gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 06:31:24 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 15 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Don't F**k With the Formula  (Read 60966 times)
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2871


View Profile
« Reply #150 on: August 19, 2015, 05:53:54 PM »

Ontor - did you read my post where Capitol released Then I Kissed Her/Mountain of Love, from 1965, in the UK in 1967? Complete with a promo video!

And with commentary from 2 band members who were unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact?

Maybe Mike was unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact, but that's not the issue he raises in the quotation you gave. That was Bruce's issue, yes, and I don't think anyone would be surprised at that since it is a pretty uncontroversial belief that Bruce was a huge fan of Pet Sounds. Mike's problem, though, in that quotation, is that Capitol has put out a single on which neither side contains a Brian Wilson composition.
Logged
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #151 on: August 19, 2015, 06:03:07 PM »

SJS, voice of the Silent Majority, Keeper of the Formula. It's good BW didn't pay attention to such mean-spirited career advice, "Heroes and Villains" alone was worth it!

 I like how he seems to think BW underachieved somehow, that having all of those hits, changing the face of pop music, influencing generations, bringing joy and hope to mopey goofballs dealing with breakups by ingesting Pet Sounds, AND a bunch of diverse experiments and different styles wasn't enough. He should somehow be having #1 singles in his 70s too. I wonder if Mike Love should be held to those standards too, I mean he certainly kept with the formula and despite Queen Latifah's help, Pisces Brothers didn't burn up the charts or make much of an impact on anyone.

Yep, what a shame that "God Only Knows" proved to be such a dismal failure in the long run... Roll Eyes  That certainly f**ked with the formula.  This is all so absurd.  Surf music was hardly hip or selling in the later 60's or 70's.  I was there and I was a fan.  We were all looking for something more interesting as far as musical concepts were concerned.  We didn't stop loving those gorgeous compositions, harmonies, nor productions.  But we wanted something more thought-provoking and quite a few of us were growing with Brian.  Describing Brian's actions in response to an awareness of this as what caused the BBs decline in sales is certainly re-writing history.  I seriously doubt "Shut Down Vol III" would have sold any better...in fact...  
What really undermined the band? Or who? If the record company under promoted the albums, who's the problem?

Yes, it is absurd. But not all of the music was ever painted with a surf, car or girl brush. It was more diverse from the outset.  There is something on each album that is thought provoking and profound.  They didn't become gorgeous become on Pet Sounds.  They were evolving all along.

The hate here creates imbalance and discord.  

I don't think anybody doesn't blame the record company for underproduction being part of the problem. But it wasn't the whole problem.  And yes, Brian was evolving all along, until he evolved too far for some, a quantum leap beyond what some people around him could comprehend, but what future generations would come to appreciate deeply... and that's when the pushback took hold more than ever before.

The discussion here is not a matter of hate, or at least not for me. I don't hate any member of this band. But posters who are too hardline into defending the "formula" quote/sentiment need to give a little, and realize that in hindsight the sentiment (or quote, if it was actually said) may have been short-sighted. Just maybe a little.
CD - today I was shocked reading what chicanery Capitol was up to in 1967, releasing minor work, 2 years post release, in the UK, which picked up the huge support that fell by the wayside in the States.  Apparently others weren't.

Those facts are not unimportant and I guess the law would call it "exculpatory" in nature.  Meaning that it would tend to show someone wasn't guilty.  That would be the band members. It should be persuasive. But never reaches a faction that is disinclined to consider alternatives. Or do a little research, instead of just running their mouths. A lot of the posters have been to college (not a requirement, of course) so why not "raise the bar?"

It was unreasonable of Capitol, and clearly didn't appreciate the "gorgeous" work cited above. As was a Best of Vol. 1 only eight weeks post Pet Sounds. They were already conspiring at the record company to "milk the early work," to the detriment of the later work.

This isn't a game of win or lose.  We all lose with this divisiveness.


No, it isn't a game of win or lose. And I'm not trying to be divisive, just realistic. It similarly helps no cause when one side refuses to give an inch - that is the most divisive action of all that anyone could take in this. You can bet your bottom dollar that if some more public responsibility had been taken by Mike for things like this, even just a little bit more in order to recognize inadvertent pain that may have been caused, that there would be somewhat less divisiveness about him (maybe quite a bit less), and in overall discussion about the band in general. It wouldn't be a magical cure-all for his exaggerated reputation, but it would have helped, and if it suddenly unexpectedly happens tomorrow (not holding my breath), it would still help some, and surely you must know there's some truth to this.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2015, 06:04:03 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #152 on: August 19, 2015, 06:04:15 PM »

Ontor - did you read my post where Capitol released Then I Kissed Her/Mountain of Love, from 1965, in the UK in 1967? Complete with a promo video!

And with commentary from 2 band members who were unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact?

Maybe Mike was unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact, but that's not the issue he raises in the quotation you gave. That was Bruce's issue, yes, and I don't think anyone would be surprised at that since it is a pretty uncontroversial belief that Bruce was a huge fan of Pet Sounds. Mike's problem, though, in that quotation, is that Capitol has put out a single on which neither side contains a Brian Wilson composition.
So...doesn't that support the proposition that Mike did indeed support Brian? And confronted the record company for this old release? Or, at least questioned authority? (I didn't quote everything.)

And that he wasn't undermining him?

People are always looking for a scapegoat.
Logged
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2871


View Profile
« Reply #153 on: August 19, 2015, 06:09:13 PM »

Ontor - did you read my post where Capitol released Then I Kissed Her/Mountain of Love, from 1965, in the UK in 1967? Complete with a promo video!

And with commentary from 2 band members who were unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact?

Maybe Mike was unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact, but that's not the issue he raises in the quotation you gave. That was Bruce's issue, yes, and I don't think anyone would be surprised at that since it is a pretty uncontroversial belief that Bruce was a huge fan of Pet Sounds. Mike's problem, though, in that quotation, is that Capitol has put out a single on which neither side contains a Brian Wilson composition.
So...doesn't that support the proposition that Mike did indeed support Brian? And confronted the record company for this old release? Or, at least questioned authority? (I didn't quote everything.)

And that he wasn't undermining him?

People are always looking for a scapegoat.

I'm sure Mike supported Brian many times. I never suggested that Mike never supported Brian nor did I say that he was "undermining him." However, none of this opposes the fact that Brian received internal opposition for just about all the music he made from Pet Sounds on, and, for Mike, much of it was on the basis of the music not being formulaic enough. He has said as much himself. This isn't "looking for a scapegoat" it's looking directly at the exact things that the people involved have undeniably said.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2015, 06:27:47 PM by Chocolate Shake Man » Logged
Stephen W. Desper
Honored Guest
******
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1365


Maintain Dynamics - Keep Peaks below 100%


View Profile WWW
« Reply #154 on: August 19, 2015, 06:41:35 PM »

COMMENT:

Brian is a visionary.

Michael is a realist.

Brian sees the present as applied to his vision of the future.

Michael sees the present as applied to his memory of the past.

Brian's view point is ... We must grow our music as we ourselves outgrow our past and embarrass our future creations.

Michael's view point is ... Don't f*** with the formula that has worked so good for us in the past so that our future is assured of continuation.

~swd
 

« Last Edit: August 19, 2015, 07:25:35 PM by Stephen W. Desper » Logged
gfac22
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 254



View Profile
« Reply #155 on: August 19, 2015, 06:52:31 PM »

Thank you, Mr. Desper, I believe that should effectively end this thread.  Well said.
Logged
SenorPotatoHead
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 272



View Profile
« Reply #156 on: August 19, 2015, 07:19:56 PM »

@Chocolate Shake Man: I haven't got the exact quote, hence the paraphrasing, but it is in the doc I got with the Pet Sounds album release of, what, the early 2000's? (somewhere in there) And I don't say it is a "deal" made, but the way Brian states it, it sounds like such.  But then Brian says a lot of things and....yeah, we all know about that, so I don't know, not defending or detracting from anyone, just trying to see the humanity in each person, not just Brian. 
To paraphrase Neil Young: "Even Mike Love has got soul"   Evil   Wink
Personally, I don't really understand how anyone could have heard GV and not been like - "Woah, dude, we have to put that sh*t out now!!!"  Seriously, who could hear that and not think, "Awesome!"  It's got hit written all over it, I think, bit then hindsight is everything as they say.  All I know is that from the first time I ever heard that song, when I was very little, it struck me as absolutely fucking amazing! (pardon my French).
I actually am sort of one of those who think the other guys should have taken a moment and realized what they were dealing with and fully supported it no matter how "weird" it might have seemed.  But then that isn't taking into account how (maybe) difficult Brian might have been for them to relate to, and the "mental health" issues/drugs - I have my own thoughts/feelings about all that, but I wasn't there, and cannot really comment on what that was truly like, and how valid it actually was as a.....:thing" at the time.....
In my mind, when confronted with such invention as Pet Sounds, GV, Smile, Surf's Up et al - eff the formula and full steam ahead!  That was what the Sixties was all about, wasn't it?   Were the band not of their time?  Brian was, seemingly anyway, and potentially a bit or more ahead of it.  It's sad because they had the clout to push it, maybe a bit rough, but they had the clout to do it anyway.   IMO they fugged up in not doing so - because that is what the Muse demanded.  The muse got tempered at it's flowering point - that sucks.  It just does.   Good things have come since, and it all washes out in the end, but still - it sucks.  Period.   
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #157 on: August 19, 2015, 07:22:29 PM »

Thank you Desper!
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
Gerry
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 352


View Profile
« Reply #158 on: August 19, 2015, 07:40:21 PM »

That's Mr. Despar to you bub.
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #159 on: August 19, 2015, 07:45:12 PM »

Sorry! LOL
Logged

And production aside, I’d so much rather hear a 14 year old David Marks shred some guitar on Chug-a-lug than hear a 51 year old Mike Love sing about bangin some chick in a swimming pool.-rab2591
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #160 on: August 19, 2015, 07:54:49 PM »

Thank God Brian was/is a visionary. What amazes me that after Good Vibrations, the masses didn't fall in line or didn't hear the genius that we few have over the many years. On the other hand, Mike being a realist did pave the way for having The Beach Boys for as many years as we have. As it turned out, at least as a live act, it is what prevailed not just within the band, but with the general music fans, as well.

A question for Debbie if you wouldn't mind answering. What is your take on why the Beach Boys did not maintain their popularity after Good Vibrations? With Brian being that visionary, with his music still dominating the albums Smiley Smile through Sunflower, why do you think people didn't catch on to Brian's new music from 1967-1970? Thanks!
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #161 on: August 19, 2015, 08:40:54 PM »

Thank God Brian was/is a visionary. What amazes me that after Good Vibrations, the masses didn't fall in line or didn't hear the genius that we few have over the many years. On the other hand, Mike being a realist did pave the way for having The Beach Boys for as many years as we have. As it turned out, at least as a live act, it is what prevailed not just within the band, but with the general music fans, as well.

A question for Debbie if you wouldn't mind answering. What is your take on why the Beach Boys did not maintain their popularity after Good Vibrations? With Brian being that visionary, with his music still dominating the albums Smiley Smile through Sunflower, why do you think people didn't catch on to Brian's new music from 1967-1970? Thanks!

Does being a realist include hawking Budweiser beer in the early 80's?
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
SurfRiderHawaii
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2569


Add Some Music to your day!


View Profile
« Reply #162 on: August 19, 2015, 08:53:37 PM »

Thank God Brian was/is a visionary. What amazes me that after Good Vibrations, the masses didn't fall in line or didn't hear the genius that we few have over the many years. On the other hand, Mike being a realist did pave the way for having The Beach Boys for as many years as we have. As it turned out, at least as a live act, it is what prevailed not just within the band, but with the general music fans, as well.

A question for Debbie if you wouldn't mind answering. What is your take on why the Beach Boys did not maintain their popularity after Good Vibrations? With Brian being that visionary, with his music still dominating the albums Smiley Smile through Sunflower, why do you think people didn't catch on to Brian's new music from 1967-1970? Thanks!

Does being a realist include hawking Budweiser beer in the early 80's?

present day 2015 - Mike now has a new endorsement deal hawking wine.


Logged

"Brian is The Beach Boys. He is the band. We're his f***ing messengers. He is all of it. Period. We're nothing. He's everything" - Dennis Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #163 on: August 19, 2015, 09:12:28 PM »

Thank God Brian was/is a visionary. What amazes me that after Good Vibrations, the masses didn't fall in line or didn't hear the genius that we few have over the many years. On the other hand, Mike being a realist did pave the way for having The Beach Boys for as many years as we have. As it turned out, at least as a live act, it is what prevailed not just within the band, but with the general music fans, as well.

A question for Debbie if you wouldn't mind answering. What is your take on why the Beach Boys did not maintain their popularity after Good Vibrations? With Brian being that visionary, with his music still dominating the albums Smiley Smile through Sunflower, why do you think people didn't catch on to Brian's new music from 1967-1970? Thanks!

Does being a realist include hawking Budweiser beer in the early 80's?

present day 2015 - Mike now has a new endorsement deal hawking wine.




Sing along: "I wish they all could be California Chards..."
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
clack
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 537


View Profile
« Reply #164 on: August 19, 2015, 09:14:08 PM »

If there was a formula for continued success, Mike had no clue. Brian did have a clue : that is, to continue to develop his music, to build upon previous achievements and not settle for replicating them.

But such internal development was not enough in the 60's. The Beatles had a formula : their music developed both internally, building on their previous records, and externally, by a continuous, intense engagement with the wider culture, musical and otherwise. Brian tried, with Van Dyke Parks and the others in his circle 66-67. But he wasn't up to it, probably relating to his psychological issues. ( The Beatles too weren't up to the job, long term, as individuals post-breakup).

So if Mike didn't say don't f**k with the formula, he probably thought or said something similar in the mid-60's. Then realized he was wrong in the late 60's, then thought he had discovered the real formula in the mid-70's, then again in the late 80's, only to realize each time he was wrong, but always chasing after that elusive formula, the formula to making a hit record. Is being Wile E. Coyote really so terrible?

Logged
Pretty Funky
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 5855


View Profile
« Reply #165 on: August 19, 2015, 09:20:35 PM »




"Don't f**k with the Feta!"
Logged
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #166 on: August 19, 2015, 09:24:01 PM »

If there was a formula for continued success, Mike had no clue. Brian did have a clue : that is, to continue to develop his music, to build upon previous achievements and not settle for replicating them.

But such internal development was not enough in the 60's. The Beatles had a formula : their music developed both internally, building on their previous records, and externally, by a continuous, intense engagement with the wider culture, musical and otherwise. Brian tried, with Van Dyke Parks and the others in his circle 66-67. But he wasn't up to it, probably relating to his psychological issues. ( The Beatles too weren't up to the job, long term, as individuals post-breakup).

So if Mike didn't say don't f**k with the formula, he probably thought or said something similar in the mid-60's. Then realized he was wrong in the late 60's, then thought he had discovered the real formula in the mid-70's, then again in the late 80's, only to realize each time he was wrong, but always chasing after that elusive formula, the formula to making a hit record. Is being Wile E. Coyote really so terrible?

The Beatles up to 1968 made it a specific point to not do what they had already done, especially in the sense of recording their music and creating the sounds on their records. It's why the albums from their first up to MMT each have a different sound and texture from the previous one. They did not want to repeat themselves sonically when they started recording a new project, this was a conscious and deliberate decision that paid huge dividends to the legacy of their music. Other 60's era bands did the same thing...they're the bands that people remember most fondly and whose records still sell.

At some point Wile E. Coyote must have gotten sick of feeling the pain as that Acme brand anvil fell on top of him. If he didn't then he was either a masochist, was insane (since repeating the same formula after it failed and expecting a different result is pretty close to that definition), or didn't mind having his audiences laugh at how continually inept he and his plans to outwit the Road Runner really were. Combination of the three, I'd say, regarding Mr. Coyote. I wouldn't want to be compared to him.
« Last Edit: August 19, 2015, 09:37:33 PM by guitarfool2002 » Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
guitarfool2002
Global Moderator
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 9996


"Barba non facit aliam historici"


View Profile WWW
« Reply #167 on: August 19, 2015, 09:25:30 PM »

Uncork The Love
Logged

"All of us have the privilege of making music that helps and heals - to make music that makes people happier, stronger, and kinder. Don't forget: Music is God's voice." - Brian Wilson
SurfRiderHawaii
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2569


Add Some Music to your day!


View Profile
« Reply #168 on: August 19, 2015, 10:10:42 PM »

Uncork The Love

 LOL LOL LOL
Logged

"Brian is The Beach Boys. He is the band. We're his f***ing messengers. He is all of it. Period. We're nothing. He's everything" - Dennis Wilson
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #169 on: August 20, 2015, 05:42:31 AM »

Ontor - did you read my post where Capitol released Then I Kissed Her/Mountain of Love, from 1965, in the UK in 1967? Complete with a promo video!

And with commentary from 2 band members who were unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact?

Maybe Mike was unhappy that pre-Pet Sounds material was being released two years after the fact, but that's not the issue he raises in the quotation you gave. That was Bruce's issue, yes, and I don't think anyone would be surprised at that since it is a pretty uncontroversial belief that Bruce was a huge fan of Pet Sounds. Mike's problem, though, in that quotation, is that Capitol has put out a single on which neither side contains a Brian Wilson composition.
Here is the section from page 182, Badman..." Friday (April) 28, 1967... Back Bay Theatre, Boston, MA. 'Then I Kissed Her/
Mountain of Love' single released in the UK.  To coincide with the group's UK tour and appearance at Sunday 7th's NME Poll Winners Concert.  Capitol/EMI rush-release this combination of tracks dating back to 1965. It will peak in the UK singles chart at number 4.

The release greatly angers Brian and the other Beach Boys and puts a serious dent in their position as 'world's number one group'.  Brian says that the A-side "should be an interesting study in contrasts" between The Beach Boys in 1965 and 1967.  Mike tells New Musical Express: "The record company did not even have the decency to put out one of Brian's compositions.  The reason for the hold-up with a new single has simply been what we wanted to give our public the best, and the best isn't ready yet." Bruce tells the same paper's reporter Keith Altham: "It's really ridiculous.  The record is in no way representative of the things we are doing now, or were doing even a year ago.  This is not the music that won us the NME award as the World's Top Vocal Group.  I've got some tapes at home of the new tracks to be on the Smile LP which would blow your mind.  All the ideas are new and Brian is coming up with fantastic ideas all the time."

The British press are baffled too and slam the group for issuing a two-year-old track as the follow up to the groundbreaking 'Good Vibrations'. New Music Express:" This is a complete puzzlement...Well, if Mr. Wilson can't get the new single ready, and they've got to release an old one, why 'this' one which reverts the group to a sound ages old.  Why not something from Pet Sounds? Oh, well, it will succeed, of course, because they have such power.  But their version of this old Crystals number is so well known, it's a bore!"

A Capitol-financed promotional clip to accompany 'Then I Kissed Her' featuring a montage of Beach Boys-related clips, is sent to the BBC for screening on the British TV show, 'Top of the Pops'. Screenings take place on the TOTP's broadcast on Thursday, May 18th (between 7:30 and 8:00 pm) and again during the Best of '67 Port One show transmitted on Christmas Day (between 2:05 and 2:58 pm)."

What actual control of releases did the band have? Did Capitol falsely represent an image that shows them "regressing" as between 1965 and 1967? They got slammed in the British press, for a release over which they had no control.

Where was this wonderful management? Brother was founded in 1966. And "it was motivated in no small part by the negative reaction of Capitol Records to some of Brian's ideas for Smile." (wiki)

This is a whole year out. They already had released Heroes in the summer of 1966. Why in May of 1967 is this going on?

Logged
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #170 on: August 20, 2015, 06:00:19 AM »

Thank God Brian was/is a visionary. What amazes me that after Good Vibrations, the masses didn't fall in line or didn't hear the genius that we few have over the many years. On the other hand, Mike being a realist did pave the way for having The Beach Boys for as many years as we have. As it turned out, at least as a live act, it is what prevailed not just within the band, but with the general music fans, as well.

A question for Debbie if you wouldn't mind answering. What is your take on why the Beach Boys did not maintain their popularity after Good Vibrations? With Brian being that visionary, with his music still dominating the albums Smiley Smile through Sunflower, why do you think people didn't catch on to Brian's new music from 1967-1970? Thanks!

Does being a realist include hawking Budweiser beer in the early 80's?
I don't really care. It was 1980. They have been sponsored by many companies over the years. It is a business too.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

Oh Brian
Thou Art In Hawthorne,
Harmonied Be Thy name
Your Kingdom Come,
Your Steak Well Done,
On Stage As It Is In Studio,
Give Us This Day, Our Shortenin' Bread
And Forgive Us Our Bootlegs,
As We Also Have Forgiven Our Wife And Managers,
And Lead Us Not Into Kokomo,
But Deliver Us From Mike Love.
Amen.  ---hypehat
Chocolate Shake Man
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 2871


View Profile
« Reply #171 on: August 20, 2015, 06:31:33 AM »

This is a whole year out. They already had released Heroes in the summer of 1966. Why in May of 1967 is this going on?



No, they had not. Heroes had yet to be released by May 1967. As they say in your article, I'm not sure it was even finished yet.

Then I Kissed Her was not a good choice by Capitol but perhaps not as bizarre when you consider that Pet Sounds and Summer Days entered the UK charts at roughly the exact same time and were both mega hits - I think they were in the Top 5 at the same time. From the position of a British consumer, Then I Kissed Her would have been a selection off of one of the two most recently charted albums.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2015, 06:36:54 AM by Chocolate Shake Man » Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #172 on: August 20, 2015, 06:37:50 AM »

"It got too hard for David. He couldn't deal with explaining something five or six separate times for five or six separate people. And there was no way to get them to agree to a single course of action when they all had their own personal desires.

Mike Love was the tough one for David. Mike really befriended David: He wanted his aid in going one direction while David was trying to take it the opposite way. Mike kept saying, "You're so good, you know so much, you're so realistic, you can do all this for us — why not do it this way," and David would say, "Because Brian wants it that way." "Gotta be this way." David really holds Mike Love responsible for the collapse. Mike wanted the bread, "and don't f*** with the formula.""

So far this article seems to be the source of the quote. It is in a section of the article about Brother Records under Anderle. The context is discussions between Anderle and Love about doing Brother's business. The quote is unattributed but the context is it is either quoting Anderle describing Mike's attitude in the business discussions (which it seems to me to be) or it is Anderle quoting Mike's description of his own opinion on conducting Brother's business.  Either way it seems to me the "formula" is a business formula and not a music formula.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #173 on: August 20, 2015, 06:55:26 AM »

This is a whole year out. They already had released Heroes in the summer of 1966. Why in May of 1967 is this going on?



No, they had not. Heroes had yet to be released by May 1967. As they say in your article, I'm not sure it was even finished yet.

The song was not a good choice by Capitol but perhaps not as bizarre when you consider that Pet Sounds and Summer Days entered the UK charts at roughly the exact same time and were both mega hits - I think they were in the Top 5 at the same time. From the position of a British consumer, Then I Kissed Her would have been a selection off of one of the two most recently charted albums.
My bad, July, 1967. Heroes - Single with "You're Welcome" on side B.  Smiley came out on September 18, 1967. Smiley was recorded between February 17, 1966 ( prior to July, 1966 - Brother incorporation) and July 14, 1967. Something must have been ready in April of 1967.  The press complained that it "wasn't even from Pet Sounds."  (With under-reported sales numbers.)

Someone was asleep at the switch. Or they didn't know what they were doing. Or, "Brother" incorporation, offended them, releasing this single, just for profit, and ignoring the artistic growth spurt they were in.

It isn't my article but part of the "diary" for that day, in Badman.  Not the point.  

There is a duty for management to "put the best foot forward" and "advance the interests" of the band, that should include that which best represents what is "timely," and to shield the band from exactly was "reasonably foreseeable," in terms of the catastrophic reaction by the press. In the music industry "time is of the essence." Time drives the train.

They (Capitol) might have been blocked legally, from releasing something that would have adversely affected their interests, which it absolutely did.

They (Capitol) were already "milking the oldies cash cow." It was a form of sabotage, in my opinion.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2015, 06:57:10 AM by filledeplage » Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #174 on: August 20, 2015, 07:04:08 AM »

"It got too hard for David. He couldn't deal with explaining something five or six separate times for five or six separate people. And there was no way to get them to agree to a single course of action when they all had their own personal desires.

Mike Love was the tough one for David. Mike really befriended David: He wanted his aid in going one direction while David was trying to take it the opposite way. Mike kept saying, "You're so good, you know so much, you're so realistic, you can do all this for us — why not do it this way," and David would say, "Because Brian wants it that way." "Gotta be this way." David really holds Mike Love responsible for the collapse. Mike wanted the bread, "and don't f*** with the formula.""

So far this article seems to be the source of the quote. It is in a section of the article about Brother Records under Anderle. The context is discussions between Anderle and Love about doing Brother's business. The quote is unattributed but the context is it is either quoting Anderle describing Mike's attitude in the business discussions (which it seems to me to be) or it is Anderle quoting Mike's description of his own opinion on conducting Brother's business.  Either way it seems to me the "formula" is a business formula and not a music formula.
David sounds as though he was "hiding behind Brian." (Maybe doing what "David wanted.") (I'm skeptical of "managers" who often have their own career agenda and use a business to advance their own personal interests.)

In working for Brother, inc., he had a duty to work for "all the band" members. And he should have been able to get all the interests of all the members on the table. This is a small corporate board of members/directors.
« Last Edit: August 20, 2015, 07:09:05 AM by filledeplage » Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 [7] 8 9 10 11 12 ... 15 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 1.214 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!