gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680599 Posts in 27601 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 11:26:40 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 25 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Mike and Bruce Tour 2016  (Read 134303 times)
NOLA BB Fan
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Gender: Female
Posts: 919


"When you come to a fork in the road, take it."


View Profile
« Reply #200 on: May 04, 2016, 06:43:25 PM »

Must admit that I went to a M&B show back in March with low expectations. It was a pretty good show, I'd say a 7 out of 10. Lots of video, a fair amount showing Brian. Was hoping that Mike would mention Brian somewhere along the line but he didn't. Bruce, however, mentioned him in praising one of his songs. Mike sang okay; Bruce seemed to struggle a bit with Disney Girls (the only really weak song in the show). No interaction between Mike and Bruce.

The BW shows were better, in that there was a stronger band. Also seemed to be sincere camaraderie between Brian, Al and Blondie. The last show (benefit in Jackson) was quite excellent. Brian had a much better handle on GOK than in the December Biloxi show. In Jackson he allowed his voice to go softer, even to a falsetto on the high notes.
« Last Edit: May 04, 2016, 06:45:41 PM by NOLA BB Fan » Logged

"No White Flags." - Team Gleason

"(Brian) got into this really touching music with songs like 'In My Room', and 'Good Vibrations' was amazing. The melodies are so beautiful, almost perfect. I began to realize he was one of the most gifted writers of our generation." - Paul Simon

 "The best thing you can be 'like' in music is yourself." Dr. John
mabewa
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 247


View Profile
« Reply #201 on: May 04, 2016, 08:44:33 PM »

So.... did they do Summer In Paradise last night? I noticed "PARADISE" was in the setlist that Mike posted.

I'm pretty sure it would be "Summer in Paradise." The "California Dreamin'/Summer in Paradise" pairing has been used going back to the 90s, with one song leading right into the other.

I guess it makes sense since they both featured Roger McGuinn (the UK SIP anyway). 

Yeah, they probably have Scott on a heavily compressed 12-string to get that Byrds sound.

I actually quite like Summer in Paradise--the song, not the album. (ducks and runs away)
Logged
Ang Jones
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 559



View Profile
« Reply #202 on: May 05, 2016, 12:40:13 AM »

Bit of a dumb question, but for those of you have attended a M&B show, how would you rate it out of 10?

I haven't seen the latest M&B shows - the last time was in 2014. They have upped their game since I saw them in 2004 but they still tend to concentrate mainly on the early years of The Beach Boys' career. I have mixed, indeed conflicting, feelings about that. On the one hand, I think it gives a false and limiting interpretation of what The Beach Boys meant rather than fully protecting their legacy - imagine a touring Beatles band mainly playing She Loves You, Twist and Shout, Please Please Me and missing out most of Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper and more. On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.

So my marks out of 10 for the M&B BBs. I'd probably give a 6, points deducted for an inaccurate impression of the band and for Mike's stage antics although that has improved a bit too. They mainly behave like a tribute band but they're not necessarily giving tribute to the best songs of The Beach Boys' career.
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #203 on: May 05, 2016, 05:25:56 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 
Logged
filledeplage
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #204 on: May 05, 2016, 06:17:53 AM »

Bit of a dumb question, but for those of you have attended a M&B show, how would you rate it out of 10?

I haven't seen the latest M&B shows - the last time was in 2014. They have upped their game since I saw them in 2004 but they still tend to concentrate mainly on the early years of The Beach Boys' career. I have mixed, indeed conflicting, feelings about that. On the one hand, I think it gives a false and limiting interpretation of what The Beach Boys meant rather than fully protecting their legacy - imagine a touring Beatles band mainly playing She Loves You, Twist and Shout, Please Please Me and missing out most of Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper and more. On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.

So my marks out of 10 for the M&B BBs. I'd probably give a 6, points deducted for an inaccurate impression of the band and for Mike's stage antics although that has improved a bit too. They mainly behave like a tribute band but they're not necessarily giving tribute to the best songs of The Beach Boys' career.
Ang - The Touring Band has come lightyears since 2004.  Those BB published songs are in the "style of the BB's" which is what is a condition of the touring license as I understand.  Mike was a part of the Surf's Up/Holland era and contributed (writing with Al a bit) and as published in the BB catalog.  The Touring Band has performed some of those songs, as recently as February when I was lucky to see them during an East Coast US tour.  I don't see it as the Touring Band "taking claim" as much as "expanding their performing set-lists" to their credit, growing in the job.   Those songs are BB work-product.  IIRC Mike accompanied Brian to Capitol, with Pet Sounds.  That does not look like not being supportive.  

Being part of BRI does not look like not being supportive.  The Paris Gaumont Palace interview clears all of that misconception up.

Let's not forget that Capitol under-promoted Pet Sounds and released a Best of Volume I,  less than 8 weeks post Pet Sounds, apparently feeling that they were at the "end of their production" dollar value.  Establishment of BRI to have more artistic control illustrates that they were all willing to take a financial risk to support Brian's and their work.  

« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 06:27:45 AM by filledeplage » Logged
Ang Jones
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 559



View Profile
« Reply #205 on: May 05, 2016, 06:53:12 AM »

Bit of a dumb question, but for those of you have attended a M&B show, how would you rate it out of 10?

I haven't seen the latest M&B shows - the last time was in 2014. They have upped their game since I saw them in 2004 but they still tend to concentrate mainly on the early years of The Beach Boys' career. I have mixed, indeed conflicting, feelings about that. On the one hand, I think it gives a false and limiting interpretation of what The Beach Boys meant rather than fully protecting their legacy - imagine a touring Beatles band mainly playing She Loves You, Twist and Shout, Please Please Me and missing out most of Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper and more. On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.

So my marks out of 10 for the M&B BBs. I'd probably give a 6, points deducted for an inaccurate impression of the band and for Mike's stage antics although that has improved a bit too. They mainly behave like a tribute band but they're not necessarily giving tribute to the best songs of The Beach Boys' career.
Ang - The Touring Band has come lightyears since 2004.  Those BB published songs are in the "style of the BB's" which is what is a condition of the touring license as I understand.  Mike was a part of the Surf's Up/Holland era and contributed (writing with Al a bit) and as published in the BB catalog.  The Touring Band has performed some of those songs, as recently as February when I was lucky to see them during an East Coast US tour.  I don't see it as the Touring Band "taking claim" as much as "expanding their performing set-lists" to their credit, growing in the job.   Those songs are BB work-product.  IIRC Mike accompanied Brian to Capitol, with Pet Sounds.  That does not look like not being supportive.  

Being part of BRI does not look like not being supportive.  The Paris Gaumont Palace interview clears all of that misconception up.

Let's not forget that Capitol under-promoted Pet Sounds and released a Best of Volume I,  less than 8 weeks post Pet Sounds, apparently feeling that they were at the "end of their production" dollar value.  Establishment of BRI to have more artistic control illustrates that they were all willing to take a financial risk to support Brian's and their work.  



Let's not forget that Mike called this "Brian's ego music' either. My guess is that Mike liked some of the music (with exceptions, like the Hang on to Your Ego lyric) but was worried about how it would be received by the public, which of course is understandable but I think perhaps he should have realised that they had to keep up or else they would have fallen so far behind. Brian was aware of the competition from bands like The Beatles and was anxious not just to rely on the style that was becoming dated.

As I have written, I attended a show in 2014 so I've seen them a lot more recently than 2004. I accept they've improved since then too.

I drew attention in the thread about how Capitol should have acted in 1966 to the unfortunate release of a Best of compilation in competition with Pet Sounds.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 06:54:20 AM by Ang Jones » Logged
Ang Jones
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 559



View Profile
« Reply #206 on: May 05, 2016, 07:00:14 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 

I can only speak for myself but it seems to me that the M&B BBs are relying on the nostalgia aspect of the music, whereas Brian is playing songs that he considers to be his best or his favourite music. However, I must add that I prefer it when Brian doesn't just go for the summer songs with which The Beach Boys are too often associated. That is a part only of his creative output but it gets far more acknowledgment than most of the rest, including songs that are far more subtle, complex and IMO important.
Logged
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8432



View Profile
« Reply #207 on: May 05, 2016, 07:10:21 AM »

Mike's band comes off as Mike and his hired hands doing their cold/well-oiled touring jukebox for the 1000th time. BW's band is an organic unit whose members seem like family and enjoy breathing new life into whatever they play.
Logged

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

Gender: Female
Posts: 3151


View Profile
« Reply #208 on: May 05, 2016, 07:55:07 AM »

Bit of a dumb question, but for those of you have attended a M&B show, how would you rate it out of 10?

I haven't seen the latest M&B shows - the last time was in 2014. They have upped their game since I saw them in 2004 but they still tend to concentrate mainly on the early years of The Beach Boys' career. I have mixed, indeed conflicting, feelings about that. On the one hand, I think it gives a false and limiting interpretation of what The Beach Boys meant rather than fully protecting their legacy - imagine a touring Beatles band mainly playing She Loves You, Twist and Shout, Please Please Me and missing out most of Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper and more. On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.

So my marks out of 10 for the M&B BBs. I'd probably give a 6, points deducted for an inaccurate impression of the band and for Mike's stage antics although that has improved a bit too. They mainly behave like a tribute band but they're not necessarily giving tribute to the best songs of The Beach Boys' career.
Ang - The Touring Band has come lightyears since 2004.  Those BB published songs are in the "style of the BB's" which is what is a condition of the touring license as I understand.  Mike was a part of the Surf's Up/Holland era and contributed (writing with Al a bit) and as published in the BB catalog.  The Touring Band has performed some of those songs, as recently as February when I was lucky to see them during an East Coast US tour.  I don't see it as the Touring Band "taking claim" as much as "expanding their performing set-lists" to their credit, growing in the job.   Those songs are BB work-product.  IIRC Mike accompanied Brian to Capitol, with Pet Sounds.  That does not look like not being supportive.  

Being part of BRI does not look like not being supportive.  The Paris Gaumont Palace interview clears all of that misconception up.

Let's not forget that Capitol under-promoted Pet Sounds and released a Best of Volume I,  less than 8 weeks post Pet Sounds, apparently feeling that they were at the "end of their production" dollar value.  Establishment of BRI to have more artistic control illustrates that they were all willing to take a financial risk to support Brian's and their work.  



Let's not forget that Mike called this "Brian's ego music' either. My guess is that Mike liked some of the music (with exceptions, like the Hang on to Your Ego lyric) but was worried about how it would be received by the public, which of course is understandable but I think perhaps he should have realised that they had to keep up or else they would have fallen so far behind. Brian was aware of the competition from bands like The Beatles and was anxious not just to rely on the style that was becoming dated.

As I have written, I attended a show in 2014 so I've seen them a lot more recently than 2004. I accept they've improved since then too.

I drew attention in the thread about how Capitol should have acted in 1966 to the unfortunate release of a Best of compilation in competition with Pet Sounds.

Ang - BRI was set up to do BB work and to my best understanding (until later grooming of newly discovered talent) and while the BB's were touring, Brian was doing writing.  I have been impressed that Brian was always working "remotely" in ways, that people now work away from the performance of the business on tour. I have never been impressed that Brian broke off as a solo act as Diana Ross did, and many others did, but that his work was in behalf of the band, because he could not do-it-all (nor should anyone have to) and tour.  So the benefit of the writing was attached to the band's mission of being independent (or sort of) from the record company. 

As much as a fan can empathize with a major figure, I still can get aggravated just thinking of how these young guys were thrown under the bus by Capitol, never mind what damage Murry did to them, and especially his own kids. 

There is always an element of nostalgia whether it is CSNY or the Beatles or BW/BB.  It is what some of us find to be comfortable music. Where else can you close your eyes and be 15 years old again, for a couple of hours?

When I hear some of the Buffalo Springfield/CSNY, I feel pride about that era, and what college students were able to effectuate and the activism that flowed from that era.  The earliest BB music is before my time (Thank God!)  I'm proud that the BB's had voter registration drives at some of their concerts, when the voting age went to 18 in 1972.  Brian plays All Summer Long a lot, live, as well as some of the older catalog and the crowd goes nuts.  He is still a Beach Boy, after all.  Wink
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #209 on: May 05, 2016, 07:56:21 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 

I can only speak for myself but it seems to me that the M&B BBs are relying on the nostalgia aspect of the music, whereas Brian is playing songs that he considers to be his best or his favourite music. However, I must add that I prefer it when Brian doesn't just go for the summer songs with which The Beach Boys are too often associated. That is a part only of his creative output but it gets far more acknowledgment than most of the rest, including songs that are far more subtle, complex and IMO important.

You're entitled to your opinion, Ang.  But, personally, I think that assessment is based on bias.  

Both camps, in a way, are relying on nostalgia.  Any artist that's been around as long as Brian or Mike rely on nostalgia.  

Also, Brian has said in many interviews that his favorite BB albums are Friends and Love You.  But, in concert, he doesn't touch that material too much.

Again, your opinion, and that's fine, but I fail to see the difference between Mike playing 1962-65 music and Brian playing Pet Sounds.  
Logged
Ang Jones
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 559



View Profile
« Reply #210 on: May 05, 2016, 08:18:22 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 

I can only speak for myself but it seems to me that the M&B BBs are relying on the nostalgia aspect of the music, whereas Brian is playing songs that he considers to be his best or his favourite music. However, I must add that I prefer it when Brian doesn't just go for the summer songs with which The Beach Boys are too often associated. That is a part only of his creative output but it gets far more acknowledgment than most of the rest, including songs that are far more subtle, complex and IMO important.

You're entitled to your opinion, Ang.  But, personally, I think that assessment is based on bias.  

Both camps, in a way, are relying on nostalgia.  Any artist that's been around as long as Brian or Mike rely on nostalgia.  

Also, Brian has said in many interviews that his favorite BB albums are Friends and Love You.  But, in concert, he doesn't touch that material too much.

Again, your opinion, and that's fine, but I fail to see the difference between Mike playing 1962-65 music and Brian playing Pet Sounds.  

I'll admit to bias if I may qualify that by stating that the reason for the bias is seeing the way that Mike has behaved over the years. When I read recently the wording in that 2005 lawsuit, it was hard to see the cousinly affection that we are told exists. Families are complicated but it is obvious that those who want to believe that these people are all the best of friends are not being entirely honest with themselves.

Yes, we all feel nostalgia about the good things from the past but it can be used cynically to sell a product or it can be one of several reasons for listening to a piece of music. Perhaps I am wrong to assign a level of cynicism to the M&B version of the BBs but I'm sorry, that is somehow the way it seems to me.
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #211 on: May 05, 2016, 08:26:32 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 

I can only speak for myself but it seems to me that the M&B BBs are relying on the nostalgia aspect of the music, whereas Brian is playing songs that he considers to be his best or his favourite music. However, I must add that I prefer it when Brian doesn't just go for the summer songs with which The Beach Boys are too often associated. That is a part only of his creative output but it gets far more acknowledgment than most of the rest, including songs that are far more subtle, complex and IMO important.

You're entitled to your opinion, Ang.  But, personally, I think that assessment is based on bias.  

Both camps, in a way, are relying on nostalgia.  Any artist that's been around as long as Brian or Mike rely on nostalgia.  

Also, Brian has said in many interviews that his favorite BB albums are Friends and Love You.  But, in concert, he doesn't touch that material too much.

Again, your opinion, and that's fine, but I fail to see the difference between Mike playing 1962-65 music and Brian playing Pet Sounds.  

I'll admit to bias if I may qualify that by stating that the reason for the bias is seeing the way that Mike has behaved over the years. When I read recently the wording in that 2005 lawsuit, it was hard to see the cousinly affection that we are told exists. Families are complicated but it is obvious that those who want to believe that these people are all the best of friends are not being entirely honest with themselves.

Yes, we all feel nostalgia about the good things from the past but it can be used cynically to sell a product or it can be one of several reasons for listening to a piece of music. Perhaps I am wrong to assign a level of cynicism to the M&B version of the BBs but I'm sorry, that is somehow the way it seems to me.

Having seen M&B twice in the last two years, I'll have to respectfully disagree.  I've been bands with one or two members just going through the motions in concert, playing the old hits.  But I don't get that vibe with M&B. 
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #212 on: May 05, 2016, 08:57:46 AM »

Both “bands” have had ups and downs in terms of doing the “meat and potatoes” stuff versus “deep cuts”, “early stuff” versus “later era” stuff. The whole dynamic of the band’s fan base and what is “doable” in concert has changed drastically compared to even the 1990s, and is in part a separate but quite interesting issue.

Here's the *main* difference between Mike and Brian’s band from a *set list* point of view: With a few exceptions, a “Brian Wilson” show is a showcase of Brian’s *writing.* As I’ve said many times, even when Al and Blondie are in the band, Brian’s shows are mostly songs Brian wrote or co-wrote. There are a few covers (usually old BB covers), and the occasional Dennis cover (which Brian arguably had a hand in), and Al’s “California Saga” (which Brian at least sang on originally). For better or worse, Brian doesn’t showcase stuff other guys in the band wrote and sang.

Let’s look at the most recent 2016 BW setlist. What’s on that list that Brian didn’t write or co-write beyond cover versions? Zilch. They didn’t even do “Cal Saga.” The only covers are “Barbara Ann” and a snippet of “Proud Mary.” So you’ve got a 40-song Brian setlist where Brian wrote 38 of them.  

Let’s look at the most recent Mike setlist, which as it happens is almost the same number of songs to boot. What’s on the list that Mike (or Brue) didn’t co-write beyond cover versions? Surfer Girl, In My Room, Don’t Worry Baby, Little Deuce Coupe, Shut Down, and God Only Knows. Plus about seven cover versions. So you’ve got a 42-song setlist where Mike co-wrote 28 of them, plus one Bruce track.

Obviously, both setlists are Brian *and* Mike-centric to some degree largely because they both play some of the same “hit” songs. But Brian’s show is a showcase of his music. Mike’s show is a showcase of The Beach Boys’ music. Again, makes sense when you look at their naming conventions.

But we also see some disparities when we look at alternate setlists. Brian has also several times done *full albums* of solo material in concert. So when Brian stretches, he stretches towards music of his own. When Mike “stretches” and does deep cuts, he starts mining more stuff that *Brian* wrote, often without Mike. “You Still Believe In Me”, “’Til I Die”, “Surf’s Up.”

So you never see Brian bust out “Kokomo” or “Summer in Paradise.” Both bands are working from a big pot of music. But Brian pulls almost exclusively from “Brian” material, whereas Mike pulls from his own stuff, does a solo track or two sometimes, and then also pulls in a lot of stuff he didn’t have a hand in.

I’m the first to admit there’s a certain amount of “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” when it comes to Mike’s setlists. He does all hits and he’s the “traveling jukebox.” He does “Surf’s Up” and then it’s sacrilege. But I think there’s room to make a more nuanced argument. The “jukebox” accusations, which Mike dispelled later into the 2000s with better setlists, came more from not being representative of the band’s whole career. It didn’t mean people needed to hear a sideman in Mike’s band sing “Surf’s Up”, it just meant Mike could broaden the setlist and even just do his own “deep cuts” from the BB catalog (along the lines of “All I Wanna Do” or “All This is That”). While Mike has done that, he has also been most liberal and open to Brian-centric deep cuts when it’s *his* choice. It’s the same when it comes to talking about Brian. Talking about Brian at one of his (Mike’s) own shows is a lot easier, and playing “’Til I Die” at his own show is a lot easier, when it’s on Mike’s terms in Mike’s own band. But when Brian suggests “Marcella” and Mike kind of gives a “mixed” response (I think this is a fair characterization based on Jason Fine’s description in Rolling Stone), that’s someone *telling* Mike to do a song.

Also, the “perception” and context of what Mike does in his own shows post-2012 will forever, at least in the minds of some, be framed based on his rejection of the reunion lineup. When he CHOOSES to not continue with the Beach Boys with Brian, and then starts knocking out Brian-penned deep cuts in concerts, some fans will find that a bit more of a dick maneuver. Same with 2016 and the likely mini-PS sets Mike is going to do. He could have tried to keep the reunion going and we’ve have Brian’s stage presentation but with Mike and Bruce added, doing the full “Pet Sounds” album. Instead, Mike would rather go out on his own, do hunks of the album, and hire one extra woodwind guy to fill the sound out. That’s his prerogative, but the kind of conflicted, mixed reaction he gets from some grizzled hardcore fans is then sometimes the result.  
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 08:59:27 AM by HeyJude » Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #213 on: May 05, 2016, 10:28:13 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment.  

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."  

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating.  

I can't speak for everyone, but for me this is why I label them as living in the past.

I think Brian's band highly respects the spiritual beauty of the music, which is probably why they don't let a cheerleader onto the stage to dance and play an instrument she doesn't know how to play. Yes, it's merely 'Barbara Ann' and they're having 'fun', but it's a cheesy nostalgia trip, plain and simple. The songs Brian and his band plays are nostalgic, but they seem to treat those songs like the art they are. 'Little Deuce Coupe' could be considered just another 60s car song...But Frank Zappa saw further into it and was enamored by the chord progression/structure in that song. Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 10:29:16 AM by rab2591 » Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

God must’ve smiled the day Brian Wilson was born!

"ragegasm" - /rāj • ga-zəm/ : a logical mental response produced when your favorite band becomes remotely associated with the bro-country genre.

Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5749



View Profile
« Reply #214 on: May 05, 2016, 10:32:39 AM »

On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.


I agree wholeheartedly with this sentiment. It's just a bit weird, and honestly I don't know how it doesn't leave an odd taste in one's mouth. Yes, we are lucky to get an original BB to be performing deep cuts, that is an undeniable truth. But the odd hypocrisy of it all is something that nags at me.

I wonder... if Cabinessence had become a more widely-known and well-loved song (it is, but not anywhere near the level of those other Brian and Brian/Van-centric deep cuts AngJones mentioned)... would Mike have the cojones to perform that song live, after all the grief and fallout that happened over his finger-wagging over the lyrics? Something tells me the answer is yes, that he would just go ahead and play it anyway.

I'm surprised Mike hasn't told his band to sing the "happy" version with the "I've found my way" lyrics for Til I Die.

Has Mike ever performed I Know There's An Answer live?
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 10:49:02 AM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #215 on: May 05, 2016, 10:51:42 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment.  

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."  

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating.  

I can't speak for everyone, but for me this is why I label them as living in the past.

I think Brian's band highly respects the spiritual beauty of the music, which is probably why they don't let a cheerleader onto the stage to dance and play an instrument she doesn't know how to play. Yes, it's merely 'Barbara Ann' and they're having 'fun', but it's a cheesy nostalgia trip, plain and simple. The songs Brian and his band plays are nostalgic, but they seem to treat those songs like the art they are. 'Little Deuce Coupe' could be considered just another 60s car song...But Frank Zappa saw further into it and was enamored by the chord progression/structure in that song. Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

I might agree with that except, when was the last time a Beach Boys concert featured actual cheerleaders on stage?  The presentation is much more respectful nowadays.

Logged
The LEGENDARY OSD
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1948

luHv Estrangement Syndrome. It's a great thing!


View Profile
« Reply #216 on: May 05, 2016, 11:03:50 AM »

Mike's band comes off as Mike and his hired hands doing their cold/well-oiled touring jukebox for the 1000th time. BW's band is an organic unit whose members seem like family and enjoy breathing new life into whatever they play.

myKe luHv and the Sidemen Cheesy would be an improved name instead of the BBs which they're not.  Roll Eyes
Logged

myKe luHv, the most hated, embarrassing clown the world of music has ever witnessed.
KDS
Guest
« Reply #217 on: May 05, 2016, 11:06:08 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment. 

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia." 

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating. 

I can only speak for myself but it seems to me that the M&B BBs are relying on the nostalgia aspect of the music, whereas Brian is playing songs that he considers to be his best or his favourite music. However, I must add that I prefer it when Brian doesn't just go for the summer songs with which The Beach Boys are too often associated. That is a part only of his creative output but it gets far more acknowledgment than most of the rest, including songs that are far more subtle, complex and IMO important.

You're entitled to your opinion, Ang.  But, personally, I think that assessment is based on bias.  

Both camps, in a way, are relying on nostalgia.  Any artist that's been around as long as Brian or Mike rely on nostalgia.  

Also, Brian has said in many interviews that his favorite BB albums are Friends and Love You.  But, in concert, he doesn't touch that material too much.

Again, your opinion, and that's fine, but I fail to see the difference between Mike playing 1962-65 music and Brian playing Pet Sounds.  

I'll admit to bias if I may qualify that by stating that the reason for the bias is seeing the way that Mike has behaved over the years. When I read recently the wording in that 2005 lawsuit, it was hard to see the cousinly affection that we are told exists. Families are complicated but it is obvious that those who want to believe that these people are all the best of friends are not being entirely honest with themselves.

Yes, we all feel nostalgia about the good things from the past but it can be used cynically to sell a product or it can be one of several reasons for listening to a piece of music. Perhaps I am wrong to assign a level of cynicism to the M&B version of the BBs but I'm sorry, that is somehow the way it seems to me.

Ang,

I may not agree with you.  But I'm glad that you made your points with logic and tact. 

Which is more than I can say for some posters here....
Logged
The LEGENDARY OSD
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1948

luHv Estrangement Syndrome. It's a great thing!


View Profile
« Reply #218 on: May 05, 2016, 11:18:56 AM »

Bit of a dumb question, but for those of you have attended a M&B show, how would you rate it out of 10?

I haven't seen the latest M&B shows - the last time was in 2014. They have upped their game since I saw them in 2004 but they still tend to concentrate mainly on the early years of The Beach Boys' career. I have mixed, indeed conflicting, feelings about that. On the one hand, I think it gives a false and limiting interpretation of what The Beach Boys meant rather than fully protecting their legacy - imagine a touring Beatles band mainly playing She Loves You, Twist and Shout, Please Please Me and missing out most of Rubber Soul, Sgt Pepper and more. On the other hand, songs like Til I Die, that Mike allegedly found depressing, or morbid or whatever he said, and Surf's Up with its VDP 'acid alliteration', Caroline No, which was originally a Brian Wilson single - these songs are so Brian's. Brian believed in them and was prepared to take a chance rather than play it safe. I resent Mike laying claim to them now that they are generally accepted as being great.

So my marks out of 10 for the M&B BBs. I'd probably give a 6, points deducted for an inaccurate impression of the band and for Mike's stage antics although that has improved a bit too. They mainly behave like a tribute band but they're not necessarily giving tribute to the best songs of The Beach Boys' career.
Ang - The Touring Band has come lightyears since 2004.  Those BB published songs are in the "style of the BB's" which is what is a condition of the touring license as I understand.  Mike was a part of the Surf's Up/Holland era and contributed (writing with Al a bit) and as published in the BB catalog.  The Touring Band has performed some of those songs, as recently as February when I was lucky to see them during an East Coast US tour.  I don't see it as the Touring Band "taking claim" as much as "expanding their performing set-lists" to their credit, growing in the job.   Those songs are BB work-product.  IIRC Mike accompanied Brian to Capitol, with Pet Sounds.  That does not look like not being supportive.  

Being part of BRI does not look like not being supportive.  The Paris Gaumont Palace interview clears all of that misconception up.

Let's not forget that Capitol under-promoted Pet Sounds and released a Best of Volume I,  less than 8 weeks post Pet Sounds, apparently feeling that they were at the "end of their production" dollar value.  Establishment of BRI to have more artistic control illustrates that they were all willing to take a financial risk to support Brian's and their work.  



Let's not forget that Mike called this "Brian's ego music' either. My guess is that Mike liked some of the music (with exceptions, like the Hang on to Your Ego lyric) but was worried about how it would be received by the public, which of course is understandable but I think perhaps he should have realised that they had to keep up or else they would have fallen so far behind. Brian was aware of the competition from bands like The Beatles and was anxious not just to rely on the style that was becoming dated.

As I have written, I attended a show in 2014 so I've seen them a lot more recently than 2004. I accept they've improved since then too.

I drew attention in the thread about how Capitol should have acted in 1966 to the unfortunate release of a Best of compilation in competition with Pet Sounds.


Right on target, Ang, but I've gotts ask, why did it take all those years for myKe luHv's band to improve (as you said)? Was it a case of musicians wanting to work but not with him? Was it a case of myKe settling for the status quo or not wanting to part with the cashola. Lastly, why was Brian's band so incredible out of the gate?
Logged

myKe luHv, the most hated, embarrassing clown the world of music has ever witnessed.
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #219 on: May 05, 2016, 11:21:22 AM »

Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

And they are humble.

I agree with you KDS, well stated.
Logged

"Bring me the head of Carmen Sandiego" Lynne "The Chief" Thigpen
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #220 on: May 05, 2016, 11:21:48 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment.  

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."  

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating.  

I can't speak for everyone, but for me this is why I label them as living in the past.

I think Brian's band highly respects the spiritual beauty of the music, which is probably why they don't let a cheerleader onto the stage to dance and play an instrument she doesn't know how to play. Yes, it's merely 'Barbara Ann' and they're having 'fun', but it's a cheesy nostalgia trip, plain and simple. The songs Brian and his band plays are nostalgic, but they seem to treat those songs like the art they are. 'Little Deuce Coupe' could be considered just another 60s car song...But Frank Zappa saw further into it and was enamored by the chord progression/structure in that song. Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

I might agree with that except, when was the last time a Beach Boys concert featured actual cheerleaders on stage?  The presentation is much more respectful nowadays.

It seems that they are still using the cheerleader shtick in video form. In which case my point still stands. It is very much a nostalgia trip for the touring band. Whereas Brian's band doesn't seem to need surf boards and palm trees placed on the stage because the show is less about nostalgia and more centered around the beauty of the music itself.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

God must’ve smiled the day Brian Wilson was born!

"ragegasm" - /rāj • ga-zəm/ : a logical mental response produced when your favorite band becomes remotely associated with the bro-country genre.

Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
KDS
Guest
« Reply #221 on: May 05, 2016, 11:43:26 AM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment.  

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."  

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating.  

I can't speak for everyone, but for me this is why I label them as living in the past.

I think Brian's band highly respects the spiritual beauty of the music, which is probably why they don't let a cheerleader onto the stage to dance and play an instrument she doesn't know how to play. Yes, it's merely 'Barbara Ann' and they're having 'fun', but it's a cheesy nostalgia trip, plain and simple. The songs Brian and his band plays are nostalgic, but they seem to treat those songs like the art they are. 'Little Deuce Coupe' could be considered just another 60s car song...But Frank Zappa saw further into it and was enamored by the chord progression/structure in that song. Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

I might agree with that except, when was the last time a Beach Boys concert featured actual cheerleaders on stage?  The presentation is much more respectful nowadays.

It seems that they are still using the cheerleader shtick in video form. In which case my point still stands. It is very much a nostalgia trip for the touring band. Whereas Brian's band doesn't seem to need surf boards and palm trees placed on the stage because the show is less about nostalgia and more centered around the beauty of the music itself.

If you strip away the couple of palm trees and the video board that M&B use, they still present a very good version of the classic material. 
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #222 on: May 05, 2016, 11:44:33 AM »

The full-time cheerleaders on tour ended a long time ago. Were they even still in the show regularly when Carl and Al did their last touring in 1997?

I do believe they still have cheerleaders out on occasion for "Be True..", from local areas.

It's funny, though. People have mentioned the cheerleaders from the past and Totten's "guitar" thing with ladies on stage as two examples of tackiness, and I found a pic (dated March 23, 2013) that combines both!



Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
KDS
Guest
« Reply #223 on: May 05, 2016, 11:48:51 AM »

Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

And they are humble.

I agree with you KDS, well stated.

Thank you, Cam
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


"My God. It's full of stars."


View Profile
« Reply #224 on: May 05, 2016, 12:01:35 PM »

Random venting here.  Probably shouldn't say it, but here it goes.  I'm a glutton for punishment.  

Why is it when Mike and Bruce's band do the early 60s stuff, they're "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."?

But, when Brian's band does these songs, it's "well, they're HIS songs."  Also, Brian is touring on his 1966 classic album Pet Sounds for the third time, yet that's not "living in the past" or "coasting on nostalgia."  

Oh, mini rant over.  I'll sit back and awaiting my beating.  

I can't speak for everyone, but for me this is why I label them as living in the past.

I think Brian's band highly respects the spiritual beauty of the music, which is probably why they don't let a cheerleader onto the stage to dance and play an instrument she doesn't know how to play. Yes, it's merely 'Barbara Ann' and they're having 'fun', but it's a cheesy nostalgia trip, plain and simple. The songs Brian and his band plays are nostalgic, but they seem to treat those songs like the art they are. 'Little Deuce Coupe' could be considered just another 60s car song...But Frank Zappa saw further into it and was enamored by the chord progression/structure in that song. Similarly, Brian-centric fans seem to be more engaged with the spiritual and artistic foundation of The Beach Boys' songs...which is why we are a bit more critical when we see cheerleaders flood the front of the crowd during a 'Beach Boys' concert.

I might agree with that except, when was the last time a Beach Boys concert featured actual cheerleaders on stage?  The presentation is much more respectful nowadays.

It seems that they are still using the cheerleader shtick in video form. In which case my point still stands. It is very much a nostalgia trip for the touring band. Whereas Brian's band doesn't seem to need surf boards and palm trees placed on the stage because the show is less about nostalgia and more centered around the beauty of the music itself.

If you strip away the couple of palm trees and the video board that M&B use, they still present a very good version of the classic material.  

That may be, but the stage props and video board are there for a reason. They are supposed to create a nostalgic/fun atmosphere for the songs that are played. Some of us find that it detracts from the artistic foundation of the songs. And in answer to your initial question, that is a probable reason as to why some fans are more critical of Mike when his band performs the classic 60s songs.

I do believe they still have cheerleaders out on occasion for "Be True..", from local areas.

I thought I remember seeing a video of some local area cheerleaders at a recent (2015) concert of theirs. But I could be totally be misremembering.
« Last Edit: May 05, 2016, 12:04:55 PM by rab2591 » Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

God must’ve smiled the day Brian Wilson was born!

"ragegasm" - /rāj • ga-zəm/ : a logical mental response produced when your favorite band becomes remotely associated with the bro-country genre.

Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
gfx
Pages: 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 [9] 10 11 12 13 14 ... 25 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.97 seconds with 21 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!