interesting article: "Mike Love states his case"

[Jim V.]

As for the Examiner article, Mike's response was emailed, and it was a "one time" statement.  Could I have gone back and picked at that emotional scab?  Sure.  But why would I do that to him?

Okay, now of course I'm not Howie, but I have a major issue with this statement here. You basically say you wouldn't wanna go back and pick at that emotional scab? Here's the problem with that: the scab was ripped off, with blood pouring all over the floor, once Mike made the frickin' statement! He brought up all this stuff when asked an innocuous question about a new song by Brian Wilson with Al Jardine and David Marks! You asked him about a new song by three of his bandmates, guys he's known for over FIFTY years, and instead of commenting on the song* he decided to go on the offensive and do his sneaky little attack about the people around Brian writing the press releases and legal nonsense about how there were no "contracts for new shows" and how there wasn't "talk about a new album" even though he himself spoke about it before! So, sorry, I don't buy the whole "pickin' at a scab" thing. Mike opened up the scab himself, and proceeded to drive a knife into said scab. If he really didn't wanna discuss C50 type stuff, he could've easily just said, "no, haven't heard the song yet Dave! Excited to hear what Brian's got in store though," instead of diving into his usual melange of legalese and backhanded slaps at Brian (or at least Brian's team).

*While we're at it, let's be honest about Mike saying he hasn't heard "The Right Time" or to bring it back a bit, Brian Wilson Presents SMiLE. He's most likely full of sh*t. So apparently he does have enough time to surf the web and find the photoshopped picture that Bossaroo did and whatnot, but he doesn't have enough time to listen to a new song by a man he claims to love so much!? Bullshit. At least Bruce had the guts to both admit he listened to BWPS and the stuff for this new album, and to enter his own opinion while he's at it. Mike acts like he hasn't had the time or something, and it's absolute bull.

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Jeez.... Maybe Mike just hadn't heard the dang song at that moment and provided an un-self edited and off the cuff answer to the question .... He basically compliments Al's voice and hopes there's no auto tune: a thing that has caused torrents of heated thread debate on this very board ... Sheesh. How about we just learn to live with the guy's answer rather than attack the interviewer, ESQ and anything/everything related?

It doesn't take a Myke Luver to see how silly this has gotten.

[ESQ Editor]

As for the Examiner article, Mike's response was emailed, and it was a "one time" statement.  Could I have gone back and picked at that emotional scab?  Sure.  But why would I do that to him?

Okay, now of course I'm not Howie, but I have a major issue with this statement here. You basically say you wouldn't wanna go back and pick at that emotional scab? Here's the problem with that: the scab was ripped off, with blood pouring all over the floor, once Mike made the frickin' statement! He brought up all this stuff when asked an innocuous question about a new song by Brian Wilson with Al Jardine and David Marks! You asked him about a new song by three of his bandmates, guys he's known for over FIFTY years, and instead of commenting on the song* he decided to go on the offensive and do his sneaky little attack about the people around Brian writing the press releases and legal nonsense about how there were no "contracts for new shows" and how there wasn't "talk about a new album" even though he himself spoke about it before! So, sorry, I don't buy the whole "pickin' at a scab" thing. Mike opened up the scab himself, and proceeded to drive a knife into said scab. If he really didn't wanna discuss C50 type stuff, he could've easily just said, "no, haven't heard the song yet Dave! Excited to hear what Brian's got in store though," instead of diving into his usual melange of legalese and backhanded slaps at Brian (or at least Brian's team).

*While we're at it, let's be honest about Mike saying he hasn't heard "The Right Time" or to bring it back a bit, Brian Wilson Presents SMiLE. He's most likely full of sh*t. So apparently he does have enough time to surf the web and find the photoshopped picture that Bossaroo did and whatnot, but he doesn't have enough time to listen to a new song by a man he claims to love so much!? Bullshit. At least Bruce had the guts to both admit he listened to BWPS and the stuff for this new album, and to enter his own opinion while he's at it. Mike acts like he hasn't had the time or something, and it's absolute bull.

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

I stand by the statement, regardless of any issues you take with it.

[DonnyL]

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

I'm glad one of the Beach Boys mentioned autotune being a problem publicly.

I don't think anyone's feeding Mike any lines (why would they need to ... he certainly doesn't seem to have a problem speaking his mind as far as I can tell) ...  Historically, Dennis and Mike have generally been the members most willing to speak their minds in public, regardless of potential backlash. If Mike doesn't care to listen to the new recordings, and says, "I haven't heard it" ... what exactly is weird about that? I don't listen to all of my friend's records that come out, but it doesn't mean they're not my friends!

[rab2591]

As for the Examiner article, Mike's response was emailed, and it was a "one time" statement.  Could I have gone back and picked at that emotional scab?  Sure.  But why would I do that to him?

Okay, now of course I'm not Howie, but I have a major issue with this statement here. You basically say you wouldn't wanna go back and pick at that emotional scab? Here's the problem with that: the scab was ripped off, with blood pouring all over the floor, once Mike made the frickin' statement! He brought up all this stuff when asked an innocuous question about a new song by Brian Wilson with Al Jardine and David Marks! You asked him about a new song by three of his bandmates, guys he's known for over FIFTY years, and instead of commenting on the song* he decided to go on the offensive and do his sneaky little attack about the people around Brian writing the press releases and legal nonsense about how there were no "contracts for new shows" and how there wasn't "talk about a new album" even though he himself spoke about it before! So, sorry, I don't buy the whole "pickin' at a scab" thing. Mike opened up the scab himself, and proceeded to drive a knife into said scab. If he really didn't wanna discuss C50 type stuff, he could've easily just said, "no, haven't heard the song yet Dave! Excited to hear what Brian's got in store though," instead of diving into his usual melange of legalese and backhanded slaps at Brian (or at least Brian's team).

*While we're at it, let's be honest about Mike saying he hasn't heard "The Right Time" or to bring it back a bit, Brian Wilson Presents SMiLE. He's most likely full of sh*t. So apparently he does have enough time to surf the web and find the photoshopped picture that Bossaroo did and whatnot, but he doesn't have enough time to listen to a new song by a man he claims to love so much!? Bullshit. At least Bruce had the guts to both admit he listened to BWPS and the stuff for this new album, and to enter his own opinion while he's at it. Mike acts like he hasn't had the time or something, and it's absolute bull.

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

100% agree with this. In the time it took for Mike to write that email he could've listened to it, or if he wasn't in a position to listen, wait until he was in a place where he could listen. The song is on YouTube, itunes, Google play. You're right, total bullshit that he couldn't/hadn't listened to it.

[Cam Mott]

But there are problems with this. Firstly, I think it’s potentially absurd to expect “concrete things in writing” when considering recording another album or considering another tour. I’m not seeing anything like “I was ready to do another album and tour just like we did in 2012, but I never got anything in writing so I went back to my own thing.” He was *already* going back to his own thing. I think you’re placing more emphasis on “something concrete in writing” being the reason Mike didn’t do more reunion activities than he is.

Before the tour was even over, we have interviews with Al Jardine at the Grammy Museum event where he already seems to be desperately trying to convince Mike not to just go back to his own tour.

The simplified, pared-down question is this: Was Mike ready and willing to do another album and tour, with the demise of such plans consisting of Mike not being presented with “concrete offers in writing”? Or, was Mike dissatisfied with elements of the reunion tour and album, and already planning post-reunion activities before the reunion was even over? Given the evidence at hand, the latter seems far more likely.

We’ve had brief moments where things almost seem to converge and everybody’s answer almost makes sense. For instance, a new Beach Boys album didn’t happen. Mike seems to acknowledge that that album, in Brian’s mind, was going to follow the TWGMTR format of more Brian/Joe songs forming the basis. Mike has also said in the past that he didn’t find that Brian/Joe songwriting basis as his preference, and has also stated his preference both in the past and going forward is to write songs from scratch, and alone, with Brian. The problem is that it stops there. There’s no “therefore, that’s why I didn’t want to do another Beach Boys album with Brian. It wasn’t the type of album I wanted to do.” Then it digresses even further into other justifications and backhanded compliments (I’m sure the song with Brian and Al would sound great, IF there’s no autotune…)

I don't know anything about booking world class bands but Mike does and has had the license and already had bookings. I would find it odd if he just accepted talk over something in hand definite concrete in writing. Especially if he was already suspicious of the talk behind it, a date in October, and something booked by Phish, a "prediction" without follow up, etc..

Mike complained sure but he is also complimentary and he was still open to it and asking for that something in hand definite concrete in writing but nothing was ever made "concrete".

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

I'm glad one of the Beach Boys mentioned autotune being a problem publicly.

I don't think anyone's feeding Mike any lines (why would they need to ... he certainly doesn't seem to have a problem speaking his mind as far as I can tell) ...  Historically, Dennis and Mike have generally been the members most willing to speak their minds in public, regardless of potential backlash. If Mike doesn't care to listen to the new recordings, and says, "I haven't heard it" ... what exactly is weird about that? I don't listen to all of my friend's records that come out, but it doesn't mean they're not my friends!

Hell, I have 9 whole albums out that my friends don't listen to and would have to say they've not yet heard in an interview!!! Now I'm PISSED! 

[HeyJude]

But there are problems with this. Firstly, I think it’s potentially absurd to expect “concrete things in writing” when considering recording another album or considering another tour. I’m not seeing anything like “I was ready to do another album and tour just like we did in 2012, but I never got anything in writing so I went back to my own thing.” He was *already* going back to his own thing. I think you’re placing more emphasis on “something concrete in writing” being the reason Mike didn’t do more reunion activities than he is.

Before the tour was even over, we have interviews with Al Jardine at the Grammy Museum event where he already seems to be desperately trying to convince Mike not to just go back to his own tour.

The simplified, pared-down question is this: Was Mike ready and willing to do another album and tour, with the demise of such plans consisting of Mike not being presented with “concrete offers in writing”? Or, was Mike dissatisfied with elements of the reunion tour and album, and already planning post-reunion activities before the reunion was even over? Given the evidence at hand, the latter seems far more likely.

We’ve had brief moments where things almost seem to converge and everybody’s answer almost makes sense. For instance, a new Beach Boys album didn’t happen. Mike seems to acknowledge that that album, in Brian’s mind, was going to follow the TWGMTR format of more Brian/Joe songs forming the basis. Mike has also said in the past that he didn’t find that Brian/Joe songwriting basis as his preference, and has also stated his preference both in the past and going forward is to write songs from scratch, and alone, with Brian. The problem is that it stops there. There’s no “therefore, that’s why I didn’t want to do another Beach Boys album with Brian. It wasn’t the type of album I wanted to do.” Then it digresses even further into other justifications and backhanded compliments (I’m sure the song with Brian and Al would sound great, IF there’s no autotune…)

I don't know anything about booking world class bands but Mike does and has had the license and already had bookings. I would find it odd if he just accepted talk over something in hand definite concrete in writing. Especially if he was already suspicious of the talk behind it, a date in October, and something booked by Phish, a "prediction" without follow up, etc..

Mike complained sure but he is also complimentary and he was still open to it and asking for that something in hand definite concrete in writing but nothing was ever made "concrete".

It's fine if Mike wants to do his own bookings instead of working out more reunion shows. But in that case, he needs to *own* that decision. As many have said, they could have easily made more reunion shows happen. Buy off any Mike/Bruce dates, reschedule, replace with "reunion" shows.... it could have been done.

One group of guys says "we're ready, let's do more shows and another album!", and other dude says "nah, I don't have anything in writing, and I already booked some other shows, and I kinda didn't like some of the aspects of the tour or the album, so I'm gonna do my own shows and take a pass on recording more Brian/Joe songs." That's all fine (if unfortunately and disagreeable to some fans). But that one dude then can't pass the buck on whose "fault" the end of the reunion is.

This "in writing" and "concrete" BS is as ridiculous as the "set end date" nonsense. You can't put anything in writing, you can't make anything concrete, when one of the involved parties has *already* decided against it.

Regarding "suspicious" concert bookings, I'm wary of any implications of that sort. Again, I ask, what is the implication exactly? Fraudulent bookings from con-men? After a HUGELY successful 73-date tour, does anybody really think that Brian and Al were ready to accept a deal for a gig from some shady guy that was going to, what, book the show and then when the Beach Boys show up and Phish is loading their gear, then suggest the Beach Boys move their gig to the local skating rink?

[Wild-Honey]

 Mike probably didn't listen to the new song because it may actually upset him, 3 bandmates are on it and he's not (whether he chose that or not).  It would upset me and I'd be a bit envious/slighted.   Did Brian even ask Mike to be on it? If not, why not?  It looks like a snub.  IMO.   Also, I like all the BB's.  The bashing is boring, if you feel the hate so strongly about someone you don't even know, who has never done anything personally to you,  you have issues.

[HeyJude]

Jeez.... Maybe Mike just hadn't heard the dang song at that moment and provided an un-self edited and off the cuff answer to the question .... He basically compliments Al's voice and hopes there's no auto tune: a thing that has caused torrents of heated thread debate on this very board ... Sheesh. How about we just learn to live with the guy's answer rather than attack the interviewer, ESQ and anything/everything related?

It doesn't take a Myke Luver to see how silly this has gotten.

It goes without saying that we have to "live" with the interview. It doesn't mean people shouldn't call BS on it if it's warranted. The BB's have all offered *plenty* of odd, head-scratcher, aggravating, WTF-style interviews over the years. This newest interview (or e-mail essay essentially) is one of the more irksome, contradictory interviews in recent times. It shouldn't be a surprise that it's causing plenty of discussion, especially since it was also attached to some rather weird motives/execution on the part of the author.

As for the "haven't heard the song" thing, it's clear going back to the 2004 "Smile" time period that, for whatever reason, Mike chooses to not listen to Brian's stuff (or at least is saying he doesn't). I was going to suggest the sympathetic interpretation, that Mike would maybe forego listening to avoid having to comment on it. Sort of like the "code" among ex-presidents to not criticize later presidents. But, Mike actually ended up essentially commenting on the new BW song and the album even after citing that he hadn't heard the song, and even offered a back-handed compliment to boot. The autotune comment would be like if Al commented on a new Mike song: "No, I haven't heard it. But I'm sure it'll be a wonderful song as long as Mike doesn't mention beaches, or surfing, or cars, or cite the lyrics to past Beach Boys hits, or sing in a nasaly voice, or wear a hat while he's singing it."

[Lowbacca]

Jeez.... Maybe Mike just hadn't heard the dang song at that moment and provided an un-self edited and off the cuff answer to the question .... He basically compliments Al's voice and hopes there's no auto tune: a thing that has caused torrents of heated thread debate on this very board ... Sheesh. How about we just learn to live with the guy's answer rather than attack the interviewer, ESQ and anything/everything related?

It doesn't take a Myke Luver to see how silly this has gotten.

It goes without saying that we have to "live" with the interview. It doesn't mean people shouldn't call BS on it if it's warranted. The BB's have all offered *plenty* of odd, head-scratcher, aggravating, WTF-style interviews over the years. This newest interview (or e-mail essay essentially) is one of the more irksome, contradictory interviews in recent times. It shouldn't be a surprise that it's causing plenty of discussion, especially since it was also attached to some rather weird motives/execution on the part of the author.

As for the "haven't heard the song" thing, it's clear going back to the 2004 "Smile" time period that, for whatever reason, Mike chooses to not listen to Brian's stuff (or at least is saying he doesn't). I was going to suggest the sympathetic interpretation, that Mike would maybe forego listening to avoid having to comment on it. Sort of like the "code" among ex-presidents to not criticize later presidents. But, Mike actually ended up essentially commenting on the new BW song and the album even after citing that he hadn't heard the song, and even offered a back-handed compliment to boot. The autotune comment would be like if Al commented on a new Mike song: "No, I haven't heard it. But I'm sure it'll be a wonderful song as long as Mike doesn't mention beaches, or surfing, or cars, or cite the lyrics to past Beach Boys hits, or sing in a nasaly voice, or wear a hat while he's singing it."

Well put.

[HeyJude]

Mike probably didn't listen to the new song because it may actually upset him, 3 bandmates are on it and he's not (whether he chose that or not).  It would upset me and I'd be a bit envious/slighted.   Did Brian even ask Mike to be on it? If not, why not?  It looks like a snub.  IMO.   Also, I like all the BB's.  The bashing is boring, if you feel the hate so strongly about someone you don't even know, who has never done anything personally to you,  you have issues.

Taking issue with or questioning comments these guys make is not "hating" them.

As for whether Mike chose whether or not to be on the track, are we really still debating that? Why in the world would Brian invite Mike to sing on it? Mike has specifically said he didn't prefer the setup of just singing on tracks Brian writes without Mike (and/or with Joe Thomas). In the interview excerpt Howie Edelson posted, Mike seemed to only begrudgingly offer positive comments about even being offered the chance to add lyrics to songs already written by Brian and/or Joe.

Brian has indicated he would have done another BB album. So, if "The Right Time" had ended up on that album, it actually isn't terribly a stretch to say that Mike would have been singing on that very song.

My personal guess is that other than being a possibly peripheral, brief annoyance (in the same way that, say, Brian losing Foskett might be to Brian), I don't think Mike cares much about Brian's new album, or Brian's albums in general. Mike doesn't seem to be super interested in recording albums himself.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Jeez.... Maybe Mike just hadn't heard the dang song at that moment and provided an un-self edited and off the cuff answer to the question .... He basically compliments Al's voice and hopes there's no auto tune: a thing that has caused torrents of heated thread debate on this very board ... Sheesh. How about we just learn to live with the guy's answer rather than attack the interviewer, ESQ and anything/everything related?

It doesn't take a Myke Luver to see how silly this has gotten.

It goes without saying that we have to "live" with the interview. It doesn't mean people shouldn't call BS on it if it's warranted. The BB's have all offered *plenty* of odd, head-scratcher, aggravating, WTF-style interviews over the years. This newest interview (or e-mail essay essentially) is one of the more irksome, contradictory interviews in recent times. It shouldn't be a surprise that it's causing plenty of discussion, especially since it was also attached to some rather weird motives/execution on the part of the author.

As for the "haven't heard the song" thing, it's clear going back to the 2004 "Smile" time period that, for whatever reason, Mike chooses to not listen to Brian's stuff (or at least is saying he doesn't). I was going to suggest the sympathetic interpretation, that Mike would maybe forego listening to avoid having to comment on it. Sort of like the "code" among ex-presidents to not criticize later presidents. But, Mike actually ended up essentially commenting on the new BW song and the album even after citing that he hadn't heard the song, and even offered a back-handed compliment to boot. The autotune comment would be like if Al commented on a new Mike song: "No, I haven't heard it. But I'm sure it'll be a wonderful song as long as Mike doesn't mention beaches, or surfing, or cars, or cite the lyrics to past Beach Boys hits, or sing in a nasaly voice, or wear a hat while he's singing it."

How is not hearing a song an example of B.S?

Wouldn't saying "Oh yeah, I heard it and it's fantastic" when you really hadn't be a better example of B.S?

Maybe we ought to take a look at how we treat each other on this board before we sanctimoniously criticize a guy we don't know for being ...... rude or full of B.S....

[SMiLE Brian]

Kokocop Pinder on patrol.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Kokocop Pinder on patrol.

KOKOCOP!!!!!!!

Ontor please get to work )

[HeyJude]

I asked many follow up questions throughout the course of 2012 that appeared in various editions of ESQ, so that's covered.  As for the Examiner article, Mike's response was emailed, and it was a "one time" statement.  Could I have gone back and picked at that emotional scab?  Sure.  But why would I do that to him?  

I would say soliciting the comments from Mike in the first place was what was picking at the scab. Nobody much seemed to care at this stage, in 2015, that "No Pier Pressure" was not a Beach Boys album.

When I listened to "The Right Time", at no point did Mike Love enter into my thoughts. I never thought "this tracks sucks; if only Mike could have let Brian make a BB album, then Mike would singing on this, and it would be for the better."

If you listen to "The Right Time", and at any point while listening to the track or considering it you think "you know, it's total bull**** to criticize Mike as if he didn't allow another BB album to be made!", then who is turning a positive (a solid new BW track with Al and Dave on it) into a negative?

It's doubly perplexing, because anybody that was or is opining that the album would have been better off with Mike on it is actually paying Mike a compliment! Right?

So why, then, did a review of "The Right Time" even need to mention Mike Love? Because one other random online preview/review mentioned Mike in passing? I would say the one-two punch of the weird "Right Time" review that goes on and on about not blaming Mike for not being on it, and this recent solicited "response" e-mail from Mike, have created more wounds/scabs than any discussion of "NPP" was creating prior.

[bgas]

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

I'm glad one of the Beach Boys mentioned autotune being a problem publicly.

I don't think anyone's feeding Mike any lines (why would they need to ... he certainly doesn't seem to have a problem speaking his mind as far as I can tell) ...  Historically, Dennis and Mike have generally been the members most willing to speak their minds in public, regardless of potential backlash. If Mike doesn't care to listen to the new recordings, and says, "I haven't heard it" ... what exactly is weird about that? I don't listen to all of my friend's records that come out, but it doesn't mean they're not my friends!

Hell, I have 9 whole albums out that my friends don't listen to and would have to say they've not yet heard in an interview!!! Now I'm PISSED! 

Just thinking....  If you could list your 9 whole albums here, then we could all not listen to them together

[Howie Edelson]

David -- I know you love the Beach Boys. I've never doubted that (at times I think you've been far more enamored of the striped shirts and Fat Boys era than the Riley era -- but that's preference not a ranking of love.)  And I say this as a friend -- I don't want to hurt your feelings. I know that ESQ, which more often than not features a ton of great stuff -- new research, cool photos, etc. -- takes up a lot of time for very little reward.

But you gotta do better.

Listen to what I say: This Mike thing wasn't good journalism, wasn't spreading the "word" of this band, and was PR for Mike's bulls hit/pain.
I NEVER do email interviews with anyone, because you lose the give and take and it turns into crafted diatribes. You need a statement or a single quote -- fine.
I'm not saying you in anyway strategized to make it so, but you ran an '88 Rock Hall speech.

You can't post stuff and take offense at criticism. You can't ask for suggestions how to make ESQ better and take umbrage at the valid suggestions people take time out to give you.

And for the record -- "Cabinessence" has never been a favorite.
Give me "Walkin' On Water" any day.

[HeyJude]

How is not hearing a song an example of B.S?

Wouldn't saying "Oh yeah, I heard it and it's fantastic" when you really hadn't be a better example of B.S?

Maybe we ought to take a look at how we treat each other on this board before we sanctimoniously criticize a guy we don't know for being ...... rude or full of B.S....

C'mon. It isn't "not listening" to the song that is BS. It's not listening to it, but then going on a diatribe about the song and its accompanying album with seemingly no prompting, and criticizing an album press release for something it didn't say (and then also implying said press release was done without Brian's consent or approval).

If one is asked if they've heard a song, and nothing else, and the answer is "no", and the answer is as long as that e-mail response, then it's BS, because it's either off-topic or talking about something they haven't heard.  

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Lastly, Mike's comment about "autotune" really got me going, and I have a feeling I know who fed him that line. But I'm not gonna post it here, cuz I don't wanna start anything.

I'm glad one of the Beach Boys mentioned autotune being a problem publicly.

I don't think anyone's feeding Mike any lines (why would they need to ... he certainly doesn't seem to have a problem speaking his mind as far as I can tell) ...  Historically, Dennis and Mike have generally been the members most willing to speak their minds in public, regardless of potential backlash. If Mike doesn't care to listen to the new recordings, and says, "I haven't heard it" ... what exactly is weird about that? I don't listen to all of my friend's records that come out, but it doesn't mean they're not my friends!

Hell, I have 9 whole albums out that my friends don't listen to and would have to say they've not yet heard in an interview!!! Now I'm PISSED!  

Just thinking....  If you could list your 9 whole albums here, then we could all not listen to them together

Yeah, another wonderful example of the type of people around here who feel oh so qualified to criticize the behavior of someone they don't even know.

Hilarious that we live in a world where Keith Richards when asked if he'd heard Mick's solo album "Goddess In The Doorway" calls it "Dogshit In The Doorway" ... But Mike says he hasn't heard a song and OUTRAGE!

[Wild-Honey]

Mike probably didn't listen to the new song because it may actually upset him, 3 bandmates are on it and he's not (whether he chose that or not).  It would upset me and I'd be a bit envious/slighted.   Did Brian even ask Mike to be on it? If not, why not?  It looks like a snub.  IMO.   Also, I like all the BB's.  The bashing is boring, if you feel the hate so strongly about someone you don't even know, who has never done anything personally to you,  you have issues.

Taking issue with or questioning comments these guys make is not "hating" them.

As for whether Mike chose whether or not to be on the track, are we really still debating that? Why in the world would Brian invite Mike to sing on it? Mike has specifically said he didn't prefer the setup of just singing on tracks Brian writes without Mike (and/or with Joe Thomas). In the interview excerpt Howie Edelson posted, Mike seemed to only begrudgingly offer positive comments about even being offered the chance to add lyrics to songs already written by Brian and/or Joe.

Brian has indicated he would have done another BB album. So, if "The Right Time" had ended up on that album, it actually isn't terribly a stretch to say that Mike would have been singing on that very song.

My personal guess is that other than being a possibly peripheral, brief annoyance (in the same way that, say, Brian losing Foskett might be to Brian), I don't think Mike cares much about Brian's new album, or Brian's albums in general. Mike doesn't seem to be super interested in recording albums himself.

Did I say I was talking about you?  There is a of lot anger and what seems like hate (to me) directed at Mike about anything he says or does by some posters on here.  That is what I am referring to. Not the questioning of comments. 

[Autotune]

Everyone is entitled to their opinions about an interview or a statement or a comment. But the severity with which some people judge this ML statement is astonishing. The level of ad-nauseam, relentless scrutiny tells more about those who judge and are unable to cope with the guy's comments than it illuminates ML's point of view. Empathy is lacking these days.

[elnombre]

Going back to the covers album which David B. claims was to be the follow-up to TWGMTR rather than what previous interviews have suggested - i.e. that it was the initial idea for the reunion album - well, how does this make any sense?

From what Mike has said it seems his involvement on a TWGMTR follow-up album was contingent on being given one on one writing time with Brian. Nothing would ensure zero writing time with Brian faster than making an album of cover songs, yet Mike was supposedly up for making just such an album....uhhh....?!?

Mike was 'enthusiastic' for an album which would ensure he did not get one single solitary writing credit? But an album where he is credited as a writer or co-writer on 1/3rd of the tracks was too much of a compromise? I don't get it. Unless the problem isn't that he particularly wants to write with Brian, but he also doesn't particularly want Brian to write with anyone else. Then the tone of sour grapes that permeates this interview starts to make a bit of sense.

[CenturyDeprived]

I think we are getting close to being on the same page finally. Like some were trying to say a bunch of pages ago, Mike is saying (in 2012 and 2015) there was a lot of talk without follow up, talk without discussion. He/they were open to more dates and albums but when the C50 agreement ended the talk never amounted to something in-writing/set-in-stone/concrete that came before them or was discussed.

One of the arguments that Mike brought up back in 2012 was to “give it a rest” for a year to build up demand. Whether he really was serious about the idea or was just trying to get people off his back about why they weren’t going right back out on the road and into the studio, I don’t know. But Brian was talking in his LA Times article about more show offers presumably in 2012, not 2014.  

If anything, perhaps Mike thought that he could use the “give it a rest for a year to build up demand" thing as an excuse, to buy time and hopefully get Brian to cave to Mike's demands in the meantime. It was really just a made-up excuse though. C'mon. There's no way you can tell me a guy like Mike Love ever actually wants to give anything a rest touring-wise. If he wrote songs with Brian in a room and got to remain the center of attention in C50, he'd not have wanted to give it a rest.

Mike can claim that, and it might make logical sense to some people reading his side of the story, and get some people behind him, but ultimately it fails as an excuse. It's not consistent with any of Mike's touring actions, ever.

While we as hardcore fans, as well as promoters, know the difference between Mike’s “Beach Boys” and the C50 “Beach Boys”, I think his “give it a rest” argument lost a lot of credibility when the concurrent discussion also involved that he was *immediately* going back out on the road as “The Beach Boys.”

I mean, wouldn’t it build up *even more* demand if you literally take the BB name off the market for even just one season?

These are obviously rhetorical questions that are even more meaningless in light of that fact that, in my opinion, factors such as “market demand” had little or nothing to do with the reunion’s demise.

let's be honest: he obviously was just doing the whole "take a year away" thing so people would be off of his back.

This.

As HeyJude has pointed out, Mike has to own it, take the criticism for his actions... but he never will. Somehow he thinks his actions are always justifiable.

[Cam Mott]

OK, I'm out. Up is down and in is out and we are killing the messenger.