gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680601 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 29, 2024, 03:28:00 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 4 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Carl and Mike's relationship  (Read 78158 times)
oldsurferdude
Guest
« Reply #325 on: May 01, 2013, 06:51:06 PM »

I'm pretty sure the one servicing him with her heels is his wife
Which wife??  Razz
Logged
Sheriff John Stone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5309



View Profile
« Reply #326 on: May 01, 2013, 07:35:51 PM »

Mike needs to recognize that the music of the Beach Boys is as classic as Gershwin or Berlin or Richard Rodgers.

Mike Love recognized that in 1973.
Logged
Mike's Beard
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4265


Check your privilege. Love & Mercy guys!


View Profile
« Reply #327 on: May 01, 2013, 11:43:21 PM »

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.



Hmmmm, don't recall ever using the words manipulated or exploited in my post. It's much less sinister than that, Brian simply doesn't care half the time and is willingly led around by whoever is leading the project at the time just for a quick, simple, quiet life. And most of these people can't see past the Brian of Pet Sounds/California Girls. What we often get is a Beach Boys forgery by talented session pro's which Brian then bangs out his shouty, robotic Ozzy Ozborne type vocals over the top of.
Logged

I'd rather be forced to sleep with Caitlyn Jenner then ever have to listen to NPP again.
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #328 on: May 01, 2013, 11:55:15 PM »


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... Smiley

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.


Thankfully you've got me mixed up with someone else as I don't think Mike was 'keeping the band relevant'. I think he was turd polishing by doing as many duets, movie soundtracks and TV shows as the band could because he knew that was the best/only way to keep the band in the public eye at the time.
« Last Edit: May 01, 2013, 11:59:22 PM by Nicko1234 » Logged
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #329 on: May 02, 2013, 12:09:41 AM »


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.


Oh, I completely agree that if Brian were left to his own devices he wouldn't suddenly come out with a 'synth-pop masterpiece'.

But the reason I mentioned 2004 was due to the release of GIOMH. Not an album he seemed to have any interest in and one which his management picked the songs and called Robbie Williams, Sting, Elton etc. to make guest appearances. As you say, it may well be that he allows himself to be forced in these things.
Logged
adamghost
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 2107



View Profile
« Reply #330 on: May 02, 2013, 02:03:02 AM »

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.

Man, you took what I was trying to say upthread, and just nailed it in two short sentences.

Exactly right.
Logged
El Molé
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 77


View Profile
« Reply #331 on: May 02, 2013, 03:50:44 AM »

You can't lop off 1985 onward without realizing the utterly stultifying effect that Endless Summer had on the band in the mid- to late 70s. And you can't talk about that without talking about the way that the group was almost instantly anthologized as an oldies act in the late 60s.

The fact is, this is a band that was always about a singular created reality. And that reality (loosely defined as surf/cars/girls/occasional mopey BW ballad) was so powerful that it warped the group's entire career, and continues to do so. The embarrassments of the 80s and 90s are easily explainable when you realize that this was something that had pulled on the group its entire career.

What's funny is, the group managed to hold it together reasonably well music-wise as long as Brian or Carl were in charge. Each one had enough of a personal musical vision that they could avoid being sucked too far into the past (or if they did, it was on their own terms). Mike had neither the artistic ability or aesthetic sense to do anything other than the most ham-handed, nakedly tacky crap once he led the band. But it wasn't his fault. The market demanded it, and he made it. And when the market stopped demanding it, he stopped making it.

This thread has moved on quite a bit since this post, but I think it's pretty important to the discussion. From '67 to '73 the band had been trying make great music and reclaim their popularity, without that much success. Endless Summer and Spirit of America (which I think had one post-65 song between them) threw them back into the people's consciousness based on material from the early sixties. The next release was 15 Big Ones, which could barely be more of a throwback. Would things have been different after Endless Summer if they'd released a solid and current sounding album in '76? A Pacific Ocean Blue with Beach boys vocals, for example? I've no idea whether the context of that time would have allowed for any genuine interest in new progressive music, but 1976 seems like a year in which they were likely to sell albums. Yet 15 Big Ones seems like an album that would make it very difficult for them to sell subsequent records. Could things have turned out differently if they'd taken the wave of success and pulled things together to release a good album on the back of it? If they could have challenged the perception of being an oldies act with a solid album of new material, maybe they wouldn't have been so locked into the image that hampered them through the 80's and 90's. It seems like they had a chance to show that as well as the early hits, they still had good music to offer - but 15 Big Ones doesn't show that they did (and most subsequent albums don't either).

Logged
LostArt
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 914



View Profile
« Reply #332 on: May 02, 2013, 04:23:27 AM »

At one point during the 15 Big Ones sessions, the plan was to release a double album...one disc of oldies, and one disc of new material.  I believe it was Carl and Dennis pushing for the release of new material, but I could be wrong about that. 
Logged
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #333 on: May 02, 2013, 04:46:08 AM »


This thread has moved on quite a bit since this post, but I think it's pretty important to the discussion. From '67 to '73 the band had been trying make great music and reclaim their popularity, without that much success. Endless Summer and Spirit of America (which I think had one post-65 song between them) threw them back into the people's consciousness based on material from the early sixties. The next release was 15 Big Ones, which could barely be more of a throwback. Would things have been different after Endless Summer if they'd released a solid and current sounding album in '76? A Pacific Ocean Blue with Beach boys vocals, for example? I've no idea whether the context of that time would have allowed for any genuine interest in new progressive music, but 1976 seems like a year in which they were likely to sell albums. Yet 15 Big Ones seems like an album that would make it very difficult for them to sell subsequent records. Could things have turned out differently if they'd taken the wave of success and pulled things together to release a good album on the back of it? If they could have challenged the perception of being an oldies act with a solid album of new material, maybe they wouldn't have been so locked into the image that hampered them through the 80's and 90's. It seems like they had a chance to show that as well as the early hits, they still had good music to offer - but 15 Big Ones doesn't show that they did (and most subsequent albums don't either).



Another great post.
Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #334 on: May 02, 2013, 05:30:39 AM »

Best of the Beach Boys #8, Beach Boys Concert #1, Endless Summer #1, Spirit of America #8, 15 Big Ones #8.  It's hard to look at that and the stats for their "new" music albums and see how Brian was "wrong" in bucking Carl and Dennis in 15BO or how the group would see an incentive to make a lot new direction music.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
AndrewHickey
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1999



View Profile
« Reply #335 on: May 02, 2013, 05:32:37 AM »

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

Given that that looks like a family photo (it has Mike's wife and at least one of his daughters in) this might be the single least classy thing I've ever seen on this board.
For that matter, even if they *weren't* his family,  that would still have been an absolutely disgraceful comment. This board is rapidly descending into a cesspit of misogynist filth.
Logged

The Smiley Smile ignore function: http://andrewhickey.info/the-smiley-smile-ignore-button-sort-of/
Most recent update 03/12/15
OGoldin
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 110


View Profile
« Reply #336 on: May 02, 2013, 06:59:35 AM »

I've no idea whether the context of that time would have allowed for any genuine interest in new progressive music, but 1976 seems like a year in which they were likely to sell albums. Yet 15 Big Ones seems like an album that would make it very difficult for them to sell subsequent records. Could things have turned out differently if they'd taken the wave of success and pulled things together to release a good album on the back of it?

I was in high school at the time.  I thought Surf's Up and Holland were wonderful albums.  Then Endless Summer was released around the same time as American Graffiti, a period of reaction against progressive rock and psychedelia, when the simplicity of  oldies was again becoming fashionable.  15 Big Ones built on that.  The attitude among those like me who were musical elitists was "oh they've become just an oldies band" -- but for most kids my age -- including the jocks and cheerleaders, etc, it was at that point that the Beach Boys became popular.  I remember hearing "15 Big Ones is a really cool album."  But I never bothered to listen -- until decades later when I discovered Love You and started sampling other later work.  I actually enjoy the album now -- but I need to remix it in my head -- bringing the drums and synths way up in the mix.  (I still hope for such a remix someday.)

My point here is that 15 Big Ones did exactly what it was supposed to do.  Even official arbiters of taste like Christgau liked it.  I think we are hard on it because it made some big steps in the direction of the painful mistakes that were to follow.
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #337 on: May 02, 2013, 07:06:41 AM »

At one point during the 15 Big Ones sessions, the plan was to release a double album...one disc of oldies, and one disc of new material.  I believe it was Carl and Dennis pushing for the release of new material, but I could be wrong about that. 
I wonder if a Compromise could have been made where Dennis and Carl made the new material disk while Brian did the oldies disc as "warm up"
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #338 on: May 02, 2013, 07:20:01 AM »


My point here is that 15 Big Ones did exactly what it was supposed to do.  Even official arbiters of taste like Christgau liked it.  I think we are hard on it because it made some big steps in the direction of the painful mistakes that were to follow.

I'm not sure about that. I know it did get some good reviews at the time but it also received some poor ones. It is a desperately poor album imo and I certainly don't think people are too hard on it.
Logged
Nicko1234
Guest
« Reply #339 on: May 02, 2013, 07:22:09 AM »

I think the Brian's Back campaign also showed the group (Mike in particular) that having a decent gimmick is more important than having good music when it comes to chart success. Pretty much all of the band's biggest successes since then have come due to something other than the music.
Logged
smile-holland
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2131


The dream of Amsterdamee...


View Profile
« Reply #340 on: May 02, 2013, 07:33:37 AM »

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

Given that that looks like a family photo (it has Mike's wife and at least one of his daughters in) this might be the single least classy thing I've ever seen on this board.
For that matter, even if they *weren't* his family,  that would still have been an absolutely disgraceful comment. This board is rapidly descending into a cesspit of misogynist filth.

Not appropriate at all, and - as the mods have decided to be more strict on the rules - he just got a first (temporary) ban.
Logged

Quote
Rule of thumb, think BEFORE you post. And THINK how it may affect someone else's feelings.

Check out the Beach Boys Starline website, the place for pictures of many countries Beach Boys releases on 45.

Listening to you I get the music; Gazing at you I get the heat; Following you I climb the mountain; I get excitement at your feet
Right behind you I see the millions; On you I see the glory; From you I get opinions; From you I get the story
bgas
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 6372


Oh for the good old days


View Profile
« Reply #341 on: May 02, 2013, 09:03:35 AM »

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

Given that that looks like a family photo (it has Mike's wife and at least one of his daughters in) this might be the single least classy thing I've ever seen on this board.
For that matter, even if they *weren't* his family,  that would still have been an absolutely disgraceful comment. This board is rapidly descending into a cesspit of misogynist filth.

Not appropriate at all, and - as the mods have decided to be more strict on the rules - he just got a first (temporary) ban.

Wait. This board is modulated?
Logged

Nothing I post is my opinion, it's all a message from God
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #342 on: May 02, 2013, 09:43:29 AM »

At one point during the 15 Big Ones sessions, the plan was to release a double album...one disc of oldies, and one disc of new material.  I believe it was Carl and Dennis pushing for the release of new material, but I could be wrong about that. 
I wonder if a Compromise could have been made where Dennis and Carl made the new material disk while Brian did the oldies disc as "warm up"

I've heard that there are alternate mixes done by virtually everyone in the group of 15BO. Can anyone with knowledge clarify, confirm or deny that?
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
Mike's Beard
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4265


Check your privilege. Love & Mercy guys!


View Profile
« Reply #343 on: May 02, 2013, 09:59:03 AM »

I think the Brian's Back campaign also showed the group (Mike in particular) that having a decent gimmick is more important than having good music when it comes to chart success. Pretty much all of the band's biggest successes since then have come due to something other than the music.

I think the 'Brian's Back!' campaign was more Steve Love's idea than anyone else. There was no need for it. Just having Brian back as a willing, full time contributing member should have been enough. Dumping full production, leadership and the bulk of the songwriting on him was clearly too much too soon. It should have been obvious within a couple of sessions and it no doubt was, but Steve HAD to have his 15 year anniversary, Brian led album out at any cost. So yes it became a case of the gimmick being more important than actually having decent music.
Logged

I'd rather be forced to sleep with Caitlyn Jenner then ever have to listen to NPP again.
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #344 on: May 02, 2013, 10:26:09 AM »


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... Smiley

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.


Thankfully you've got me mixed up with someone else as I don't think Mike was 'keeping the band relevant'. I think he was turd polishing by doing as many duets, movie soundtracks and TV shows as the band could because he knew that was the best/only way to keep the band in the public eye at the time.


The line in bold print may be where opinions we agree on start to drift apart, hear me out: What you say is correct, to a point, because once again it has to be remembered that at the same time we had all the Summer In Paradise and Baywatch and Problem Child debacles and missteps coming out, we also had the CD releases of the classic albums for the first time, as well as a continued buzz about the Pet Sounds CD release. I remember that well, and while not on the mass appeal level of 1987 when I witnessed people lining up at record stores to get the newest crop of Beatles releases on CD, there were a lot of people seriously getting into the *music* of the Beach Boys through those albums which they could buy for the first time on CD, and that legacy was alive and well, and serving the band quite well, thank you.

When you write "keep the band in the public eye", I'd suggest a better phrase would be "keep Mike in the public eye".

As a distant observer and fan, a lot of what gets done and said seems more about Mike's desire to be in the spotlight than it does any notion of the band or the legacy. "The band" as a concept often looks more like a vehicle for Mike to get the spotlight.

And I may be waaaayyyyy off base in saying this, but I think the 50th anniversary tour and the TTGMTR album of 2012...hell, all of 2012 related to Beach Boys events...may have challenged Mike's identity and his role as the focus of attention surrounding the name "Beach Boys", especially on a concert stage. He became part of a larger group and a larger event where his frontman routine was pushed aside every night by not only a "full" band of original members, but also a notion that people were there to celebrate the Beach Boys as a whole...whether that was seeing Brian on stage, hearing David Marks play some amazing guitar solos, seeing Al and David rocking out on rhythm guitars, watching the tributes to Carl and Dennis, etc.

There wasn't much room for Mike in a frontman/leader/focal point role when all of that was going on under the name "Beach Boys", whereas Mike was more accustomed to being the only true original member on those stages and being the focus of the attention during the show.

And when it came time to do the first new BB's album with this lineup, yes he received "Executive Producer" credit on the cover but the focus was clearly on Brian producing the surviving original members of the Beach Boys in the studio for the first time in decades. Mike's role was again pushed aside by the sheer force of what was happening and who was involved, and there was no room to make videos like Kokomo or whatever the case may be.


And the difference between thinking Mike was doing those things around the Kokomo era for the "band" versus doing it for "Mike" relates to the original topic of Mike and Carl. I believe Carl could very well have known when it was time to step a little further back into the shadows for the benefit of the band and those who depended on it, whereas Mike's decisions were more about proving himself and his role as a frontman and focus of attention.

I truly believe Carl was more of a team player who could have been more willing to take a step back, out of the spotlight and leadership role, if it meant keeping the band going. I believe Mike had a harder time doing that because his identity as leader and frontman of the Beach Boys is both his offense and defense, as he sometimes shows in interviews like the one where he mentioned TTGMTR's chart position at #3 as "not bad" while mentioning his authorship of California Girls. It's about him rather than the notion of the band.

In my opinion.
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
Sheriff John Stone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5309



View Profile
« Reply #345 on: May 02, 2013, 11:07:46 AM »


My point here is that 15 Big Ones did exactly what it was supposed to do.  Even official arbiters of taste like Christgau liked it.  I think we are hard on it because it made some big steps in the direction of the painful mistakes that were to follow.

I'm not sure about that. I know it did get some good reviews at the time but it also received some poor ones. It is a desperately poor album imo and I certainly don't think people are too hard on it.

I think in some ways 15 Big Ones DID work for the group:

1. First and foremost, it made money for the band. The album went to No. 8, stayed on the charts for 27 weeks, and went Gold. The guys were drug addicts, alcoholics, had alimony payments, child support payments, mortgage payments, boat payments, attorneys' fees, and doctors' fees. 15 Big Ones wasn't a commercial flop.

2. It got them a hit single (almost two) and got them back on AM radio since when, 1969?

3. It gave them accessible songs to perform live; they played a good 5-6 songs from 15 Big Ones.

4. For better or worse, 15 Big Ones did get Brian back to writing and producing. An album of entirely new material might've been too much for Brian and scared him away. I think the tracks on 15 Big Ones are well-produced.

15 Big Ones, while seriously flawed, did what it was intended to do (see above points). Yes, it might've driven some fans away. I mean, by the time you got to "Blueberry Hill" you were losing patience fast. And it had its fair share of WTF moments (i.e. Brian's and Dennis's vocals). However, I think the real problem at that time (late 1976 early 1977) was Love You. As much as I adore Love You - and it's in my Top 4-5 Beach Boys' albums - THAT WAS THE ALBUM that sealed the band's fate in their attempt for relevance and going in a non-fun musical direction. Love You was not the album for that crucial time.

The Beach Boys kept their fans interested with 15 Big Ones, they stayed on the radio, they stayed in the record stores, and they remained popular on the road. NOW WAS THE TIME for that serious, post-Holland, "band showcase", non-surf 'n turf album. Oh, um, did I mention a couple of things that prevented that from happening....It was "decided" on a full album of Brian Wilson songs, Dennis was pursuing a solo album so there went his songs, Carl was having serious drug problems, and I really don't know what Mike Love voted for in late 1976. If a group ever needed a manager or a mentor or someone to provide guidance or words of wisdom, it would've been The Beach Boys in 1976-77. But, based on where everybody's heads were at in 1976-77, I guess it just wasn't meant to be, and we never got the album we were waiting for...
« Last Edit: May 02, 2013, 11:42:55 AM by Sheriff John Stone » Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #346 on: May 02, 2013, 11:26:58 AM »

The line in bold print may be where opinions we agree on start to drift apart, hear me out: What you say is correct, to a point, because once again it has to be remembered that at the same time we had all the Summer In Paradise and Baywatch and Problem Child debacles and missteps coming out, we also had the CD releases of the classic albums for the first time, as well as a continued buzz about the Pet Sounds CD release. I remember that well, and while not on the mass appeal level of 1987 when I witnessed people lining up at record stores to get the newest crop of Beatles releases on CD, there were a lot of people seriously getting into the *music* of the Beach Boys through those albums which they could buy for the first time on CD, and that legacy was alive and well, and serving the band quite well, thank you.

When you write "keep the band in the public eye", I'd suggest a better phrase would be "keep Mike in the public eye".

As a distant observer and fan, a lot of what gets done and said seems more about Mike's desire to be in the spotlight than it does any notion of the band or the legacy. "The band" as a concept often looks more like a vehicle for Mike to get the spotlight.

And I may be waaaayyyyy off base in saying this, but I think the 50th anniversary tour and the TTGMTR album of 2012...hell, all of 2012 related to Beach Boys events...may have challenged Mike's identity and his role as the focus of attention surrounding the name "Beach Boys", especially on a concert stage. He became part of a larger group and a larger event where his frontman routine was pushed aside every night by not only a "full" band of original members, but also a notion that people were there to celebrate the Beach Boys as a whole...whether that was seeing Brian on stage, hearing David Marks play some amazing guitar solos, seeing Al and David rocking out on rhythm guitars, watching the tributes to Carl and Dennis, etc.

There wasn't much room for Mike in a frontman/leader/focal point role when all of that was going on under the name "Beach Boys", whereas Mike was more accustomed to being the only true original member on those stages and being the focus of the attention during the show.

And when it came time to do the first new BB's album with this lineup, yes he received "Executive Producer" credit on the cover but the focus was clearly on Brian producing the surviving original members of the Beach Boys in the studio for the first time in decades. Mike's role was again pushed aside by the sheer force of what was happening and who was involved, and there was no room to make videos like Kokomo or whatever the case may be.


And the difference between thinking Mike was doing those things around the Kokomo era for the "band" versus doing it for "Mike" relates to the original topic of Mike and Carl. I believe Carl could very well have known when it was time to step a little further back into the shadows for the benefit of the band and those who depended on it, whereas Mike's decisions were more about proving himself and his role as a frontman and focus of attention.

I truly believe Carl was more of a team player who could have been more willing to take a step back, out of the spotlight and leadership role, if it meant keeping the band going. I believe Mike had a harder time doing that because his identity as leader and frontman of the Beach Boys is both his offense and defense, as he sometimes shows in interviews like the one where he mentioned TTGMTR's chart position at #3 as "not bad" while mentioning his authorship of California Girls. It's about him rather than the notion of the band.

In my opinion.

Nice post. But I gotta say, since it's bugging me....its TWGMTR and not TTGMTR.
Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #347 on: May 02, 2013, 11:48:41 AM »

I think in some ways 15 Big Ones DID work for the group:

1. First and foremost, it made money for the band. The album went to No. 8, stayed on the charts for 27 weeks, and went Gold. The guys were drug addicts, alcoholics, had alimony payments, child support payments, mortgage payments, boat payments, attorneys' fees, and doctors' fees. 15 Big Ones wasn't a commercial flop.

2. It got them a hit single (almost two) and got them back on AM radio since when, 1969?

3. It gave them accessible songs to perform live; they played a good 5-6 songs from 15 Big Ones.

4. For better or worse, 15 Big Ones did get Brian back to writing and producing. An album of entirely new material might've been too much for Brian and scared him away. I think the tracks on 15 Big Ones are well-produced.

15 Big Ones, while seriously flawed, did what it was intended to do (see above points). Yes, it might've driven some fans away. I mean, by the time, you got to "Blueberry Hill" you were losing patience fast. And it had its fair share of WTF moments (i.e. Brian's and Dennis's vocals). However, I think the real problem at that time (late 1976 early 1977) was Love You. As much as I adore Love You, and it's in my Top 4-5 Beach Boys' albums, THAT WAS THE ALBUM that sealed the band's fate in their attempt for relevance or going in non-fun musical direction. Love You was not the album for that time.

The Beach Boys kept their fans interested with 15 Big Ones, they stayed on the radio, they stayed in the record stores, and they remained popular on the road. NOW WAS THE TIME for that serious, post-Holland, "band showcase", non-surf 'n turf album. Oh, um, did I mention a couple of things that prevented that from happening....It was "decided" on a full album of Brian Wilson songs, Dennis was pursuing a solo album so there went his songs, Carl was having serious drug problems, and I really don't know what Mike Love voted for in late 1976. If a group ever needed a manager or a mentor or someone to provide guidance or words of wisdom, it would've been The Beach Boys in 1976-77. But, based on where everybody's heads were at in 1976-77, I guess it just wasn't meant to be...

I guess 15 Big Ones worked to an extent, but I still think they would have garnered more positive reviews and more sales if they divided up the album a la Holland and L.A. (Light Album). You could still market Brian as being "back" with his four new classics. One classic ballad ("Good Timin'"), one summery rocker ("It's OK"), one quirky pocket symphony ("Had To Phone Ya"), and one paean to California ("California Feelin'"). Add in a few tracks by Dennis ("River Song", "Pacific Ocean Blue"), maybe one by Mike ("Everyone's In Love With You"), and one by Carl ("Angel Come Home)", along with a few covers ("Just Once In My Life", "Palisaides Park"), and you have a pretty strong album. Maybe not as strong as Holland, but possibly with more high points. I also think that album would be stronger than anything their contemporaries had out (Wings At The Speed Of Sound, The Who By Numbers, Dylan's Desire, or the Stones Black And Blue. I think it would have made The Beach Boys more firmly contemporary than 15 Big Ones did.
Logged
Sheriff John Stone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5309



View Profile
« Reply #348 on: May 02, 2013, 12:01:20 PM »

I think in some ways 15 Big Ones DID work for the group:

1. First and foremost, it made money for the band. The album went to No. 8, stayed on the charts for 27 weeks, and went Gold. The guys were drug addicts, alcoholics, had alimony payments, child support payments, mortgage payments, boat payments, attorneys' fees, and doctors' fees. 15 Big Ones wasn't a commercial flop.

2. It got them a hit single (almost two) and got them back on AM radio since when, 1969?

3. It gave them accessible songs to perform live; they played a good 5-6 songs from 15 Big Ones.

4. For better or worse, 15 Big Ones did get Brian back to writing and producing. An album of entirely new material might've been too much for Brian and scared him away. I think the tracks on 15 Big Ones are well-produced.

15 Big Ones, while seriously flawed, did what it was intended to do (see above points). Yes, it might've driven some fans away. I mean, by the time, you got to "Blueberry Hill" you were losing patience fast. And it had its fair share of WTF moments (i.e. Brian's and Dennis's vocals). However, I think the real problem at that time (late 1976 early 1977) was Love You. As much as I adore Love You, and it's in my Top 4-5 Beach Boys' albums, THAT WAS THE ALBUM that sealed the band's fate in their attempt for relevance or going in non-fun musical direction. Love You was not the album for that time.

The Beach Boys kept their fans interested with 15 Big Ones, they stayed on the radio, they stayed in the record stores, and they remained popular on the road. NOW WAS THE TIME for that serious, post-Holland, "band showcase", non-surf 'n turf album. Oh, um, did I mention a couple of things that prevented that from happening....It was "decided" on a full album of Brian Wilson songs, Dennis was pursuing a solo album so there went his songs, Carl was having serious drug problems, and I really don't know what Mike Love voted for in late 1976. If a group ever needed a manager or a mentor or someone to provide guidance or words of wisdom, it would've been The Beach Boys in 1976-77. But, based on where everybody's heads were at in 1976-77, I guess it just wasn't meant to be...

I guess 15 Big Ones worked to an extent, but I still think they would have garnered more positive reviews and more sales if they divided up the album a la Holland and L.A. (Light Album). You could still market Brian as being "back" with his four new classics. One classic ballad ("Good Timin'"), one summery rocker ("It's OK"), one quirky pocket symphony ("Had To Phone Ya"), and one paean to California ("California Feelin'"). Add in a few tracks by Dennis ("River Song", "Pacific Ocean Blue"), maybe one by Mike ("Everyone's In Love With You"), and one by Carl ("Angel Come Home)", along with a few covers ("Just Once In My Life", "Palisaides Park"), and you have a pretty strong album. Maybe not as strong as Holland, but possibly with more high points. I also think that album would be stronger than anything their contemporaries had out (Wings At The Speed Of Sound, The Who By Numbers, Dylan's Desire, or the Stones Black And Blue. I think it would have made The Beach Boys more firmly contemporary than 15 Big Ones did.

sweetdudejim, I agree with you 100%. That's the way they should've gone, no doubt about it. The point I am making, and have been making for years, is that even though they made a mistake with 15 Big Ones, and took a hit with it to some extent, they were still very much alive. It was still 1976 and they were still riding high - literally. But, instead of moving forward from 15 Big Ones and recording that artistic, post-Holland, blah blah blah album, they did Love You and the game was over. There was still a chance AFTER 15 Big Ones is my point I guess.
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #349 on: May 02, 2013, 12:17:42 PM »

Billy C once made an interesting idea for a BBs album in 1975. To hide Brian's vocal decline by using vault outtakes from 1968-1974.
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
gfx
Pages: 1 ... 9 10 11 12 13 [14] 15 16 17 18 19 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.534 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!