomo’ to ‘Kiss Me Baby’, for me, just doesn’t sit right and I strongly feel that it makes the band’s overall output to the uninitiated feel like a strange mess. I truly believe this mismanagement of the band’s hits albums is why I’ve spent some time over the years making mix tapes and convincing people of the true legacy of the BBs.

Or maybe I’m just obsessive compulsive or something! 

[Dunderhead]

What about, you know, just a photograph of the band?

[tansen]

What would the perfect image be that represented the band's 50-year output?  They gotta pick something…

There is no perfect image. Who said anything about the perfect image? Yeah, they gotta pick something. So something has to = surfboards nearly every single time? Hey, what about a car? Didn’t they write just as many songs about cars? Wait a second, they’re called THE BEACH BOYS, they can’t make songs about cars! That doesn’t have anything to do with surfing or the beach and they’re called THE BEACH BOYS! What’s going on here??? Once you pick a name have a name picked for you when you’re teenagers just starting out, you must stick to that theme 4 lyfe.

Seriously though, what about a design (using the band name and title) that does away with the problematic idea of using a photograph to try to capture 50 years of a band’s career? Something well designed, tasteful, classy, and even colorful and eye-catching. You’d think a group who revolutionized and forever changed popular music in composition, arranging, production, and vocal performance/harmony deserves something of quality rather than making their releases look like soda ads, no? What, Greatest Hits packages by The Beach Boys can only sell if they have these dumb covers, if they keep shoving a one-dimensional, grossly oversimplified image of the group down the public’s throat? Do The Beetlez continually get reduced to the first year of their existence? Hey, it’s those mop top bubblegum guys with matching suits that have a harmonica on every song! Do they ever for that matter? Has it happened to them even ONCE?

I'm sure you would love to see the Brother logo on the compilations, I would anyway. But then again, the Brother logo has nothing to do with the Beach Boys really. In fact it's a statue in San Francisco that Dean Torrence saw and liked when he designed the logo. My point being: The public recognise the surf board as something to do with the Beach Boys, Capitol knows this, and therefore uses it. Easy as that.
And come on, why do you really care that much? The collection isn't meant for use hardcore fans (all though we WILL buy it as AGD said), so rather start worrying about the box set logo

[Matt H]

It seems like they should have sold 50 Big Ones throughout the whole tour, but maybe they wanted to push the new album, and figured that people would buy 50 Big Ones instead of it.

[Cabinessenceking]

This is all really great, exciting news, but that cover is so insulting. Capitol and capitalism will go to the grave insisting that the Beach Boys can and should be reduced to their first two years as a band, a surf group, period. It’s pathological at this point. I’ve never, ever seen anyone or anything continually belittled and boxed-in like they have over the decades. Even Christmas Harmonies has a damn surfboard. Just in case, for one brief moment, you might forget that they were/are a surf band. Also, don’t forget that in the overall scope of the group's career, Smile does not exist. Neither does Love You. Kewl.

Their name is The Beach Boys. Lends itself to surfboards. The idea of a band named The Beach Boys being taken too seriously is kinda funny, if you think about it.
I think surf culture and surfboards are pretty boss, myself. Being linked with them isn't a bad thing.

I get that they’re named the BEACH BOYS, i managed to catch that part. This seems to be the go-to response now for this topic, which seems to always miss the point (i suspect on purpose to be glib)--it’s not about being linked to surf culture, or trying to deny that part of their background...it’s about being reduced to it entirely. The good majority of their catalogue has nothing to do with surfing. And it’s irrelevant what one’s opinion is on surfing culture or what kind of image it carries with it; this is about being accurate and not misrepresentative. Obviously the surfing motif is the angle that sells, so it’s been used for decades, there’s nothing new here, but that doesn’t mean it should just be accepted because it’s standard practice. It undermines the vast majority of the music and the group’s legacy simply because it’s an incredibly narrow representation, done so to make more money from the band. How is it okay to represent the entire history of the band by only truly accounting for the first two years when they were kids? Where’s the surfing on Little Deuce Coupe, Shut Down Volume 2, All Summer Long, Today, Summer Days, Pet Sounds, Smile, Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, Friends, 20/20, Sunflower, Surf’s Up, So Tough, Holland, 15 Big Ones, Love You, M.I.U., L.A., etc.? Would it have made sense to have surfboards on those album covers too? Where’s the surfing on anything other than the first three records, which span NOT EVEN A FULL YEAR out of FIFTY YEARS? Taking these two new Greatest Hits releases, on the 1 disc version, there are 3 out of 20 songs that are about surfing: 15%. The 2 disc version has 4 out of 50 songs: 8%. Yet there it is: a gaudy, stock-image-like photo of surfboards lined up on a beach. Isn’t that cheapening the band’s overall career? This is the best way to go about representing the band? To, without fail, do this EVERY TIME? From their very own record label? It’s like we’re caught in an infinity loop. Yes, i get that most of their early music is about escapism and glorifying a simpler life, but there are other metaphors and images that could be used instead of the very specific surf imagery that is used year after year after year. This sort of one-angle dumbing down of a subject in general is a social disease, certainly not just with the Beach Boys.   

Just my two lousy cents.

best post on this thread so far. I fully agree with all of it. (btw there is surf in Surf's Up  )

[Cabinessenceking]

I think that the greatest hits packages were a bit of a wasted opportunity – and I’m not usually much of a cynic.

I saw this as chance to consolidate the Beach Boy’s career achievements in the mind of the public.

To best honest, I was hoping for two discs, in chronological order, that hit most of the milestones.

I hate to mention them in the same sentence as the BBs (again), but it’s something that Apple have done with The Beatles’ back catalogue very well.

You have the ‘1’ standard hits package, and then the red and blue compilations that hit most of the key career beats in – and this is key – chronological order.

In my opinion this creates a clear narrative of the band for the collective public consciousness. People have a general idea of each ‘era’ and pick up ANY Beatles comp, you can roughly follow that path along with the music.

In my opinion, BB comps have been packaged and re-packaged so many times, in so many different ways, it confuses the narrative of the band and leans too heavily on a particular audience, usually the surfer/hits side of things.

It was wishful thinking, but I thought these hits packages could be the final word on The Beach Boys wonderful career, sending a clear message to the record-buying public as to how the BB story unfolds.

To go from ‘Kokomo’ to ‘Kiss Me Baby’, for me, just doesn’t sit right and I strongly feel that it makes the band’s overall output to the uninitiated feel like a strange mess. I truly believe this mismanagement of the band’s hits albums is why I’ve spent some time over the years making mix tapes and convincing people of the true legacy of the BBs.

Or maybe I’m just obsessive compulsive or something! 

Very true, has there ever been a really goos BB's comp? I cannot recall... Sure Endless Summer was well played, but nothing really happened after that...
Imagine Beach Boys red and blue, that could've been something. What the hell ever, screw all the idiots who buy 'best of' packages, they always suck. Real music lovers listen to albums, not hits packages, certainly not predicatable ramble packages like the ones Capitol issues for the Beach Boys. gimme box and I'll be happy.

[The Shift]

All the BBs comps are good - great in fact - they just mostly dish out the same classics time and again.

[EgoHanger1966]

What about, you know, just a photograph of the band?

This!!! I guess there was a certain point where actually putting your face on an album cover became uncool, unless you're a teen pop star who needs it to sell records? Utter bull. I can understand not wanting to put a picture of the 70s/80s band on a cover - long bearded, robed Mike Love shouldn't be anywhere near an album cover (i jest) .....but there were plenty of periods where the band actually looked good. Hell, NOW is one of them! Even just something that alludes to their likeness - like the back cover of Warmth of The Sun.

They're The Beach Boys, they shouldn't be marketed as some faceless group.

[mammy blue]

I wrote this in another thread, but it seems to be focussed on interpersonal board relationship discussions at the moment.

I've already preordered Today, Summer Days and Smiley. I'm considering purchasing the earlier albums for the mono mixes, but I have a general question about them. Are there a lot of discernable and interesting differences between the mono and stereo mixes of those early Beach Boys songs? I'm thinking of the Beatles mixes, and how there are various edits, mistakes, and mixing decisions that pop out at you when you've heard the alternative mix many times. Is the early BB catalog at all like that when going from stereo to mono? Any insights you may have are welcome.

[adam78]

I got into the Beach Boys heavily right around the year 2000, so my collection has only really consisted of the 2fers for all this time for the main early albums. But as time went by, and I heard my more mono like the US capitol singles boxset etc then I knew I was missing out! Not for everyone, and this discussion I have seen countless times on here, but for people like me who believe a lot of the power and feel of their early work is lost in the wide separation stereo versions, I cannot wait for these to be released!
Listening to the HMV clips has truly got me excited. Songs like farmers daughter sound so much more than they ever did on the stereo counterparts.