Don't F**k With the Formula

[Cam Mott]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams:

 "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”


Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”. 
 

[filledeplage]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

[Empire Of Love]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

[filledeplage]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

What makes sense to me, and my analysis of what I've read is not subject to anyone's  approval.

[Ang Jones]

Fans have been criticised for being as argumentative as the band they follow but what interests me is WHY it is important to some people to deny that there was resistance from some band members to Brian's new ideas when the evidence from those there at the time is so compelling. I can only assume that some are in denial, determined to believe that the success and credibility of the Beach Boys as a unit is the most important issue. That is surely simplistic. Brian IMO was the most important member of the band, the man whose music they depended on and therefore surely deserving of support. Enough of the fans at the time could appreciate what he was doing - why not his fellow band members who should have had more insight as professional musicians?

Here's a question: do you think this same microscopic contingent of people would still be saying such if Mike himself made a concession and stated in a heartfelt, sincere interview that he may have inadvertently crossed a line with a very sensitive person, that he regrets that, and that nobody guilted him into saying such heartfelt words? Would those people be saying "Mike should never have said that! He was lying! He never went too far! He should have been able to talk to Brian in any manner that he deemed fit at the time!"  

One thing's for sure: if this hypothetical scenario is posed to that microscopic contingent, if that contingent is asked what they would do/say under these circumstances, they will duck and avoid answering that hypothetical at all costs.

No arguments from me. The greatest single reason for Mike's unpopularity IMO is not just what he did but his subsequent refusal to own to it and his continued 'Brian did drugs' comments.

[Empire Of Love]

Also, why is everyone pretending that using "the voice as an instrument" is some radical thing, even in the 60s?  The voice *is* and always has been an instrument and the Beach Boys, as much as anyone, had been using their voices as "instruments" for years by this point.  This sounds to me not quite like a false distinction, but like all these years after the fact more is being made of it than is warranted.  And hey, if you can dismiss Anderles "resistance" I can dismiss Vosse's distinction.  My opinion, make of it what you will.

EoL

[Empire Of Love]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

What makes sense to me, and my analysis of what I've read is not subject to anyone's  approval.

Well I suspected that's all it was.  You should have said "it seems to me closer to the truth", given that's what you meant and you provided zero evidence to support the conclusion.

EoL

[filledeplage]

Fans have been criticised for being as argumentative as the band they follow but what interests me is WHY it is important to some people to deny that there was resistance from some band members to Brian's new ideas when the evidence from those there at the time is so compelling. I can only assume that some are in denial, determined to believe that the success and credibility of the Beach Boys as a unit is the most important issue. That is surely simplistic. Brian IMO was the most important member of the band, the man whose music they depended on and therefore surely deserving of support. Enough of the fans at the time could appreciate what he was doing - why not his fellow band members who should have had more insight as professional musicians?

Here's a question: do you think this same microscopic contingent of people would still be saying such if Mike himself made a concession and stated in a heartfelt, sincere interview that he may have inadvertently crossed a line with a very sensitive person, that he regrets that, and that nobody guilted him into saying such heartfelt words? Would those people be saying "Mike should never have said that! He was lying! He never went too far! He should have been able to talk to Brian in any manner that he deemed fit at the time!"  

One thing's for sure: if this hypothetical scenario is posed to that microscopic contingent, if that contingent is asked what they would do/say under these circumstances, they will duck and avoid answering that hypothetical at all costs.

No arguments from me. The greatest single reason for Mike's unpopularity IMO is not just what he did but his subsequent refusal to own to it and his continued 'Brian did drugs' comments.

Not necessarily.  When new managers come into an organization, they tend to "survey the scene" and "go after" the brightest or "savvy-est" person, so as not to be challenged in management.  It happens in business and schools, as well.  It is a vehicle to manage opposition, and wrest control from various "power players" in a group.  Make "that one" the "scapegoat."

Probably.

[filledeplage]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

What makes sense to me, and my analysis of what I've read is not subject to anyone's  approval.

Well I suspected that's all it was.  You should have said "it seems to me closer to the truth", given that's what you meant and you provided zero evidence to support the conclusion.
EoL

Well, I've provided YouTube and other documentary evidence from that era.  The record company's refusal to promote the "actual grown-up Beach Boys." Dennis' nterview, with Fornatale, the Paris 1970 interview with four of them in agreement about the record company refusing to accept the music and the image promotion failure in Europe where they had done extraordinary well during the Vietnam War.  I've provided quotes from Brian himself, Mike and Bruce.  So you don't believe Brian? OK.

This is while I was in college and grad school, and seeing them evolve from the striped shirts to doing the college and university circuit.    

You may not agree.  We can disagree without being disagreeable.  

[Empire Of Love]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

What makes sense to me, and my analysis of what I've read is not subject to anyone's  approval.

Well I suspected that's all it was.  You should have said "it seems to me closer to the truth", given that's what you meant and you provided zero evidence to support the conclusion.
EoL

Well, I've provided YouTube and other documentary evidence from that era.  The record company's refusal to promote the "actual grown-up Beach Boys." Dennis' nterview, with Fornatale, the Paris 1970 interview with four of them in agreement about the record company refusing to accept the music and the image promotion failure in Europe where they had done extraordinary well during the Vietnam War.  I've provided quotes from Brian himself, Mike and Bruce.  So you don't believe Brian? OK.

This is while I was in college and grad school, and seeing them evolve from the striped shirts to doing the college and university circuit.    

You may not agree.  We can disagree without being disagreeable.  

The problem is you're arguing from the fact that Capitol did not support Brian to the conclusion that Mike Love did support Brian.  That is a non sequitur.

EoL

[Empire Of Love]

That Mike wanted grown-up music does not prove that he wanted Pet Sounds and Smile. It's another non sequitur. That Mike did his job by recording and re-recording vocals it does not follow that he supported Pet Sounds and Smile. Yet another non sequitur. So aside from three non-Sequitur arguments I don't really see any evidence you have provided. I do however see a lot of evidence you have ignored.

EoL

[Empire Of Love]

It seems to me that around the time of the Smile Sessions and C50 that Mike's story began to change in regards to cost Sounds and Smile.  At the very least it seems to me he was silent for many many years.  I am wondering if anyone has insight as to why?

[filledeplage]

How many ways are there to "interpret" this description? It's as clear as can be about the scenes with the Beach Boys and Brian in the studio and the effect it had on Brian and the process overall. Unless someone is willing to discredit or dismiss what David Anderle said here, this doesn't need interpretation or someone to help other fans "understand" it unless the goal is to parse his words to fit another definition. And that doesn't exactly work when the words were spoken this clearly:

David Anderle, one example out of many as told to Williams: "But Brian would come in, and he would want to do different things, and they would really balk at that; and again, I have to keep thinking that this is the problem with what's going on right now. Sooner or later it has to tire you out, and Brian would complain about it. It would be much easier for Brian to go in and lay all those voices out himself, and do all those things; there's a lot of things on Pet Sounds that uh, incredible vocal things that are all Brian's voices, because he can sing all their parts. But he would go through a tremendous paranoia before he would get into the studio, knowing he was going to have to face an argument. He would come into the studio uptight, he would give a part to one of the fellas or to a group of the fellas, say "This is what I would like to have done," and there would be resistance. And it wouldn't be happening and there would be endless takes and then he would just junk it. And then maybe after they left to tour he would come back in and do it himself. All their parts. But it was very taxing, and it was extremely painful to watch. Because it was, uh, a great wall had been put down in front of creativity. And now, maybe, he just doesn't want to fight anymore. It used to be a big fight thing in that studio, and he just may be damn well tired of fighting and having to give the parts to the guys and hearing their excuses why they don't want to do it this way or why they want to do it that way...that could very easily be it."

Anderle explains this here I think:

“And then he brought them into the studio, and they were hearing things they never heard before. Not only were they hearing things they'd never heard from Brian, but also you've got to remember that none of this Beatles stuff was happening then. There was no way to relate to what Brian was putting down. That's when he started meeting resistance from the Beach Boys. "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part." In one specific song Brian wanted to sing the lead, but it was almost promised to Mike. And Mike couldn't cut it the way Brian wanted it to be cut, although Mike was cutting it beautifully. But it still wasn't right, and Brian wanted to do it ... they went through an incredible amount of time, almost a whole week of wasted studio time, before Brian finally did it. Brian didn't know how to deal with the boys.”

And here:

“Well, the first thing Brian will come up with is a concept, an album concept; generally he wants to do a thing. I say "a thing" because it's, you don't really know what it is, he throws out a whole bunch of words at you, one-liners, and words and half-phrases, and you really don't know what he's talking about at all. All you know is to go along with it. The Beach Boys could walk into a session and not have the slightest idea what they're recording that night. He tells them what to record, and they do it. They don't know what it means, generally, and that was always a problem, too. We're gonna do a piece of this, and a piece of that, a fragment, and they would do it, as instruments.”

I would say that’s why the Boys had these questions and concerns "Brian, what are you ... what is this? What are you doing? This is not within our framework, you're going too far now, Brian, this is too experimental. I can't sing this part.”

Somehow Anderle’s statement about “big fight thing” has to be harmonized with his other statement about “not antagonistic”. A non-antagonistic big fight thing somehow. On the other hand we know regardless of whatever “resistance” amounted to “He tells them what to record, and they do it” was done.

Vosse said:

“So all of these tracks had been done at Western and everything was ready, and the Beach Boys returned from their triumphant English tour - and the whole thing started going nuts then. First three sessions with the group were just full of confusion, because what Brian would do was give them a bit at a time: he didn't like teach them a song; he used them as instruments: he'd teach Mike Love one little part, and somebody else this, that, and the other ... Then
he'd spend about three days recording and recording and recording to get one song right; then he'd finish with it, tell them everything was fine - and two days later, he'd go back in alone, take out the voice track of say Carl which wasn't right, and he'd put his own voice in instead; and then he'd dabble with somebody
else's - and before you knew it, it was almost all Brian.  Al Jardine, though, did a lot of good singing at that time - really good singing. And Mike Love always comes through very well on what it is he does, which is pretty limited.  Then, the guys started getting up tight about the material. They were worried about how they'd do it in person. Now they're orchestrated, but even then Brian was considering a full orchestra to back them up ... and that sort of forestalled things a little: they thought it might be a good idea. Then, tension developed in the studio, because what it came down to was that Brian and Van Dyke had come up with music a little too complex for them, and which they began to resent. A lot of the arguments that took place were between Brian and Mike Love. And a lot of people would go off into comers together - the sure sign that a group is in trouble: where you have two over in this half, and two other there at the same time - huddling, and saying: hey, you know, this fucking thing ... There was a lot of that.”

Vosse describes confusion, not “resistance”, from giving the Boys just a bit at a time and tension and resentment over the music’s complexity and arguments between Brian and Mike. Vosse also says Brian and Mike disagreed and then agreed. Again still singing good and doing it take after take after take. Vosse elaborates on Anderle adding Brian tells the Boys their singing is “fine”.  

Vosse's characterization of "confusion" (reasonable under the circumstances) is far less "dramatic" than, Anderle's of  "resistance" to this concept of a voice used as an instrument, as opposed to straight vocals.  It seems closer to the truth.

And their "realities" were different.  Brian was looking at studio product and the band were likely looking at "how do we (5 guys) translate" what is going to be recorded and submitted to the record company and then, "take this out on the road" and get it arranged so it would be manageable on the road.  

For what reason does it seem closer to the truth, other than the fact that you say so?  I must have missed your reason.

EoL

What makes sense to me, and my analysis of what I've read is not subject to anyone's  approval.

Well I suspected that's all it was.  You should have said "it seems to me closer to the truth", given that's what you meant and you provided zero evidence to support the conclusion.
EoL

Well, I've provided YouTube and other documentary evidence from that era.  The record company's refusal to promote the "actual grown-up Beach Boys." Dennis' nterview, with Fornatale, the Paris 1970 interview with four of them in agreement about the record company refusing to accept the music and the image promotion failure in Europe where they had done extraordinary well during the Vietnam War.  I've provided quotes from Brian himself, Mike and Bruce.  So you don't believe Brian? OK.

This is while I was in college and grad school, and seeing them evolve from the striped shirts to doing the college and university circuit.    

You may not agree.  We can disagree without being disagreeable.  

The problem is you're arguing from the fact that Capitol did not support Brian to the conclusion that Mike Love did support Brian.  That is a non sequitur.

EoL

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own. 

Not the collective group. 

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

[guitarfool2002]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own. 

Not the collective group. 

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

[filledeplage]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own.  

Not the collective group.  

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul. It is why I give such importance to Dennis' interview with Fornatale, and those quotes from Brian, Mike and Bruce, and the Gaumont Palace interview.  That direct band-member perspective is the direct evidence of the members' perch and the negative impact from the record company.   It is not different from Archie Bunker telling Edith to "stifle" herself.  They kept the band down.  It couldn't have been any one individual. 

Not someone who came in, and "cleaned house."  Or tried to minimize any member's contributions.  That happens in any business organization.

[guitarfool2002]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own. 

Not the collective group. 

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

[filledeplage]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own. 

Not the collective group. 

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

[guitarfool2002]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own. 

Not the collective group. 

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

Where does that hypothetical come into play on what we're discussing? Suppose Brian had broken off from the band and had gone solo as was being hinted at as early as fall 1966, suppose Carl had his C.O. status rejected and had been drafted into the military or sent to prison instead of remaining with the band in 1967-68 when that was an ongoing issue putting the whole band's future in a state of limbo, suppose the band had in fact broken up as Brian said they almost did at times in 1967 and concerning issues like Surf's Up, what would any of them have done? What does that have to do with your questioning what David Anderle did or didn't do as a manager?

[filledeplage]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own.  

Not the collective group.  

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

Where does that hypothetical come into play on what we're discussing? Suppose Brian had broken off from the band and had gone solo as was being hinted at as early as fall 1966, suppose Carl had his C.O. status rejected and had been drafted into the military or sent to prison instead of remaining with the band in 1967-68 when that was an ongoing issue putting the whole band's future in a state of limbo, suppose the band had in fact broken up as Brian said they almost did at times in 1967 and concerning issues like Surf's Up, what would any of them have done? What does that have to do with your questioning what David Anderle did or didn't do as a manager?

The "formula thing."  In the Badman and Rusten - Stebbins books, generally the same April, 28th, 1967 (I don't have the book available right now.) time lag up to the December, 1970 Gaumont Palace videos show that it is a "continuing offense" with the record company.  It is now edging to a full 4 years of "false representation" of the band.  

The earlier quotes from Brian, Mike, and Bruce kept falling on deaf ears.  For four years.  While they are being interviewed, they almost appear depressed and beaten by the record company, while describing the diverse venues and audiences they are playing for.  ( Gaumont Palace) So, my inference is that the "formula" was imposed from the "top down" rather concocted from the "inside" of the band member sphere.  It was a type of corporate repression.

Mike, with that long beard did not resemble any striped-shirt "formula," (still being pushed in Europe) nor did the rest of them with those pork chop sideburns.  They were deep into consciousness raising and the socio-political scene with the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. And Carl's battle over his conscientious objector status.

[guitarfool2002]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own.  

Not the collective group.  

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

Where does that hypothetical come into play on what we're discussing? Suppose Brian had broken off from the band and had gone solo as was being hinted at as early as fall 1966, suppose Carl had his C.O. status rejected and had been drafted into the military or sent to prison instead of remaining with the band in 1967-68 when that was an ongoing issue putting the whole band's future in a state of limbo, suppose the band had in fact broken up as Brian said they almost did at times in 1967 and concerning issues like Surf's Up, what would any of them have done? What does that have to do with your questioning what David Anderle did or didn't do as a manager?

The "formula thing."  In the Badman and Rusten - Stebbins books, generally the same April, 28th, 1967 (I don't have the book available right now.) time lag up to the December, 1970 Gaumont Palace videos show that it is a "continuing offense" with the record company.  It is now edging to a full 4 years of "false representation" of the band.  

The earlier quotes from Brian, Mike, and Bruce kept falling on deaf ears.  For four years.  While they are being interviewed, they almost appear depressed and beaten by the record company, while describing the diverse venues and audiences they are playing for.  ( Gaumont Palace) So, my inference is that the "formula" was imposed from the "top down" rather concocted from the "inside" of the band member sphere.  It was a type of corporate repression.

Mike, with that long beard did not resemble any striped-shirt "formula," (still being pushed in Europe) nor did the rest of them with those pork chop sideburns.  They were deep into consciousness raising and the socio-political scene with the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. And Carl's battle over his conscientious objector status.

And how is or was David Anderle responsible for that? He was the one who fired the first shot at Capitol in order to set up the band's own corporate structure to operate more independently especially related to their own projects and working with outside artists at the band's discretion. And through those efforts launched under the management of Anderle, the Beach Boys indeed got their own corporate structure and had their own label set up under the "Brother" name and label. Nick Grillo took over after Anderle. If anything Anderle got the band their own label and setup as of 1967, at a time when this was unheard of for pop musicians in their 20's to seek and win that much control in a corporate sense from a label.

[filledeplage]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own.  

Not the collective group.  

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

Where does that hypothetical come into play on what we're discussing? Suppose Brian had broken off from the band and had gone solo as was being hinted at as early as fall 1966, suppose Carl had his C.O. status rejected and had been drafted into the military or sent to prison instead of remaining with the band in 1967-68 when that was an ongoing issue putting the whole band's future in a state of limbo, suppose the band had in fact broken up as Brian said they almost did at times in 1967 and concerning issues like Surf's Up, what would any of them have done? What does that have to do with your questioning what David Anderle did or didn't do as a manager?

The "formula thing."  In the Badman and Rusten - Stebbins books, generally the same April, 28th, 1967 (I don't have the book available right now.) time lag up to the December, 1970 Gaumont Palace videos show that it is a "continuing offense" with the record company.  It is now edging to a full 4 years of "false representation" of the band.  

The earlier quotes from Brian, Mike, and Bruce kept falling on deaf ears.  For four years.  While they are being interviewed, they almost appear depressed and beaten by the record company, while describing the diverse venues and audiences they are playing for.  ( Gaumont Palace) So, my inference is that the "formula" was imposed from the "top down" rather concocted from the "inside" of the band member sphere.  It was a type of corporate repression.

Mike, with that long beard did not resemble any striped-shirt "formula," (still being pushed in Europe) nor did the rest of them with those pork chop sideburns.  They were deep into consciousness raising and the socio-political scene with the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. And Carl's battle over his conscientious objector status.

And how is or was David Anderle responsible for that? He was the one who fired the first shot at Capitol in order to set up the band's own corporate structure to operate more independently especially related to their own projects and working with outside artists at the band's discretion. And through those efforts launched under the management of Anderle, the Beach Boys indeed got their own corporate structure and had their own label set up under the "Brother" name and label. Nick Grillo took over after Anderle. If anything Anderle got the band their own label and setup as of 1967, at a time when this was unheard of for pop musicians in their 20's to seek and win that much control in a corporate sense from a label.

GF - I never blamed Anderle. Anderle was talking about "resistance" and Vosse talked about "confusion" and ultimate acceptance and hard work on the vocals.  I found Vosse's take on the situation, more reasonable and credible, given the "totality of the circumstances."

If the band is upset about the public perception of TIKH being released as a single, in Europe, post Pet Sounds, why, if possible couldn't Anderle have stopped that release in favor of something that actually "represented them" at that time? 

[guitarfool2002]

Nay, nay. Anderle was an "industry guy" - not an artist. (Even if he was a painter later in his life.)  So is it plausible that he didn't want to alienate a record company and take the chance of being "black-balled" in the clique of managers?  Whose interests was he advancing? Ultimately? His own.  

Not the collective group.  

Does that mean he wasn't a great guy? Of course not. But his position of manager within a class of people as industry managers  suggests "influence outside of the band."

I don't think is plausible or logical to make such suggestions considering David, acting as manager along with Nick Grillo working the books and Abe Sommers on the legal front had just successfully been fighting and eventually had won an uphill battle by successfully taking Capitol to task and exposing a practice that I had already explained earlier in this thread. They were David taking on and slaying Goliath in the guise of Capitol who had been ripping off the band through the "breakage clause" loophole that allowed them to take money from artists like the Beach Boys. The team Anderle assembled demanded an audit, found the discrepancies, had the ammunition to use, and filed the lawsuit which went public. That's how initially the band won a 6-figure settlement against Capitol and how Brother Records got set up officially...as part of the settlement.

Then later a similar case from those audits of the books found that Capitol had failed to pay producer royalties or "points" owed to Brian for his work on the BB's records, so that lawsuit also went through the system and scored upwards of a million in back payments owed to Brian for the work he never got paid for doing.

If anything, David Anderle was the one taking on the record company, exposing a nefarious practice they had been engaging in for years and skimming money from their artists, and taking money from Capitol to give to the rightful recipients like the Beach Boys and Brian.

I doubt the scenario as you described would have held true at that time in and around 1967 considering what actually happened.

GF - I absolutely did not ignore Anderle's whistleblower role. And think that is an important part of history.

The area is of concern is the difference between the band core (who have lived and died as Beach Boys) and an industry person who will "move on" once the "job" is done.  Or who might have divided interests, working for, Elektra, West Coast Talent, MGM Verve, A&M records, his own Willow Productions.  He was not a "one trick pony."

The Beach Boys, were in it for the long haul.

But I don't understand why you would say he didn't want to alienate the record company and risk getting blackballed after he had done (successfully for the band's interests) exactly what you suggested he wouldn't or didn't do, and in a public way that got picked up and reported widely in the press.

Say, The Beach Boys disbanded as did The Beatles?  Anderle would still move on inside the industry.  His skill set was different from theirs'.

Where does that hypothetical come into play on what we're discussing? Suppose Brian had broken off from the band and had gone solo as was being hinted at as early as fall 1966, suppose Carl had his C.O. status rejected and had been drafted into the military or sent to prison instead of remaining with the band in 1967-68 when that was an ongoing issue putting the whole band's future in a state of limbo, suppose the band had in fact broken up as Brian said they almost did at times in 1967 and concerning issues like Surf's Up, what would any of them have done? What does that have to do with your questioning what David Anderle did or didn't do as a manager?

The "formula thing."  In the Badman and Rusten - Stebbins books, generally the same April, 28th, 1967 (I don't have the book available right now.) time lag up to the December, 1970 Gaumont Palace videos show that it is a "continuing offense" with the record company.  It is now edging to a full 4 years of "false representation" of the band.  

The earlier quotes from Brian, Mike, and Bruce kept falling on deaf ears.  For four years.  While they are being interviewed, they almost appear depressed and beaten by the record company, while describing the diverse venues and audiences they are playing for.  ( Gaumont Palace) So, my inference is that the "formula" was imposed from the "top down" rather concocted from the "inside" of the band member sphere.  It was a type of corporate repression.

Mike, with that long beard did not resemble any striped-shirt "formula," (still being pushed in Europe) nor did the rest of them with those pork chop sideburns.  They were deep into consciousness raising and the socio-political scene with the U.S. involvement in Vietnam. And Carl's battle over his conscientious objector status.

And how is or was David Anderle responsible for that? He was the one who fired the first shot at Capitol in order to set up the band's own corporate structure to operate more independently especially related to their own projects and working with outside artists at the band's discretion. And through those efforts launched under the management of Anderle, the Beach Boys indeed got their own corporate structure and had their own label set up under the "Brother" name and label. Nick Grillo took over after Anderle. If anything Anderle got the band their own label and setup as of 1967, at a time when this was unheard of for pop musicians in their 20's to seek and win that much control in a corporate sense from a label.

GF - I never blamed Anderle. Anderle was talking about "resistance" and Vosse talked about "confusion" and ultimate acceptance and hard work on the vocals.  I found Vosse's take on the situation, more reasonable and credible, given the "totality of the circumstances."

If the band is upset about the public perception of TIKH being released as a single, in Europe, post Pet Sounds, why, if possible couldn't Anderle have stopped that release in favor of something that actually "represented them" at that time?  

I don't know where this is going, but was it even possible for Anderle or anyone to stop EMI from issuing a single like this as a stop-gap release outside the US? The Beatles - also on EMI through the UK subsidiary Parlophone - had what I'd argue was even more clout as an artist than the Beach Boys and they couldn't stop Capitol from not only remixing their music but also re-sequencing their album releases, and spinning off singles from those albums which had nothing to do with the band's wishes or intent. Some think it was ended finally with both Penny Lane/Strawberry Fields and ultimately Sgt Pepper, both of which lined up with the band's wishes and matched the UK releases. However, even Magical Mystery Tour was turned from the EP length soundtrack the band released in the UK into a collection of the band's singles on "side B" when Capitol got hold of it for US release. The practice of remixing and re-sequencing going back to at least 1964 was really upsetting to the band, and led to probably the most obvious public protest of Capitol doing this stuff with the music in the form of the "Butcher Cover" which was promptly pulled and pasted over and replaced with a less controversial shot for US release.

So The Beatles couldn't change it even though they had both more clout to change it and more of a prolonged protest against Capitol doing these things once the music got outside the band's home country. That was under the EMI umbrella, just like Capitol was with the Beach Boys in the US versus the releases in some other countries and continents. It's a confusing mess to sort out. Then factor in Capitol even earlier in the 60's when the artist who basically opened Capitol in the 1950's and put his name on their first recording from "The Tower", Frank Sinatra, left Capitol to start his own Reprise. Capitol still had ownership of the music Sinatra had done for Capitol, and started putting out repackages and re-releases of his 50's stuff just as Frank was putting out his new music on his own new Reprise label. So you had a record bin with "new" Sinatra albums from both Capitol and Reprise at certain times in the 60's, even before "Then I Kissed Her" on EMI in Europe was an issue.

So how much of an issue was this, really? It was done perhaps against the band's wishes, but it would seem they were in good company since Capitol and other branches of EMI had done similar reissues and repackages against the artist's wishes if not in direct competition with the artist's current product with the Beatles and Sinatra. If the Beatles and Sinatra couldn't stop it to their satisfaction (at least in the Beatles' case), why are there suggestions that David Anderle is the one to blame for not stopping it for the Beach boys? Again, I'm not understanding where this is going.

Another point or two worth considering:

In September 1967 with Anderle out of the picture, the band operating as Brother Records with their own label to boot put out their second 45rpm single release, credited to Brian And Mike, "Gettin Hungry" b/w "Devoted To You". So the band, as a group decision and specifically released under the banner "produced by The Beach Boys", releases a single from the then-new Beach Boys album Smiley Smile, backs it up with an album cut pulled from the then-two-year-old "Party!" release, and puts it out not as The Beach Boys but as "Brian & Mike"? How-what-why-WTF...etc.? If EMI pulling Then I Kissed Her from a 1965 album and making it a single in Europe, Africa, and Asia (several countries where it went top-10) was such a negative thing to the band or against them, why did the band then do the same thing by pulling and re-labeling an old album cut, and done under even more confusing circumstances as the credit on the single didn;t match the credit on the album, all decided and done when they were calling the shots as Brother on the Brother label?

In 1974, Capitol put out Endless Summer and couldn't even be bothered to find a master of "Help Me Rhonda" for the single/radio mix everyone knew and which the band had been playing live for years, but instead substituted "Help Me Ronda", the more bland album version instead. The band and their managers at that time had some say in what got released, I'd think - Why wasn't there more of a fight then to get the correct Rhonda mix on the release? Or simply a demand that if Capitol couldn't locate the 45rpm mix masters, to either find them or replace the track entirely with something they actually did have a master available for to press? Again, Capitol went with an inferior "Ronda", does anyone blame one of the Love brothers managing the band at that time or anyone else for not demanding the right mixes be used and approved? or did they approve it anyway...whatever the case.

It's baffling to me why David Anderle is the one getting called out for a non-US EMI single release that ultimately meant little or nothing, was barely an issue in the US, and which ended up going top-ten and even top-5 in at least half of the regions that did see the release in 1967. I guess I'm just not getting it.

[filledeplage]

GF - I'm not calling Anderle out. I'm examining the inconsistencies in the remarks.  Anderle says "resistant" and Vosse says "confusion." One image ( the real image) in the States is "progressive" and in the UK is "regressive." The U.S. Press is full of coverage of Carl the Draft Dodger, which means he is in war protest mode.  And Capitol releases stuff, not penned by Brian (to his and their public chagrin) to the UK that is irrelevant, in terms of time, on every level.

The Brian, Mike and Bruce quotes in April of 1967 indicate puzzlement with releasing TIKH, alongside a UK tour post Pet Sounds. The sales are of no consequence to me.  The imaging is striped shirts that were already gone, in fact but being played up and being criticized in the UK press as passé.  I have an earlier post in this thread, with those UK quotes from a music reviewer.  And the interview four years post from Gaumont Palace is filled with frustration and almost contempt, by Mike, Carl, Dennis and Al, in 1970, for being stereotyped as beach, surf, and cars music, after they grew demonstrably after those phases, earlier in time.

There are contradictions and inconsistencies, all over the place. And they made public statements consistent with that window of time. Records that they didn't want out there, with better quality material available, in their view.  That is where I'm going.  It appears that they don't have artistic control of what is going on, in terms of records being released, and imaging that is being projected overseas.

And, I have somewhere, the single Gettin' Hungry that you mention.  It was a weird release.  And, there was some talk of a solo Brian career for a very short time.  A lot of groups had the band leader's break off from their bands.

[Lee Marshall]

I seem to recall 'Gettin' Hungry' being a Capitol label Brian Wilson/Mike Love release rather than a Beach Boys release.  THAT was strange to me...as was the previously released 'Caroline No' by some guy named Brian Wilson.  [Both songs were on Beach Boys albums obviously although maybe 'Caroline No' beat the release of Pet Sounds by a few days/weeks.  Smiley Smile was out before the other single in question was issued]

The Boys had their own record company moving to try and get things organized as Capitol figured they were 'history' and just tossed everything at the wall to see if anything would  stick.  Everybody LOST.  Anderle wasn't there to set things up and then leave.  He was going to run Brother Records.  And run properly it could have provided him with all he needed for the rest of his professional life.  Of course THAT would have been the best case scenario.  Anderle's 'take' on things was as accurate as it gets.  Until he and Brian had their 'falling out'  NOBODY was more 'inside' than David Anderle.  What a catastrophe!!!  What a shame.  What a waste.  What a PISSER!!!!!

[CenturyDeprived]

I seem to recall 'Gettin' Hungry' being a Capitol label Brian Wilson/Mike Love release rather than a Beach Boys release.  THAT was strange to me...as was the previously released 'Caroline No' by some guy named Brian Wilson.  [Both songs were on Beach Boys albums obviously although maybe 'Caroline No' beat the release of Pet Sounds by a few days/weeks.  Smiley Smile was out before the other single in question was issued]

The Boys had their own record company moving to try and get things organized as Capitol figured they were 'history' and just tossed everything at the wall to see if anything would  stick.  Everybody LOST.  Anderle wasn't there to set things up and then leave.  He was going to run Brother Records.  And run properly it could have provided him with all he needed for the rest of his professional life.  Of course THAT would have been the best case scenario.  Anderle's 'take' on things was as accurate as it gets.  Until he and Brian had their 'falling out'  NOBODY was more 'inside' than David Anderle.  What a catastrophe!!!  What a shame.  What a waste.  What a PISSER!!!!!

The true answer to why Gettin' Hungry was released as "Brian and Mike" must be out there somewhere. I think it seems like a statement was trying to be made just as much as the Caroline No single was trying to make a statement.

Are Brian and Mike the only people who would know? I'm guessing that's the case. Maybe Mike would let someone know if he was asked. I doubt Brian would address it, but maybe he would. I wonder if any fanboy/girl has ever asked him over 48 years.