THE BEACH BOYS 1964 KEEP AN EYE ON SUMMER (follow up to The Big Beat 1963)

[CenturyDeprived]

Biggest revelation so far - Al Jardine on lead falsetto on "All Dressed Up for School" in the choruses (the "ooh what a turn on" part)

I KNOW, RONDEMON!!!! Man, that blew my mind! For twenty-four years I knew there was something odd about it, but it wasn't obvious until last night!

I wonder if Al singing that part on record was done to prep the song for possibly playing it live in concert with the live show (sans Brian) BB lineup, on which Al would certainly sing a typically Brian-sung part like that.

I doubt it, since the song was recorded several months before Brian's late December '64 meltdown and January '65 decision to leave the road band more-or-less permanently.

Glad you guys are diggin' the liners, though!

unless of course, Brian was planning to leave the touring group in any case

But if that were the case, I'd imagine he'd have had Al singing MORE of the falsetto chorus leads that he ended up singing himself ("Dance, Dance, Dance", "Kiss Me, Baby", etc.).

Yes it could have happened either way, but I'm guessing, Brian probably didn't want to give Al too many leads all at once; it had to be in the back of his mind that he was getting overwhelmed, and might want to stop touring

I'm 50/50 on my thoughts on Brian's rationale for having Al sing these parts. Maybe it was just Brian trying something new (or even just having Al's parts there as more of a temp vocal track that never got revised), but on the other hand, I think it could possibly have been an experiment in getting Al more versed in having Al's own falsetto parts down pat for live settings. As opposed to Al always singing Brian's falsetto parts in a hypothetical live setting, here could've been an opportunity for Al to sing Al's own falsetto parts in a live setting - if only the song had seen release and then gotten played live. Maybe that's totally wrong, but I think it's a feasible possibility. Interesting to ponder.

I almost think this song could have been a single, if the lyrics hadn't been considered unacceptable, and I do wonder if that ever was a thought in Brian's mind.

Also, in listening to the song, I thought of how much it sounds like it would have been a song with a typical Mike lead vocal (with the song's subject matter and vibe), and how much the song is improved/freshened by having Carl sing it instead of Mike. Not a knock against Mike, but it was good (and unfortunately very rare) to have vocals on early songs like these spread amongst the band's other very capable vocalists. Some people wonder if the band could've succeeded without Mike in the early days, and while that remains debatable and Mike certainly did add a lot, this song is a rare window into an alternate universe of an early-style (yet advanced) typically Mike-sung BB song with a different lead vocalist.

[branaa09]

So, since Man With All The Toys, Santa's Beard, Merry Christmas Baby, Christmas Day, We'll Run Away, Do You Remember, Carl's Big Chance and Drive In weren't on the Keep an Eye On Summer 1964 release, are they out of copyright or is there another compilation that will gather up those songs?

[LeeDempsey]

So, since Man With All The Toys, Santa's Beard, Merry Christmas Baby, Christmas Day, We'll Run Away, Do You Remember, Carl's Big Chance and Drive In weren't on the Keep an Eye On Summer 1964 release, are they out of copyright or is there another compilation that will gather up those songs?

Any unreleased tracks from those sessions would have fallen into the public domain in the European Union after December 31, 2014, but the released mono and stereo versions continue to remain under copyright protection for another 20 years -- as do any unused takes, false starts, vocal-only mixes, track-only mixes, etc. derived from those master tapes.

From a copyright protection standpoint, the impetus was to get any unreleased songs on the compilation (e.g. "If It Can't Be You, "Christmas Eve," "Let's Live Before We Die").  But that in and of itself would have been a very short release.  Instead, my understanding is that permission was granted to Mark and Alan expand the set into a 1964 50th Anniversary release, which allowed them to include the remixes, alternate takes, etc. -- not because copyright protection was needed, but in order to make it a more satisfying archival release.  We fans owe Mark and Alan a huge debt of gratitude for lobbying to make this happen.

Lee

(NB: original post edited to correct some factual errors.  LED)

[tansen]

Have only listened to a few songs here and there, some of it is really great.  The alternate version of "I'm So Young" is really beautiful.  And the live in the studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" are awesome too.

I find the live in studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" rather embarrassing, mostly of course because of Mike Love's nasal singing, but also due to the sloppy playing. I really dislike the fact that they feel the need to speed up the songs too. Loving the rest of KAEOS though.

[c-man]

Have only listened to a few songs here and there, some of it is really great.  The alternate version of "I'm So Young" is really beautiful.  And the live in the studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" are awesome too.

I find the live in studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" rather embarrassing, mostly of course because of Mike Love's nasal singing, but also due to the sloppy playing. I really dislike the fact that they feel the need to speed up the songs too. Loving the rest of KAEOS though.

The nasal singing, sloppy playing and sped-up tempo were necessary so that these recordings would fit in with the actual live in concert recordings from Sacramento. They fit in so well, that it's a mystery why they opted to used doctored versions of the original studio tracks from the hit versions instead.

[metal flake paint]

Have only listened to a few songs here and there, some of it is really great.  The alternate version of "I'm So Young" is really beautiful.  And the live in the studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" are awesome too.

I find the live in studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" rather embarrassing, mostly of course because of Mike Love's nasal singing, but also due to the sloppy playing.

Carl also voiced his displeasure during the alternate version intro to "Fun, Fun, Fun" ("The guitar sounds shitty").

[metal flake paint]

Have only listened to a few songs here and there, some of it is really great.  The alternate version of "I'm So Young" is really beautiful.  And the live in the studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" are awesome too.

I find the live in studio versions of "Fun, Fun, Fun" and "I Get Around" rather embarrassing, mostly of course because of Mike Love's nasal singing, but also due to the sloppy playing. I really dislike the fact that they feel the need to speed up the songs too. Loving the rest of KAEOS though.

The nasal singing, sloppy playing and sped-up tempo were necessary so that these recordings would fit in with the actual live in concert recordings from Sacramento. They fit in so well, that it's a mystery why they opted to used doctored versions of the original studio tracks from the hit versions instead.

It's a mystery to me that they didn't use the original live versions of these two songs

[Jim Rockford]

I like it. It's a nice collection of songs. A good Christmas present for myself.

[runnersdialzero]

I hate you guys.

[Custom Machine]

From a copyright protection standpoint, the impetus was to get any unreleased songs on the compilation (e.g. "If It Can't Be You, "Christmas Eve," "Let's Live Before We Die").  But that in and of itself would have been a very short release.  Instead, my understanding is that permission was granted to Mark and Alan expand the set into a 1964 50th Anniversary release, which allowed them to include the remixes, alternate takes, etc. -- not because copyright protection was needed, but in order to make it a more satisfying archival release.  We fans owe Mark and Alan a huge debt of gratitude for lobbying to make this happen.

Lee

(NB: original post edited to correct some factual errors.  LED)

And it is a very satisfying archival release.  Thank you Mark and Alan for your lobbying efforts. 

[CenturyDeprived]

From a copyright protection standpoint, the impetus was to get any unreleased songs on the compilation (e.g. "If It Can't Be You, "Christmas Eve," "Let's Live Before We Die").  But that in and of itself would have been a very short release.  Instead, my understanding is that permission was granted to Mark and Alan expand the set into a 1964 50th Anniversary release, which allowed them to include the remixes, alternate takes, etc. -- not because copyright protection was needed, but in order to make it a more satisfying archival release.  We fans owe Mark and Alan a huge debt of gratitude for lobbying to make this happen.

Lee

(NB: original post edited to correct some factual errors.  LED)

And it is a very satisfying archival release.  Thank you Mark and Alan for your lobbying efforts. 
 

Seconded.

[branaa09]

I was just wondering! Anyway what a great set and release! I hope we get a 65 release as well! Thanks Alan and Mark for the hard work and effort put into it, it was worth the wait!

[bringahorseinhere?]

its totally pathetically bullshit that Capitol/EMI don't release this in a 'hard copy' format...

It's the Freakin' "BEACH BOYS" for f*cks sake!!!  

Why does Dylan, Beatles, Zepplin and every other prick under the sun gets fair treatment.....

and the 'Beach Boys' get new offerings as 'downloads' only......

pissweak........ apart from 'Smile Sessions' and the Pet Sounds box, which trying to get was like pulling teeth......

everything is always half assed.  

They can't even release their original catalogue properly!!  

What's the matter with these guys?  

This and the 63 big beat collection have been magical offerings....... but presentation? seriously? 

not good enough.

Anyways......... ive had my winge........ I'm happy  

RickB

[ArchStanton]

I just love Beach Boys acapella mixes, so this is a real treat. "Don't Hurt my Little Sister" kind of took me by surprise, really works well in this format with Mike's bass vocals sounding much more prominent to my untrained ear.

[runnersdialzero]

I didn't want to comment on this for a few days because I was feeling rage-y about other things and was trying to minimize rage-yness, but I hate hate hate hate lossy formats without a lossless source. It's not about "hurr durr humens cant even hear above 128kbps" or whatever (which is an irrelevant cop out*, anyway), it's about preservation and about the versatility of lossless formats. I think it's a joke that people will pay about as much for low quality copies of something that exists in higher quality or should exist in higher quality. There is no "convenience factor" - converting from a lossless format takes seconds or, on my incredibly ancient 2005 Sony VAIO tower, a couple minutes. You have the lossless source, you have the lossy format. Lossy formats only serve to, uh, dirty the pool, anyway.

I'm very glad The Big Beat 1963 has finally surfaced in lossless format on some obscure foreign site, but it's really a shame that, in the year 2014, people are still working their way backwards in terms of quality. Music continues to get the shaft in terms of people not taking it seriously as an art form and it sucks. They're selling it to you in lossy and not telling you you can get it in better quality, sometimes they're selling it to you with a bunch of dynamic range compression and not telling you if there's a less compressed alternative out there (or presenting it to you on a totally inaccurate format like vinyl and charging you 30 dollars for the "privilege" - if they're bothering with that at all, which they're usually not; a lot of times nowadays the vinyl master is the same as the CD master, kids). It sucks. It shouldn't have to take a year plus only to surface on some obscure site, it should be an option along with lossy formats right out of the box. Apple/Amazon can suck my ballz in hell forever for not being more forward-thinking on this for well over a Gosh Darn decade, now.

* I used "cop out" in the incorrect manner and it bothers me, but I wasn't sure how else to say it. Shut up.

[wantsomecorn]

its totally pathetically bullshit that Capitol/EMI don't release this in a 'hard copy' format...

It's the Freakin' "BEACH BOYS" for f*cks sake!!!  

Why does Dylan, Beatles, Zepplin and every other prick under the sun gets fair treatment.....

and the 'Beach Boys' get new offerings as 'downloads' only......

The Beach Boys do usually get shafted in terms of releases, but last year's Beatles Bootleg Recordings 1963 was also only released as a digital download. And Bob Dylan's was only released as 100 CDs.

We're lucky enough to get as good a product as we do, thanks to the hard work of Mark, Alan, and C-Man, but the fact that record companies as gritting their teeth through these copyright laws means that we're never going to get exactly what we want.

[Mitchell]

Release it lossy, people will buy. Later release it lossless, people will buy again.

I agree, Runners. I'm annoyed but am also part of the problem since I paid for it. But  I'd rather be able to buy it than not at all.

[bringahorseinhere?]

yes I buy and I will buy....... my argument is the format and presentation of 'delicate' recordings..

I am glad and thankful for the exposure of these recordings 'officially'......... but really?  

aren't these great enough for  Capitol/EMI to release these on CD at least???

how long have those bastards been milking the Beach Boys Greatest Hits Cow stuff since what...? 66?

Doesn't anyone in position give a Fu(

I'm sick of this record company..... no wonder 'us' alike bootleg 'the group'....... we wouldn't have to if they

were represented properly.........

damn, they even screwed up not releasing all of the 2012 reissues........ what the F"uck?

we at least should have some explanation........... and not a 'it was not viable' shitty response....

Seriously.

RickB

[Smilin Ed H]

Yes - to everything you said, Rick

[ArchStanton]

I don't know the ins and outs of it all, but I do have to agree that it is unfortunate these are download only, as it really should be easy enough to sell these on a hard drive format through print-on-demand, if nothing else. Amazon even has a wing that does that.

[bringahorseinhere?]

this material is as great as 'endless harmony' and the 'hawthorne CA' material....

and why it is not released in the physical format 'sh*t's me'!

how many bucks have Capitol made off this group?........ even if they could have made a

limited release edition...?  I know Cd's/Vinyl don't bring in the big bucks like they used to...

but really?.....

this collection along with big beat 63, and live at sacramento needs better treatment.

damn they should employ me to look after 'The Beach Boys'........ cos I would do a better job.

RickB

[HeyJude]

So, since Man With All The Toys, Santa's Beard, Merry Christmas Baby, Christmas Day, We'll Run Away, Do You Remember, Carl's Big Chance and Drive In weren't on the Keep an Eye On Summer 1964 release, are they out of copyright or is there another compilation that will gather up those songs?

Any unreleased tracks from those sessions would have fallen into the public domain in the European Union after December 31, 2014, but the released mono and stereo versions continue to remain under copyright protection for another 20 years -- as do any unused takes, false starts, vocal-only mixes, track-only mixes, etc. derived from those master tapes.

From a copyright protection standpoint, the impetus was to get any unreleased songs on the compilation (e.g. "If It Can't Be You, "Christmas Eve," "Let's Live Before We Die").  But that in and of itself would have been a very short release.  Instead, my understanding is that permission was granted to Mark and Alan expand the set into a 1964 50th Anniversary release, which allowed them to include the remixes, alternate takes, etc. -- not because copyright protection was needed, but in order to make it a more satisfying archival release.  We fans owe Mark and Alan a huge debt of gratitude for lobbying to make this happen.

Lee

(NB: original post edited to correct some factual errors.  LED)

Thanks for this explanation! While it's unfortunate that the system (e.g. Brother and/or Capitol/Universal) has to be sort of "gamed" into doing an archival release, I'm glad Alan Boyd and the gang were able to convince them to expand the release into something much more interesting than an EP with "Christmas Eve", etc.

One can only hope that perhaps something like these releases will be a gateway to convincing Brother to let loose with the archival stuff. It would be interesting to know what sort of sales numbers "Keep and Eye on Summer" has managed to attain. I'm sure they don't expect huge sales, but hopefully they could get enough to take it to Brother and say "Hey, look at this. You can sell this many copies of a monthly archival release!"

I also hope that Brother and/or Capitol/Universal have either a different attitude/strategy or legal interpretation of the whole "copyright extension" thing, as it appears as of December 30th that the Beatles/Apple are probably *not* doing a 1964 set for the Beatles.

[HeyJude]

its totally pathetically bullshit that Capitol/EMI don't release this in a 'hard copy' format...

It's the Freakin' "BEACH BOYS" for f*cks sake!!!  

Why does Dylan, Beatles, Zepplin and every other prick under the sun gets fair treatment.....

and the 'Beach Boys' get new offerings as 'downloads' only......

pissweak........ apart from 'Smile Sessions' and the Pet Sounds box, which trying to get was like pulling teeth......

everything is always half assed.  

They can't even release their original catalogue properly!!  

What's the matter with these guys?  

This and the 63 big beat collection have been magical offerings....... but presentation? seriously? 

not good enough.

Anyways......... ive had my winge........ I'm happy  

RickB

I don't think we're ever going to get any substantial future archival releases like "Keep and Eye..." on physical media. As it is, it was apparently a whole "sales" job they had to do to convince Brother and/or Capitol/Universal just to do the download-only releases.

Beach Boys archival releases apparently don't sell super well. They don't want to invest in pressing a bunch of copies.

If any sort of "Beach Boys Central" project gets going again, it will likely be download-only.

Don't get me wrong; I think they could probably partner with some indie labels and do physical copies of this stuff. But Capitol/Universal won't manufacture it. But they only have first rights of refusal (if that), so Brother could take archival stuff to another label. Brother doesn't appear to want to go this route. Hopefully their minds will be changed at some point.

[Bicyclerider]

Rhino Handmade would love to get their hands on this material and release it in a 2000 to 5000 copy physical release.  They've been doing that with Monkee releases and I'm sure the Beach Boys would move at least as much as the Monkees at this point. 

[Andrew G. Doe]

In need of an assist here, please - I've contrived to loose the liners/sessionography, and the link provided here doesn't work, so... any kind soul out there willing to zap me said documents ?

Thanks in (hopeful) anticipation.