gfxgfx
 
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
logo
 
gfx gfx
gfx
680598 Posts in 27600 Topics by 4068 Members - Latest Member: Dae Lims March 28, 2024, 10:15:49 PM
*
gfx*HomeHelpSearchCalendarLoginRegistergfx
gfxgfx
0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.       « previous next »
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Go Down Print
Author Topic: Can "Summer in Paradise" be salvaged?  (Read 29748 times)
GoogaMooga
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 580



View Profile
« Reply #100 on: January 19, 2018, 12:05:20 AM »

If I am inflating Mike's importance, it is to balance things, counter the extreme anti-Mike sentiments. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between these two positions? That is, Mike being better than his rep, but not as good as he himself thinks and what his fans make him be? I am coming across as an uncritical Mike fan, but really, I am neutral about the whole thing. People have different ideas of what constitutes the Beach Boys. I think he was integral to the mix, no more, no less.

Wiki lists 115 songs written, co-written, and/or composed by Mike Love, as of Sept 13, 2016. Have a look. Some pretty good songs on there.
Compare with the contributions of Al, Bruce, David, Blondie, and Ricky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Songs_written_by_Mike_Love
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #101 on: January 19, 2018, 02:29:06 AM »

If I am inflating Mike's importance, it is to balance things, counter the extreme anti-Mike sentiments. Perhaps the truth lies somewhere in between these two positions? That is, Mike being better than his rep, but not as good as he himself thinks and what his fans make him be? I am coming across as an uncritical Mike fan, but really, I am neutral about the whole thing. People have different ideas of what constitutes the Beach Boys. I think he was integral to the mix, no more, no less.

Wiki lists 115 songs written, co-written, and/or composed by Mike Love, as of Sept 13, 2016. Have a look. Some pretty good songs on there.
Compare with the contributions of Al, Bruce, David, Blondie, and Ricky. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Songs_written_by_Mike_Love

GoogaMooga, if you’ve got a problem with two people on the other side of the spectrum going to the extreme, why on earth would you do the exact same thing for your side of the spectrum? I think most everyone on this forum has a pretty good idea of the great contributions Mike made to the band. Do you think because two people here have an extremely negative view of Mike you need to over-exaggerate his contributions to save Mike’s rep? Just be honest about about Mike...most people here would probably agree with that position and it wouldn’t create any unnecessary division.

Mike has done some really dumb sh*t in his time, but he’s also done some really great stuff. Being honest about both the good and the bad is the best thing we can do as fans to ensure the true story stays in tact. Otherwise we turn into either a divisive community or something akin to BBB...both are unappealing.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

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

Gender: Male
Posts: 580



View Profile
« Reply #102 on: January 19, 2018, 04:31:37 AM »

Well, that's what I am trying to do, give a balanced view. And if you say most members here take the middle ground, more the better. I don't think it's extreme to link to a wiki list of 115 songs, but I'll stop now. Plenty of other things we can all agree on. Peace out.  Smiley
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #103 on: January 19, 2018, 05:38:29 AM »

Hard to surpass that level of sarcasm, but consider this: if Mike hadn't been a constant all those years, if he hadn't soldiered on, being the frontman and pitching in with the occasional inspired lyrics and some pretty good songs (fourth best songwriter of the principal nine?) now and then, would we even have this forum here today? Would there even be a Beach Boys, or factions? People talk of Carl being the anchor, but who left the band for two years? Contrast with the man who never quit the band. Who believed in the idea all along. To suggest that Mike only contributed lyrics or songs of value in the beginning is, well, contentious.  Smiley I'll keep my SiP, make judicious use of the skip button in doing so, and I'll even order Unleash... just out of curiosity.

I think it's true that Mike's best lyrical contributions were on the albums from 1963-73.   After that, they became pretty middle of the road.

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #104 on: January 19, 2018, 06:11:57 AM »

Well, that's what I am trying to do, give a balanced view. And if you say most members here take the middle ground, more the better. I don't think it's extreme to link to a wiki list of 115 songs, but I'll stop now. Plenty of other things we can all agree on. Peace out.  Smiley

It’s not a balanced view to heap praise on Mike for never quitting the band while implying Carl wasn’t a good anchor because he quit during an awful time for the band for two years. Linking a Wiki list isn’t extreme at all, but when you try to comparatively diminish (in the same paragraph) the contributions of other members it feels less balanced than you’re trying to be.

A previous member here, Sheriff John Stone, admitted to taking some lunatic stance on the Mike vs Brian feud by “faking” to hate Melinda and Brian for years and years to prove a point to the Brianistas (something really nuts like that). Anyways, his posts caused a ton of pointless arguing and divisiveness here, all because he was supposedly trying to create a balance. Point being, it’s not healthy for the board if you take extreme stances to create a balance. Just tell it how it was/is without any exaggeration and the board will be better for it.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

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

Gender: Male
Posts: 580



View Profile
« Reply #105 on: January 19, 2018, 07:17:52 AM »

Fair enough, I take back the Carl comment. I do think I have tried to write balanced and considered posts. It was argued that Mike was the worst at everything, I rate him higher than that. In short, I like ALL nine Beach Boys. Go back and read some of the vitriol in this thread. Yes, some of it is funny, but it is still vitriol. I've been here, what, ten years or more, I never tried to cause strife. Mike Love, not war.  angel
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #106 on: January 19, 2018, 07:25:52 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
KDS
Guest
« Reply #107 on: January 19, 2018, 08:18:07 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 
Logged
Jim V.
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Online Online

Posts: 3038



View Profile
« Reply #108 on: January 19, 2018, 09:15:57 AM »

A previous member here, Sheriff John Stone, admitted to taking some lunatic stance on the Mike vs Brian feud by “faking” to hate Melinda and Brian for years and years to prove a point to the Brianistas (something really nuts like that). Anyways, his posts caused a ton of pointless arguing and divisiveness here, all because he was supposedly trying to create a balance. Point being, it’s not healthy for the board if you take extreme stances to create a balance. Just tell it how it was/is without any exaggeration and the board will be better for it.

Yeah I remember when he "revealed" all this to me. And while I understand that it would be annoying to see somebody you dig being sh*t on (sometimes unfairly), I don't understand why disparaging Brian and basically doing everything but calling him an invalid made up for it. SJS is probably one of the least respectful people of Brian's situation that I have ever dealt with online, and that is really saying something.
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #109 on: January 19, 2018, 09:25:04 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

Yes, and we should all of course like what we like and not like what we don't like.

But, when we're talking about more objective/historical issues surrounding the band (e.g. fan attitudes towards the band, such as a perceived "decline" in quality, etc.), then we really have to step outside of what we personally like and look at what the historical record shows (to the degree we can discern) and what the general feeling is among fans over many decades.

So in terms of Mike and his role in the perceived "quality" of the band's output, I don't think Mike has been particularly singled out for the band's  mid-late 70s "decline." He didn't really add much to the proceedings during those years, and the other guys sometimes did. So, it may be that he isn't singled out for many high points in that era while others are, but that's as it should be. The high points in the 1976-1986-ish era come mostly from Dennis, Carl, and Brian, with some good moments from Al and Bruce. Mike, not so much. He turned in professional vocal work, and sometimes augmented others' music with serviceable lyrics. But "Everyone's In Love With You" is about as good as it gets from Mike in that era. "Sumahama" is awful, MIU isn't so great (some good music, but awful lyrics), Mike got in some decent lyrics working with Brian on some KTSA lyrics, and Mike actually takes a back seat to Carl on the '85 album.
Logged

THE BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE IS ON FACEBOOK!!! http://www.facebook.com/beachboysopinion - Check out the original "BEACH BOYS OPINION PAGE" Blog - http://beachboysopinion.blogspot.com/
KDS
Guest
« Reply #110 on: January 19, 2018, 09:28:37 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

Yes, and we should all of course like what we like and not like what we don't like.

But, when we're talking about more objective/historical issues surrounding the band (e.g. fan attitudes towards the band, such as a perceived "decline" in quality, etc.), then we really have to step outside of what we personally like and look at what the historical record shows (to the degree we can discern) and what the general feeling is among fans over many decades.

So in terms of Mike and his role in the perceived "quality" of the band's output, I don't think Mike has been particularly singled out for the band's  mid-late 70s "decline." He didn't really add much to the proceedings during those years, and the other guys sometimes did. So, it may be that he isn't singled out for many high points in that era while others are, but that's as it should be. The high points in the 1976-1986-ish era come mostly from Dennis, Carl, and Brian, with some good moments from Al and Bruce. Mike, not so much. He turned in professional vocal work, and sometimes augmented others' music with serviceable lyrics. But "Everyone's In Love With You" is about as good as it gets from Mike in that era. "Sumahama" is awful, MIU isn't so great (some good music, but awful lyrics), Mike got in some decent lyrics working with Brian on some KTSA lyrics, and Mike actually takes a back seat to Carl on the '85 album.

Fair enough. 

Personally, I think Sumahama is a pretty good song, and Getcha Back a good, bordering on great, song.  So, while I get your point about being objective, simply stating "Sumahama is awful" as if its fact doesn't seem too objective to me. 
Logged
HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #111 on: January 19, 2018, 09:31:30 AM »

Regarding a "balanced" view, I think a more appropriate term would to be accurate, to be fair.

I occasionally see a "balanced" view presented as a ridiculous exercise in "say one positive and negative thing about this guy, and then one positive and negative thing about that guy."

If 37 bad reviews for "Unleash the Love" come in, you don't need to "balance" it out with a positive one. If *you* think it's good, then say it's good and tell us why.

But in general, Mike gets a bad rap from fans because of the things he has done and said. It doesn't mean it hasn't gone over the line on occasion, and there's something to be said for calling it like it is regarding Mike but then moving on to something else where you can be more positive. Instead of trying to fabricate or stretch it to say something positive about Mike, just talk about something else where one *can* be positive.

Most everyone, with maybe a few exceptions, have regularly recognized Mike's *hugely important* contributions to the band.
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/
DonnyL
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 1990



View Profile WWW
« Reply #112 on: January 19, 2018, 09:36:23 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I surprised myself by realizing recently that I like 15 Big Ones more than Sunflower. I think it has aged well ... it's like a light version of Love You.
Logged

HeyJude
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 10030



View Profile WWW
« Reply #113 on: January 19, 2018, 09:41:49 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

Yes, and we should all of course like what we like and not like what we don't like.

But, when we're talking about more objective/historical issues surrounding the band (e.g. fan attitudes towards the band, such as a perceived "decline" in quality, etc.), then we really have to step outside of what we personally like and look at what the historical record shows (to the degree we can discern) and what the general feeling is among fans over many decades.

So in terms of Mike and his role in the perceived "quality" of the band's output, I don't think Mike has been particularly singled out for the band's  mid-late 70s "decline." He didn't really add much to the proceedings during those years, and the other guys sometimes did. So, it may be that he isn't singled out for many high points in that era while others are, but that's as it should be. The high points in the 1976-1986-ish era come mostly from Dennis, Carl, and Brian, with some good moments from Al and Bruce. Mike, not so much. He turned in professional vocal work, and sometimes augmented others' music with serviceable lyrics. But "Everyone's In Love With You" is about as good as it gets from Mike in that era. "Sumahama" is awful, MIU isn't so great (some good music, but awful lyrics), Mike got in some decent lyrics working with Brian on some KTSA lyrics, and Mike actually takes a back seat to Carl on the '85 album.

Fair enough. 

Personally, I think Sumahama is a pretty good song, and Getcha Back a good, bordering on great, song.  So, while I get your point about being objective, simply stating "Sumahama is awful" as if its fact doesn't seem too objective to me. 

I think "Sumahama" is awful. That's my opinion. All subjective.

Fans in general over the years, in my decades and decades of fandom and scholarship, have across the board tended to agree that the song isn't good. Very, very few "Sumahama" fans that I've seen over the years.

"Getcha Back" has tended to go rather middle of the road. I think fans were happy to have it in '85 after a number of years of not much of anything. It was a moderate hit for the band (#26), and thus has often made it onto compilations to represent that era. But again, over the years, I haven't heard a ton of people trashing the song (though many have rightly pointed out it's somewhat of a rewrite of "Don't Worry Baby"), but few have singled it out as anything near "great."

Over the years, I've frankly noticed the majority of the discussion surrounding "Getcha Back" has involved Brian's falsetto vocal part (e.g. "It sounds good" or "It sounds awful" or "Is it really Brian singing that?")

In my opinion, the song has always sounded sparse and unfinished, like a demo. It not only sounds like "Don't Worry Baby" (highlighted when they did a medley of the two songs on the 25th Anniversary show), but also "Hushabye." It also sounds at times like "Hungry Heart", which makes it even more ironic that Mike a number of years later covered "Hungry Heart" for a Springsteen tribute album. I'm also not a fan of Mike's vocal on the song (Mike himself apparently mentioned over the years that he wanted a Dennis-ish, Bryan Adams-type voice singing the song, and we got that a bit when David Marks sang it), and I think he had amped up his nasal voice in that era, with the production/mixing on the recording only making it worse.

I put "Getcha Back" in the same category as something like "Come Go With Me"; moderately catchy, generally well-performed, innocuous at absolute worst. But not a high water mark for the band by any means.
Logged

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

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #114 on: January 19, 2018, 09:46:00 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I surprised myself by realizing recently that I like 15 Big Ones more than Sunflower. I think it has aged well ... it's like a light version of Love You.

15 Big Ones has really grown on me in the past few years. Palisades Park, Susie Cincinnati, It’s OK, Had To Phone Ya. It’s full of really damn good songs, and they all have phenomenal harmonies and big sound.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
KDS
Guest
« Reply #115 on: January 19, 2018, 09:52:54 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I surprised myself by realizing recently that I like 15 Big Ones more than Sunflower. I think it has aged well ... it's like a light version of Love You.

Fair enough, but I never could understand the attraction of that era. 

To be fair, I listened to 15 Big Ones recently, and its a better album than I initially gave it credit for, but I think the drop from Holland to 15BO is a steep one. 
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #116 on: January 19, 2018, 09:55:30 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

Yes, and we should all of course like what we like and not like what we don't like.

But, when we're talking about more objective/historical issues surrounding the band (e.g. fan attitudes towards the band, such as a perceived "decline" in quality, etc.), then we really have to step outside of what we personally like and look at what the historical record shows (to the degree we can discern) and what the general feeling is among fans over many decades.

So in terms of Mike and his role in the perceived "quality" of the band's output, I don't think Mike has been particularly singled out for the band's  mid-late 70s "decline." He didn't really add much to the proceedings during those years, and the other guys sometimes did. So, it may be that he isn't singled out for many high points in that era while others are, but that's as it should be. The high points in the 1976-1986-ish era come mostly from Dennis, Carl, and Brian, with some good moments from Al and Bruce. Mike, not so much. He turned in professional vocal work, and sometimes augmented others' music with serviceable lyrics. But "Everyone's In Love With You" is about as good as it gets from Mike in that era. "Sumahama" is awful, MIU isn't so great (some good music, but awful lyrics), Mike got in some decent lyrics working with Brian on some KTSA lyrics, and Mike actually takes a back seat to Carl on the '85 album.

Fair enough. 

Personally, I think Sumahama is a pretty good song, and Getcha Back a good, bordering on great, song.  So, while I get your point about being objective, simply stating "Sumahama is awful" as if its fact doesn't seem too objective to me. 

I think "Sumahama" is awful. That's my opinion. All subjective.

Fans in general over the years, in my decades and decades of fandom and scholarship, have across the board tended to agree that the song isn't good. Very, very few "Sumahama" fans that I've seen over the years.

"Getcha Back" has tended to go rather middle of the road. I think fans were happy to have it in '85 after a number of years of not much of anything. It was a moderate hit for the band (#26), and thus has often made it onto compilations to represent that era. But again, over the years, I haven't heard a ton of people trashing the song (though many have rightly pointed out it's somewhat of a rewrite of "Don't Worry Baby"), but few have singled it out as anything near "great."

Over the years, I've frankly noticed the majority of the discussion surrounding "Getcha Back" has involved Brian's falsetto vocal part (e.g. "It sounds good" or "It sounds awful" or "Is it really Brian singing that?")

In my opinion, the song has always sounded sparse and unfinished, like a demo. It not only sounds like "Don't Worry Baby" (highlighted when they did a medley of the two songs on the 25th Anniversary show), but also "Hushabye." It also sounds at times like "Hungry Heart", which makes it even more ironic that Mike a number of years later covered "Hungry Heart" for a Springsteen tribute album. I'm also not a fan of Mike's vocal on the song (Mike himself apparently mentioned over the years that he wanted a Dennis-ish, Bryan Adams-type voice singing the song, and we got that a bit when David Marks sang it), and I think he had amped up his nasal voice in that era, with the production/mixing on the recording only making it worse.

I put "Getcha Back" in the same category as something like "Come Go With Me"; moderately catchy, generally well-performed, innocuous at absolute worst. But not a high water mark for the band by any means.

That's fine if that's your opinion. 

But when you advised I should look at the Beach Boys catalog "objectively" followed by "Sumahama is awful," it gives the impression that you're stating that an objective fact. 

And, I'm really not trying to be a smart ass here, but what is this "scholarship" that you keep referring to? 
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #117 on: January 19, 2018, 09:55:54 AM »

A previous member here, Sheriff John Stone, admitted to taking some lunatic stance on the Mike vs Brian feud by “faking” to hate Melinda and Brian for years and years to prove a point to the Brianistas (something really nuts like that). Anyways, his posts caused a ton of pointless arguing and divisiveness here, all because he was supposedly trying to create a balance. Point being, it’s not healthy for the board if you take extreme stances to create a balance. Just tell it how it was/is without any exaggeration and the board will be better for it.

Yeah I remember when he "revealed" all this to me. And while I understand that it would be annoying to see somebody you dig being sh*t on (sometimes unfairly), I don't understand why disparaging Brian and basically doing everything but calling him an invalid made up for it. SJS is probably one of the least respectful people of Brian's situation that I have ever dealt with online, and that is really saying something.

It was just really bizarre. Years of really harsh statements about Brian and Melinda all because he loved Brian more than his own family apparently. I’m glad that’s all in the past.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

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

Gender: Male
Posts: 580



View Profile
« Reply #118 on: January 19, 2018, 09:58:48 AM »

Sumahama is really quite lovely, IMO. Better than Shortnin' Bread, at least!

One newish Mike song I really like is Cool Head, Warm Heart.
« Last Edit: January 19, 2018, 09:59:56 AM by GoogaMooga » Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #119 on: January 19, 2018, 10:00:36 AM »

Sumahama is really quite lovely, IMO. Better than Shortnin' Bread, at least!

One newish Mike song I really like is Cool Head, Warm heart.

From that era, I also like Belles of Paris, although I think it works better as Bells of Christmas. 

I think Cool Head, Warm Heart is pretty decent, and easily the best of the "new" songs on the Songs From Here and Back comp. 
Logged
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #120 on: January 19, 2018, 10:01:19 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I surprised myself by realizing recently that I like 15 Big Ones more than Sunflower. I think it has aged well ... it's like a light version of Love You.

Fair enough, but I never could understand the attraction of that era. 

To be fair, I listened to 15 Big Ones recently, and its a better album than I initially gave it credit for, but I think the drop from Holland to 15BO is a steep one. 

Part of me wishes that they had continued in the Holland frame of mind - environmentally/politically conscious, branching out artistically....heck, they could’ve made a whole series of albums in different countries as an experiment. But I’m also glad we got to experience both Holland and 15 Big Ones. The latter isn’t a favorite album of mine by any stretch, but it’s a whole new palette of colors that was pretty well done all things considered.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

Ever want to hear some Beach Boys songs mashed up together like The Beatles' 'LOVE' album? Check out my mix!
rab2591
Smiley Smile Associate
*
Offline Offline

Gender: Male
Posts: 5865


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


View Profile
« Reply #121 on: January 19, 2018, 10:03:34 AM »

Sumahama is really quite lovely, IMO. Better than Shortnin' Bread, at least!

Ugh, that album version of Shortenin Bread sucks any bit of life out of that song...it’s just awful. But the unreleased/booted version is one hell of a rockin tune.
Logged

Bill Tobelman's SMiLE site

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

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

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

Gender: Male
Posts: 580



View Profile
« Reply #122 on: January 19, 2018, 10:03:51 AM »

The covers on 15 Big Ones were quite inspired. When I read a mention of "Rock and Roll Music", I am just as likely to think BB as I am Chuck Berry. That's no mean feat by them.
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #123 on: January 19, 2018, 10:05:20 AM »

But, on the other side of that spectrum, I'd argue that the overall quality of Beach Boys material took a nosedive after Holland, and that includes Brian Wilson penned songs, and Mike often shoulders 100% of the blame for dip in quality in BB material. 

In all my years as a fan, I've never had the impression that Mike has been blamed excessively for the drop off in quality post-1973 (or whatever one views as the turning point). I think it's well understood that, especially in the 70s and early 80s, the other members often weren't bring their A-game either. Most of the albums have many moments of brilliance, and also some solid material, and then some dreck.

I do think Mike *should* shoulder the vast majority of the responsibility for the dip quality post-1987 or so. Mike not only wrote or co-wrote a lot of the material, but *actively sought out* a role as the creative leader of the group. I think it's important to spread some of the blame to the other members for their inaction/passivity, etc.

But if you don't like the material the BBs released post-1987, that's more about Mike than anybody else. He co-wrote most of the new stuff on "Still Cruisin'", and SIP was 100% his baby.

Personally, I'll take the "new" songs on Still Cruisin over most of the Brian's Back era (Big 15 Ones / Love You).  But, I know I'm in the minority. 

I couldn't disagree more. In fact, I surprised myself by realizing recently that I like 15 Big Ones more than Sunflower. I think it has aged well ... it's like a light version of Love You.

Fair enough, but I never could understand the attraction of that era. 

To be fair, I listened to 15 Big Ones recently, and its a better album than I initially gave it credit for, but I think the drop from Holland to 15BO is a steep one. 

Part of me wishes that they had continued in the Holland frame of mind - environmentally/politically conscious, branching out artistically....heck, they could’ve made a whole series of albums in different countries as an experiment. But I’m also glad we got to experience both Holland and 15 Big Ones. The latter isn’t a favorite album of mine by any stretch, but it’s a whole new palette of colors that was pretty well done all things considered.

While I'm grateful for all of the Beach Boys albums, even ones I'm not a fan of, I think 15 Big Ones could've been better.   I really like It's OK and the Pallisades Park cover.  

I think the single mix of Rock and Roll Music far surpassed the album version, and the song sounds much better in concert....partly because it actually sounds more like a rock song.  I think many of the covers could've been so much better.  In the 1960s, The Beach Boys took other artists' material and really made it their own.   I don't get that from the 15BO covers.  
Logged
KDS
Guest
« Reply #124 on: January 19, 2018, 10:06:20 AM »

The covers on 15 Big Ones were quite inspired. When I read a mention of "Rock and Roll Music", I am just as likely to think BB as I am Chuck Berry. That's no mean feat by them.

I'll take Chuck Berry, The Beatles, and even Yahoo Serious over the version from 15 Big Ones. 
Logged
gfx
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 Go Up Print 
gfx
Jump to:  
gfx
Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines Page created in 1.245 seconds with 22 queries.
Helios Multi design by Bloc
gfx
Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!