gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
673039 Posts in 27115 Topics by 3988 Members - Latest Member: davidTN December 03, 2021, 02:49:13 AM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Mike Love’s 2016 solo project  (Read 19830 times)
Peadar 'Big Dinner' O'Driscoll
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1031



View Profile WWW
« Reply #50 on: May 11, 2016, 11:18:25 PM »

Give it up guys. Mike is 75 now so I think the boat has sailed on any possibility of a good album. Pisces and the Christmas song were both very poor IMO.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current"
- Read: adding horrible vocal/auuutttooo tune to everything.
Logged

CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #51 on: May 12, 2016, 12:34:14 AM »


Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.
Logged
Alan Smith
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 2089


I'm still here bitches and I know everything. –A


View Profile
« Reply #52 on: May 12, 2016, 02:12:51 AM »


Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.
That's an interesting observation and I agree that's how things read at face value.

When I read the full article Q & A's, I'm not convinced they've printed the actual verbatim questions.

Yes, Mike can duck, weave and ramble with best of them, but I'd like to get a sense the article's been presented accurately - as I would for any of the band.
Logged

ESQ - Subscribe Now!!!

A new Beach Boys forum is here! http://beachboys.boards.net/
The LEGENDARY OSD
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 1913

luHv Estrangement Syndrome. It's a great thing!


View Profile
« Reply #53 on: May 12, 2016, 06:05:22 AM »

Give it up guys. Mike is 75 now so I think the boat has sailed on any possibility of a good album. Pisces and the Christmas song were both very poor IMO.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current"
- Read: adding horrible vocal/auuutttooo tune to everything.

Right. And that boat sailed decades ago and sunk in the deepest reaches the ocean has to offer.
Logged

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

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #54 on: May 12, 2016, 07:44:55 AM »


Whether Mike intended to or not, the way he answers a question about "The Beach Boys" getting in the studio soon by often using "we" to refer to his in-progress solo stuff could certainly give a casual reader the impression that Mike is recording a "Beach Boys" album.

It's not a huge deal; it's going to say "Mike Love" when it comes out, but it's funny how Brian and Al get harangued for too prominently using the "Beach Boys" verbiage to describe themselves for their solo shows, yet Mike by virtue of promoting a "Beach Boys" tour and then answering questions about potential "Beach Boys" studio activity by talking about his solo stuff, is indirectly using his license to promote his solo stuff.

Not saying it's against any rules or contracts, but it's ironic that he feels he can use the Beach Boys name to promote his solo stuff, but Brian and Al get "friendly" letters reminding them to not use their original "Beach Boy" status too prominently when advertising shows. And yes, I get why those two scenarios are not exactly the same. But maybe Mike should get a friendly letter reminding him to make sure his words don't "inadvertently" imply he's currently spearheading a Beach Boys album.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 08:23:29 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/
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #55 on: May 12, 2016, 08:28:25 AM »


Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.
That's an interesting observation and I agree that's how things read at face value.

When I read the full article Q & A's, I'm not convinced they've printed the actual verbatim questions.

Yes, Mike can duck, weave and ramble with best of them, but I'd like to get a sense the article's been presented accurately - as I would for any of the band.

I think those could be the actual questions that were asked; the interviewer just seems to not be very familiar with his subject.

Seriously, asking Mike this question: "What was behind the decision process to get back out and tour again?" strongly suggests the interviewer isn't aware that Mike has indeed been touring more or less non-stop for decades.

Even if he's referencing going back out after the reunion (which I don't think is the case), it still makes no sense because Mike is in his fourth year of heavy touring after the reunion.

Also, if the author knew the current fractured state of the group, and understood how the tour license works, he probably wouldn't be casually asking if a the "Beach Boys" were headed into the studio soon.
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/
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #56 on: May 12, 2016, 10:50:52 AM »


Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.

Not at all, he (Mike, not BBs) answered he (Mike, not BBs) is in the studio for an album to go with his autoboigraphy (Mike's, not BBs) and far as anything else we'll have to wait and see.
Logged

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

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #57 on: May 12, 2016, 11:00:05 AM »


Except that he answered about his own self (solo recordings) when the question was about if The BBs were going into the studio soon.  It's a very awkward position he's in, because for him to truthfully answer the question, he would have to say that The BBs are in fact not going into the studio soon.

Not at all, he (Mike, not BBs) answered he (Mike, not BBs) is in the studio for an album to go with his autoboigraphy (Mike's, not BBs) and far as anything else we'll have to wait and see.

Umm.... no.

Interviewer's question: "Do you see the Beach Boys getting in the studio soon?"

Mike's answer: "I have been (in the studio), yes."

Mike gave no kind of answer addressing the question, which was about "The BBs" getting in the studio. The band called "The BBs" is not going into the studio. Same deal would apply if Brian gets asked "Do you see the Beach Boys getting in the studio soon?"... Brian can't just say "Yes, I'm going into the studio", and avoid talking about The BBs when that was the only actual question.

It's false advertising by Mike. You KNOW Brian would answer any question like that by addressing that the BBs aren't going into the studio, before any mention of any Brian solo studio activity. You know he would do this. And I've heard Mike address questions like this appropriately in the past - by mentioning that The BBs aren't currently together in the studio. He is capable of answering it honestly, he just apparently chose to avoid dealing with it this time. I can understand, it must be emotionally hard to deal with that type of question where the authenticity and difference in branding between the live vs. studio band are two different things. I can understand he wanting to brush it aside and not even go there. But that doesn't mean his answer was in any way accurate.

Mike answered as though she said "Do you see yourself, as a solo artist, getting in the studio soon?", which wasn't the question at all.  

Then he goes on to say "we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music)..." which, while obviously Mike is going into the studio with other humans, implies that members of studio group "The BBs" are going into the studio (since that was the question asked), most especially when using the plural "we're" term.

That said, I'm interested to hear what Mike has to offer, and I hope it's in the vein of Cool Head, Warm Heart (which itself has smooth, not-overproduced production not terribly dissimilar to what Brian did on That Lucky Old Sun). I just don't want it advertised as a "BB" album, which is basically what Mike is doing in this article. A not-well-educated-in-BB-history reader could very easily get the impression that Mike is referring to a "BB" band project.

It all just implies that Mike seems to think "The BBs" = "Mike Love".
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 11:16:46 AM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #58 on: May 12, 2016, 11:16:31 AM »

As with most of the stuff Cam parses, the whole point of this is that what Mike says is not factually incorrect. It's just a case where a reasonable person (e.g. a person not predisposed to making excuses for everything someone does) might point out how an objective analysis of the wording suggests some people would get the impression he's talking about *THE* Beach Boys, or that he's blurring the "group" with his "touring band" and with his "solo" material. Continually making references to "we" in response to a question about "The Beach Boys" is what might help give this impression.

Nothing Mike said is inaccurate, because he's just not really answering the same exact question that is asked. The following hypothetical is also not really inaccurate, only confusing and potential misleading:

Q: Do you see Celebration getting in the studio soon?
A: I have been (in the studio), yes.

or

Q: Do you see The Archies getting in the studio soon?
A: I have been (in the studio), yes.

Now, Mike may have put extra stress on the "I", but the more *clear* answer to whether "The Beach Boys" are getting in the studio would be: "No, but I have been in the studio."

By answering sort of vaguely affirmatively (he ends his first answer with "yes") to a question about "The Beach Boys", and then going on to make numerous plural references to recording ("we"), the statement is simply potentially misleading.

I don't think Mike was trying to make people think his album is going to be a "Beach Boys" album, and I certainly don't believe Mike was trying to make people think *The* Beach Boys are recording. I think he's rightly embarrassed and rightly feels awkward about the fact that the full band is fractured (or, rather, feels embarrassed and awkward having to address the issue in any detail), and doesn't want his solo recording sessions to sound like a sub-par consolation prize for those looking for a "Beach Boys" album.

It's the same reason he has, in the past few years, been asked about the reunion tour and he'll QUICKLY simply move on and start talking about his current touring band, even when the interviewer wasn't asking about it.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 11:18:34 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/
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #59 on: May 12, 2016, 11:56:39 AM »

Mike is a Beach Boy speaking about his solo projects.  If the same question was asked of any of the other Boys, they would also be a Beach Boy talking about their solo projects.
Logged

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

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #60 on: May 12, 2016, 12:05:11 PM »

Mike is a Beach Boy speaking about his solo projects.  If the same question was asked of any of the other Boys, they would also be a Beach Boy talking about their solo projects.

Only when it's clearly defined that a solo project is what is being discussed.

Mike is a Beach Boy, but he is not "The Beach Boys" which is what the question asked about.  I missed the part where he identifies any of his projects as solo projects. Please point me in the direction where Mike says that. And based on his answer, where would any reader (beyond us nerds) draw the conclusion that Mike is talking about solo projects? Just because he says that he "I" is in the studio, and then "we're"... how is anyone supposed to know this is solo material, based on the interviewer's question, and Mike's not mentioning anything about a solo project?

The vaguer the better for Mike. Just like my friend, who a few years ago, saw "The BBs" at a local show and thought she was seeing Brian and the whole gang. Better for Mike that she not know the full details.

Listen, Mike doesn't need to be lambasted about it beyond mentioning that it's not accurate and probably unfortunately related to not wanting to get into details that are undoubtedly a pain in the arse to discuss, but that doesn't mean he didn't give an inaccurate impression with his answer. We can have empathy for what must be a tough situation for him, but doesn't mean it's right or accurate.

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 12:15:34 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #61 on: May 12, 2016, 12:11:58 PM »

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?

Yes, same thing, a member of the band talking about his solo efforts.  If it were John Lennon asked about the Beatles and he answered about what he was doing solo but said otherwise we would have to wait and see, I would take it that Lennon was working on his described solo projects but wasn't sure about any other plans.
Logged

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

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #62 on: May 12, 2016, 12:23:42 PM »

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?

Yes, same thing, a member of the band talking about his solo efforts.  If it were John Lennon asked about the Beatles and he answered about what he was doing solo but said otherwise we would have to wait and see, I would take it that Lennon was working on his described solo projects but wasn't sure about any other plans.

And using a plural, which obviously when this is the response to the question of a BAND's presence in a studio, would lead most readers to think the answer is in regards to the band, not a solo project.

Yeah, John Lennon would have said "we're going in to work on vocals..." in response to a question about The Beatles, but when he would in actuality be referring to (but not mentioning) it's referring to his own solo work? That's a laugh!

Not one other member of this band or The Beatles would be foolish enough to do that as blatantly as this article, because nobody else has been in the tough emotional pickle regarding the band name that Mike is in right now. That's an unfortunate fact. Again, Mike isn't Satan for doing it. He just omitted pertinent info and answered a different question. He's taking lessons from Hillary.

In fact, I see Mike used the term "we" not once, but twice, and one of those was with regards to redoing vocals, the thing THE BEACH BOYS are certainly best known for. Dude, it's obviously misleading. Maybe not intentionally so, but the end result is quite misleading unless you are a superfan who knows the true details.

A plural (used twice) doesn't bug ya either?


EDIT: I didn't look closely enough... Mike used "we" (plural) 6 times in answer to "The BB" question.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current, in terms of the guitar here or the drums there ...  maybe we’re re-doing some vocals or a lyrical change or two. Yes, I’m busy in the studio.

In addition to my book, we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music) … one of which we hope to have come out kind-of at the same time as the book, perhaps. Around that time, late summer (or) early fall. That’s what we’re hoping to do. We’ll have an album, a book ... and we’ll see what else happens."

---------------

Yet according to Cam, it's reasonable for a reader to magically know that this is all about a SOLO project, when the question was in regards to "THE BEACH BOYS".  Grin
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 12:39:50 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #63 on: May 12, 2016, 12:25:16 PM »

Mike is a Beach Boy speaking about his solo projects.  If the same question was asked of any of the other Boys, they would also be a Beach Boy talking about their solo projects.

Mike was definitely speaking about his solo projects. He wasn't, however, asked about his solo projects. Again, he's just answering a different question (one he's more comfortable answering) than what is being asked.

The result, as a byproduct, is that some people may be confused about the nature of what he's recording (he doesn't mention other Beach Boys by name, but answers "yes" when asked about *The Beach Boys* recording, sort of implying he's solely going in to record "Beach Boys" material, but then starts referring to an undefined "we" later in the answers).

Again, this is nothing major whatsoever. He's simply obviously sidestepping a question about *The Beach Boys* by talking about his solo stuff instead. I just find that amusing, and acknowledge that some casual fans/readers might be confused about on the group versus solo issue.

The sidestepping issue isn't new. There's an audio/radio interview Mike did a year or two ago where he was *specifically* asked about the C50 tour/lineup and he almost immediately, without prompting, started talking about his current touring band. The corporate/naming/licensing issue creates these awkward issues, and through a mixture of most interviewers ignoring the issue and Mike avoiding talking about it (how many times has Mike, in specific language, mentioned in interviews that he pays for a license to use the Beach Boys name?), the awkwardness only comes up on occasion, and sometimes only the hardcore fans even notice or care.

It's like being in high school or college:

Professor: Talk about the symbolism in "The Scarlet Letter."

Student: I think there's definitely some noteworthy symbolism in the story. You know what else is symbolic? My awesome new tattoo with flames and skulls! I got it yesterday, and it's pretty rad........
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 12:34:33 PM 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/
CenturyDeprived
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #64 on: May 12, 2016, 12:41:22 PM »


It's like being in high school or college:

Professor: Talk about the symbolism in "The Scarlet Letter."

Student: I think there's definitely some noteworthy symbolism in the story. You know what else is symbolic? My awesome new tattoo with flames and skulls! I got it yesterday, and it's pretty rad........

 LOL
Logged
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #65 on: May 12, 2016, 12:46:35 PM »

Mike is a Beach Boy speaking about his solo projects.  If the same question was asked of any of the other Boys, they would also be a Beach Boy talking about their solo projects.

Mike was definitely speaking about his solo projects. He wasn't, however, asked about his solo projects. Again, he's just answering a different question (one he's more comfortable answering) than what is being asked.

The result, as a byproduct, is that some people may be confused about the nature of what he's recording (he doesn't mention other Beach Boys by name, but answers "yes" when asked about *The Beach Boys* recording, sort of implying he's solely going in to record "Beach Boys" material, but then starts referring to an undefined "we" later in the answers).

Again, this is nothing major whatsoever. He's simply obviously sidestepping a question about *The Beach Boys* by talking about his solo stuff instead. I just find that amusing, and acknowledge that some casual fans/readers might be confused about on the group versus solo issue.

The sidestepping issue isn't new. There's an audio/radio interview Mike did a year or two ago where he was *specifically* asked about the C50 tour/lineup and he almost immediately, without prompting, started talking about his current touring band. The corporate/naming/licensing issue creates these awkward issues, and through a mixture of most interviewers ignoring the issue and Mike avoiding talking about it (how many times has Mike, in specific language, mentioned in interviews that he pays for a license to use the Beach Boys name?), the awkwardness only comes up on occasion, and sometimes only the hardcore fans even notice or care.

It's like being in high school or college:

Professor: Talk about the symbolism in "The Scarlet Letter."

Student: I think there's definitely some noteworthy symbolism in the story. You know what else is symbolic? My awesome new tattoo with flames and skulls! I got it yesterday, and it's pretty rad........
Yeah, but what if he had an A tatooed on his chest?
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

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

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #66 on: May 12, 2016, 12:52:09 PM »

Yeah, but what if he had an A tatooed on his chest?

It would probably then play out like some Mike interviews: The professor would then stop and listen for a bit longer, and then eventually still realize they're being bulls**tted!

Seriously, I'm quite familiar with the "change the subject while trying to seem like your answering the question" tactic (and the similar "quickly answer the question and then change the subject and talk long enough so that the initial question won't be asked again" tactic), I watched it for years in college.
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/
Cam Mott
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4171


View Profile
« Reply #67 on: May 12, 2016, 01:09:39 PM »

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?

Yes, same thing, a member of the band talking about his solo efforts.  If it were John Lennon asked about the Beatles and he answered about what he was doing solo but said otherwise we would have to wait and see, I would take it that Lennon was working on his described solo projects but wasn't sure about any other plans.

And using a plural, which obviously when this is the response to the question of a BAND's presence in a studio, would lead most readers to think the answer is in regards to the band, not a solo project.

Yeah, John Lennon would have said "we're going in to work on vocals..." in response to a question about The Beatles, but when he would in actuality be referring to (but not mentioning) it's referring to his own solo work? That's a laugh!

Not one other member of this band or The Beatles would be foolish enough to do that as blatantly as this article, because nobody else has been in the tough emotional pickle regarding the band name that Mike is in right now. That's an unfortunate fact. Again, Mike isn't Satan for doing it. He just omitted pertinent info and answered a different question. He's taking lessons from Hillary.

In fact, I see Mike used the term "we" not once, but twice, and one of those was with regards to redoing vocals, the thing THE BEACH BOYS are certainly best known for. Dude, it's obviously misleading. Maybe not intentionally so, but the end result is quite misleading unless you are a superfan who knows the true details.

A plural (used twice) doesn't bug ya either?


EDIT: I didn't look closely enough... Mike used "we" (plural) 6 times in answer to "The BB" question.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current, in terms of the guitar here or the drums there ...  maybe we’re re-doing some vocals or a lyrical change or two. Yes, I’m busy in the studio.

In addition to my book, we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music) … one of which we hope to have come out kind-of at the same time as the book, perhaps. Around that time, late summer (or) early fall. That’s what we’re hoping to do. We’ll have an album, a book ... and we’ll see what else happens."

---------------

Yet according to Cam, it's reasonable for a reader to magically know that this is all about a SOLO project, when the question was in regards to "THE BEACH BOYS".  Grin


And his answer is about what he knows of Beach Boys in the studio which is he himself, "I", working on solo material. He used "we" in the context of recording his solo album/material, so still not referring to the Beach Boys, just those involved in his solo projects.
Logged

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

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #68 on: May 12, 2016, 01:16:23 PM »

To reiterate HeyJude's question... if the interviewer asked him about Celebration going into the studio, and he started talking about Mike solo projects (without identifying them as such), would that be okay too?

Yes, same thing, a member of the band talking about his solo efforts.  If it were John Lennon asked about the Beatles and he answered about what he was doing solo but said otherwise we would have to wait and see, I would take it that Lennon was working on his described solo projects but wasn't sure about any other plans.

And using a plural, which obviously when this is the response to the question of a BAND's presence in a studio, would lead most readers to think the answer is in regards to the band, not a solo project.

Yeah, John Lennon would have said "we're going in to work on vocals..." in response to a question about The Beatles, but when he would in actuality be referring to (but not mentioning) it's referring to his own solo work? That's a laugh!

Not one other member of this band or The Beatles would be foolish enough to do that as blatantly as this article, because nobody else has been in the tough emotional pickle regarding the band name that Mike is in right now. That's an unfortunate fact. Again, Mike isn't Satan for doing it. He just omitted pertinent info and answered a different question. He's taking lessons from Hillary.

In fact, I see Mike used the term "we" not once, but twice, and one of those was with regards to redoing vocals, the thing THE BEACH BOYS are certainly best known for. Dude, it's obviously misleading. Maybe not intentionally so, but the end result is quite misleading unless you are a superfan who knows the true details.

A plural (used twice) doesn't bug ya either?


EDIT: I didn't look closely enough... Mike used "we" (plural) 6 times in answer to "The BB" question.

"I have been (in the studio), yes. I’ve been stockpiling songs for years, decades. I’m re-doing them now to make them more current, in terms of the guitar here or the drums there ...  maybe we’re re-doing some vocals or a lyrical change or two. Yes, I’m busy in the studio.

In addition to my book, we’re seriously working on a couple album’s worth (of music) … one of which we hope to have come out kind-of at the same time as the book, perhaps. Around that time, late summer (or) early fall. That’s what we’re hoping to do. We’ll have an album, a book ... and we’ll see what else happens."

---------------

Yet according to Cam, it's reasonable for a reader to magically know that this is all about a SOLO project, when the question was in regards to "THE BEACH BOYS".  Grin


And his answer is about what he knows of Beach Boys in the studio which is he himself, "I", working on solo material. He used "we" in the context of recording his solo album/material, so still not referring to the Beach Boys, just those involved in his solo projects.

Let's not pretend that either of us don't know what he's talking about. Obviously, both you and I know what he's referring to. We are nerds.

Yet my discussion with you is about what perception Mike's responses would lead to in the average reader. You honestly think the average reader would have any inkling that Mike is talking about solo material? Especially with all those "we's"? C'mon. Honestly. The average reader would have every reason to be excited about a new album by The Beach Boys based on the album.
Logged
drbeachboy
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5214



View Profile
« Reply #69 on: May 12, 2016, 01:32:49 PM »

Man, you guys will argue about anything. I read the article and knew right away that Mike was speaking of his solo release. I know he was asked Beach Boys, but I thought he was clear that it was his own solo material.
Logged

The Brianista Prayer

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

Posts: 5723



View Profile
« Reply #70 on: May 12, 2016, 01:37:49 PM »

Man, you guys will argue about anything. I read the article and knew right away that Mike was speaking of his solo release. I know he was asked Beach Boys, but I thought he was clear that it was his own solo material.

It's easy for you to know right away, because you, just like me, are nerds who obviously know there's no imminent "BB" studio reunion.

But try to think about reading the article from the perspective of a casual fan, or even a bigger fan without much current, modern day knowledge of the brand... do you still think it's clear? Or that he actually answers the interviewer's question?

It's very, very likely being omitted for one reason, and that's because it's uncomfortable to talk about. I get it.  I just don't think we should be in denial about that either. I feel bad that Mike has to continually deal with that difficult situation, yet it is an uncomfortable position of his own making.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 01:43:09 PM by CenturyDeprived » Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #71 on: May 12, 2016, 01:47:01 PM »

Man, you guys will argue about anything. I read the article and knew right away that Mike was speaking of his solo release. I know he was asked Beach Boys, but I thought he was clear that it was his own solo material.

I just made an observation. As usual, it was a simple observation ("hrrm, interesting, I could see how a casual reader might be confused or misled by that interview snippet, and I believe that Mike's slight dodge of the question is a result of his aversion to discussing the full group"), and someone then had to go the extra step of parsing Mike's comments to defend him.

Of course *we* all know what Mike's talking about. One might say the objective observation that an unspecified casual reader might be confused by Mike's comment or that Mike is dodging a question about the full group is a useless observation, and that person can then ignore the observation and discussion.

Quick observations like the one I made are not meant to provoke a debate. The thread could have easily died with my innocuous (and arguably useless) observation. The response to the innocuous observation, predictably defending Mike against what barely even amounts to any sort of accusation, is what then kicks off the debate/argument.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 01:51:32 PM 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/
SMiLE Brian
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 8339



View Profile
« Reply #72 on: May 12, 2016, 01:52:12 PM »

Mike is the BBs in his warped mind... Roll Eyes
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
Sheriff John Stone
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5309



View Profile
« Reply #73 on: May 12, 2016, 01:59:37 PM »

Quick observations like the one I made are not meant to provoke a debate.

Yes, they are. And you do it well. Very well.
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 9456



View Profile WWW
« Reply #74 on: May 12, 2016, 02:08:15 PM »

Quick observations like the one I made are not meant to provoke a debate.

Yes, they are. And you do it well. Very well.

I don't mind engaging in debates, but I don't set out to start debates, and certainly not arguments. I can see how some, particularly folks whose modus operandi is to defend Mike regardless of the circumstances, might take away that impression.

But as I said, observations were made, and the whole topic would have died an unceremonious death were it not for someone trying to parse and defend Mike. At that point, yes, I don't mind engaging in that debate for some length of time. Sometimes, as with cases where I'm literally having the same debate with Cam I had in 1999, I might eventually tire and move on.

Like anyone, I don't tend to dig it when someone questions my motives, but when the characterization is wrong, and comes from someone whose motives I (not coincidentally) apparently equally question, I don't give the accusation or characterization much weight. Like any reasonably thoughtful person, I'll take the criticism and do some self-reflection. That's always good. In this particular case though, the accusation and characterization that I intended to provoke a debate is incorrect. That a debate has resulted does not prove I intended to provoke one.

Now, I *am* aware a debate may result whenever I point out a lamentable aspect of something Mike has done or said, because the same small group will tend to come out and offer the predictable defenses. So, while I didn't want a debate and didn't intend to provoke one, I *was* aware that it was quite possible one would result. But obviously, I don't think editing discussion because a small group will predictably disagree is the way to go either.
« Last Edit: May 12, 2016, 02:19:42 PM 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/
gfx
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 0.253 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!