Why do you hate Mike Love?

[Cam Mott]

Or maybe Brian's autobio.

Ears can be deceiving.  Maybe the eyes too because I remember Brian being invested in the filmed sessions but the memory's not that great and I haven't seen it for a long time.

My favorite didn't make the album, just the video.

[guitarfool2002]

Or maybe Brian's autobio.

Ears can be deceiving.  Maybe the eyes too because I remember Brian being invested in the filmed sessions but the memory's not that great and I haven't seen it for a long time.

My favorite didn't make the album, just the video.

Minnie Pearl and Grandpa Jones covering Summer Of Love?

[Cam Mott]

Or maybe Brian's autobio.

Ears can be deceiving.  Maybe the eyes too because I remember Brian being invested in the filmed sessions but the memory's not that great and I haven't seen it for a long time.

My favorite didn't make the album, just the video.

Minnie Pearl and Grandpa Jones covering Summer Of Love?

In My Room.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

More like Pisces brothers is dogshit.

SB, you are being way too generous and kind when it comes to myKe luHv's wizardly, groundbreaking artistry on "Pisces Brothers".  

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

I think the only Airplay SIP got was in Mike Love's house.

Only after myKe handed her the paycheck and she went out shopping  spending most of his dinero. 

[SMiLE Brian]

OSD!!!!!!

[rogerlancelot]

Has anybody read the Original Poster's article on Jan & Dean yet?

http://www.iainlee.com/2015/03/jan-and-dean/

I really love Iain, but I have to quote just a few BB related parts in his essay:

"Jan Berry, knowing they were on their way out, befriended The Beach Boys and persuaded Brian Wilson to give them a half written tune called ‘Surf City’ which Berry dutifully tidied up. It became the only surf song to get to number one in the U.S of good ol’ A, pissing off Mike Love no end which can only be a good thing (unfair, sorry. Cheap jibe. I don’t subscribe to the theory that Mike Love is evil personified, I think he’s done some dodgy things but probably deserves a lot more respect than the world affords him)."

"Warner Brothers were impressed enough with Jan’s recovery (or maybe they were mislead slightly as to how well he actually was. That was a trick the Beach Boys played every time they had to sign a new record contract – clean up a drooling Brian and show him off for 20 minutes telling the execs he was back to normal and would be writing all the new songs, before discharging him back to bed!) that they allowed him to record another album. Carnival Of Sound was supposed to be the duo’s psychedelic masterpiece – a swirling orgy of sound and colour inspired by the drug culture and the changing world around them. You would never have to hear surf music again."

"The Beach Boys were finally acknowledging they were an oldies band. Love had won the internal battle for control and dictated that creativity was out and sunshine funshine hits were in. J&D could tap into that market, they could have a piece of that pie."

And the guy vanishes after starting the thread.

Also, thank you to Craig (GF) for a good insight into the SIP and S&S album origins. That was a side of the story that I was previously unaware of.

[Autotune]

But isn't it like a cool thing from Mike to want to have Brian on board for the project he alledgedly led (i.e. S&S)? Wasn't Mike supportive of the Was-produced material (which Mike did not co-write btw)?


If anything, Mike can be blamed for being the one guy in the group to always want to have Brian on board. If anything, he regarded Brian's talent as high as anyone. I suppose this should be cool with some people, but it will be debunked by the end of the day ("Mike wants Brian only on his terms", etc.).

Did you miss what I wrote about this, are you just ignoring it so you can apply the term "allegedly", or is it a case of not being familiar with pitching ideas for a project, getting backers, and negotiating the terms?

Brian's involvement was part of the negotiations from when Joe first mentioned Willie Nelson to Mike as they were planning it out, and Brian's participation was essential for some of the backers to invest in the project so it could move forward. Simple as that. No Brian, no backing, no project.

I didn't miss it. I read the whole post through. All 4000 words of it. And I followed the making of it and the interviews back then.

Will you submit that Mike's sole reason for getting Brian involved was getting backers for the album? You Believe that otherwise they would have done without Brian? They they had been working together, WITH Brian, since like a year before.

I will not defend S&S. It's the biggest turd of an album Brian Wilson ever produced.

I won't submit a sole reason for any of that, because it's not a sole reason situation. Was Brian's involvement in the project a key factor in getting the project from idea to pitch to actual reality? YES times 1,000. If anyone doubts that, they're ignoring the facts of what happened. The people who would be funding it all but demanded Brian's name on the credits. It gave automatic credibility that SIP for one lacked, especially anything labeled "Beach Boys". Still holds true today. No Brian, no project, period. Assume what you like about Mike's reasons, but that was a major factor.

Mike and Brian were writing songs when Don Was and Andy Paley were on board, yes. What was Carl's reason for scuppering that arrangement? Because it seemed everyone from Mike to Brian to Was to Paley was into cutting the song Soul Searchin and moving forward with it as a release, then Carl balked. Why did Carl also nix the idea of the orchestral Pet Sounds tour that was on the table? Ask around, see what folks say about those issues.

Tell us how much of that record you think Brian was hands-on with the production and arranging.

My point is that, as you mention, Brian and Mike and the rest of the guys were already collaborating; it wasn't a stretch for Mike to look for Brian to produce it. Regarding Carl's reasons for nixing some of those ideas, I've heard several reasons-- none of them entirely convincing... perhaps it was a combination of different reasons. But if it's a rethorical question, go ahead and answer it yourself.

It's not a rhetorical question, so what's your take on it?

Either Brian and Carl's relationship was strained as an aftermath of the conservatorship and autobiography issues. Or Carl didn't care for the projects. Or he was busy battling then-uncovered health issues. Or he didn't trust his brother's instincts
as a producer/songwriter at the time. Or he didn't trust his brother's vocal prowess. Or he found artistic fulfillment in recording with Beckley and Lamm. Or a combination of all or some of the above. Or none of those reasons.

What's your take?

[clack]

The Love/Melcher songwriting partnership was actually a pretty good one, but not good enough to carry a whole lp ( or even half of one, frankly).

But what was the alternative to SIP? Brian was not available. Carl and Bruce weren't writing.  Mike understandably thought he had something going post-Kokomo. Are we saying that Mike should have had enough objectivity to recognize that Kokomo was a fluke? Should the band have thrown in the towel after Still Cruisin'?

[Mujan, 8@$+@Rc| of a Blue Wizard]

The Love/Melcher songwriting partnership was actually a pretty good one, but not good enough to carry a whole lp ( or even half of one, frankly).

But what was the alternative to SIP? Brian was not available. Carl and Bruce weren't writing.  Mike understandably thought he had something going post-Kokomo. Are we saying that Mike should have had enough objectivity to recognize that Kokomo was a fluke? Should the band have thrown in the towel after Still Cruisin'?

Why is releasing nothing for awhile not an option? Wait until you have something good. I guess Mike thought he did, but yeah. It's not like they were starving.

[guitarfool2002]

But isn't it like a cool thing from Mike to want to have Brian on board for the project he alledgedly led (i.e. S&S)? Wasn't Mike supportive of the Was-produced material (which Mike did not co-write btw)?


If anything, Mike can be blamed for being the one guy in the group to always want to have Brian on board. If anything, he regarded Brian's talent as high as anyone. I suppose this should be cool with some people, but it will be debunked by the end of the day ("Mike wants Brian only on his terms", etc.).

Did you miss what I wrote about this, are you just ignoring it so you can apply the term "allegedly", or is it a case of not being familiar with pitching ideas for a project, getting backers, and negotiating the terms?

Brian's involvement was part of the negotiations from when Joe first mentioned Willie Nelson to Mike as they were planning it out, and Brian's participation was essential for some of the backers to invest in the project so it could move forward. Simple as that. No Brian, no backing, no project.

I didn't miss it. I read the whole post through. All 4000 words of it. And I followed the making of it and the interviews back then.

Will you submit that Mike's sole reason for getting Brian involved was getting backers for the album? You Believe that otherwise they would have done without Brian? They they had been working together, WITH Brian, since like a year before.

I will not defend S&S. It's the biggest turd of an album Brian Wilson ever produced.

I won't submit a sole reason for any of that, because it's not a sole reason situation. Was Brian's involvement in the project a key factor in getting the project from idea to pitch to actual reality? YES times 1,000. If anyone doubts that, they're ignoring the facts of what happened. The people who would be funding it all but demanded Brian's name on the credits. It gave automatic credibility that SIP for one lacked, especially anything labeled "Beach Boys". Still holds true today. No Brian, no project, period. Assume what you like about Mike's reasons, but that was a major factor.

Mike and Brian were writing songs when Don Was and Andy Paley were on board, yes. What was Carl's reason for scuppering that arrangement? Because it seemed everyone from Mike to Brian to Was to Paley was into cutting the song Soul Searchin and moving forward with it as a release, then Carl balked. Why did Carl also nix the idea of the orchestral Pet Sounds tour that was on the table? Ask around, see what folks say about those issues.

Tell us how much of that record you think Brian was hands-on with the production and arranging.

My point is that, as you mention, Brian and Mike and the rest of the guys were already collaborating; it wasn't a stretch for Mike to look for Brian to produce it. Regarding Carl's reasons for nixing some of those ideas, I've heard several reasons-- none of them entirely convincing... perhaps it was a combination of different reasons. But if it's a rethorical question, go ahead and answer it yourself.

It's not a rhetorical question, so what's your take on it?

Either Brian and Carl's relationship was strained as an aftermath of the conservatorship and autobiography issues. Or Carl didn't care for the projects. Or he was busy battling then-uncovered health issues. Or he didn't trust his brother's instincts
as a producer/songwriter at the time. Or he didn't trust his brother's vocal prowess. Or he found artistic fulfillment in recording with Beckley and Lamm. Or a combination of all or some of the above. Or none of those reasons.

What's your take?

My take is that it could very well have been some of those points you listed. But overall I think there was a dynamic between the brothers during this time that doesn't seem to be talked about that much, which also says there may have been deeper issues that are "off limits" outside the family and friends who were there. I can't speculate and won't try, but if we put together what little has been said about things that happened during this time, it can paint a picture that might run counter to what a lot of fans might assume things were like. And some of those issues you mentioned, again, could very well have been at play, in fact a few have been reported (or revealed?) in various places.

I do think Carl had issues with Brian's ability to perform - again *just* my opinion based on what has come out - and seemed to take it perhaps a bit too far in trying to stave off what he may have thought had the potential to reflect badly on the band. Yet - Brian had the Don Was documentary under his belt, and was giving a few one-off performances...was it that much of an issue for Carl to try to avoid the potential for possible problems as he seems to have done?

Was that why the Pet Sounds tour was nixed by Carl? Was that why there were reportedly concerns about Brian performing at the Nashville Fan Fest, Letterman, etc? Was it Carl being too concerned or was there more behind it than just performance concerns? Again, until more is actually revealed (or if more is revealed), we just don't know. Why did Carl nix Soul Searchin' when all the key players seemed to be energized by the song and getting it out as a single, even? Why did Carl apparently cancel out on Brian when they tried to make plans to meet for dinner? Who knows.

But it was something beyond what the public might know or think, and again  it seems to be one of those off-limits topics since there just isn't much on the record.

[guitarfool2002]

Adding to that, just consider putting yourself in Brian's shoes, hypothetically getting out of the Landy disaster and wanting to get back with your band and your brother making music, since that was the vibe that was in the public "we can't wait to be back together making music with Brian again"...all of that...and the dynamic was more on the weird side instead of being perhaps as Brian (or some of us) would have expected. And also factor in something that may or may not have been hanging over the activities - Mike's efforts to oust Al from the Beach Boys. That had to cause some strained feelings outside Mike and Al, I'd think.

[elnombre]

You know I really don't get why some of you waste your time coming to this board. People like drbeachboy and Mike's beard(you know what that makes you right?) This whole Brian vs. Mike thing is futile. It's art vs. commerce. I have always subscribed to Dennis' thoughts about Brian;"He is the Beach Boys,we're just his fucking messengers". I do think Mike gets blamed too much but his personality encourages it. Things like sitting there when Carl got punched by Rocky Pamplin or saying that Brian's first solo album was sh*t in the Goldmine article. Doing the 1981 Long Beach concert without Carl which did a fair amount of harm to their reputation. The cheerleaders onstage in the '90's, yes I know that the other Boys signed off on it but Mike came up with the idea.By the way, comparing SIP with those other albums is just sheer ignorance and bad taste. SIP would've been a better if Brian had been involved with it. Go listen to the Sea of Tunes stuff if you are wondering who the Beach Boys were. Somebody else knocked Brian's solo albums, only in America would people criticize an artist of Brian's magnitude. I don't know if you take Mike's side because you feel somebody has to or you really believe it, but I wish you a lot of luck.

But here it's you purporting this Brian vs. Mike bullshit. Why are there supposed to be two factions? Why is it an x vs. y situation? It is you and others making it that way. Reality is more intricate and subtle than that.

Who are you trying to kid?

1. Mike makes anti-Brian comments publicly and people here read them, you've read and commented on them.

2. Mike has initiated lawsuits against Brian (and Al) and I'm not just talking about the song writing credits lawsuit.  Are you unaware of these lawsuits?  I am pretty sure you've commented in those threads as well.

I don't think people here are making it that way.  I think Mike is making it that way.  Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is Mike.
 

I'm pretty sure you're absolutely right on all counts, EOL, and the myKe luHv apologists just keep on getting their backs closer to that wall of no quarter.  

You did it again! You changed the letters in his name around!!!!!!  

That is so good! Oh my god, let me catch my breath. Wait, I've got one myself: "Adolf Shitler". Geddit? Because he was a sh*t? Eh, it's not so funny when it's about someone who isn't as bad a human being as Mike. Sorry, mYkE.

Wheeee-oooo. Okay, sorry, I can't resist, do it again! Oh you did ?!!!!! Twice?!!!!! On the following page??!!!!! What are you trying to do, make me die from laughter?  

Ohhhhh god. Nurse?

[Andrew G. Doe]

Tworandom observations. Discard if you will.

1 - the BB/Was sessions were in November 1995. In January 1996 Carl accompanies the band to London and appears on TV looking very rough. It's widely agreed that he knew something was very wrong some considerable time before the 'official' cancer diagnosis being announced in April 1997. Maybe this was also the reason behind all his interviews for Nashville Sounds being shot separately, and why - please correct me if I'm wrong - he's barely, if ever, shown  in the session footage.

2 - If Willie was the bait for getting other top-line country stars on board... how come no-one else did ?  I'm not talking "big in the States" here, I'm talking A+++ like Willie: he and Tim Schmit were the only two I'd even heard of, much less knew something about (OK, and Tammy, even though she didn't make the cut). Reba... Dolly... Cash... Emmylou... Garth... Waylon... Kristofferson... were they even approached ?

[elnombre]

Certainly regarding point 2, the talent you'd have expected to be willing compared to the turn-out was a paltry showing. Presumably everything aside from the leads had been cut before the guest parts too, so what, a day's work? All I can imagine is record company politics playing a role - or at least that's what I'd rather imagine than the Boys' stock having fallen so far that they could no longer get them. Just the idea of Emmylou harmonizing with them is magnificent - if it had been a Parsons' song, even better.

Come to think of it, I think 'The Beach Boys go Country' would have been a far better album than 'Country goes The Beach Boys'.

[Mike's Beard]

The buzz was happening, people were talking and referencing and being influenced by and loving this music again. Or in the case of the Smile material on the box, those who didn't have the bootlegs prior to this were pretty much in awe and wanting to know more. Again, 1992-93, there was the same exact buzz and excitement and recognition that you said wasn't there.

The buzz may have been building but clearly in 1992 that had yet to translate into upward swings in sales of new material. That would take the 30 Years box, the Pet Sounds box and a raised profile of Brian Wilson after the whole Landy thing. Even then Stars & Stripes sold very little (and has rarely been in print since it's initial release). Personally, I think despite not sinking to the lows of the Stamosied Forever it is a much poorer record than SIP overall.

Well, that leads us back to your own question - would a good album of new BBs material have sold well in 1992? If you're acknowledging that there was indeed a buzz around the band's, shall we say, more serious side then I think the answer is most likely yes. Lot's of 60s influenced bands doing very well, springing up, having hit albums, name-checking....this was an age where indie respectability would have sold. Cartoonish plastic sounding power ballads and rap attempts which frankly were at least 5 years out of date by the time SIP was released, not so much.

Everyone should have spent a little more time looking at the La's and a little less at Bart Simpson and Vanilla Ice.

This was hardly an isolated incident thought was it? The last time the BBs had their finger on the pulse of what was happening was Holland. Okay, BB85 was also an attempt to be current - look how that ended up. While it's a nice dream the BBs were never going to become Godfathers of the Indie scene in the early 90s. They were dorks pushing 50.

[Autotune]

Tworandom observations. Discard if you will.

1 - the BB/Was sessions were in November 1995. In January 1996 Carl accompanies the band to London and appears on TV looking very rough. It's widely agreed that he knew something was very wrong some considerable time before the 'official' cancer diagnosis being announced in April 1997. Maybe this was also the reason behind all his interviews for Nashville Sounds being shot separately, and why - please correct me if I'm wrong - he's barely, if ever, shown  in the session footage.

2 - If Willie was the bait for getting other top-line country stars on board... how come no-one else did ?  I'm not talking "big in the States" here, I'm talking A+++ like Willie: he and Tim Schmit were the only two I'd even heard of, much less knew something about (OK, and Tammy, even though she didn't make the cut). Reba... Dolly... Cash... Emmylou... Garth... Waylon... Kristofferson... were they even approached ?

Following your and guitarfool's posts, I'd add that the autobiography seemingly hurt Carl very deeply. We don't know exactly how close they remained until the end. And keep in mind it was Carl who sidelined Brian's stage role in the late 70s - early 80s. So yes, he could be his brother's toughest critic.

[Please delete my account]

I have never liked Mike's style or his arrogant and boastful attitude as expressed onstage and in interviews. He is obviously a good singer but I think his importance to the Beach Boys is overstated by him and his defenders. Some of his early lyrics are good but his later lyrics are usually excruciating.

Perhaps some of the legends about the negative influence he has had on the band are over the top. But too many of the arguments in favour of absolving him from blame are based on his own self-serving testimony.

[filledeplage]

The buzz was happening, people were talking and referencing and being influenced by and loving this music again. Or in the case of the Smile material on the box, those who didn't have the bootlegs prior to this were pretty much in awe and wanting to know more. Again, 1992-93, there was the same exact buzz and excitement and recognition that you said wasn't there.

The buzz may have been building but clearly in 1992 that had yet to translate into upward swings in sales of new material. That would take the 30 Years box, the Pet Sounds box and a raised profile of Brian Wilson after the whole Landy thing. Even then Stars & Stripes sold very little (and has rarely been in print since it's initial release). Personally, I think despite not sinking to the lows of the Stamosied Forever it is a much poorer record than SIP overall.

Well, that leads us back to your own question - would a good album of new BBs material have sold well in 1992? If you're acknowledging that there was indeed a buzz around the band's, shall we say, more serious side then I think the answer is most likely yes. Lot's of 60s influenced bands doing very well, springing up, having hit albums, name-checking....this was an age where indie respectability would have sold. Cartoonish plastic sounding power ballads and rap attempts which frankly were at least 5 years out of date by the time SIP was released, not so much.

Everyone should have spent a little more time looking at the La's and a little less at Bart Simpson and Vanilla Ice.

This was hardly an isolated incident thought was it? The last time the BBs had their finger on the pulse of what was happening was Holland. Okay, BB85 was also an attempt to be current - look how that ended up. While it's a nice dream the BBs were never going to become Godfathers of the Indie scene in the early 90s. They were dorks pushing 50.

Timing was always crazy. People aren't always ready to digest what an avant guard artist releases.  Even Brian has said that in the Smiley interviews...

Who knew country would become sexy? They were ahead of the curve with Stars and Stripes and a little behind it with SIP and Baywatch.  Had it been a real studio album instead of on ProTools (and leading edge in a techie way) but with that authentic human groove, things might be different. It isn't bad music.  I sort of get annoyed when the UK or other countries get an "enhanced" or deluxe version and they are US guys.  Guess I'm just "territorial" like that! 

And, I used to wake up my youngest for school (like trying to raise the dead!)  with DWB with Lorrie Morgan! They did assemble the greats for that album.  Country was becoming sexy at that time, but it wasn't there, yet...

[Andrew G. Doe]

I'd add that the autobiography seemingly hurt Carl very deeply.

The 1991 pseudobiography hurt everyone whose name wasn't Eugene Landy or Alexandra Morgan. I'm omitting Brian's name as his involvement in the whole sorry mess was on the slight side of minimal. He stated under other that his contribution was seven or eight hours of interviews, and that he'd never read it. In private, he's (accurately) called it "a piece of sh*t". Whatever the merit of the 2016 reboot, it has to be better.

[Robbie Mac]

I have never liked Mike's style or his arrogant and boastful attitude as expressed onstage and in interviews. He is obviously a good singer but I think his importance to the Beach Boys is overstated by him and his defenders. Some of his early lyrics are good but his later lyrics are usually excruciating.

Perhaps some of the legends about the negative influence he has had on the band are over the top. But too many of the arguments in favour of absolving him from blame are based on his own self-serving testimony.

This x 100.

Leaf and Priore did their homework.

[The LEGENDARY OSD]

You know I really don't get why some of you waste your time coming to this board. People like drbeachboy and Mike's beard(you know what that makes you right?) This whole Brian vs. Mike thing is futile. It's art vs. commerce. I have always subscribed to Dennis' thoughts about Brian;"He is the Beach Boys,we're just his fucking messengers". I do think Mike gets blamed too much but his personality encourages it. Things like sitting there when Carl got punched by Rocky Pamplin or saying that Brian's first solo album was sh*t in the Goldmine article. Doing the 1981 Long Beach concert without Carl which did a fair amount of harm to their reputation. The cheerleaders onstage in the '90's, yes I know that the other Boys signed off on it but Mike came up with the idea.By the way, comparing SIP with those other albums is just sheer ignorance and bad taste. SIP would've been a better if Brian had been involved with it. Go listen to the Sea of Tunes stuff if you are wondering who the Beach Boys were. Somebody else knocked Brian's solo albums, only in America would people criticize an artist of Brian's magnitude. I don't know if you take Mike's side because you feel somebody has to or you really believe it, but I wish you a lot of luck.

But here it's you purporting this Brian vs. Mike bullshit. Why are there supposed to be two factions? Why is it an x vs. y situation? It is you and others making it that way. Reality is more intricate and subtle than that.

Who are you trying to kid?

1. Mike makes anti-Brian comments publicly and people here read them, you've read and commented on them.

2. Mike has initiated lawsuits against Brian (and Al) and I'm not just talking about the song writing credits lawsuit.  Are you unaware of these lawsuits?  I am pretty sure you've commented in those threads as well.

I don't think people here are making it that way.  I think Mike is making it that way.  Yeah, I'm pretty sure it is Mike.
 

I'm pretty sure you're absolutely right on all counts, EOL, and the myKe luHv apologists just keep on getting their backs closer to that wall of no quarter.  

You did it again! You changed the letters in his name around!!!!!!  

That is so good! Oh my god, let me catch my breath. Wait, I've got one myself: "Adolf Shitler". Geddit? Because he was a sh*t? Eh, it's not so funny when it's about someone who isn't as bad a human being as Mike. Sorry, mYkE.

Wheeee-oooo. Okay, sorry, I can't resist, do it again! Oh you did ?!!!!! Twice?!!!!! On the following page??!!!!! What are you trying to do, make me die from laughter?  

Ohhhhh god. Nurse?

myKe luHv   

[guitarfool2002]

2 - If Willie was the bait for getting other top-line country stars on board... how come no-one else did ?  I'm not talking "big in the States" here, I'm talking A+++ like Willie: he and Tim Schmit were the only two I'd even heard of, much less knew something about (OK, and Tammy, even though she didn't make the cut). Reba... Dolly... Cash... Emmylou... Garth... Waylon... Kristofferson... were they even approached ?

This taps into just how segmented country music really is, and has been for decades. The artists listed, Garth Brooks aside, eventually fell into the "legends" category even by the 90's. They made their mark in previous decades, but modern country radio would rarely play their songs. Garth Brooks changed country music, some would say for better or for worse depending on their views, but they were saying that about Willie, Kris, Waylon, etc back in the eraly 70's too. They were changing country too much, the diehard fans who tuned into the Grand Ol Opry radio show would say...yet they changed it for the better. Expanded its appeal, brought a different take on the genre into the genre. Garth Brooks sold records outside the "country" genre, he got the treasured "crossover" markets and demographics to buy country records, which was the plan all along. Garth was all about the marketing which is why some really didn't dig what he was doing...but I digress.

The Stars & Stripes project wanted to tap into the "modern country" demographic. It wasn't necessarily the "carry your own lawn chair to the concert" demographic who was the target, it was the hit country radio market they wanted to tap into. Some of the artists in S&S did in fact go on to become major stars in commercial country and on country radio, but at that time 1996 they may have been the equivalent of a modern band today with maybe two radio hits under their belt but who are still playing package tours and mid-level venues. They broke, but not yet cracked the big time arena market yet.

So consider if S&S was supposed to tap into that younger "hit country" or "crossover country" or "modern country" or "pop country" market, the kind of new records that got played regularly on country radio that didn't play nostalgia, they'd go after some of those artists in that category. If they got Kris or Waylon to cut a song, chances are it wouldn't get on modern country radio especially in 1996.

Willie Nelson - The clout came from landing a major artist, in fact one of the most recognizable country artists period, I'd suggest perhaps as much for the industry and agents/managers as the artists themselves. You get Willie on a project, instant credibility, and if other artists' managers and agents and even labels were approached about the project, the thought would be "Willie is involved? We're in." It was an industry thing. However, if you were looking to crack country radio and the younger modern country demographic, you wouldn't fill the album with with Willie's peers and all of his cohorts because that's not the demographic you're trying to tap into.

Country music as a genre has as many segments and sub-genres and labels as any style of music, not to mention some odd attitudes toward tradition versus modern appeal, wanting to cross over versus stay true to the old traditions...it's bizarre sometimes.

Maybe I should have done this instead, save all the words...

Click on this link, it goes directly to the most current Billboard top country chart. See how many names are recognizable to those who don't follow country or listen to modern country radio. Then consider that the artists on S&S were on this same chart back in 95-96 with few exceptions, and that's what S&S was aiming for:

http://www.billboard.com/charts/country-songs

[Sheriff John Stone]

Perhaps some of the legends about the negative influence he has had on the band are over the top. But too many of the arguments in favour of absolving him from blame are based on his own self-serving testimony.

I agree with your first sentence. Mike's negative influence - or any influence - is overrated. I also agree with your second sentence. Too many arguments absolving Mike from blame are coming from Mike himself, which ties in with the first sentence. If the perception of Mike's negative influence is, as you say, "over the top", then maybe fans need a dose of reality. Mike's simply supplying it. But there is a point that is still being missed.

Regardless of whether these "bad" ideas came from Mike Love directly or indirectly, it doesn't matter. The ideas had to be approved and executed by the group. Mike was not a dictator. It had to be done via a vote, with signed contracts, riders, etc. - or just VERBAL consent and approval. Any form of approval you choose, the group carried out the idea(s). Nobody was forcing them to do anything. Could Brian, Dennis, or Carl Wilson actually be forced to do...anything?

You can decide for yourself why the group agreed to the bad ideas and choices that they did. But I find it hard to believe it was because of Mike Love's charming personality and good looks. How many times have posters ON THIS BOARD stated how Mike - because he wasn't a musician - wasn't even respected by the Wilsons, how his role in the band was intentionally diminished over time, how he was an embarrassment to the group. Then why would they listen to him? Of all people, why would they listen to HIM?

What possible reasons? Could it be alimony and child support payments? Maybe boat refurbishing loans? How about past due mortgages? Outrageous doctor bills? Expensive cars? Girlfriends? Cocaine?

Well, somebody agreed to put more oldies in the setlist, somebody agreed to the recording of the M.I.U. album, somebody agreed to the disco version of "Here Comes The Night", somebody agreed to "keepin' the summer alive", somebody agreed to do a video with The Fat Boys, somebody agreed to appear on Full House, somebody agreed to the configuration of the Still Cruisin' album, somebody OK'd the recording and release of Summer In Paradise complete with John Stamos' lead vocal on "Forever", somebody agreed to appear and perform "Summer Of Love" on Baywatch, somebody participated in the Stars & Stripes project - both the album and the Fan Fair concert, somebody voted to give Mike the touring license, somebody CONTINUES to give Mike the touring license, and on and on. Mike Love didn't do all of that alone.

And who would those "somebodies" be? Well, that would Mike Love AND his bandmates - Brian Wilson, Dennis Wilson, Carl Wilson, Al Jardine, and Bruce Johnston. In the words of Fredo Corleone, "Did you ever think about that? Did you ever once think about that?"

[guitarfool2002]

Sheriff - In recent years JC Penney wanted to try to reverse some of their losses and decreasing hold in the retail sales and department store market, they had once been among the iconic American brands and a retail powerhouse for decades until the business in general began to change, leaving Penney's brand and image seemingly stuck in the past. The Penney's board hired an executive who had been with Apple previously to try re-energizing the company and reversing their fortunes which were on a downward trend.

This Apple exec steps in, and proceeds with his "vision" and plan for the Penney brand. It was all but a reboot, or a total revamping of everything from how the store interacted with customers, to the look, to the overall day-to-day ops of the stores.

This former Apple exec's "vision" ended up nearly destroying the Penney brand for good. The loyal customers they did have rejected the changes. They still looked for weekly sales and special buys via ads that the Apple exec thought were too old-fashioned for his modernization plan. They wanted some of the old JC Penney to still be recognizable, and when it changed too much too fast, those loyal customers bailed too. The new, more tuned into Apple style business operations customer demographic never warmed up to the "new" ways of JC Penney either. Thinking perhaps..."I don't want to buy a pair of Khakis like I just bought this iPhone at the Apple Store". Etc etc etc.

Point is, it was one of the biggest corporate flops of the past decade. The Apple exec ended up getting shown the door after he all but marched the company off a cliff. JC Penney is still recovering after realizing JC Penney is NOT and should NOT be The Apple Store for obvious reasons. You'll have to check how they're doing now, I stopped following it.

But the point also that I'm getting at is this:

If the board of directors for JC Penney brought this Apple exec in to develop and execute a business plan to help the business, if everyone from high level management to mid level managers to buyers to the individual store managers and floor workers put their trust in the former Apple exec's vision and plan but it ended up almost destroying the company...

Is it their fault too that it failed? Or is it more a case of the leader who was trusted to lead the company simply failing to do what he was charged with doing for a variety of reasons, which was as in all business to make that business better? In the case of JC Penney, it must have been a cold shot in the face to realize Penney customers are not the same as Apple devotees. But the "blame" if you will rests more on the guy who put the entire fortunes of the company on what turned out to be a flawed premise from the start.