New Sunshine Tomorrow podcast at Pray for Surf

[Mark Dillon]

Hello all,

In a new podcast, Phil Miglioratti, who runs the Pray for Surf audio blog, and I discuss Sunshine Tomorrow: how Brian seemed very much still in creative control, Mike's great lyrics, Carl discovering his rock and roll voice, the wonder of "Aren't You Glad," Bruce's keyboard chops, and how the group as a whole stepped up and recorded some timeless music. You can listen here:

http://prayforsurfblog.blogspot.ca/2017/07/pray-for-surf-podcast-1967-sunshine.html?m=1

[PrayForSurf]

Thanks Mark,
For another insightful conversation about The Beach Boys.

Never thought I'd be learning to love Wild Honey so much‼️

Phil

[guitarfool2002]

Mark and Phil, I just listened to the discussion and you touched on some key points for sure. To Mark more than Phil: I am in the same age group and demographic as you, and relate to those years in the late 80's of discovering some of this music much like you did. It was a learning process that my age seemed to mesh with perfectly in terms of the release and reissue of things like Pet Sounds, the SS/WH two-fer, Live In London, etc.

Having said that, in terms of the discussion itself: I could not help but feel a sense of deja vu on a lot of the points you raised. It's been said often since this release how certain elements in these tracks are a "revelation", or are exposing things that people had no idea were true, or even factual, etc. In terms of the sonics and the new mixes, yes - Sonically these are a revelation as most seem to agree. The tracks jump out of the speakers, and elements lost to the process of summing, bouncing, and mono mixing are now fully audible and in cases like certain vocals, they actually sparkle in audio terms.

But this issue of how involved Brian Wilson was in the creation and especially the production to me is one that I'll admit (and not wanting to put myself into it but it's part of what happened) is a big issue for me personally.

At various points you mentioned various things in ESQ, articles, etc.

Point #1: How do you react after hearing the actual hard evidence on these tapes to those affiliated with, connected with, or those who contributed to ESQ through the years who had previously argued against Brian's involvement in the production of this music? Obviously it's right there on the tapes for anyone to hear as of July 2017. Yet, in years past and in the not too distant past here on this board, there were arguments made against that fact which some knew was a stone cold truth of the situation, versus what was being proposed, argued, or stated as fact.

Adjunct to that were the attempts to dismiss or discredit accounts of the way the Redwood situation unfolded, by some "historians" and others trying to stake a claim on knowledge and reporting of the facts regarding the band. Mark in this discussion says Danny Hutton himself described how it went down. So I also ask how and why some of this was allowed to go reported and even published as "fact" for so long, again including some affiliated with ESQ and offshoots, when there were people all along telling the truth, stating the facts, and confirming pretty much the same information as the audio on this new set has confirmed?

I don't think this set rewrites any history at all. I'd say it *corrects* the history that was reported and then repeated incorrectly for so long, in some cases perhaps done more out of spite or personal grudges than wanting to state the facts. As I'm tired of saying after a week or so, and I'm sure people are tired of reading, the truth is in the audio. Not coming from the mouths of historians with agendas.

So I am a little surprised but not much to see some people who have been in this business for decades expressing shock to hear Brian running the sessions when associates of theirs were the ones arguing against that fact prior to this release.

It may also change some of the opinions of which outlets for fans are the real "toxic" elements considering those labeled toxic by certain individuals and interests were the ones who actually got it right regarding some of those points proven by the audio on this set.

Point #2 - I enjoyed hearing and agree with both of you on the importance of this release in terms of the musical legacy of this band, introducing new listeners to things they may not have known prior to the focus of this set, and also the great respect for the music itself which both the release itself and the team of Boyd and Linett who produced it have made possible.

With that in mind, and this is only asking your opinion as fans and in Mark's case, as a published BB author: What is your opinion of Mike Love releasing a remake of Do It Again featuring Mark McGrath coming days after this Sunshine Tomorrow set? And what is your opinion, again as fans and listeners, of that release in terms of the music itself?

My feelings of it are well known, but after listening to the discussion and agreeing so much with both of you on the matters of respect and legacy, how do you square up Mike's decision to release a remake like Do It Again and playing it on a nationally televised concert, both with and as The Beach Boys within days after a release that was almost universally positively received by fans, which brought exactly the kind of positive attention to the music and the legacy?

Point #3 - Is James Hirsch coming back for part 4? I'd like to hear his take on issues like these, especially the Do It Again remake and the Sunshine Tomorrow set, which transpired since the last appearance. And I'd also ask him specifically to comment on those sections of Mike's book regarding the C50 reunion, the albums (both TWGMTR and the live release), and the notion of that reunion not being commercial enough to be successful in his eyes in light of what Mike just released this week. And about the contradictions of Mike's issues with using autotune centered around C50 and beyond versus hearing his lead vocal on Help Me Rhonda autotuned as of this past Tuesday's televised concert. The contradictions of what we read and were told versus what we've heard from Mike in studio and in concert are pretty glaring, it would be nice to hear some thoughts on that stuff.

[MikestheGreatest!!]

Gosh, Mike certainly does appear to be the straw that stirs the drink.  He is truly living in some folks heads rent free!

[SMiLE Brian]

Trollingsthegreatest...

[PrayForSurf]

This is Phil with a few responses to Guitarfool2002 ===>

Mark and Phil, I just listened to the discussion and you touched on some key points for sure. To Mark more than Phil: I am in the same age group and demographic as you, and relate to those years in the late 80's of discovering some of this music much like you did. It was a learning process that my age seemed to mesh with perfectly in terms of the release and reissue of things like Pet Sounds, the SS/WH two-fer, Live In London, etc.
===>I enjoy the different perspectives that result from our age when we were introduced to the Beach Boys

Having said that, in terms of the discussion itself: I could not help but feel a sense of deja vu on a lot of the points you raised. It's been said often since this release how certain elements in these tracks are a "revelation", or are exposing things that people had no idea were true, or even factual, etc. In terms of the sonics and the new mixes, yes - Sonically these are a revelation as most seem to agree. The tracks jump out of the speakers, and elements lost to the process of summing, bouncing, and mono mixing are now fully audible and in cases like certain vocals, they actually sparkle in audio terms.
===>"Sparkle" ~ a great description

But this issue of how involved Brian Wilson was in the creation and especially the production to me is one that I'll admit (and not wanting to put myself into it but it's part of what happened) is a big issue for me personally.

At various points you mentioned various things in ESQ, articles, etc.

Point #1: How do you react after hearing the actual hard evidence on these tapes to those affiliated with, connected with, or those who contributed to ESQ through the years who had previously argued against Brian's involvement in the production of this music? Obviously it's right there on the tapes for anyone to hear as of July 2017. Yet, in years past and in the not too distant past here on this board, there were arguments made against that fact which some knew was a stone cold truth of the situation, versus what was being proposed, argued, or stated as fact.
===> I try to react with love and mercy to those who authentically made, what are now known to be, erroneous assertions. Regarding keener insight posted here and earlier ... as wide as this board reachers, not everyone resides here, or even if they do, can read everything. Years ago I had a conversation with David Beard who recognized the need for crossover communication. Grand idea; difficult to implement. I am grateful for SS.net and ESQ and other well-intentioned sources.

Adjunct to that were the attempts to dismiss or discredit accounts of the way the Redwood situation unfolded, by some "historians" and others trying to stake a claim on knowledge and reporting of the facts regarding the band. Mark in this discussion says Danny Hutton himself described how it went down. So I also ask how and why some of this was allowed to go reported and even published as "fact" for so long, again including some affiliated with ESQ and offshoots, when there were people all along telling the truth, stating the facts, and confirming pretty much the same information as the audio on this new set has confirmed?
===>Please clarify what you mean by "allowed to go reported/published" ...

I don't think this set rewrites any history at all. I'd say it *corrects* the history that was reported and then repeated incorrectly for so long, in some cases perhaps done more out of spite or personal grudges than wanting to state the facts. As I'm tired of saying after a week or so, and I'm sure people are tired of reading, the truth is in the audio. Not coming from the mouths of historians with agendas.
===>Guitarfool2002, it seems you too have an agenda - What has you fired-up on this point? (it may be obvious to other readers - I'm just trying to understand better;)

So I am a little surprised but not much to see some people who have been in this business for decades expressing shock to hear Brian running the sessions when associates of theirs were the ones arguing against that fact prior to this release.
===>Maybe this is the answer to my query just above ... ?

It may also change some of the opinions of which outlets for fans are the real "toxic" elements considering those labeled toxic by certain individuals and interests were the ones who actually got it right regarding some of those points proven by the audio on this set.

Point #2 - I enjoyed hearing and agree with both of you on the importance of this release in terms of the musical legacy of this band, introducing new listeners to things they may not have known prior to the focus of this set, and also the great respect for the music itself which both the release itself and the team of Boyd and Linett who produced it have made possible.
===>For sure - once the reputation of the Beach Boys was diminished, trashed, ignored, over the decades, I must admit I gave up hope, never anticipating the respect and adulation we are seeing now.

With that in mind, and this is only asking your opinion as fans and in Mark's case, as a published BB author: What is your opinion of Mike Love releasing a remake of Do It Again featuring Mark McGrath coming days after this Sunshine Tomorrow set? And what is your opinion, again as fans and listeners, of that release in terms of the music itself?

My feelings of it are well known, but after listening to the discussion and agreeing so much with both of you on the matters of respect and legacy, how do you square up Mike's decision to release a remake like Do It Again and playing it on a nationally televised concert, both with and as The Beach Boys within days after a release that was almost universally positively received by fans, which brought exactly the kind of positive attention to the music and the legacy?
===> I enjoy covers of Beach Boys songs; hunt for them all the time. Is this a Mike Love cover of a Beach Boys song sung by and co-written by Mike Love? It may grow on me but my initial reaction is less than whelming. Regarding legacy, this release of DIA does more for sales than legacy.


Point #3 - Is James Hirsch coming back for part 4? I'd like to hear his take on issues like these, especially the Do It Again remake and the Sunshine Tomorrow set, which transpired since the last appearance. And I'd also ask him specifically to comment on those sections of Mike's book regarding the C50 reunion, the albums (both TWGMTR and the live release), and the notion of that reunion not being commercial enough to be successful in his eyes in light of what Mike just released this week. And about the contradictions of Mike's issues with using autotune centered around C50 and beyond versus hearing his lead vocal on Help Me Rhonda autotuned as of this past Tuesday's televised concert. The contradictions of what we read and were told versus what we've heard from Mike in studio and in concert are pretty glaring, it would be nice to hear some thoughts on that stuff.
===> IMHO, James would be unable to give you his personal opinions and I presume he is not in ongoing, contemporaneous conversations with Mike (certainly I could be wrong on both counts).

===>THANKS for a good conversation. Feed/Pushback welcomed,  Phil

[Mark Dillon]

Sorry for my tardy reply.

Not sure, guitarfool2002, about the specific comments you're referencing regarding the 1967-era, but I do know that more mainstream sources have reported that Carl was the lead producer at this time. Here is one example: http://www.robertchristgau.com/xg/rs/albums1967-07.php. But we as fans who have heard session bootlegs before have always believed Brian continued to call the shots. Sure, Carl was at his right hand, and would really take over later on. Brian told me that Carl was the disciplinarian, mainly keeping the other guys on task (not specific to this era). And yes, it was all more collaborative than it had been in the Pet Sounds and Smile days because now the group was laying down the instrumental tracks.

As for the new release of "Do It Again," honestly, I hadn't given it much thought. But your comment got me to dig it up. I'm not too jazzed about the guys covering the old songs. Would be much more excited to hear some new material. That said, it's a passable if unnecessary version.  I don't think Mike was trying to sabotage the Sunshine Tomorrow set with the timing of its release. Why would he? Wild Honey is very much his baby as well. He is currently doing the Wild Honey Tour and his band is performing "Wild Honey," "Darlin'," and "Aren't You Glad."

As for Jim Hirsch, I think he's said his piece.

[guitarfool2002]

Mark: What I most enjoyed about your conversation was the enthusiasm that you and Phil expressed when you were talking about the Sunshine Tomorrow set - It was a feeling shared by many fans as they listened to those tracks, and it was a nice part of the discussion to hear that in your voices as well. It truly is a joy to hear some of this music presented in a new way. As I said earlier, I also liked hearing your descriptions of how you came to find some of this music in your younger years, because I shared both a similar experience in discovering it and also we shared basically the same time frame as in the years when certain reissues started coming out as we were on that quest to get more of this goodness. Brought back some good memories of going to record shops or ordering albums when it seemed the floodgates opened at just that right time for us to discover it.

No doubt there has been some misinformation or misunderstandings of that year 1967 in general which have been repeated and reported erroneously through the years, specifically about the post-Smile period covered on Sunshine Tomorrow. As I've been saying, when the fans can hear the actual tracking sessions for themselves, all of the mistakes are corrected immediately by the audio. That is, unless fans out there are hearing examples of someone other than Brian Wilson acting as the primary producer or leader on those sessions that we may have missed on the set.

Bear with me, there is a tie-in to both my mention of the Do It Again single from Mike, and your previous Jim Hirsch interviews.

The question you raised of why Mike would try to sabotage the release of Sunshine Tomorrow by dropping this remake of DIA days later...I think most fans who follow this stuff are asking the basic question of why would Mike do this at all at this specific time?

I'll also answer a question with a question: Why didn't Mike do anything to promote Sunshine Tomorrow on that July 4th televised concert where he promoted "our" single DIA to a TV audience?

My take: He's there doing a TV appearance with the Beach Boys name, representing the brand. So the original Beach Boys whose name Mike is carrying have released an archival set of music that benefits all involved, including the fans, and instead of saying a word about that release, giving the Sunshine Tomorrow a shot in the arm via advertising it on TV at a Beach Boys concert...Mike instead promotes a release which is not a Beach Boys release...it by rights has nothing at all to do with the Beach Boys. If anything it's a Mike Love solo release despite him calling it "our" new single.

Quality issues aside, along with issues of good or bad taste regarding the sample of another non-Beach Boy on that track shouting "Do It!" throughout the track, and the blatant autotune Mike had such an issue with a few years ago...it's a head-scratcher of a decision to put it mildly.

Regarding Jim Hirsch and his interviews with you and Phil: Some pretty overt contradictions were left hanging from those discussions which were never addressed or clarified in follow-up appearances. I'm just wishing they had been because a few of them were pretty obvious. But due to the nature of the business and contracts and whatnot, I wouldn't expect Jim to address them any further than he did, which in some cases meant overlooking what were either errors or simple misunderstandings.

Connected to the Sunshine Tomorrow set, and Mike, and Jim Hirsch, and the lot of it: One thing which Sunshine Tomorrow does is also to make Mike's 2005 lawsuit and specific claims made in that lawsuit look even more asinine and vindictive - as well as blatantly false if not slanderous. The transcript can easily be posted, but to sum up Mike's claim in that legal document was that Brian from 1967 onward was living in his bed or a sandbox, surrounded by drug addicts, dealers, and parasites (and plagiarizers) , too physically and mentally ill to do anything but collect royalty payments...etc.

So I go back again to wishing someone had asked Jim why that 2005 lawsuit was not addressed in Mike's book, if anything to get an explanation or clarification from Mike himself. And I would also have asked if Jim in his research for the book had read that 2005 lawsuit and its followup legal actions, or if he had been made aware of it at all during his research.

As Sunshine Tomorrow corrects some of the mistakes regarding who produced Wild Honey and other projects from 1967, it perhaps even more forcefully corrects what Mike claimed and filed in a legal document in 2005 regarding Brian's role in the band and their music in 1967.

It would have been interesting to hear such a discussion in light of Sunshine Tomorrow.

[Mark Dillon]

Hey guitarfool,

Thanks for your in-depth response and for your kind words about the podcast. As I mentioned, Wild Honey is particularly significant to me, because when I discovered it--at the time of its 20th anniversary--it made me fall back in love with the band and got me to dig deeper.

I'm not at all surprised Mike did not give a shout out to the Sunshine Tomorrow release on July 4. Re-mixes, sessions and outtakes from albums that weren't even huge hits 50 years ago or weren't even released (Lei'd)? For fans only, and we can embrace it. From a commercial perspective, I can see how Mike would think a new version of a familiar song might have more appeal to a mainstream audience. Although, as mentioned, I don't think we need it.

Yes, it is hypocritical for Mike's book to ignore the 2005 lawsuit, but are we surprised? That one didn't go so well for him. I meant to bring it up with Jim, but the reasons for its omission are pretty obvious, aren't they?   

[guitarfool2002]

Hey guitarfool,

Thanks for your in-depth response and for your kind words about the podcast. As I mentioned, Wild Honey is particularly significant to me, because when I discovered it--at the time of its 20th anniversary--it made me fall back in love with the band and got me to dig deeper.

I'm not at all surprised Mike did not give a shout out to the Sunshine Tomorrow release on July 4. Re-mixes, sessions and outtakes from albums that weren't even huge hits 50 years ago or weren't even released (Lei'd)? For fans only, and we can embrace it. From a commercial perspective, I can see how Mike would think a new version of a familiar song might have more appeal to a mainstream audience. Although, as mentioned, I don't think we need it.

Yes, it is hypocritical for Mike's book to ignore the 2005 lawsuit, but are we surprised? That one didn't go so well for him. I meant to bring it up with Jim, but the reasons for its omission are pretty obvious, aren't they?   

I really did enjoy hearing the enthusiasm both of you expressed in the discussion, it made me feel the same way about the music! For me I guess it was the Smiley/WH 2-fer that really pulled me in to the music a lot deeper. I still can't get over hearing that Heroes "Cantina" mix, that really made an impact on me as listener and fan. And mentioning the Aren't You Glad live version from the Live In London album, that for me too is a highlight and one of my favorite performances in the band's career - another one I really got into from the 2-fer releases. They just nailed it on that performance. Both the studio and live cuts are personal favorites.

I guess part of my issue with not mentioning the Sunshine Tomorrow release is also that you get to hear some great vocal performances from Mike himself on those tracks, I'd argue some like Aren't You Glad, Let The Wind Blow, the tag to Wind Chimes - That's some of the better and more intimate singing Mike has done in his whole career, and I'd think he'd want more people to give a listen to that. He can be proud of those vocals and I think most fans would agree they are some of his best ever put on record. Alas, he didn't at least give it a shout-out and he has other priorities these days. But celebrating a true musical accomplishment from the band *as a band*, I thought there would be at least a mention of it. And everyone, every fan, needs to hear Surfer Girl from Hawaii, not just for the quality of the performance but for the historical significance, which can be heartbreaking to consider when you're listening to the last true group performance of the original band that was practicing in the Wilsons' music room in Hawthorne as kids.

The omissions are obvious, yes. I'm not surprised it wasn't addressed, but disappointed just the same. I guess I was hoping for some more clarification or even a pipe-dream of a mea culpa from Mike of some kind to at least explain what stands as one of the lowest moments of the band's career in terms of the pure bile written in that 2005 filing.

[Bicyclerider]

I'd be interested to know exactly when the myth of Carl taking the major role in producing Wild Honey started, and by whom.  Was it in the Preiss book?  I'm sure part of the myth began because of the new credit "Produced by the Beach Boys" - people made assumptions about that credit that in the face of the actual session tapes has turned out to be incorrect.  We know certain well connected individuals with  "insider knowledge" have also claimed this, but that is more recent (in the past, oh, fifteen years?).  We don't have any Jim Lockhert interviews to reference.  I don't remember anyone asking Carl about this before his death, which is a shame - I would love to hear his take on the production of Smiley through Sunflower to get some specifics on who did what, although it appears we know now what went down with Smiley and Wild Honey.  It's been reported that Brian only fully produced one track on Sunflower, Add Some Music, and on the others Carl either produced or co-produced, yet we have no tape evidence that's been released to confirm that.  Friends is like a black hole of knowledge - while I suspect Brian was still fully in control of production, apparently Murray was also involved?  Love to find out more about this era.

[guitarfool2002]

I'd be interested to know exactly when the myth of Carl taking the major role in producing Wild Honey started, and by whom.  Was it in the Preiss book?  I'm sure part of the myth began because of the new credit "Produced by the Beach Boys" - people made assumptions about that credit that in the face of the actual session tapes has turned out to be incorrect.  We know certain well connected individuals with  "insider knowledge" have also claimed this, but that is more recent (in the past, oh, fifteen years?).  We don't have any Jim Lockhert interviews to reference.  I don't remember anyone asking Carl about this before his death, which is a shame - I would love to hear his take on the production of Smiley through Sunflower to get some specifics on who did what, although it appears we know now what went down with Smiley and Wild Honey.  It's been reported that Brian only fully produced one track on Sunflower, Add Some Music, and on the others Carl either produced or co-produced, yet we have no tape evidence that's been released to confirm that.  Friends is like a black hole of knowledge - while I suspect Brian was still fully in control of production, apparently Murray was also involved?  Love to find out more about this era.

I'm sorry I missed this reply until now, because it hits on the same points I've had as well. I can say pretty confidently that this notion was NOT in the Preiss book unless there were some serious misreadings or twisting of what was written in the book regarding these topics. If anything I have clipped and pasted various quotes, especially those from Carl on the WH album and Brian's role in it, to argue against this notion that Carl produced most of this material.

I'd say for three decades of reading and listening...my ears always heard these productions as the new outtakes released on the CD set have backed up with audio evidence. Those are Brian's productions. But I've been arguing that fact for some time, specifically here, so no need to recap the details.

I wonder too how this all got started, where it got started, and maybe why it got started too. It's one thing to go on speculation, or misreading/misunderstanding, but this was different as some of the relevant links to previous discussions would show.

So to answer more succinctly, it wasn't in anything I read in Preiss unless I overlooked a quote somewhere. It wasn't in any of the other major books, specifically, and again unless I missed a few sentences. It never sounded like what was being argued on the actual songs even before the new outtakes were released. And we all knew (or should have known already) that Brian did indeed "step back" and start trying to bring his brothers into the production side of making records, he wanted to mentor them so they could start cutting sides and producing them as he had been doing. But by 1967 it wasn't a done deal, and taking a step back isn't equal to handing over the controls entirely and dropping out.

The main place(s) I think I recall hearing these arguments were on this board, or its predecessors. But I'd like to know too if it did come out elsewhere. Anyone remember?

[guitarfool2002]

Just remembered this too - It didn't help set any records straight to have two TV movie "bios" of the band, Summer Dreams and the John Stamos-produced ABC 2-parter "An American Family" portraying the years 1966/67 as they did for millions of viewers. And those false narratives are still being repeated on various cable stations to this day. The latter showed Brian as a cartoonish man-child playing with squeak toys and stuffed animals in the studio circa 1967, surrounded by various drug addicts, dealers, hangers-on, and other surly characters (sound familiar?) that amounted to in a few cases near-slander.

So a lot of people saw those films, maybe those who didn't bother reading or learning what actually happened, and believed what was shown in those TV movies.