David Marks' take on the end of C50 tour

[HeyJude]

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Good point.

On another topic,  has anyone considered that it might be as simple as a guy wishing to get back in a way to a place of the best and most productive time of their lives with his cousin?

I think maybe that’s true. It may also be that Mike is the only person, barring some hopeful fans, that believes the two of them alone can write a full album of quality material. I would question whether even Brian believes that is possible. And, frankly, when one person is largely writing the music and the other is writing mostly lyrics, it’s arguably easier for the lyricist to take for granted what it will take to write good music.

Just as you can’t force Mike into a reunion tour, you can’t force Brian into being a writing team with Mike.  

[Cam Mott]

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Good point.

On another topic,  has anyone considered that it might be as simple as a guy wishing to get back in a way to a place of the best and most productive time of their lives with his cousin?

I think maybe that’s true. It may also be that Mike is the only person, barring some hopeful fans, that believes the two of them alone can write a full album of quality material. I would question whether even Brian believes that is possible. And, frankly, when one person is largely writing the music and the other is writing mostly lyrics, it’s arguably easier for the lyricist to take for granted what it will take to write good music.

Just as you can’t force Mike into a reunion tour, you can’t force Brian into being a writing team with Mike.  

But the point is, as I understand Mike, it was Brian's idea.

[HeyJude]

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Good point.

On another topic,  has anyone considered that it might be as simple as a guy wishing to get back in a way to a place of the best and most productive time of their lives with his cousin?

I think maybe that’s true. It may also be that Mike is the only person, barring some hopeful fans, that believes the two of them alone can write a full album of quality material. I would question whether even Brian believes that is possible. And, frankly, when one person is largely writing the music and the other is writing mostly lyrics, it’s arguably easier for the lyricist to take for granted what it will take to write good music.

Just as you can’t force Mike into a reunion tour, you can’t force Brian into being a writing team with Mike.  

But the point is, as I understand Mike, it was Brian's idea.

I don’t recall Mike saying in an interview that Brian said or promised the new album that would accompany their 50th anniversary tour would involve the two of them sitting down alone and writing new songs. (Let’s set aside that, despite this, they actually DID write several songs together for the album; but of course not alone).

I know Mike has said he would like to write alone with Brian. He has mentioned discussing with Brian the idea of the group re-recording old favorites (but that wouldn’t have entailed writing new material). I don’t recall, recently, Mike saying Brian said he wanted to write alone with Mike, and I don’t recall Brian saying this in interviews either, at least as it pertains to the album in question.

[guitarfool2002]

Just to recap/revisit the information being discussed, and to add some specific timeline dates to all of this, here is the rundown. (For those interested, of course)

Rewind to the third week in June 2012. The Beach Boys C50 had just played in the Houston area, earlier that June. A promotional release was put out less than two weeks later to the local press announcing that the Beach Boys would be returning to the Houston area in early October. The local music beat writer got this news, fact-checked it with Nutty Jerry's, and they confirmed that it was in fact the band with Wilson-Marks-Jardine who had played Houston a few weeks ago. That writer then published the announcement along with ticket info, this was on or around June 20th.

Several days later, June 25th, the writer published a correction and follow-up, as he had since been informed by Nutty Jerry's that the gig was not in fact the C50 Beach Boys but instead the touring band from before the C50 tour, minus Wilson-Marks-Jardine. That writer published the official statement from Nutty Jerry's which cancelled the show: "Due to a misunderstanding with the Beach Boy's management and a local booking agent, the October 6th Beach Boys concert at Nutty Jerry's has been cancelled. The group that was scheduled to perform at Nutty Jerry's is not the same lineup as the current "Beach Boys 50th Anniversary" tour. As a result Nutty Jerry's did not feel that we could advertise the show as the "original" Beach Boys. Nutty Jerry's regrets the misunderstanding and any inconvenience to our loyal customers.

Rolling Stone picked up the story and printed it the next day, June 26th, along with comments from Brian where he said he wasn't aware of the South America booking slated for October, and also mentioning the possibility of working on a new Beach Boys album and continuing the C50 tour.

That article also mentioned that as of that time, only one confirmed show had been booked, the South America date in October.

Fast forward to Sept 19th 2012, with the LA Times report of the Grammy Museum events. This statement was in that report: The shift in the touring lineup also has caused some confusion outside the group itself. Texas club Nutty Jerry's had booked a Beach Boys show, which has since been canceled. Love's manager Jay Jones said it was Love's decision to halt the show because it was being inaccurately promoted as part of the reunion tour with the original members.


So a few months removed, there is a contradiction. Nutty Jerry's canceled the show within a week via that press release of June 25, and in September via this report, it's told that Mike actually cancelled the show.

Which one is it? Anyway, that's a sidebar.

When this Nutty Jerry's situation broke nationally via Rolling Stone, again June 26th, at that point there had been one booking for October in South America. The Nutty Jerry's October 6th gig was scheduled to happen almost a week after the band was to play the last show in England, that last week of September.

Almost immediately after the C50 tour returned from England, there was the charity gig Sept 30th at the Santaluz Club in California, with John Stamos.

That third week in June 2012 seems to have been the first indication that shows were being booked separate from C50 as C50 was in full force on the road. At that time, the only gigs known to have been booked were the failed Nutty Jerry's show in October, and the South American show in October.


I'm only outlining that to put all the dates and timeline issues into some context with the discussions. What happened in the way of what was or wasn't booked from July 2012 up to the Grammy event just prior to the European trip for C50 is subject to more digging.

Getting back to the live shows. For HeyJude and others regarding the booking issues: Help me figure out some of the contradictions in the timeline. There are suggestions that the non-50th BB tour dates were being booked at earlier times throughout the 50th tour.

The 50th tour had been in full force since mid-April 2012. As of June 25th or 26th, when Rolling Stone broke the Texas story of Nutty Jerry's nationally, there were only two confirmed dates, one of which was in South America which according to the reports Brian for one was unaware of, and the other which had been announced and almost immediately cancelled via that venue's press release.

It doesn't add up to suggest that bigger plans for post-C50 shows separate from the C50 lineup were already being put into place when as of the last week in June 2012 only one post-C50 show is known to have been scheduled, and even that one show seemed to have been "news" for other C50 participants.

Or am I missing something? I've been known to do that. 

[lee]

I think they should have made 2012 a year of ONLY the C50 Wilson-Love-Jardine-Johnston-Marks lineup. That's it. Make an announcement before the tour began that to celebrate The Beach Boys 50th, all surviving members would tour together for the year of 2012. The celebration would come to a close with a new year's eve show (MSG for example) and Mike & Bruce would go back to touring under "The Beach Boys" name come 2013. That way there would be no public misunderstandings and there'd still be room within the year 2012 (between Wembley and the new year's eve show) to add any more last minute shows they were offered (if they chose to). To me, that seems like it would have been the easiest way to go about the tour.

[HeyJude]

Just to recap/revisit the information being discussed, and to add some specific timeline dates to all of this, here is the rundown. (For those interested, of course)

Rewind to the third week in June 2012. The Beach Boys C50 had just played in the Houston area, earlier that June. A promotional release was put out less than two weeks later to the local press announcing that the Beach Boys would be returning to the Houston area in early October. The local music beat writer got this news, fact-checked it with Nutty Jerry's, and they confirmed that it was in fact the band with Wilson-Marks-Jardine who had played Houston a few weeks ago. That writer then published the announcement along with ticket info, this was on or around June 20th.

Several days later, June 25th, the writer published a correction and follow-up, as he had since been informed by Nutty Jerry's that the gig was not in fact the C50 Beach Boys but instead the touring band from before the C50 tour, minus Wilson-Marks-Jardine. That writer published the official statement from Nutty Jerry's which cancelled the show: "Due to a misunderstanding with the Beach Boy's management and a local booking agent, the October 6th Beach Boys concert at Nutty Jerry's has been cancelled. The group that was scheduled to perform at Nutty Jerry's is not the same lineup as the current "Beach Boys 50th Anniversary" tour. As a result Nutty Jerry's did not feel that we could advertise the show as the "original" Beach Boys. Nutty Jerry's regrets the misunderstanding and any inconvenience to our loyal customers.

Rolling Stone picked up the story and printed it the next day, June 26th, along with comments from Brian where he said he wasn't aware of the South America booking slated for October, and also mentioning the possibility of working on a new Beach Boys album and continuing the C50 tour.

That article also mentioned that as of that time, only one confirmed show had been booked, the South America date in October.

Fast forward to Sept 19th 2012, with the LA Times report of the Grammy Museum events. This statement was in that report: The shift in the touring lineup also has caused some confusion outside the group itself. Texas club Nutty Jerry's had booked a Beach Boys show, which has since been canceled. Love's manager Jay Jones said it was Love's decision to halt the show because it was being inaccurately promoted as part of the reunion tour with the original members.


So a few months removed, there is a contradiction. Nutty Jerry's canceled the show within a week via that press release of June 25, and in September via this report, it's told that Mike actually cancelled the show.

Which one is it? Anyway, that's a sidebar.

When this Nutty Jerry's situation broke nationally via Rolling Stone, again June 26th, at that point there had been one booking for October in South America. The Nutty Jerry's October 6th gig was scheduled to happen almost a week after the band was to play the last show in England, that last week of September.

Almost immediately after the C50 tour returned from England, there was the charity gig Sept 30th at the Santaluz Club in California, with John Stamos.

That third week in June 2012 seems to have been the first indication that shows were being booked separate from C50 as C50 was in full force on the road. At that time, the only gigs known to have been booked were the failed Nutty Jerry's show in October, and the South American show in October.


I'm only outlining that to put all the dates and timeline issues into some context with the discussions. What happened in the way of what was or wasn't booked from July 2012 up to the Grammy event just prior to the European trip for C50 is subject to more digging.

Getting back to the live shows. For HeyJude and others regarding the booking issues: Help me figure out some of the contradictions in the timeline. There are suggestions that the non-50th BB tour dates were being booked at earlier times throughout the 50th tour.

The 50th tour had been in full force since mid-April 2012. As of June 25th or 26th, when Rolling Stone broke the Texas story of Nutty Jerry's nationally, there were only two confirmed dates, one of which was in South America which according to the reports Brian for one was unaware of, and the other which had been announced and almost immediately cancelled via that venue's press release.

It doesn't add up to suggest that bigger plans for post-C50 shows separate from the C50 lineup were already being put into place when as of the last week in June 2012 only one post-C50 show is known to have been scheduled, and even that one show seemed to have been "news" for other C50 participants.

Or am I missing something? I've been known to do that. 

I think the general idea is that shows can be pursued, tentatively booked, scheduled, etc. FAR before they are actually announced or publicized. As with a lot of this stuff, we can only guess. But if Mike’s band was already playing shows in September/October 2012, and later into that year, to say nothing of 2013, I don’t believe he hadn’t booked anything but those few shows by the end of C50 at the end of September 2012.

Word got out by June that South American dates for post-C50 were being booked (with the implication that some had “known of” those plans even earlier). Once that was happening, I doubt Mike was booking just a “few” shows with the thought that they might be doing any imminent additional reunion tour dates. Stands to reason that once that was the case, by June/July, they were booking future shows as they normally would. By the end of September, it’s feasible (again, we’re just guessing of course) that they had already begun booking 2013 dates.

[Cam Mott]

I probably won't have time to look it up but as I remember it is from discussions about Brian coming to Mike a year before and discussing what he wanted to do or what they could do.

[Ron]

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Exactly.  I truly believe Mike made this happen, beacuse he wanted to work with Brian and he wanted to give the fans something they'd love (see what I did there???).  He probably thought that he could have his cake and eat it too.

in Mike's mind, he does the C50 thing, then does the Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a C51 thing, then a Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a c52 thing, etc.  Once the C50 tour ended and Brian and Al basically acted like little girls about it, Mike just decided he didn't feel charitable anymore and went all 'if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" on us.  So when somebody asks him about it, he just smiles and says it was pleasant blah blah blah and never really mentions that he didn't enjoy becoming part of Brian's entourage.

So now he's in a position where he feels like he gave the fans what they wanted, and he was nice to Brian, and now he's back to touring how he wants and making money how he wants. 

If it was all about money, he would have been bending over backwards to please Brian or get Brian to do anything at all with him.  He booked dates on purpose at the end of the tour, well before the tour, so that he'd have an out in October.  He knew from the beginning he wasn't going to really want to do it like that forever, which proves in my mind at least that Mike did this for Brian, and for the fans.  That's about as charitable as Mike gets, and to be honest, I appreciate that he did it. 

[guitarfool2002]

If it was all about money, it would have happened earlier and lasted longer.

Exactly.  I truly believe Mike made this happen, beacuse he wanted to work with Brian and he wanted to give the fans something they'd love (see what I did there???).  He probably thought that he could have his cake and eat it too.

in Mike's mind, he does the C50 thing, then does the Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a C51 thing, then a Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a c52 thing, etc.  Once the C50 tour ended and Brian and Al basically acted like little girls about it, Mike just decided he didn't feel charitable anymore and went all 'if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" on us.  So when somebody asks him about it, he just smiles and says it was pleasant blah blah blah and never really mentions that he didn't enjoy becoming part of Brian's entourage.

So now he's in a position where he feels like he gave the fans what they wanted, and he was nice to Brian, and now he's back to touring how he wants and making money how he wants. 

If it was all about money, he would have been bending over backwards to please Brian or get Brian to do anything at all with him.  He booked dates on purpose at the end of the tour, well before the tour, so that he'd have an out in October.  He knew from the beginning he wasn't going to really want to do it like that forever, which proves in my mind at least that Mike did this for Brian, and for the fans.  That's about as charitable as Mike gets, and to be honest, I appreciate that he did it. 

You might truly believe it but that doesn't always make it true. 

Consider a few possibilities, one of which being perhaps Brian, Al, and David didn't wish to become part of Mike's touring entourage either.

And consider there is a possibility that the events of 2012, backed by Capitol Records and surrounding both a new album and a major tour, would not have happened had Brian not been involved as he was. Brian can (and has) gotten major-label deals on his own, under his own name with "Beach Boys" nowhere on those album covers or titles, and he has a new one coming out soon. Mike has not released anything of note, has he? And I'm just guessing he could not get a major release on a label like Capitol on the basis of the Beach Boys' status and legacy without Brian involved.

Just speculation, but perhaps worth considering.

[Robbie Mac]

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

[the captain]

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

I sort-of agree with you, but I think the difference in such a situation is far less problematic than it would have been in previous eras. The traveling Beach Boys-branded band is really good. To my mind, the difference between then and Brian's recent bands is less about the musicianship than numbers. Wilson's bands are bigger and use more natural instrumentation, thanks to Paul and Probyn's ability to bring in wind and brass instruments (as well as Darian and Scott playing vibes and such). But as has been much discussed here, the Beach Boys traveling band has really upped its game in the past however-many years.

[HeyJude]

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

I think not using the C50 band just using Mike’s band is one of those things that is too difficult to take beyond a theoretical. I think the main magic beyond C50 was those five BB’s on stage. But I don’t delude myself either; they need a robust backing band vocally, and certainly instrumentally.

I don’t think I’d be opposed to the idea of the five BB’s being backed by Mike’s band. But I think what such a concession would mean about the entire project would not make such a project feasible or as enjoyable. That is, that would be so far beyond a reasonable compromise that it would signify giving in to Mike’s theoretical demands for a cheaper operation to the point of significantly hobbling a reunion tour.

A more fair compromise, at least just in terms of the backing band composition, would be to drop a few members and try to get more bang for the buck. Maybe drop a guitarist (Nicky, who missed the last half of the tour on C50), and maybe drop Nelson Bragg and Jeff Foskett (whom I’d be curious to know whether Brian would want back on another reunion tour) and add Matt Jardine who can do some percussion stuff like Bragg and do the falsetto parts like Foskett. That would shave two members off the overheard cost right there. Let me be clear. *I* wouldn’t want that; I think using the huge backing band was one of the main reasons the C50 tour garnered such rave reviews. In some ways they are indeed the unsung heroes of that tour. I don’t think the reviews (or the shows) would have been nearly as amazing with Mike’s leaner backing band behind them.

[Nicko1234]

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

I think, and I mean this with all due respect, this is a slightly odd hypothetical.

Would anyone have been happy if Mike had been able to dictate exactly who was onstage and Brian had had no say at all seems to be the thrust of the question.

I don`t think even Mike would have considered that possible for a nanosecond.

[Nicko1234]

Exactly.  I truly believe Mike made this happen, beacuse he wanted to work with Brian and he wanted to give the fans something they'd love (see what I did there???).  He probably thought that he could have his cake and eat it too.

in Mike's mind, he does the C50 thing, then does the Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a C51 thing, then a Mike's Beach Boys thing... then maybe a c52 thing, etc.  Once the C50 tour ended and Brian and Al basically acted like little girls about it, Mike just decided he didn't feel charitable anymore and went all 'if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all" on us.  So when somebody asks him about it, he just smiles and says it was pleasant blah blah blah and never really mentions that he didn't enjoy becoming part of Brian's entourage.

So now he's in a position where he feels like he gave the fans what they wanted, and he was nice to Brian, and now he's back to touring how he wants and making money how he wants. 

If it was all about money, he would have been bending over backwards to please Brian or get Brian to do anything at all with him.  He booked dates on purpose at the end of the tour, well before the tour, so that he'd have an out in October.  He knew from the beginning he wasn't going to really want to do it like that forever, which proves in my mind at least that Mike did this for Brian, and for the fans.  That's about as charitable as Mike gets, and to be honest, I appreciate that he did it. 

I don`t think any of the group members did it for the fans or each other. They did it for themselves which is what any of us would have done.

What were Mike`s motivations? That the whole Smile Sessions, C50 tour and new album deal would work as a business package. And he probably hoped that they would have a big hit album and maybe had unrealistic about how many it might sell (the sales figures that people have quoted are good for the present day but significantly worse than those quoted for albums like Still Cruisin` or BW88 so maybe Mike is still stuck in that era).

[Mr. Cohen]

Watching some of the C50 stuff again, it's obvious that the group never really gelled on a personal level. The QVC special was painful. Near the end, when they ask the group members to say one last thing, Brian says "Well, I just hope they like 'Good Vibrations', because that's our masterpiece." Which he said because they didn't play the song. And then we go in "Wouldn't It Be Nice" and Brian looks lost for half of it, his microphones practically muted. That was his lead!

Then, when I rewatched the Rolling Stone Mag Live rendition of "Surfer Girl", Brian really nails it when they turn up his mic for the lead. Finally. Then Foskett does the falsetto at the end and Brian has this weird look on his face. You get a feeling Brian wished he could sing it.

There's a lot of tension. Brian seemed to visibly resent the way he allowed himself to be pigeonholed in the BBs power structure, while Mike had zero interest in relinquishing any control. It's hard to see how the situation could've went on for years of touring.

[Nicko1234]

Watching some of the C50 stuff again, it's obvious that the group never really gelled on a personal level. The QVC special was painful. Near the end, when they ask the group members to say one last thing, Brian says "Well, I just hope they like 'Good Vibrations', because that's our masterpiece." Which he said because they didn't play the song. And then we go in "Wouldn't It Be Nice" and Brian looks lost for half of it, his microphones practically muted. That was his lead!

Then, when I rewatched the Rolling Stone Mag Live rendition of "Surfer Girl", Brian really nails it when they turn up his mic for the lead. Finally. Then Foskett does the falsetto at the end and Brian has this weird look on his face. You get a feeling Brian wished he could sing it.

There's a lot of tension. Brian seemed to visibly resent the way he allowed himself to be pigeonholed in the BBs power structure, while Mike had zero interest in relinquishing any control. It's hard to see how the situation could've went on for years of touring.

I`m really not sure that Brian looking awkward is much of an indicator of anything. I agree that it was never going to go on for years though.

[the professor]

I judge all those analyses as wrong. Brian was trying to recall (and did find) one of the missing harmony parts. Confusion over the set list means nothing. BW does not even sing the lead on WIBN in concert.  QVC was fun but for the artificial tone of the mc, which has nothing to do with the band's dynamic. Mt Cohen, you are way off base sir.

Watching some of the C50 stuff again, it's obvious that the group never really gelled on a personal level. The QVC special was painful. Near the end, when they ask the group members to say one last thing, Brian says "Well, I just hope they like 'Good Vibrations', because that's our masterpiece." Which he said because they didn't play the song. And then we go in "Wouldn't It Be Nice" and Brian looks lost for half of it, his microphones practically muted. That was his lead!

Then, when I rewatched the Rolling Stone Mag Live rendition of "Surfer Girl", Brian really nails it when they turn up his mic for the lead. Finally. Then Foskett does the falsetto at the end and Brian has this weird look on his face. You get a feeling Brian wished he could sing it.

There's a lot of tension. Brian seemed to visibly resent the way he allowed himself to be pigeonholed in the BBs power structure, while Mike had zero interest in relinquishing any control. It's hard to see how the situation could've went on for years of touring.

[SMiLE Brian]

Professor you need to realize these guys mostly did the C50 for the money and fame, not each other. Granted they enjoyed each other's company once they realized how fun touring was again.

[Micha]

Professor you need to realize these guys mostly did the C50 for the money and fame, not each other. Granted they enjoyed each other's company once they realized how fun touring was again.

So good we have you who can look inside their brains and thus can tell us what we need to realize.

[Ram4]

At the end of the day, the obvious remains.  We got an amazing C50 reunion tour and a better than expected reunion album - I think 2012 exceed anyone's expectations by a long shot.  I'm happy to have even gotten the chance to see that tour (3 times) and if that's the end, then it's fine by me.  It would be great for them to keep it going, but that's why we have these threads.

[Cam Mott]

Let me ask this. If keeping the 2012 lineup depended on Brian making more "sacrifices" (the takeaway I am getting from Mike supporters is that MIke gave up more than Brian), would those fans be OK if that sacrifice meant Brian not having his band members at all? i.e. Brian, Al and David simply join the MIke and Bruce show?

The BW Band were the unsung heroes during the 2012 reunion. While the surviving BB together still would have been noteworthy, not utilizing the BW Band would have been a shame.

I assumed it would be a mash up of Brian and Mike's band but thought it probably would be the license holding band filled out with some of Brian's band. I do not envy whoever had to tell those in either band that they did not make the cut.

I think the point is they all are responsible for what worked and what didn't and they all sacrificed, some more in one way and others in another. They should call it all good, learn from their mistakes, and do it again but better.