Fall Breaks & Back to Winter

[guitarfool2002]

Cam, have you ever made a list of what were "band" decisions and what were "Brian" decisions? There has to be a logic behind how you manage to compartmentalize these issues into one or the other depending on your take on the situation at hand. Once I remember you were suggesting the Maharishi tour in '68 was in the "Brian" decision column.

Generally, while Brian was the Producer (or whoever was Producer) he made those decisions is my opinion. Otherwise things were generally group decisions, probably often with deference to Brian (or Carl) I'm guessing. I think other Boys have spoken to things being a vote and democratic though I can't put a finger on any off the top of my head.

I remember there was a dispute as to whether Brian was devoted to the Maha' and how early but as far as I remember I've always assumed the Maha' tour was a group decision.  Can you point me to that claim in case I need to retract?

First part - How does all of this square with the "Produced by The Beach Boys" label that was first put onto Smiley Smile? Apart from what we know of the actual work on the songs in the studio, what could that credit have actually referred to? Perhaps what songs to include or not include on an upcoming album? What to release as a single? Starting with Smiley Smile it was also "Brother Records", which implies group as well.

Second part - I don't know where it would be. Somewhere in the archives. But in that case Nick Grillo in the Gaines book, whose word you said is solid on those kinds of details, suggested more to the story than it was a group decision, and if I recall some of what you said implied Brian had as much to do with that tour as others...and I don't think Grillo backs that up. Nor does what Brian's involvement was regarding tour planning and details at the time that tour was being proposed.

[Cam Mott]

Cam, have you ever made a list of what were "band" decisions and what were "Brian" decisions? There has to be a logic behind how you manage to compartmentalize these issues into one or the other depending on your take on the situation at hand. Once I remember you were suggesting the Maharishi tour in '68 was in the "Brian" decision column.

Generally, while Brian was the Producer (or whoever was Producer) he made those decisions is my opinion. Otherwise things were generally group decisions, probably often with deference to Brian (or Carl) I'm guessing. I think other Boys have spoken to things being a vote and democratic though I can't put a finger on any off the top of my head.

I remember there was a dispute as to whether Brian was devoted to the Maha' and how early but as far as I remember I've always assumed the Maha' tour was a group decision.  Can you point me to that claim in case I need to retract?

First part - How does all of this square with the "Produced by The Beach Boys" label that was first put onto Smiley Smile? Apart from what we know of the actual work on the songs in the studio, what could that credit have actually referred to? Perhaps what songs to include or not include on an upcoming album? What to release as a single? Starting with Smiley Smile it was also "Brother Records", which implies group as well.

Second part - I don't know where it would be. Somewhere in the archives. But in that case Nick Grillo in the Gaines book, whose word you said is solid on those kinds of details, suggested more to the story than it was a group decision, and if I recall some of what you said implied Brian had as much to do with that tour as others...and I don't think Grillo backs that up. Nor does what Brian's involvement was regarding tour planning and details at the time that tour was being proposed.

First part - I believe there is evidence and testimony that Brian was the Producer of those albums and so that is my opinion too.

Second part - When or if you ever find these supposed posts of mine please feel free to posts them.

"Mike managed to convince the rest of the group that it would be a good move..." = group decision with deference to Mike.

[CenturyDeprived]

Several notable peacekeeping gestures were made in 1967.

Brian broke his promise to Mike by not recording the Pet Sounds follow up with him as the primary lyricist. I don't see how GH's credit, or the entire songwriting of the WH album, weren't - at least in part - both peacekeeping gestures, and Brian's attempt to make things up to Mike for Brian's pesky habit of breaking promises.

Or just Brian's desire to work with Mike on the music Brian wanted to make.

I'm not saying it's impossible that Brian had that desire rekindled… But don't you think Brian also felt he had to make things up to Mike for breaking promises? Do you in any way assume that Mike was quiet about reminding Brian of that fact?

 Seriously here… You don't think that Brian could have remotely for the slightest moment felt a sense of obligation? You think it's clear cut and black-and-white like that? Let's all admit there are shades of gray here. Maybe a sense of obligation wasn't the deciding factor, but let's not pretend that it's something that didn't factor in whatsoever.

Considering the reported previous history of Brian's keeping of promises to Mike, I have no reason to think it was a reason or a concern. Especially since Mike has said he was in fact very supportive of PS and we have actual recordings of Mike being supportive of SMiLE and also since Brian and Mike seem to have shared the same concerns with the particular SMiLE tracks Brian self-admittedly unilaterally dumped for his reasons. So to me these long touted conjectures are red herrings. IMO I think it much more likely that Brian realized that most of their greatest commercial success was in collabs with Mike and that was a strength to play to, especially with a new label. We can agree to disagree.

Why does someone even make such a promise to somebody else in the band? Because that other person has made it clear that this is what their demands/requests are. For peacekeeping. For emotional reassurance. Just the same as 2012 - Mike currently mentions the broken promise ad naseum because he feels it's OWED to him because Brian PROMISED. Same as in 1967.

The 2012 broken promise wasn't a non-issue to Mike. It's VERY important for him to remind the world of how unacceptable it was for that promise to be broken. He's not repeatedly mentioning it for no reason.

Even if Brian decided that he wanted to back to basics and write an album with Mike again (either in 1967 or 2012), doesn't mean that the knowledge of this expectation was somehow off Brian's radar.  Mike has made it clear post 2012 how the promise was a KNOWN THING that was expected to be honored.

Someone who is having their way?  

And it doesn't mean any of it was either.

Since Mike was supportive of PS the promise was null I suppose and even if it were still in effect (which I doubt), since they seem to agree over the SMiLE tracks dumped, the promise was null again or kept, depending. If there were anything to apologize for I would think it would be Brian's claim that the band nearly broke up over Brian decision to dump some of the SMiLE songs. Those weren't Mike songs so I'm having trouble figuring out what Brian "owed" Mike for.

Does that trouble figuring out what Brian "owed" Mike for extend to 2012? Hasn't Mike made it crystal clear that he was owed a 2012 Brian-Mike collaboration in a certain manner due to a promise of songwriting that was made?

And "the promise was null"... why do you think a promise was made in the first place? Someone doesn't just make a collaboration promise like that to someone for no reason at all. Even if you think the promise became invalid, it WAS made, and for a reason or two.

Cam - what say you about my questions above?

[Cam Mott]

No.  No, Mike said he was promised, not owed, and apparently by Joe Thomas.

I did answer your speculation with speculation: "Someone who is having their way?"

[CenturyDeprived]

No.  No, Mike said he was promised, not owed, and apparently by Joe Thomas.

I did answer your speculation with speculation: "Someone who is having their way?"

Firstly, you didn't respond to my question of why a promise in 1966/67 was made in the first place. I still pose that question to you.

And yeah... the whole idea is that a promise of that sort (whether made by Thomas, Brian, or whoever) that is not kept is unacceptable to him, right?

Whether "promised" or "owed", it really makes no particular difference how we phrase it. If a promise is not kept, Mike was/is hurt/pissed, because he felt he did not get what he felt he was owed as a founding member who has cowritten many hits. C'mon, I'm sure even Mike himself would probably say he feels he deserves to write more songs that way.

Mike would not repeatedly bring up the 2012 promise if he wasn't trying to rally people around the idea of Mike being promised writing with Brian must be a promise kept or else (and the "or else" is Mike having ditched the reunion). He wants sympathy, and I'm sure he's getting some from some people. Mike didn't outright, point-blank say "I quit the reunion because I couldn't write with Brian in the manner which I was promised", but it's heavily implied that this broken promise was a major thorn in his side (I can understand his disappointment), and that there were resultant consequences, since it's almost always mentioned in tandem with a "why did the reunion end" type of conversation.

Thus it's obvious that if Mike doesn't/didn't get his way with writing with Brian - in a manner previously promised to him - that there would be consequences of some sort, and at the very least there would be emotional microagressions to occur as a result... even (especially) in 1967, when the band's future (and especially Mike's place in the band as main collaborator) was increasingly on uncertain ground. Just as in 2012, I'm sure there would have been *some* hell to pay for Brian if he decided not to write with Mike again.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Brian didn't want to give writing an album with Mike a shot again ANYWAY for reasons unrelated to the imminent threat of potential emotional microagressions, but please don't tell me you actually believe that if Brian, post SMiLE and Smiley Smile, decided to go back to writing with Tony Asher, or choose another collaborator for writing entire albums with, that Mike wouldn't have continually given Brian some sort of weird vibes about yet another broken promise. People aren't like that. As he's shown with his 2012 public gripes, Mike's proven that he's not like that.

[Cam Mott]

No.  No, Mike said he was promised, not owed, and apparently by Joe Thomas.

I did answer your speculation with speculation: "Someone who is having their way?"

Well yeah... the whole idea is that a promise of that sort (whether made by Thomas, Brian, or whoever) that is not kept is unacceptable to him, right?

Whether "promised" or "owed", it really makes no particular difference how we phrase it. If a promise is not kept, Mike was/is hurt/pissed, because he felt he did not get what he felt he was owed as a founding member who has cowritten many hits. C'mon, I'm sure even Mike himself would probably say he feels he deserves to write more songs that way.

Mike would not repeatedly bring up the 2012 promise if he wasn't trying to rally people around the idea of Mike being promised writing with Brian must be a promise kept or else (and the "or else" is Mike having ditched the reunion). He wants sympathy, and I'm sure he's getting some from some people. Mike didn't outright, point-blank say "I quit the reunion because I couldn't write with Brian in the manner which I was promised", but it's heavily implied that this broken promise was a major thorn in his side (I can understand his disappointment), and that there were resultant consequences, since it's almost always mentioned in tandem with a "why did the reunion end" type of conversation.

Thus it's obvious that if Mike doesn't/didn't get his way with writing with Brian - in a manner previously promised to him - that there would be consequences of some sort, and at the very least there would be emotional microagressions to occur as a result... even (especially) in 1967, when the band's future (and especially Mike's place in the band as main collaborator) was increasingly on uncertain ground. Just as in 2012, I'm sure there would have been *some* hell to pay for Brian if he decided not to write with Mike again.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Brian didn't want to give writing an album with Mike a shot again ANYWAY for reasons unrelated to the imminent threat of potential emotional microagressions, but don't for a moment try to convince me that if Brian, post SMiLE and Smiley Smile, decided to go back to writing with Tony Asher, or choose another collaborator for writing entire albums with, that Mike wouldn't have continually given Brian some sort of weird vibes about yet another broken promise.

Being promised something in the premise that you disagree but you don't actually disagree is a promise without purpose and a non-problem.  You frame it as something Brian promised when Mike recently claims Thomas promised it so another null situation where Mike wasn't promised or owed anything by Brian.  

All questions answered, we disagree apparently.

[SMiLE Brian]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

[Emily]

Being promised something in the premise that you disagree but you don't actually disagree is a promise without purpose and a non-problem.  You frame it as something Brian promised when Mike recently claims Thomas promised it so another null situation where Mike wasn't promised or owed anything by Brian.  

All questions answered, we disagree apparently.

I had to read that about three times, but it ends up being a completely rational and coherent statement, but I could never say it three times fast.

[CenturyDeprived]

No.  No, Mike said he was promised, not owed, and apparently by Joe Thomas.

I did answer your speculation with speculation: "Someone who is having their way?"

Well yeah... the whole idea is that a promise of that sort (whether made by Thomas, Brian, or whoever) that is not kept is unacceptable to him, right?

Whether "promised" or "owed", it really makes no particular difference how we phrase it. If a promise is not kept, Mike was/is hurt/pissed, because he felt he did not get what he felt he was owed as a founding member who has cowritten many hits. C'mon, I'm sure even Mike himself would probably say he feels he deserves to write more songs that way.

Mike would not repeatedly bring up the 2012 promise if he wasn't trying to rally people around the idea of Mike being promised writing with Brian must be a promise kept or else (and the "or else" is Mike having ditched the reunion). He wants sympathy, and I'm sure he's getting some from some people. Mike didn't outright, point-blank say "I quit the reunion because I couldn't write with Brian in the manner which I was promised", but it's heavily implied that this broken promise was a major thorn in his side (I can understand his disappointment), and that there were resultant consequences, since it's almost always mentioned in tandem with a "why did the reunion end" type of conversation.

Thus it's obvious that if Mike doesn't/didn't get his way with writing with Brian - in a manner previously promised to him - that there would be consequences of some sort, and at the very least there would be emotional microagressions to occur as a result... even (especially) in 1967, when the band's future (and especially Mike's place in the band as main collaborator) was increasingly on uncertain ground. Just as in 2012, I'm sure there would have been *some* hell to pay for Brian if he decided not to write with Mike again.

That doesn't necessarily mean that Brian didn't want to give writing an album with Mike a shot again ANYWAY for reasons unrelated to the imminent threat of potential emotional microagressions, but don't for a moment try to convince me that if Brian, post SMiLE and Smiley Smile, decided to go back to writing with Tony Asher, or choose another collaborator for writing entire albums with, that Mike wouldn't have continually given Brian some sort of weird vibes about yet another broken promise.

Being promised something in the premise that you disagree but you don't actually disagree is a promise without purpose and a non-problem.  You frame it as something Brian promised when Mike recently claims Thomas promised it so another null situation where Mike wasn't promised or owed anything by Brian.  

All questions answered, we disagree apparently.

Geez, Cam. That's like seriously not not the most use of double negatives since Never Learn Not to Love.

Do you truly think that each and every time that Brian has worked with a collaborator other than Mike, that Mike has been 100% A-OK, hunky dory with it? That he isn't human and prone to feeling jealous *sometimes*? Even once?

The problem is that Brian, apparently, seems to have inadvertently screwed with Mike's brain (I say this in all sincerity) over the years, causing Mike to legitimately think (in his heart) that Brian turning Mike down ALWAYS has something to do with someone else imposing their will on Brian, and NEVER, NOT ONCE as a result of Brian's own instincts and preference.   If Mike just keeps on believing that Mike himself is never the reason why Brian would not choose to work with Mike, then Mike holds things together better and retains a better opinion of himself.

Brian has obviously shown himself to be a guy who will sometimes go along with what other people say, and will sometimes agree to things in an attempt for there to not be conflict. Wouldn't you say that's true, at least sometimes? I don't know why it's impossible to conceive that sometimes Brian did things like that to appease Mike, when it came to writing material together. Do you not think this is possible to have occurred, even one single time in 50+ years? Brian is sometimes too nice for his own good - pretty much everyone knows that's the case.

[Cam Mott]

Being promised something in the premise that you disagree but you don't actually disagree is a promise without purpose and a non-problem.  You frame it as something Brian promised when Mike recently claims Thomas promised it so another null situation where Mike wasn't promised or owed anything by Brian.  

All questions answered, we disagree apparently.

I had to read that about three times, but it ends up being a completely rational and coherent statement, but I could never say it three times fast.

Thanks. (overly elaborate bow involving a tri-corner hat with plume)

[Cam Mott]

CD, I respectfully disagree with your premises and that is my answer so please refrain from continuing to claim I avoid and/or don't answer your questions.

[c-man]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

Hmmm...musical genius and 5-part harmony-thinking wizard that he is, I don't think Brian could or would have "created" The Beach Boys without Dennis and Mike's initial vision of doing a surfing song. And yes, Mike was part of that suggestion, having just returned from the beach with Dennis (according to Carl in 1974). Undoubtedly Brian would have made his mark in music somehow, but it likely wouldn't be the rock 'n' roll band we've come to (mostly) love without the ideas and input of all the others.

[filledeplage]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

Hmmm...musical genius and 5-part harmony-thinking wizard that he is, I don't think Brian could or would have "created" The Beach Boys without Dennis and Mike's initial vision of doing a surfing song. And yes, Mike was part of that suggestion, having just returned from the beach with Dennis (according to Carl in 1974). Undoubtedly Brian would have made his mark in music somehow, but it likely wouldn't be the rock 'n' roll band we've come to (mostly) love without the ideas and input of all the others.

c-man - it was a "package deal."  

And, there is another context of "promise" which means "agreement" in another context.  Where there is an "understanding" or a "meeting of the minds."  

So, it may not be the pejorative connotation that "momma promised me a lollypop" and "she did not give it to me after I made my bed."  

Or, "Mike doesn't get his way." That is an incorrect way of regarding what may have actually happened in an adult corporate context.  We don't know unless we were there.

One must inquire into what the circumstances and relative positions of all the parties were at that time.    

[Cam Mott]

Cam, have you ever made a list of what were "band" decisions and what were "Brian" decisions? There has to be a logic behind how you manage to compartmentalize these issues into one or the other depending on your take on the situation at hand. Once I remember you were suggesting the Maharishi tour in '68 was in the "Brian" decision column.

Generally, while Brian was the Producer (or whoever was Producer) he made those decisions is my opinion. Otherwise things were generally group decisions, probably often with deference to Brian (or Carl) I'm guessing. I think other Boys have spoken to things being a vote and democratic though I can't put a finger on any off the top of my head.

I remember there was a dispute as to whether Brian was devoted to the Maha' and how early but as far as I remember I've always assumed the Maha' tour was a group decision.  Can you point me to that claim in case I need to retract?

First part - How does all of this square with the "Produced by The Beach Boys" label that was first put onto Smiley Smile? Apart from what we know of the actual work on the songs in the studio, what could that credit have actually referred to? Perhaps what songs to include or not include on an upcoming album? What to release as a single? Starting with Smiley Smile it was also "Brother Records", which implies group as well.

Second part - I don't know where it would be. Somewhere in the archives. But in that case Nick Grillo in the Gaines book, whose word you said is solid on those kinds of details, suggested more to the story than it was a group decision, and if I recall some of what you said implied Brian had as much to do with that tour as others...and I don't think Grillo backs that up. Nor does what Brian's involvement was regarding tour planning and details at the time that tour was being proposed.

Is it in here?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18591.25.html

[guitarfool2002]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

Hmmm...musical genius and 5-part harmony-thinking wizard that he is, I don't think Brian could or would have "created" The Beach Boys without Dennis and Mike's initial vision of doing a surfing song. And yes, Mike was part of that suggestion, having just returned from the beach with Dennis (according to Carl in 1974). Undoubtedly Brian would have made his mark in music somehow, but it likely wouldn't be the rock 'n' roll band we've come to (mostly) love without the ideas and input of all the others.

c-man - it was a "package deal."  

And, there is another context of "promise" which means "agreement" in another context.  Where there is an "understanding" or a "meeting of the minds."  

So, it may not be the pejorative connotation that "momma promised me a lollypop" and "she did not give it to me after I made my bed."  

Or, "Mike doesn't get his way." That is an incorrect way of regarding what may have actually happened in an adult corporate context.  We don't know unless we were there.

One must inquire into what the circumstances and relative positions of all the parties were at that time.    

I'm curious, up to 1968 how many songs released by the Beach Boys had music written and records arranged/produced by someone in the band other than Brian Wilson? It's fine to speculate and postulate and hypothesize, but when you look at the discography and notice who else in the band was capable of writing and producing when it really counted for the band to have strong, innovative musical material to release...no one else in the band had the chops to do it. That's fact. They would develop it, but Carl didn't come into his own as a writer until the 70's, and Dennis was just coming into his own as the Capitol contract expired at the end of the 60's. Was anyone else from 1962-1968 writing and producing hit material for this band?

It is like any sports team as well, you could look at the starting lineup of a team that won the World Series and say everyone on the roster was vital to that success, but at the same time there are some who without their contributions the team would not have had a leader or that person who got things done consistently if no one else could step into that role.

[guitarfool2002]

Cam, have you ever made a list of what were "band" decisions and what were "Brian" decisions? There has to be a logic behind how you manage to compartmentalize these issues into one or the other depending on your take on the situation at hand. Once I remember you were suggesting the Maharishi tour in '68 was in the "Brian" decision column.

Generally, while Brian was the Producer (or whoever was Producer) he made those decisions is my opinion. Otherwise things were generally group decisions, probably often with deference to Brian (or Carl) I'm guessing. I think other Boys have spoken to things being a vote and democratic though I can't put a finger on any off the top of my head.

I remember there was a dispute as to whether Brian was devoted to the Maha' and how early but as far as I remember I've always assumed the Maha' tour was a group decision.  Can you point me to that claim in case I need to retract?

First part - How does all of this square with the "Produced by The Beach Boys" label that was first put onto Smiley Smile? Apart from what we know of the actual work on the songs in the studio, what could that credit have actually referred to? Perhaps what songs to include or not include on an upcoming album? What to release as a single? Starting with Smiley Smile it was also "Brother Records", which implies group as well.

Second part - I don't know where it would be. Somewhere in the archives. But in that case Nick Grillo in the Gaines book, whose word you said is solid on those kinds of details, suggested more to the story than it was a group decision, and if I recall some of what you said implied Brian had as much to do with that tour as others...and I don't think Grillo backs that up. Nor does what Brian's involvement was regarding tour planning and details at the time that tour was being proposed.

Is it in here?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18591.25.html

Honestly I don't remember. All I recall is there was the issue of Mike Love advocating for that tour, and the argument made that it was a group decision even though Grillo reported they tried to talk Mike out of it to no avail. Just as Lennon and McCartney tried to talk the Maharishi out of it to no avail, and it ended up being a disaster for all involved.

[joshferrell]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

Hmmm...musical genius and 5-part harmony-thinking wizard that he is, I don't think Brian could or would have "created" The Beach Boys without Dennis and Mike's initial vision of doing a surfing song. And yes, Mike was part of that suggestion, having just returned from the beach with Dennis (according to Carl in 1974). Undoubtedly Brian would have made his mark in music somehow, but it likely wouldn't be the rock 'n' roll band we've come to (mostly) love without the ideas and input of all the others.

c-man - it was a "package deal."  

And, there is another context of "promise" which means "agreement" in another context.  Where there is an "understanding" or a "meeting of the minds."  

So, it may not be the pejorative connotation that "momma promised me a lollypop" and "she did not give it to me after I made my bed."  

Or, "Mike doesn't get his way." That is an incorrect way of regarding what may have actually happened in an adult corporate context.  We don't know unless we were there.

One must inquire into what the circumstances and relative positions of all the parties were at that time.    

I'm curious, up to 1968 how many songs released by the Beach Boys had music written and records arranged/produced by someone in the band other than Brian Wilson? It's fine to speculate and postulate and hypothesize, but when you look at the discography and notice who else in the band was capable of writing and producing when it really counted for the band to have strong, innovative musical material to release...no one else in the band had the chops to do it. That's fact. They would develop it, but Carl didn't come into his own as a writer until the 70's, and Dennis was just coming into his own as the Capitol contract expired at the end of the 60's. Was anyone else from 1962-1968 writing and producing hit material for this band?

It is like any sports team as well, you could look at the starting lineup of a team that won the World Series and say everyone on the roster was vital to that success, but at the same time there are some who without their contributions the team would not have had a leader or that person who got things done consistently if no one else could step into that role.

after listening to the Sunrays I have a feeling that Murry was involved with the production of "Break Away"  at least some of it..

[guitarfool2002]

Everything is a broken promise when Mike doesn't get his way. He is a control freak with nasty behavior far beyond his talent or intelligence. He would be nowhere near the TM/Kokomo guru he makes himself out to be today without BW's action of creating the BBs in 1961.

Hmmm...musical genius and 5-part harmony-thinking wizard that he is, I don't think Brian could or would have "created" The Beach Boys without Dennis and Mike's initial vision of doing a surfing song. And yes, Mike was part of that suggestion, having just returned from the beach with Dennis (according to Carl in 1974). Undoubtedly Brian would have made his mark in music somehow, but it likely wouldn't be the rock 'n' roll band we've come to (mostly) love without the ideas and input of all the others.

c-man - it was a "package deal."  

And, there is another context of "promise" which means "agreement" in another context.  Where there is an "understanding" or a "meeting of the minds."  

So, it may not be the pejorative connotation that "momma promised me a lollypop" and "she did not give it to me after I made my bed."  

Or, "Mike doesn't get his way." That is an incorrect way of regarding what may have actually happened in an adult corporate context.  We don't know unless we were there.

One must inquire into what the circumstances and relative positions of all the parties were at that time.    

I'm curious, up to 1968 how many songs released by the Beach Boys had music written and records arranged/produced by someone in the band other than Brian Wilson? It's fine to speculate and postulate and hypothesize, but when you look at the discography and notice who else in the band was capable of writing and producing when it really counted for the band to have strong, innovative musical material to release...no one else in the band had the chops to do it. That's fact. They would develop it, but Carl didn't come into his own as a writer until the 70's, and Dennis was just coming into his own as the Capitol contract expired at the end of the 60's. Was anyone else from 1962-1968 writing and producing hit material for this band?

It is like any sports team as well, you could look at the starting lineup of a team that won the World Series and say everyone on the roster was vital to that success, but at the same time there are some who without their contributions the team would not have had a leader or that person who got things done consistently if no one else could step into that role.

after listening to the Sunrays I have a feeling that Murry was involved with the production of "Break Away"  at least some of it..

We have one song, so far, logged as a "maybe". 

[Andrew G. Doe]

I'm curious, up to 1968 how many songs released by the Beach Boys had music written and records arranged/produced by someone in the band other than Brian Wilson? It's fine to speculate and postulate and hypothesize, but when you look at the discography and notice who else in the band was capable of writing and producing when it really counted for the band to have strong, innovative musical material to release...no one else in the band had the chops to do it. That's fact. They would develop it, but Carl didn't come into his own as a writer until the 70's, and Dennis was just coming into his own as the Capitol contract expired at the end of the 60's. Was anyone else from 1962-1968 writing and producing hit material for this band?

It is like any sports team as well, you could look at the starting lineup of a team that won the World Series and say everyone on the roster was vital to that success, but at the same time there are some who without their contributions the team would not have had a leader or that person who got things done consistently if no one else could step into that role.

after listening to the Sunrays I have a feeling that Murry was involved with the production of "Break Away"  at least some of it..

We have one song, so far, logged as a "maybe". 

No, we don't. "Break Away" was released in 1969. 

[Cam Mott]

Cam, have you ever made a list of what were "band" decisions and what were "Brian" decisions? There has to be a logic behind how you manage to compartmentalize these issues into one or the other depending on your take on the situation at hand. Once I remember you were suggesting the Maharishi tour in '68 was in the "Brian" decision column.

Generally, while Brian was the Producer (or whoever was Producer) he made those decisions is my opinion. Otherwise things were generally group decisions, probably often with deference to Brian (or Carl) I'm guessing. I think other Boys have spoken to things being a vote and democratic though I can't put a finger on any off the top of my head.

I remember there was a dispute as to whether Brian was devoted to the Maha' and how early but as far as I remember I've always assumed the Maha' tour was a group decision.  Can you point me to that claim in case I need to retract?

First part - How does all of this square with the "Produced by The Beach Boys" label that was first put onto Smiley Smile? Apart from what we know of the actual work on the songs in the studio, what could that credit have actually referred to? Perhaps what songs to include or not include on an upcoming album? What to release as a single? Starting with Smiley Smile it was also "Brother Records", which implies group as well.

Second part - I don't know where it would be. Somewhere in the archives. But in that case Nick Grillo in the Gaines book, whose word you said is solid on those kinds of details, suggested more to the story than it was a group decision, and if I recall some of what you said implied Brian had as much to do with that tour as others...and I don't think Grillo backs that up. Nor does what Brian's involvement was regarding tour planning and details at the time that tour was being proposed.

Is it in here?

http://smileysmile.net/board/index.php/topic,18591.25.html

Honestly I don't remember. All I recall is there was the issue of Mike Love advocating for that tour, and the argument made that it was a group decision even though Grillo reported they tried to talk Mike out of it to no avail. Just as Lennon and McCartney tried to talk the Maharishi out of it to no avail, and it ended up being a disaster for all involved.

Actually Nick said the rest of the group were convinced the tour was a good move, so it was a group decision. Apparently the tour's promoters thought it was a good move too, until they took it in the neck I presume.  I suppose "success has many fathers, but failure is an orphan".

My memory is hit and miss too but I have no memory of what you are claiming. If you ever do remember or find proof of your claim about my opinion please post it.

[Cam Mott]

I'm curious, up to 1968 how many songs released by the Beach Boys had music written and records arranged/produced by someone in the band other than Brian Wilson? It's fine to speculate and postulate and hypothesize, but when you look at the discography and notice who else in the band was capable of writing and producing when it really counted for the band to have strong, innovative musical material to release...no one else in the band had the chops to do it. That's fact. They would develop it, but Carl didn't come into his own as a writer until the 70's, and Dennis was just coming into his own as the Capitol contract expired at the end of the 60's. Was anyone else from 1962-1968 writing and producing hit material for this band?

It is like any sports team as well, you could look at the starting lineup of a team that won the World Series and say everyone on the roster was vital to that success, but at the same time there are some who without their contributions the team would not have had a leader or that person who got things done consistently if no one else could step into that role.

after listening to the Sunrays I have a feeling that Murry was involved with the production of "Break Away"  at least some of it..

We have one song, so far, logged as a "maybe". 

No, we don't. "Break Away" was released in 1969. 

There are covers and SUSA that weren't written by Brian. There are the songs produced by Nik Venet or Murry according to Brian. There aren't going to be many of either I presume.

[guitarfool2002]

Not many. Not many at all. Precious few is more like it. And that's the point. No one else in this group could do what Brian did in those first 7-8 years, when it counted to have hit records and when they needed to maintain that level of quality and popularity. Repeat - No One Else in that band had the same skill set that Brian brought to the table. Writing music, arranging music, or producing records. No one.

Who was the backup catcher on the '27 Yankees? You could argue whoever that man was could have been just as vital to that team's success as Babe Ruth, Lou Gehrig, Tony Lazzeri, and the rest of Murderers' Row, but doing so would miss the point by 100 times the distance of one of Babe Ruth's monster home runs that year. Whichever one of his 60 was the longest.

[Bicyclerider]

Do you mean up to 1968 or through 1968?  Because in 1968 they recorded I Can Hear Music, the Nearest Faraway Place, Never Learn Not to Love and Bluebirds Over the Mountain, none of which were arranged or produced by Brian.

[guitarfool2002]

Do you mean up to 1968 or through 1968?  Because in 1968 they recorded I Can Hear Music, the Nearest Faraway Place, Never Learn Not to Love and Bluebirds Over the Mountain, none of which were arranged or produced by Brian.

Those exact songs were my cutoff point.

[guitarfool2002]

Do you mean up to 1968 or through 1968?  Because in 1968 they recorded I Can Hear Music, the Nearest Faraway Place, Never Learn Not to Love and Bluebirds Over the Mountain, none of which were arranged or produced by Brian.

Those exact songs were my cutoff point.

BR - Beyond that, of those four, two are covers, one was primarily a Charles Manson original, and the other was an instrumental by a band member who was at best was a part time member from 1965 up to the 80's.

Who else was writing for the band, who else was capable of writing original music for the band among the other band members, even into 1968? My point again.