Carl and Mike's relationship

[Nicko1234]

Didn't Terry Melcher produce SIP?

Yep and he has expressed regret for it. Bruce said that Melcher hated it as they had to rush the CD because the distributor offered them a stack of cash to get it out quickly.

[SMiLE Brian]

No, you were saying you deserve his apology for SIP. Let's not rewrite history. 

I never said I wanted an apology, I was just pointing out how I grew up in the 1990s and finding out SIP was their final album. Just seeing all those bad reviews was a bummer.

[SMiLE Brian]

All I am saying is that I don't like Mike's arrogance in putting "TWGTMR" down as a flop, when he did not do better leading the BBs with SIP.

That's not what he said though is it?

I actually haven't seen Mike really interviewed about the period from 1985 onwards apart from when he is asked about Kokomo which is a shame.

Read between the lines:
Q: Well, it’s recent history.

A: Well, it debuted at No. 3. That’s not bad.( didn't do as expected) But it didn’t stay up there very long. (disappointment like H&V) To have sustained success, like we’ve been known to do (kokomo reference), you need a single that will chart and stay in the Top 20 or the Top 10 for three months.(Fantasy on how well Kokomo did)   And that didn’t happen with this album. (flop)

[Nicko1234]

Read between the lines:
Q: Well, it’s recent history.

A: Well, it debuted at No. 3. That’s not bad.( didn't do as expected) But it didn’t stay up there very long. (disappointment like H&V) To have sustained success, like we’ve been known to do (kokomo reference), you need a single that will chart and stay in the Top 20 or the Top 10 for three months.(Fantasy on how well Kokomo did)   And that didn’t happen with this album. (flop)

Not bad doesn't equal flop. I'm not saying I agree with what Mike said because I think the comments show himself to be out of touch with the music industry nowadays as many older performers are. But he didn't say flop at all.

[Dancing Bear]

All I am saying is that I don't like Mike's arrogance in putting "TWGTMR" down as a flop, when he did not do better leading the BBs with SIP.

That's not what he said though is it?

I actually haven't seen Mike really interviewed about the period from 1985 onwards apart from when he is asked about Kokomo which is a shame.

Read between the lines:
Q: Well, it’s recent history.

A: Well, it debuted at No. 3. That’s not bad.( didn't do as expected) But it didn’t stay up there very long. (disappointment like H&V) To have sustained success, like we’ve been known to do (kokomo reference), you need a single that will chart and stay in the Top 20 or the Top 10 for three months.(Fantasy on how well Kokomo did)   And that didn’t happen with this album. (flop)

Kokomo reference? H&V? Do you have a direct link to Mike's brain to know every obscure reference he throws in his interviews?

I think TWGMTR was a triumph and Mike wasn't exactly Mr. Positivity here. He was being grumpy, while he had better things to say about the CD and reunion in several other interviews. You really take everything the guy says out of proportion. It's just Mike being Mike, you can criticize him without fantasizing about his ulterior motives.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Well Brian has Jeff for eye candy 

I wonder if Mike ever nailed Taylor Mills!

I'm sure he's at least tried.

[SMiLE Brian]

Before or after weight-loss surgery?

Not that it matters because Jeff got around in the 1980s ML style.

[Nicko1234]

I wonder if Mike ever nailed Taylor Mills!

I'm sure he's at least tried.

Why would he need to?

I'm sure he has plenty of other comely wenches who are willing to commit harlotry with him in any city he visits.

[Wirestone]

I see it more as Darian, Foskett, Joe Thomas etc trying to clone the Pet Sounds/California Girls style arrangements to everything Brian does these days. If given true 100% creative freedom, I'm positive Brian would be making music that sounded like 'Love You' only with more modern synths.

Well, at least we had a lot of pages before the "Brian is being manipulated / exploited by his collaborators" meme started. Admirable restraint, folks.

Brian has all the freedom in the world. If he doesn't use it, it's either because he doesn't want it or is indeed content with how his modern-day music sounds. Amazing how despite the collaborators he's used -- Andy Paley, Joe Thomas, Scott Bennett, etc. -- it still mostly comes out sounding like the Beach Boys when he was in charge. I don't think that's an accident.

[Nicko1234]

Well, at least we had a lot of pages before the "Brian is being manipulated / exploited by his collaborators" meme started. Admirable restraint, folks.

Brian has all the freedom in the world. If he doesn't use it, it's either because he doesn't want it or is indeed content with how his modern-day music sounds. Amazing how despite the collaborators he's used -- Andy Paley, Joe Thomas, Scott Bennett, etc. -- it still mostly comes out sounding like the Beach Boys when he was in charge. I don't think that's an accident.

To be fair, this thread had already gone wildly off topic as most do after a while.

Brian obviously didn't have freedom in 2004 so it would be interesting to know when that began...

That should probably be saved for another thread though.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Can't we all just call a truce and blame Bruce for everything?

[Chocolate Shake Man]

Ah, the Bruce truce.

[SMiLE Brian]

Free Shorts and disney girls for everybody!

[Shady]

Even in 1965, Brian was using the BBs and the WC to make "pop symphonies" unlike the 1963 garage material. California girls, the quintessential "formula" song, features a complex backing track based off Bach. The progression with Pet Sounds through love you sound nothing like the early material.

As Brian ages, he likes to look back to his prime and makes new music using his BBs sound. While Mike threw away his talents developed on Wild Honey through Holland to relive the past. It can't be 1964 forever, Mike.

You should hurry and tell Mike this....

Living in the past has gotta be rough:

I wonder how much Mr L paid them to walk on his testicles in their high heels later on?

I truly nearly died laughing at this post

[guitarfool2002]

If you don't want to see the comparison, that's one thing, but it's the same basis for both points, only one was taken to court by a team of lawyers and the other was posted on a message board.

I think comparing one person posting an opinion on a message board to somebody being taken to court is buffoonery. Kill me.  

I mentioned Al because I was getting the subject back closer towards the original topic of the later years of The Beach Boys. Al was obviously a big part of the Mike/Carl relationship because he was such a pain in the proverbial (and I like Al I should say) during that period. From various sources it has been claimed that Al complained about performing Kokomo live, refused to sing Somewhere Near Japan due to the drug references and also wasn't happy to sing Summer in Paradise. It's interesting to me that he made so many complaints about the group at that time and the setlists before going solo and doing much the same as The BBs had done. Playing a greatest hits set at casinos and outdoor shows and singing songs about cars for PT Cruiser money. He obviously realized this is what the public wanted.

I think Brian's management have also realized how narrow the public perception can be and even he has been forced at times into playing greatest hits sets and recording stuff about cars and girls.

When you see some of the stuff that Al and Brian have done due to public demand, it isn't really such a surprise that The BBs turned into the act that they did in the 1980s.

Buffoonery can also be cherry-picking one or two lines from posts rather than addressing the bigger point(s) being made which you've conveniently distorted or ignored, or instead focused on bullshit minutiae like the saxophone and comparing message boards to court cases rather than taking a giant analytical leap forward and addressing the actual points being made *through the symbolism* instead of the actual symbols.

I'd suggest buffoonery is also trying to bring in a non-issue or a non sequitur like Al Jardine's recent career decisions in order to deflect attention or distract from the other points being made...and expecting no one to notice the tactic. That also never works in the political threads, because those attempting it are usually as ham-fisted in the execution as Mike was when guiding the new music being released by the Beach Boys...

Hashing this stuff out is fine, but trying to rewrite history and telling new fans how Mike was "keeping the legacy alive" or "keeping the band relevant" while fucking things up time after time will continue to be challenged.

It was the recent interview about TTGMTR that got me on this topic anyway, prior to this I could care less and basically ignored what Mike said or did and let the other stuff that used to bother me as a fan from the past drift away into history, bygones-be-bygones and all of that.

But reading the interview as he tries to marginalize TTGMTR, point out its lack of top-5 single success, bemoan the fact that he wasn't as involved...yet the credits read: EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: MIKE LOVE...I guess that's just a bullshit title if he says he wasn't involved...then makes it a point yet again to remind us that he wrote the lyrics to California Girls and Good Vibrations and all those other classics.

It's just too much disappointment and crap to read that interview and see him still playing the same games and all but suggesting the TTGMTR fell short of the greatness that was Kokomo's chart success 25 years ago (it has to be Kokomo he's comparing it to because the man or the band name has not had a new single or album reach anywhere near TTGMTR's #3 position in the past 25 years) because of something they did or didn't do related to his involvement, or his lyrics, or whatever he's saying.

Despite the credit EXECUTIVE PRODUCER: MIKE LOVE

Anyone who can't take the whole of that interview and connect the dots to see these sentiments coming out, after a year of supposed "good vibes and harmony" around the 50th tour and album, either doesn't want to see it or is simply blind to what's going on.

And this is coming from a fan who has enjoyed quite a lot of what Mike has done and what he does musically and on stage for decades. It was just a huge letdown to see him pissing on the latest album, while pointing out his success as a lyricist yet again.

That's about it. Bring back the Mike who was on the Jimmy Fallon and Charlie Rose interviews, he was a much more positive and upbeat guy who seemed to actually be enjoying the music he was involved with rather than Monday-Morning-Quarterbacking it and trying to remind folks of past success.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Free Shorts and disney girls for everybody!

Sounds like Socialism to me

[oldsurferdude]

I want Mike to advise bands on how to stay "relevant"

Mike's rules for Success:
1. Wear neon hats and Zubaz pants.
2. Use cheerleaders and "rappers" in your live show.
3. Hang onto a teenage lifestyle into your 50s.
4. Call your cousin a "genius" for staying home.
5. Use cheap 1980s keyboards for past hits.
6. Have latter day hit song and never let ANYBODY forget it.
7. Go on baywatch with a "current" song.
8. The past is what you want it to be.
9. Play only the hits and covers that sound like them.
10. Pretend that abandoned project that was the best work the group ever did doesn't exist.

Great post!

[oldsurferdude]

Even in 1965, Brian was using the BBs and the WC to make "pop symphonies" unlike the 1963 garage material. California girls, the quintessential "formula" song, features a complex backing track based off Bach. The progression with Pet Sounds through love you sound nothing like the early material.

As Brian ages, he likes to look back to his prime and makes new music using his BBs sound. While Mike threw away his talents developed on Wild Honey through Holland to relive the past. It can't be 1964 forever, Mike.

You should hurry and tell Mike this....

Living in the past has gotta be rough:

Yes it's true! Five out of 100 whores prefer canned ham over antipasto! And now we have pictures!

[Myk Luhv]

I think if Mike didn't have his obsession with commercial viability he'd be pretty punk as f***. Dude just doesn't seem to give a sh*t in a lot of ways, haha.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Good point...... And if he was really hip to commercial viability, aren't there SO MANY things he could be doing?? Like, putting out cool releases (a Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again/waltz Big Sur 7inch, Carnegie Hall live set, Country Love 180gam vinyl release, vintage live DVDs, etc etc etc) and such? Playing SeaWorld and putting out repetitive greatest hits CDs doesn't cut it these days.

[Dancing Bear]

Not that it matters a lot in a message board, but I think there's a daughter of his sitting in the sofa.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I'm pretty sure the one servicing him with her heels is his wife

[Myk Luhv]

She, of course, gets first dibs on the nut-crushing.

[Wirestone]

Brian obviously didn't have freedom in 2004 so it would be interesting to know when that began...

Letting other people make choices for you because you refuse to make them doesn't mean you're being controlled. It doesn't mean you aren't free. It just means you're lazy (or scared). Brian doesn't have to stay married to Melinda, he doesn't have to work with his band, and he doesn't have to record.  He either allows himself to be forced or chooses to do these things.

If folks don't like his current day music, fine. But blame the man responsible. Don't prefer some imaginary world where an "unshackled" Brian would totally start blowing everyone's mind with synth-pop masterpieces. After 25 years as a solo artist, I'm pretty sure we would have had some evidence by now if that were an actual possibility.

[clack]

I think if Mike didn't have his obsession with commercial viability he'd be pretty punk as f***. Dude just doesn't seem to give a sh*t in a lot of ways, haha.

Yeah, Mike should have the self-awareness to realize that he's basically Tony Bennett at this point -- an elderly gent singing the songs of his long-gone youth.

I mean, Tony doesn't pretend to be hip to contemporary musical tastes or trends. He's not trying to make hit singles. He's just making music he loves in a timeless style.

Mike needs to recognize that the music of the Beach Boys is as classic as Gershwin or Berlin or Richard Rodgers. Let contemporary taste move Beach Boy-wards (which it has), no need to go chasing after passing fads.