Was there any evidence "Wind Chimes" was Air?

[guitarfool2002]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

[filledeplage]

I don't know who knew what in the band but if they were unaware Brian had scrapped SMiLE by May 6, shame on Brian. As I said Mike didn't even know the title had changed as late as after H&V had been released but he did know that Brian had dumped some songs and changed some and added some songs to the album which was a process that started before they left for UK. So their statements are consistent with that.

Cam, there was a call earlier in this discussion for documentation. Anyone who has LLVS can see a group of Capitol session documents for Smile.

Every one of the Smile sessions dating back to 1966 on those session sheets was logged under the project number 31-5526.

There is a sheet for Love To Say Dada, a session for May 16 1967, logged under project number 31-5526. That sheet also has names and details familiar to the Smile sessions which had come before as we've already mentioned.

If the "Smile" album had been scrapped and as you suggest Brian scrapped it (then told Taylor but the band wasn't informed), why was Brian still recording and turning in paperwork to Capitol under the same project number 31-5526 as he had used for Smile dating back months to 1966?

Who exactly was unaware the album had been scrapped if Brian handed in such a document to Capitol just over a week after something led Derek Taylor to declare the album scrapped?

I believe that is also the Smiley Smile project number, he just kept using it.

Yes, true, but if it were scrapped...

GF - if it had been scrapped, and (I defer to your industry knowledge) wouldn't the tapes be treated as "files" -such as those used in business, or in an office, or even student files post-graduation, which would be closed and archived?

And the number would be associated with an end-date?

Wouldn't there be an end-date that could precede or coincide with the press release?  

And the subsequent sessions, be cancelled in advance?  
 
Thanks.  

[guitarfool2002]

I don't know who knew what in the band but if they were unaware Brian had scrapped SMiLE by May 6, shame on Brian. As I said Mike didn't even know the title had changed as late as after H&V had been released but he did know that Brian had dumped some songs and changed some and added some songs to the album which was a process that started before they left for UK. So their statements are consistent with that.

Cam, there was a call earlier in this discussion for documentation. Anyone who has LLVS can see a group of Capitol session documents for Smile.

Every one of the Smile sessions dating back to 1966 on those session sheets was logged under the project number 31-5526.

There is a sheet for Love To Say Dada, a session for May 16 1967, logged under project number 31-5526. That sheet also has names and details familiar to the Smile sessions which had come before as we've already mentioned.

If the "Smile" album had been scrapped and as you suggest Brian scrapped it (then told Taylor but the band wasn't informed), why was Brian still recording and turning in paperwork to Capitol under the same project number 31-5526 as he had used for Smile dating back months to 1966?

Who exactly was unaware the album had been scrapped if Brian handed in such a document to Capitol just over a week after something led Derek Taylor to declare the album scrapped?

I believe that is also the Smiley Smile project number, he just kept using it.

Yes, true, but if it were scrapped...

GF - if it had been scrapped, and (I defer to your industry knowledge) wouldn't the tapes be treated as "files" -such as those used in business, or in an office, or even student files post-graduation, which would be closed and archived?

And the number would be associated with an end-date?

Wouldn't there be an end-date that could precede or coincide with the press release?  

And the subsequent sessions, be cancelled in advance?  
 
Thanks.  

There was obviously a lot of activity going on at this time related to the lawsuit, and the legalities and business details (including contracts that would need to be revised and eventually were) involved in both settling the lawsuit, coming to a mutual agreement with regards to how the Beach Boys "Brother Records" would operate with Capitol, and the basic legal and business issues that surround establishing and incorporating a record label in general. It was not a process that can be wrapped up in a week or even a month until all the details have been worked out and filed as necessary.

It would take more digging and documentation to establish some exact details regarding what happened and exactly when it happened.

What I think is safe to assume is that Capitol (and related company EMI) had employees in the business keeping up with any developments, both internally and what would be reported in the trade papers and music press, such as Disc & Music Echo, Billboard, NME, Melody Maker, etc. Just as all of Hollywood would wait for Variety to come out.

If word got published in one of these papers that the album Capitol had been waiting for in the past 5 months or so had been declared "scrapped", the phones back and forth between the UK and the US would have lit up as soon as that paper published that declaration.

To try to make a point that no one knew or no one was made aware that this long-awaited album had been scrapped seems almost ridiculous in light of what was at stake and what the term "scrapped" implied. It wasn't delayed, it wasn't held up, it wasn't being reworked...it was "scrapped".

That would have triggered a major reaction both within the record companies and especially within the band. Saying it was scrapped would, i think, imply everything that was on the table had been shelved and something new was going to instead take its place. Yet Brian was back at Gold Star recording, and the band's comments suggested they thought the album's work and future release was still on as of May 1967. It's hard to line it up, for sure.

[Cam Mott]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

In this case, someone can ask Mike and no because there is no evidence for it and Brian because Taylor is describing Brian as the scrapper and Brian's reasons for scrapping and the Boys as clueless and Brian was the Producer.

[filledeplage]

I don't know who knew what in the band but if they were unaware Brian had scrapped SMiLE by May 6, shame on Brian. As I said Mike didn't even know the title had changed as late as after H&V had been released but he did know that Brian had dumped some songs and changed some and added some songs to the album which was a process that started before they left for UK. So their statements are consistent with that.

Cam, there was a call earlier in this discussion for documentation. Anyone who has LLVS can see a group of Capitol session documents for Smile.

Every one of the Smile sessions dating back to 1966 on those session sheets was logged under the project number 31-5526.

There is a sheet for Love To Say Dada, a session for May 16 1967, logged under project number 31-5526. That sheet also has names and details familiar to the Smile sessions which had come before as we've already mentioned.

If the "Smile" album had been scrapped and as you suggest Brian scrapped it (then told Taylor but the band wasn't informed), why was Brian still recording and turning in paperwork to Capitol under the same project number 31-5526 as he had used for Smile dating back months to 1966?

Who exactly was unaware the album had been scrapped if Brian handed in such a document to Capitol just over a week after something led Derek Taylor to declare the album scrapped?

I believe that is also the Smiley Smile project number, he just kept using it.

Yes, true, but if it were scrapped...

GF - if it had been scrapped, and (I defer to your industry knowledge) wouldn't the tapes be treated as "files" -such as those used in business, or in an office, or even student files post-graduation, which would be closed and archived?

And the number would be associated with an end-date?

Wouldn't there be an end-date that could precede or coincide with the press release?  

And the subsequent sessions, be cancelled in advance?  
 
Thanks.  

There was obviously a lot of activity going on at this time related to the lawsuit, and the legalities and business details (including contracts that would need to be revised and eventually were) involved in both settling the lawsuit, coming to a mutual agreement with regards to how the Beach Boys "Brother Records" would operate with Capitol, and the basic legal and business issues that surround establishing and incorporating a record label in general. It was not a process that can be wrapped up in a week or even a month until all the details have been worked out and filed as necessary.

It would take more digging and documentation to establish some exact details regarding what happened and exactly when it happened.

What I think is safe to assume is that Capitol (and related company EMI) had employees in the business keeping up with any developments, both internally and what would be reported in the trade papers and music press, such as Disc & Music Echo, Billboard, NME, Melody Maker, etc. Just as all of Hollywood would wait for Variety to come out.

If word got published in one of these papers that the album Capitol had been waiting for in the past 5 months or so had been declared "scrapped", the phones back and forth between the UK and the US would have lit up as soon as that paper published that declaration.

To try to make a point that no one knew or no one was made aware that this long-awaited album had been scrapped seems almost ridiculous in light of what was at stake and what the term "scrapped" implied. It wasn't delayed, it wasn't held up, it wasn't being reworked...it was "scrapped".

That would have triggered a major reaction both within the record companies and especially within the band. Saying it was scrapped would, i think, imply everything that was on the table had been shelved and something new was going to instead take its place. Yet Brian was back at Gold Star recording, and the band's comments suggested they thought the album's work and future release was still on as of May 1967. It's hard to line it up, for sure.

GF - thanks for that.  "Scrapped" can take many contexts, for example, in the auto industry it means that a car gets "parted out" and broken up for parts as a stand-alone items.  I was looking for the music industry context.  And, I was wondering, about those "parts" (tracks) that would be migrating to a new project.  Some did and some didn't.

There certainly is a process in winding-up/wrapping-up of a project or business.   But it would seem that some of this information would be contained in the business files and/or sessions that were scheduled.

Was there a major reaction by the band?  Did we see it?  The interviews that were done contemporaneous to this press release run counter to that.  And, seems to have some of us wondering and trying to make sense of a very high profile couple of weeks, that was chaotic to say the least.  

That Variety analogy to those other industry magazine/journals was a good one.  But it does seem that the industry (EMI, perhaps) kept the band - the entire band out of the process, at least with respect to the TIKH tour and promotion.  One hand did not know (or appears not to) what the other hand was doing.   And it seems to undermine the reason they started Brother in the first place.

Would Anderle or anyone else, have known what the band (including Brian, as they represented him in the field) was walking into (a trap) when they got to Europe with this promotion?  Did someone stateside know and keep that information from the band? Smile session #85 is on May 18th, p. 182, Badman.
 
They seem to be on the same page in the Rusten/Stebbins book, p. 90-1, with regard the TIKH tour, being shocked at what music was being showcased.      

Thanks.  

[guitarfool2002]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

In this case, someone can ask Mike and no because there is no evidence for it and Brian because Taylor is describing Brian as the scrapper and Brian's reasons for scrapping and the Boys as clueless and Brian was the Producer.

You're preemptively dodging the question, Cam, before anyone can answer: Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

NOT about the 'scrapping' issue, but in general related to the tour and related activities.

[Cam Mott]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

In this case, someone can ask Mike and no because there is no evidence for it and Brian because Taylor is describing Brian as the scrapper and Brian's reasons for scrapping and the Boys as clueless and Brian was the Producer.

You're preemptively dodging the question, Cam, before anyone can answer: Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

NOT about the 'scrapping' issue, but in general related to the tour and related activities.

I answered it: "no because there is no evidence for it".

[Andrew G. Doe]

He and the group were unaware *after* Derek Taylor's D&ME piece in the May 6th issue hit by the time they gave the interview to Altham? No one gave them a copy? It wasn't brought to their attention? No one asked them about it after seeing Taylor's article?

I can't buy that without more proof.

EDIT: Keep in mind, the whole band was in the same room as Altham spoke with them, it was a group interview.

Your proof is staring you in the face.

The band in the UK was unaware of an article that had been published in the UK (by their own paid publicist) which declared their album dead?

That Bruce was still referring to a Smile album would strongly indicate this. I'll ask him.

[guitarfool2002]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

In this case, someone can ask Mike and no because there is no evidence for it and Brian because Taylor is describing Brian as the scrapper and Brian's reasons for scrapping and the Boys as clueless and Brian was the Producer.

You're preemptively dodging the question, Cam, before anyone can answer: Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

NOT about the 'scrapping' issue, but in general related to the tour and related activities.

I answered it: "no because there is no evidence for it".

Where was the evidence Brian had recorded a solo version of Surf's Up in the fall of 1967 before the tape was found? If someone asked even the most informed Smile historians at any point up to the discovery of the tape "Did Brian record a solo version of Surf's Up in Fall 1967?", the answer would be "no, there is no evidence of it" but there actually was audio evidence of it sitting on a tape reel which had not been discovered or even considered up to that discovery.

The question(s) still stands.

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

[Andrew G. Doe]

I think "filledthepage" needs to "use" a few "more" of those "quotations." Anybody "agree"?

"I" "absolutely" "agree" "."

[guitarfool2002]

He and the group were unaware *after* Derek Taylor's D&ME piece in the May 6th issue hit by the time they gave the interview to Altham? No one gave them a copy? It wasn't brought to their attention? No one asked them about it after seeing Taylor's article?

I can't buy that without more proof.

EDIT: Keep in mind, the whole band was in the same room as Altham spoke with them, it was a group interview.

Your proof is staring you in the face.

The band in the UK was unaware of an article that had been published in the UK (by their own paid publicist) which declared their album dead?

That Bruce was still referring to a Smile album would strongly indicate this. I'll ask him.

That would absolutely help shed some light on this to hear Bruce's perspective when he made those comments to Altham in light of the "scrapped" article.

[filledeplage]

I think "filledthepage" needs to "use" a few "more" of those "quotations." Anybody "agree"?

"I" "absolutely" "agree" "."

Andrew - Comments about "punk-tuation," and not "content" are counter-productive, and are distractors from the issues with which some don't agree.

Carry on.       

[filledeplage]

He and the group were unaware *after* Derek Taylor's D&ME piece in the May 6th issue hit by the time they gave the interview to Altham? No one gave them a copy? It wasn't brought to their attention? No one asked them about it after seeing Taylor's article?

I can't buy that without more proof.

EDIT: Keep in mind, the whole band was in the same room as Altham spoke with them, it was a group interview.

Your proof is staring you in the face.

The band in the UK was unaware of an article that had been published in the UK (by their own paid publicist) which declared their album dead?

That Bruce was still referring to a Smile album would strongly indicate this. I'll ask him.

That would absolutely help shed some light on this to hear Bruce's perspective when he made those comments to Altham in light of the "scrapped" article.

GF - not from Bruce, but from Badman, p. 185,under Saturday, May 6, 1967..."A week after his optimistic statement, Beach Boys publicist Derek Taylor, prematurely (emphasis added) announces to the press the abandonment of Smile...skip to May 11th, Smile session 82, Heroes and Villains session 30, Back in California, unaffected (and possibly invigorated) by Taylor's statement of the 6th, Brian returns to the studio and 'sweetens' his March 2nd mix down of Heroes and Villains...May 16th, Smile Session 83...Now almost two weeks after Derek Taylor's announcement about the abandonment of Smile, Brian continues work on the album, here with Engineer Jim Hilton. (p. 187, Badman)

Is there some clue with the word "prematurely" as it relates to May 6th?  Was this supposed to be discussed with the band and not? It seems that someone had this scrapping concept on their radar.

The actions are not matching the words.   

   

[Cam Mott]

I don't know who knew what in the band but if they were unaware Brian had scrapped SMiLE by May 6, shame on Brian. As I said Mike didn't even know the title had changed as late as after H&V had been released but he did know that Brian had dumped some songs and changed some and added some songs to the album which was a process that started before they left for UK. So their statements are consistent with that.

Cam, there was a call earlier in this discussion for documentation. Anyone who has LLVS can see a group of Capitol session documents for Smile.

Every one of the Smile sessions dating back to 1966 on those session sheets was logged under the project number 31-5526.

There is a sheet for Love To Say Dada, a session for May 16 1967, logged under project number 31-5526. That sheet also has names and details familiar to the Smile sessions which had come before as we've already mentioned.

If the "Smile" album had been scrapped and as you suggest Brian scrapped it (then told Taylor but the band wasn't informed), why was Brian still recording and turning in paperwork to Capitol under the same project number 31-5526 as he had used for Smile dating back months to 1966?

Who exactly was unaware the album had been scrapped if Brian handed in such a document to Capitol just over a week after something led Derek Taylor to declare the album scrapped?

I believe that is also the Smiley Smile project number, he just kept using it.

Yes, true, but if it were scrapped...

SMiLE was scrapped but Smiley Smile was not.

At some point recording for that project number stopped being for SMiLE and started being for Smiley Smile, so no one knows definitely when but by April 4 they had started recording songs that were not on the SMiLE track list and retooling a few songs that were and Smiley is from those recordings. So some time before that, maybe early March or late January  even, who knows?

[Andrew G. Doe]

I think "filledthepage" needs to "use" a few "more" of those "quotations." Anybody "agree"?

"I" "absolutely" "agree" "."

Andrew - Comments about "punk-tuation," and not "content" are counter-productive, and are distractors from the issues with which some don't agree.

Carry on.        

1 - your idiosyncratic punctuation is itself counter-productive, both as a distraction and an impediment to smooth reading.

2 - who died and made you Queen of the Board ?

3 - you're using Badman as a credible source. Think again.

[Cam Mott]

Focus back on some questions asked:

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

In this case, someone can ask Mike and no because there is no evidence for it and Brian because Taylor is describing Brian as the scrapper and Brian's reasons for scrapping and the Boys as clueless and Brian was the Producer.

You're preemptively dodging the question, Cam, before anyone can answer: Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

NOT about the 'scrapping' issue, but in general related to the tour and related activities.

I answered it: "no because there is no evidence for it".

Where was the evidence Brian had recorded a solo version of Surf's Up in the fall of 1967 before the tape was found? If someone asked even the most informed Smile historians at any point up to the discovery of the tape "Did Brian record a solo version of Surf's Up in Fall 1967?", the answer would be "no, there is no evidence of it" but there actually was audio evidence of it sitting on a tape reel which had not been discovered or even considered up to that discovery.

The question(s) still stands.

Mike says he was not the source for Taylor's info, but does he have any thoughts on who was the source?

Was Mike working with Taylor on the band's PR at this time, connected to the May 1967 tour and related events? If not, who was?

No one was claiming there was because there was no evidence of it.

The Boys are griping about the PR around the TIKH/MOL single.  What is the evidence that Mike or any of the Boys ever worked with Taylor or anyone on the band's PR in May?

[filledeplage]

I think "filledthepage" needs to "use" a few "more" of those "quotations." Anybody "agree"?

"I" "absolutely" "agree" "."

Andrew - Comments about "punk-tuation," and not "content" are counter-productive, and are distractors from the issues with which some don't agree.

Carry on.        

1 - your idiosyncratic punctuation is itself counter-productive, both as a distraction and an impediment to smooth reading.

2 - who died and made you Queen of the Board ?

3 - you're using Badman as a credible source. Think again.

Andrew - we are not here to correct English papers. We are here to discuss music.  More than once, I have had women PM me, who have joined this forum, writing me for advice as to how to manage some of the bullying.  There are proportionally few women here for a reason.  It is the shark-like atmosphere.  

If my writing is a problem, please also feel free to use the ignore button.  I have let some of your errors go, and ignored the reflex, to reply nastily in-kind, as it is a distractor from the reason we are united here.  I also disregard this faction nonsense as much as possible although this thread and other Smile related threads in search of facts tend to provoke that response.  

And, having signed multiple non-plagiarism pledges in post graduate school, citation in quotes or other manner are overemphasized rather than under-emphasized to obviate charges of plagiarism.  It is erring on the side of caution. (this expression should be quoted)  And, I am still connected in the academic context, subject to the same citation-context-or expression regulations.  I repeat, if it is a problem, please use the Andrew Hickey ignore function.    

Badman is not without flaws, I will concede,  particularly with regard the publication of personal information on the session sheets.  However, there are aspects of greater completeness over other publications.  And I am not throwing the baby out with that bathwater.  (And that expression should be quoted.)

If my information is incorrect - you are most welcome to challenge and I welcome it.    

[Ian]

Hope you understand that in terms of accurate info about gigs the beach boys in concert by Jon Stebbins and Ian rusten (that being I) is far superior and corrects hundreds of badman errors.  I did not catalog all sessions as, based on his published writing, Craig slovinski was the man to do that subject justice. However if you just want accurate dates without much discussion than bellagio gigs and sessions hosted by esq is the site for you. I collaborated on it with agd and we corrected many session dates that badman erred on.  In addition, with the help of Craig, Alan Boyd and the kind folks at the musicians Union we were able to gain access to many session documents and dates that Keith badman was unaware of when he wrote.  In my book I pointed out many other errors that we've discovered like the 1962 non existent summer tour and the correct date and info on the bbs first national TV appearance on red Skelton

[Ian]

Basically what I was saying was that there are better sources now than badman though his book has some great photos!

[Andrew G. Doe]

And, having signed multiple non-plagiarism pledges in post graduate school, citation in quotes or other manner are overemphasized rather than under-emphasized to obviate charges of plagiarism.  It is erring on the side of caution. (this expression should be quoted)  And, I am still connected in the academic context, subject to the same citation-context-or expression regulations.

This isn't post-graduate school: it's just a message board. No-one's going to accuse you of plagiarism. Condescension, maybe.

[filledeplage]

Hope you understand that in terms of accurate info about gigs the beach boys in concert by Jon Stebbins and Ian rusten (that being I) is far superior and corrects hundreds of badman errors.  I did not catalog all sessions as, based on his published writing, Craig slovinski was the man to do that subject justice. However if you just want accurate dates without much discussion than bellagio gigs and sessions hosted by esq is the site for you. I collaborated on it with agd and we corrected many session dates that badman erred on.  In addition, with the help of Craig, Alan Boyd and the kind folks at the musicians Union we were able to gain access to many session documents and dates that Keith badman was unaware of when he wrote.  In my book I pointed out many other errors that we've discovered like the 1962 non existent summer tour and the correct date and info on the bbs first national TV appearance on red Skelton

Hi Ian - thanks for the post.  I have your book written with Jon Stebbins. It was a gift from a BB fan.  Just was given the Carlin book from another fan.  And, I am going among the three. Zeroing in on that two-week window is where a great deal of chaos and inconsistencies lie.  

If the facts could be extracted from some of these sources, as to who-did-what, with facts laid bare, I think a lot of the strife on this forum would cease and the focus returned to the music where most would agree it belongs.  I think it is a worthwhile search.   There is more here, with this music we all love, to unite rather than divide.  

And I enjoy both volumes for different reasons some of which you mentioned.  I enjoyed your quotes from the band, while perplexed in England, and some of the journal entries in Badman and for which I will PM you with some additional details.  Thanks again.  

  

[Andrew G. Doe]

Basically what I was saying was that there are better sources now than badman though his book has some great photos!

Badman also shamelessly plagiarised other BB authors & researchers without giving them due credit - indeed, in many case, any credit at all. I think his crowning moment was in the "earky years" section, which started out by detailing the early history of Hawthorne... Hawthorne, Putnam County, Florida.  

[filledeplage]

And, having signed multiple non-plagiarism pledges in post graduate school, citation in quotes or other manner are overemphasized rather than under-emphasized to obviate charges of plagiarism.  It is erring on the side of caution. (this expression should be quoted)  And, I am still connected in the academic context, subject to the same citation-context-or expression regulations.

This isn't post-graduate school: it's just a message board. No-one's going to accuse you of plagiarism. Condescension, maybe.

Andrew - Reasonable minds can differ. 

We can disagree without being disagreeable.   You have referred to that expression in the past, as condescending. 

A former school principal used to say that all the time. 

Maybe that is verbal plagiarism, or verbal appropriation, if that exists.   

[guitarfool2002]

Might I also suggest, sparked by seeing Ian Rusten join the conversation, a look at whatever interviews, reviews, and articles exist from May 1967 that are not covered in sources mentioned here like LLVS or general online sources. I know some do exist, as they have been referenced by collectors on this board in years past. The band after finishing up the UK leg of the May 67 tour traveled further into Europe and ended the tour in Germany before returning to the US. If there are any interviews or articles which appeared in any publications from those countries which the band appeared, or anything featuring comments from the band members published to promote those shows (even if they need to be translated into English), I think whatever exists would add to the available resources.

It could also add further context to the band's mindset after the Taylor piece appeared, especially if they commented on their "next album" or Smile in any way in those weeks after Taylor declared the album scrapped.

[filledeplage]

Basically what I was saying was that there are better sources now than badman though his book has some great photos!

Badman also shamelessly plagiarised other BB authors & researchers without giving them due credit - indeed, in many case, any credit at all. I think his crowning moment was in the "earky years" section, which started out by detailing the early history of Hawthorne... Hawthorne, Putnam County, Florida.  

Andrew - I don't read Badman in a linear fashion; I look for windows of time and compare them to firsthand knowledge/ concert dates and have found some errors, but what I am looking at for this particular time at issue Spring of 1967, and seems pretty accurate going day-to-day looking for the inconsistencies.  And compare that with other sources, including 10452.  

My biggest beef with the book is the use of the un-redacted time sheets.  Big problem.