Bruce Johnston Reimagines Gershwin

[Douchepool]

Lost my head again.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

The dude was probably more prolific than Brian was as a producer and performer in those days. So many records he either co-wrote, sang on, played on, produced, you name it.

Prolific means in great quantity, volume. Not better in quality or worth.

So this may be true, for those that might want to do a comparison. Bruce did a lot of sessions back then. Course, he had a bunch of help from Terry Melcher.

Obviously, Brian was much more commercially and creatively successful.

[Mendota Heights]

When I think "prolific songwriter" I think "good songwriter". I take quality into consideration.

When I google "prolific songwriters" the results are "best songwriters", "great songwriters", "Hall of Fame songwriters", "top ten songwriters", "most successful songwriters" et c. That is how the word "prolific" can be used when it comes to music. If I write eleven bad songs that flop and Bruce ten hit songs would people refer to me as a more prolific songwriter than Bruce? I doubt it.

But then again, if I am wrong I am wrong.

[Douchepool]

The dude was probably more prolific than Brian was as a producer and performer in those days. So many records he either co-wrote, sang on, played on, produced, you name it.

Prolific means in great quantity, volume. Not better in quality or worth.

So this may be true, for those that might want to do a comparison. Bruce did a lot of sessions back then. Course, he had a bunch of help from Terry Melcher.

Obviously, Brian was much more commercially and creatively successful.

Did anyone even imply that Bruce's work in 1962-64 was better? Whose post are you really replying to?

[SurfRiderHawaii]

The dude was probably more prolific than Brian was as a producer and performer in those days. So many records he either co-wrote, sang on, played on, produced, you name it.

Prolific means in great quantity, volume. Not better in quality or worth.

So this may be true, for those that might want to do a comparison. Bruce did a lot of sessions back then. Course, he had a bunch of help from Terry Melcher.

Obviously, Brian was much more commercially and creatively successful.

Did anyone even imply that Bruce's work in 1962-64 was better? Whose post are you really replying to?

No, and that's why I was backing up your post. Some thought you were saying Bruce was a better early producer and I was saying you didn't. You fairly said Bruce might have been more prolific and I agreed. Prolific means more, not better. So no, I was replying to others, not you.

[Douchepool]

I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification.

[SurfRiderHawaii]

I misunderstood. Thanks for the clarification.

Sure! Bruce was prolific!  I wish the market were such that we could get a Bruce box. To include demos, unreleased stuff. I'd love to here Bruce's rejected song from the Radio sessions.

[Douchepool]

Sadly, the bootleggers already beat Bruce to it for the most part.

[feelsflow]

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/prolific

And no, it wasn't an attack on Brian by any means. Of course, I can't say I'm surprised at the simple fucks/usual suspects who thought it was. Unfortunately for them, not everything said on here is an attack on Brian as they so often hallucinate. Or it was because I used the word "probably," which damned near destroyed the board once before thanks to similarly or the same overzealous fuckwits.

I should have clarified that I was referring to the 1962-65 period before Bruce joined the band. And I don't even have to make a list, because Andrew Doe already beat me to it.

http://esquarterly.com/bellagio/bruce.html

I'll ask the same question.  Whose post are you really replying to?

I only referred to you as someone who makes good lists.  That was a compliment.  I didn't even quote your post in my reply, a reply to the posters I did quote.  I gave my take on what prolific means to me when speaking of Brian vs Bruce in 1962 - 1963.  I didn't mangle your post to say you meant 1963.  Your date was vague, and I left it as that.

I will quote you now:  I am not a "simple f***" or a "usual suspect."  I have tried to make it clear that I like all of the Beach Boys, my favorite American band of the 60's, 70's, and part of the 80's.  And boy do I get sh*t from my friends.  Stuff like, "You mean better than the Byrds?"  I made it clear from my very first post that I like the Wilson brothers the most.  That does not make me a "usual suspect," as I take no part in the Brian vs Mike/everybody else in the band threads in any negative way.  I do have a problem with Mike, but that's only since 1992.  I have a right to have an opinion.  If you didn't mean me, okay, but it seems your reply was at least partially aimed at me.  And should you be calling anyone a simple f***?  I know it's been a bit tense around here this week, but really.  That is offensive to say to anyone.

You can make or clarify a point without any sort of negative vibe.  -Will