What will be intersting to see is how much of these tracks are new recordings, and how much will feature a hodge-podge of eras of recording. I'm guessing mostly the latter, considering he's apprently been tinkering with his recordings ever since he started up his Big Sur studio. I somehow doubt we'll ever know what's what in terms of when elements of the various recordings date from, as I can't envision detailed liner notes on his CD with each overdub date.

In the new issue of ESQ, Al talks about the album. He talks about finishing "Looking Down the Coast", and I believe he also mentions "Crumple Car." He mentions that he is planning on including "Don't Fight the Sea", and says that that track features Carl and Brian. This comment was obviously made well before Brian did whatever he did a few days ago on Al's tracks, so presumably some of this new album will feature elements from Beach Boys era recordings going back into the 90's and perhaps 80's and 70's. Al also mentions in the interview that he is considering re-recording "Santa Ana Winds" and "Don't Go Near the Water", but he doesn't know if he wants to do Beach Boys material yet. I'd be interested to hear his new takes on the song, but it certainly will be a bit distracting if he has no less than three BB re-recordings on it (if he indeed includes "Honkin' Down the Highway"). But it seems from the ESQ interview that Al is definitely going for some sort of theming running through the album, and I can see how those three BB remakes could fit in with the ecological theme, and perhaps "Honkin'...." and "Crumple Car" might connect in some way.

If nothing else, it sounds like since Al is using some old BB recordings as the basis for his new album, his new album will at least be a bit like an Al-themed "Brother Rarities" set we've been begging for for so long!

Amen.

(including singing "Sail On Sailor," if he really wasn't kidding about not liking singing it).

Really? When did he say that?

At the Saratoga show, before starting the song, Brian made a comment, I can't remember the exact wording, but it was something about how it wasn't his favorite song but he was going to sing it anyway. I don't remember saying he didn't like singing it. It was a funny, typical Brian type of comment. I think Al even commented about how he really liked the song, sort of humorously letting Brian know that the song was good.

I think these conspiracy theories get out of hand. I don't say this because I'm naive, but because I've never seen a shred of evidence to the contrary. Brian's band strike me as decent people-- you think they'd stick around for 8 years knowing that Brian is being abused and manipulated?
I don't know what the truth is either, but I'll give you a possible version of it:

*Melinda is posting (and not Brian) because Brian is getting ready to leave for a European tour this afternoon.
Or because Melinda (anyone, for that matter) is far more articulate at explaining these things than Brian.
Or because Brian didn't feel like explaining it.
*Brian had a dizzy spell on stage because he was dehydrated.
Or because he was under hot lights
Or because he was tired
Or maybe because he was briefly protesting the show, but, as Darian has said, he feels one way one moment and one way the next, and this was just a passing moment of rebellion.
Who knows? I have dizzy spells and have actually fainted in the past, and I know I'm not in dire health. It happens. And the advice I was given by a doctor? "If it happens again, sit down on the ground, whereever you are, no matter how foolish it looks, to save yourself the possibility of stitches."
*Al quit the tour because he wanted Brian to have the spotlight
Or because Brian wanted the spotlight and asked him to step aside
Or because Al would have had to foot the expenses of the tour for himself
Or because Al just didn't feel like touring
If Al is disgusted by the way Brian is supposedly being treated, you'd think he'd want to STAY for his "dear friend," and not leave him to his "handlers." So I don't know how realistic that theory is.

I'm not an insider, and I don't know anything. But I don't think most of you know much about this either.

I agree that voicing conspiracy theories as if they have been proven or are definitely true is not a good thing, but I think most people posting here, definitely myself, have made it clear that, not unlike your post, we are just throwing ideas out there as to possible reasons behind all of this. We are not being given much information. Regarding Brian's health, while I would hope that fans would be told the truth and kept up to date (and they may well be doing just that), fans certainly are not owed any information about Brian's health.

But, regarding Al not appearing in Europe, I do think that people who bought tickets to those shows are owed a better explanation. Reading Al's statement, I'm thinking that Al isn't even trying to hold any information back. It sounds to me like joining Brian on tour, whether in Europe or in past shows that he has done, has not been any sort of huge event for him, or perhaps a better way to put it is that I think maybe both Brian and Al underestimate how big of a deal it is to many fans for those two to appear together. It sounds like Al is almost underestimating how much the fans want to see him specifically, as if having Al at the show is something that the fans would take or leave.

While I actually ended up getting to see Al with Brian in Saratoga (and let me reiterate that setting aside all of the drama, it was really a great show both from Al and Brian and the band), I did sort of deal with having to decide whether to buy tickets and go to the show in relation to whether Al would be there or not. Al was originally on the billing, at which time I was totally jazzed about seeing the show. When they took Al's name off and said he wasn't scheduled to be there, I had to think about whether I was going to shell out around $200 for two tickets to see Brian on June 11th, having just seen both Brian and Al together on January 28th. I went ahead and got tickets anyway, since it is Brian Wilson and however long he tours in the future, chances are becoming fewer and fewer to see him. Plus, the Mountain Winery in Saratoga is quite a good concert venue, quite intimate, not a bad seat in the place. But, for a brief moment when I was really jazzed about seeing Al and Brian, I considered actually buying from a ticket broker even better seats than what I assumed I would end up getting through Ticketmaster, just to be closer to the stage to see Al and Brian. Once Al was no longer scheduled, I was no longer at all motivated to buy extra tickets just to get closer (and I probably wouldn't have done it even if Al was scheduled; I've never and probably never will buy tickets from a broker). Anyway, the point I'm trying to make is that I can understand how some people, even huge "Brianistas", would have only bought tickets to a show because Al was going to be there. On the one hand, maybe Brian's "people" might be surprised that so many people in Europe were going specifically because Al was going to be there. On the other hand, I can't imagine a lot of fans actually trying to refund or otherwise get rid of their tickets because of Al's cancellation. If I had bought tickets to a show expecting Brian and Al, and Al was dropped, I'd probably still go to the show.

OK, so maybe Brian had an "episode" and admitted to Al that he didn't really want to go? That he was being forced to go? Maybe this happened while at Al's ranche during recording, and then Al witnesses the incident on stage, etc.  Who knows, but if any of this is true, then good for Al for doinfg what is right by Brian and also keeping confidences at the same time.  Truth be told, Al does not owe us the secrets told to him by Brian...

I dunno. Something either in terms of the explanation, or at least in terms of the timeframe of these decisions, is rather confusing. The statement from Al seems to suggest that he decided either before or after the Monterey show on the 9th that he wasn't doing Europe. But we have an account from somebody in Saratoga on the 11th of Al talking about playing Europe. It may just be that Al and Brian talked about the European tour in Monterey, but only after the 11th did Al and Brian make the final decision.

Something odd is going on; if nothing else, we are getting only bits and pieces of information. But I will say that I don't think anybody should assume that Brian's "spell" has anything to do with Al not going to Europe. It may have played a part, but I would tend to doubt it. Sometimes two different odd things happen at the same time but really don't have anything directly to do with each other. I know that Al somehow "protesting" Brian continuing to tour sounds noble on the part of Al, and this scenario certainly is the most feasible of any scenarios I can think of in which the "incident" and Al's non-appearance in Europe are actually connected. But I still think that the two things don't have anything to do with each other.

When I spoke of Brian's fans seeing him more than once, I was thinking of those of us who live in the markets he's played repeatedly.  In my market alone, he played Oakland in January, after having played Berkeley in the summer of '06.  And San Francisco in November of '05.  Of course, he mostly recently played Saratoga this Monday, which is certainly still in the Bay Area.  I don't get the reason he played this market so many times in such a relatively short period of time, and as huge a Brian and band fan as I am, I didn't go to all of those shows.  Granted, "Smile" was special, but the rest of those shows were oldies.  The ticket prices were fairly high, too.  Although a week before the Saratoga show, I was sent an promotional e-mail offering a deal to get two Brian tickets (minimum price of $50 each) plus two free Santa Cruz Beach Boardwalk ride passes (worth almost $30 each) for a total of $99.  That would seem to indicate they were worried about ticket sales.  I don't think Brian likes worrying about his ticket sales, either, and I'm sure it hurts his feelings when he sees any empty seats. 

Just a bit of a correction: His Bay Area shows haven't been quite this lumped together. He played San Francisco in November '04 and Berkeley in September '05, then as you say Oakland in January of this year and then Saratoga in June. So, while I would agree that they didn't leave a lot of time between San Francisco and Berkeley, or Oaklanda and Saratoga, they did at least leave about 16 months between Berkeley in '05 and Oakland in '07. It's probably not a coincidence that, by my total guess, the San Francisco and Oakland shows seemed to be nearly if not fully sold out, while it was the Berkeley and Saratoga shows that probably lagged in sales a bit.

Brian does seem to have a history of "passive-aggressive" rebellion against stuff he doesn't want to do.

I've heard people say this about Brian, even about how he is today. I have no idea how true it is. But when this "incident" happened in Saratoga, I was reminded of this alleged tendency of Brian. It was hard to tell whether Brian was just really a bit "dizzy" (as they are saying on the bw.com board now; apparently dehydration and dizziness is the "official" word), or if he was sort of consciously overblowing the situation as if he was trying to find a way to get out of finishing the show. I think this sort of theory, that he didn't want to finish the show or do the tour and overexaggerated this "incident" to the point of dramatizing it in the front of the audience to try to get out of finishing the show, is probably way beyond what really happened. But, I've heard some people say that Brian even today can be surprisingly crafty and ingenious in being manipulative in certain ways, so I certainly can't rule this possibility out 100%.

But at the same time, it did seem like Brian really was upset (if not a bit scared) about not being able to finish the show for whatever reason, which would contradict this theory that he was trying to manipulate his way out of doing the show or tour. I dunno. Strange stuff. Even if everything is as benign as they are saying, and Brian is fine and wants to tour, they need to realize that we are now going beyond even the normal problems of the last 8 years of Brian seeming ill at ease on stage and prompting questions of whether he wants to be out touring. Whatever is really happening, they have to realize that the appearance to some is now not only that he may not be as enthusiastic about touring as one would hope, but that he may not be best served by being out there touring in terms of his health. Again, I'm talking about what the appearance is, as we obviously cannot know the details of what his health actually is. But even taking all of the "official" statements as totally accurate, I'm surprised they are not more concerned about how this all appears to fans and outsiders.

I should reiterate that while I still have a lot of questions and concerns about the broader question of whether or how Brian should continue touring, I have to say having been at the Saratoga show, that the "official" explanation just posted on the bw.com message board seems totally feasible; as I said before, I don't think what happened in Saratoga is in and of itself a particularly problematic event. But it is, rightly or wrongly, prompting a lot of more thought and discussion from fans about these issues we've been discussing.

AGD, I don't disagree with you at all. I would like to make one point, having witnessed the "incident": While the more broad question of whether Brian needs to or should continue touring is valid, I don't think the incident in Saratoga was in and of itself as dire of a situation as many may feel. Brian on stage is usually very forward and literal, his stage presence is such that he doesn't do much in terms of PR or things for show. In other words, most artists in his situation who may have felt faint or near fainting, probably wouldn't have blurted out "I don't know if I can finish the show" and just sat there staring forward and not knowing what to do. They probably would have kept it together enough to simply say they were going to take an intermission, or would have just stayed in their seat and called a band member over and whispered to them, etc. (99% of the audience wouldn't have known that an intermission wasn't planned if they hadn't been told so). I'm not trying to downplay what happened, and even if it was the most innocent of problems, if maybe Brian really just ate "a bad burrito"  like Foskett said, Brian's people should be making some sort of statement about it to the fans so fans understand that he is okay, if he is okay. While Brian's aging over the last 8 years or so may be a major factor, I think the fans collectively should be honest with themselves and say that the concerns that we all presently have about whether Brian should be touring are the same concerns that were valid in 1999, and even before then. I don't know if I'm prepared or in a knoweldgeable enough position to say whether Brian now should continue touring or not, but if we are to be honest, this same issue was and should have been thought about back in 1999 and earlier. In other words, if someone were to say defintively that Brian presently should no longer tour, I'd have a tough time buying an argument that he was in any significantly better shape to be touring in 1999, etc. 

One other comment to AGD: I noticed on the BB Britain board that you were referencing what I believe is this Saratoga show as not being able to sell out with only 1500 seats. Just a slightly correction or at least my take on it: I think it seats a bit more than 1500 (closer to 1800 perhaps), and as someone who was there, my totally on-site guesstimate as to the attendance would be that it was at least 90% full, perhaps a bit more. Only a small rear general admission bleacher section was noticeably missing ticket buyers as I could see it. It seemed pretty full considering Brian had just played the Bay Area on January 28th (at a show in Oakland that was seemingly near if not a full sellout), and this Saratoga show didn't get a lot of publicity since this was just a small four-show west coast mini-tour. The tickets for Saratoga went on sale maybe 10 weeks or so after he played Oakland, so I'm surprised tickets sold as well as they did.

But I agree with the main point you were making in your comment on the BB Britain board, which is that the novelty of Brian touring is wearing off and he is perhaps oversaturating certain markets. I would reiterate what I said earlier: Brian doesn't need to burn himself out singing "Catch a Wave."

Maybe after last night he does not feel Brian should still be touring and its a protest to his handlers. He has seen behind the scenes and perhaps he doesn't like it. Who knows.

Well, this point is something that definitely crossed my mind among the many possible explanations. As I mentioned, Al seemed to be a bit more deeply concerned right after Brian's incident than most of the rest of the band (I don't mean to say the rest of the band wasn't showing concern, I just think it's something they might be more used to, or perhaps since Al was closest to Brian when he had his episode, perhaps Al was able to see what happened more than some of the other band members.) If Al shows up at the Pasadena show, it would make it rather unlikely that he was protesting or anything of that sort.

I have to say, when Brian got up and told the audience that he had had a "fainting spell" and that he didn't know if he could continue the show, I actually felt really bad for Brian. This is just my take, but the look on his face and his demeanor as he said he didn't know if he could continue the show seemed to me to seem more like Brian was worried that he would be in trouble or would be disappointing the fans if he didn't finish the show, as opposed to being concerned about himself. As I said, this is just my take/guess. This more than anything is what made me strongly consider whether I should feel that perhaps they need to let Brian retire from touring (perhaps do the odd one-off show from time to time). First coming out in 1999 was an event in and of itself. Doing his first UK and European dates was an event. Doing "Pet Sounds" and "Smile" were events worthy of mounting full-blown tours. But now they are simply doing a greatest hits show, albeit with a slant towards a Brian-style setlist that, even as a "greatest hits" show, has a much more intersting setlist than the average Beach Boys show. Al and Brian together make a great show. I can even understand retreading "Pet Sounds" for a handfull of a shows for its 40th anniversary. I got to see the Oakland show on that tour, and that was great. But so far, the 2007 shows have basically been the 2004-2007 setlist, with "Smile" or "Pet Sounds" deleted and a few others thrown in. For Brian's sake, I don't know if anybody needs him to run himself ragged singing "Catch a Wave."

It's easier for me to contemplate the possibility of Brian retiring from touring after having seen him seven times since 1999, having seen both "Pet Sounds" and "Smile" twice, having seen Brian and Al on stage together twice (once singing "Pet Sounds" together).

I certainly hope that Brian and those around him do what's best for Brian, whether that means retiring or continuing touring.

I was at the Saratoga show last night, and I'm glad most reports have correctly pointed out that Brian didn't faint on stage. He sat down behind Al, presumably to avoid fainting. That doesn't mean it wasn't a potentially serious situation. But I've already read a few reports elsewhere saying Brian fainted or collapsed on stage, reports not helped by Brian himself saying "I just had a fainting spell". But I don't think he actually fainted. He just sort of got up and then sat down on the stage behind Al. That's why after Brian did it, nobody immediately seemed too concerned. It's not as if he just fell over as you would envison somebody all of a sudden fainting.

Strangely, Brian seemed to look and sound fine both before and after the incident. He seemed to have a little less energy than average in the first half of the show (although he finished the show more energetically than I usually see him), but I've seen him look and sound worse at other shows from time to time than he looked or sounded at any time during last night's show.

They quickly took Brian away after the show, and his van passed right by me as I left and he had the winow rolled down and was, without prompting, thanking the fans for coming to the show. He looked fine. This is all relative of course. But given what he has looked and sounded like at shows since I saw him in 1999, he didn't seem any worse off other than the near-fainting incident.

I don't know how this incident may impact future shows, nor do I know if it has anything to do with the reports of Al not being on the European tour. I don't see how this incident would impact Al's participation in Europe. Al wasn't even supposed to be at the Saratoga show, it was a semi-surprise to begin with. We could all come up with a million hypothetical reasons why Al isn't on the European tour, but we don't know anything beyon the admittedly curious explanation that Al is too busy in the studio. I suppose that Al could have decided that since he really isn't getting to contribute a lot to the shows (he gets 2-3 lead vocals), perhaps he felt his time would be better spent finishing his album. If he really does finally finish the album, that *would* be great. But I can understand the disappointment of European fans.

I would tend to doubt that this indicates any sort of falling out between Al and Brian, and I can't see how Brian's condition during last night's show would cause any falling out. If anything, Al seemed to express more concern for Brian out of all of the band members. It was actually quite heartening to see Al show so much concern for Brian. Not that anybody and everybody didn't or wouldn't be concerned for Brian. But, knowing now that Brian appears to be okay, it was nice to see Al show some very personal concern for Brian.

I suppose a larger question, even if this particular incident isn't nearly as dramatic as it might sound, is whether Brian should continue touring so much, or at all. I have to admit that after the show, I was conflicted. I'm not sure whether I feel that they should just finally let Brian relax and retire from touring, or that I feel that Brian should be commended for bouncing back and putting on a good show.

I would still be surprised if the European tour is cancelled. However, I won't be surprised if we see very little Brian touring in the future apart from perhaps this European tour and the "Lucky Old Sun" shows in September. But we've already seen his touring tapering off anyway.

There's also a wrong production credit

Which one?

My guess is "All This Is That"...says it was produced by Alan, but in their authorized biography (Byron Preiss) Alan says that Carl wanted a certain approach to the production, so he cut the track.  Without getting up to look, I believe the liners in the "So Tough"/"Holland" twofer credited both of them.  Is that the one, Andrew?

I think the whole idea of the crediting of a production credit can get confusing. Apart from a few instances such as songs released on singles, we don't have a lot of song-by-song production credits on the original releases.

Often, on compilation albums, the production for a given track is simply credited to whomever was credited with producing the whole album when the original album in question only had one full-album production credit.

I see several contradictions between the production credit on WOTS and some previous releases. The GV '93 boxed set credits production of '"409" to Murry Wilson, while WOTS credits it to Brian. The GV boxed set credits Carl and Al for production of "California Saga: California", while WOTS credits only Al. The GV boxed set credits only Brian for producing "'Til I Die", while WOTS credits Carl and Brian. The GV boxed set credits "Brian Wilson and the Beach Boys" on "Surf's Up", while WOTS credits Carl and Brian.

For "All This Is That" on the other hand, the GV set doesn't offer individual credits for production and simply notes that all seven BB's were credited with production on "So Tough."

I could be wrong, but I think a lot if not most of the individual song production credits we've seen on latter-day compilations of material are more for historcal accuracy, using the evidence at hand (namely, AFM and/or other paperwork  and records and simply interviewing the members to ask who produced it) to show who produced a given track, while contractually or technically the production credit goes to whatever the original credit is. So on albums where the production credit simply went to the "Beach Boys", while individual tracks may have been produced by fewer or a single member and then credited as such on later compilations, the producer of record would still be the "Beach Boys."

I certainly can't dispute that that set looks quite nice. But I'd much rather get some unreleased material rather than another reissue, no matter how nice it looks, and even if it provides some mixes we don't have on CD. I'd rather see at some later point all of the 60's albums released with both mono and stereo mixes (where mono and/or stereo mixes existed and/or where a stereo remix is possible) which could give us all the mixes of both album tracks and, via bonus tracks, singles as well.

I hadn't heard Foskett's version before, but I just listened to a 30-second clip of it on Amazon, and apart from the Brian vocal part, it didn't sound like the original/rough version that floats around with Brian sharing the lead vocal with Carnie and Wendy. I suppose Foskett could have used the original backing track as a starting point, but on that clip that I heard, Foskett's version sounded as different from the original as the Thomas-produced version on "The Wilsons."

But I readily admit that I'm going off of a mediocre-sounding 30-second clip, so I only have so much detail to compare.

I was just cruising the dial on TV and came across a new Donovan "Live in L.A." concert on PBS, and all of a sudden I see Mike Love is on stage with him singing "Mellow Yellow." I don't know if that's the only song he comes on stage for, and from the latter portion of the song I heard, I couldn't even hear Mike Love in the audio mix. But you may want to check your local PBS listings to see if this is on. It's re-airing again later tonight on another local PBS station where I am, so I might tune in and see exactly why Mike Love was joining Donovan (I would imagine it is the 1968 India connection). The concert must be fairly recent. It has a 2007 date on my DirecTV listing, so it must have premiered on PBS fairly recently, so I would imagine it was taped/filmed within the last couple of years or so.

The #40 chart placement seems pretty impressive. 14,000 sold sounds okay. I mean, in the context of what you normally see on the charts in terms of placement and sales, and in the context of what releases of the Beach Boys' have sold in the past, I think this chart placement and sales figure is pretty good.

I still think "Sounds of Summer", like "Greatest Hits Vol. 1", will consistently sell more copies than anything else.

Did "Sounds of Summer" chart at #16? I thought it peaked at #26, but maybe I was just remembering the "6" part of it and not the first digit.

It's still quite exciting to see tracks from "Surf's Up" and other later period stuff charting and selling. Hopefully somebody will decide the time is right for some archival releases now. I'm hoping the next project we see isn't a summer 2008 release of another compilation of previously released stuff that didn't make it onto SOS or WOTS.

Interestingly, it appears that there is a previously unreleased downloadable track exclusive to Target stores as well. It's a live version of "Fun Fun Fun" from Sacramento, 1964. It's supposedly labeled as previously unreleased, so it must be different from the version on the "Concert" album, perhaps from the other show or a non-overdubbed version.

The Target website or flier makes no mention of the exclusive, so that's a bit strange. But I don't think I'll buy the CD again for this track, especially since all of the Sacramento 1964 stuff has appeared on the SOT CD's, while the "409" track at least hadn't been booted.

This doesn't address the original question, but it's interesting that Brian also cut another version of "Shortenin' Bread" in 1980, after they had released it on "LA (Light Album)." As far as I know, this version only circulates as a backing track. I don't know if any more work was done on that version, or what Brian possibly could have been planning to do with another version of the song.

[Sounds Of Summer]

It's a good compilation for the newbie - first play them Sounds Of Summer, then hand them The Warmth Of The Sun saying "OK, now for the stuff you probably won't know".

Certainly true, but I'd say the same thing to varying degrees about "Greatest Hits" Volumes 2 and 3, and some other compilations. But I certainly can't fault the programming of the compilation too much; there are at least 3 or 4 songs on the "Warmth of the Sun" that I would put in my Top 10 BB songs.

Interestingly, the liner notes state that "California Dreamin'" is the original 1986 mix, which certainly isn't the case. The song as a whole sounds like the same mix, but it has to be an alternate done either back then or recently to incorporate more of the thunder sound effects. The actual original 1986 mix starts cold with the guitar, and then incorporates a bit of the sound effects. The version on "Warmth of the Sun" stars with sound effects and then the opening guitar quickly fades up.

I might be motivated to write a more detailed review about the stereo remixes, but my general impression and feelings are mixed. Some do have too much reverb in my opinion. In general, I still like the idea of stereo remixes. Some have criticized previous stereo remixes for having too much reverb, and while I don't feel that way regarding the "Pet Sounds" stereo remix, some of these new stereo remixes do exhibit this to a degree, in my opinion of course. One of the reasons I like stereo remixes is that they can have more clarity in general than sometimes muddy mono mixes when a big production is crammed into mono. But if the stereo remix uses a lot of reverb, that tends to muddy it up a bit in a different way. But perhaps I'll get more into that in a more detailed review. I'd still say I'm generally happy to have these stereo remixes.

As for the CD's tracklisting, there are a few interesting tidbits on the "Warmth of the Sun" blog, indicating that Al didn't want to talk about "It's OK". I'd be interested to know why that is. Does he just not like the song? Is it something about that era of the BB's that Al doesn't like to talk about? In the actual podcast episode covering the song, and there is nothing from Al, so we can't even hear what his specific comment was about, well, not commenting on the song. Did he just say "I can't think of anything on that song", or was it like "I'd rather not get into that particular song", or something else? Brian certainly links the song with a period that he doesn't remember so fondly today, or at least didn't remember fondly at the time he gave that interview.

I got my copy from Best Buy, and just got around to downloading the "Best Buy exclusive" bonus track, the live take of "409" from Chicago in 1965. It's about what you would expect; probably the least interesting bonus track they could have come up with. I have to say it is a bit of a novelty to have a live take of "409" with Brian on it, and it's worth noting that the bits from the Chicago shows on the SOT CD's (which I think consisted of overdub sessions) did not include this track. Certainly this was a nice enough free bonus.

I hadn't done the downloading a free bonus track thing before, so I was surprised that the whole process was pretty easy and quick. I thought it might download the track on its own and stick it somewhere on a playlist on one of playback programs or something, but it just let me download the WMA track wherever I wanted. The ease with which I downloaded the track was tempered by the fact that it's not exactly CD quality (160 kbps), and was my first experience with the dreaded DRM. I don't do ITunes, so I hadn't dealt with this before. I thought EMI recently announced they were going to start doing higher bitrate non-DRM files. But I guess that only applies to ITunes, and to services where you pay for the track. I guess the free downloads are lower bitrate, with DRM still present. Plus, I don't think EMI has anywhere near totally switched over to the non-DRM files even on ITunes. Oh well. I was hoping I would be able to put the track on a CD just to catalog it. I'm sure there are ways to get around it and encode it for a CD, but since I don't deal with downloads much, I haven' t a clue how to do that. So, in retrospect, I'm glad they didn't choose to make this free exclusive download some sort of huge, lost classic like a "Smile" track or a cool Dennis outtake. I would be totally ticked if I was stuck with some great masterpiece that I could only listen to in 160 kbps on my computer.

Now I'll have to listen to the actual "Warmth" CD! I think that might be a bit more fun!

What's kind of distressing, or perhaps discouraging is a better way to put it, about this new CD is that the remaining BB's seem to have put a good deal of thought and effort into selecting and sequencing the tracks as well as promoting the thing. Both the Amazon video and the ITunes podcast, at least the first podcast, seems to just be a big sales pitch for the album. (Also, what's up with the Amazon video including a comment from Al about "Hang On To Your Ego?" What has that got to do with this album? Did they slip up and use an outtake from this "Pet Sounds 40th Anniversary" interview?) It's good to see the BB's involved and interested in some way, and good to see Capitol soliciting their input. But I wish the remaining BB's would put this same effort and enthusiasm into putting something new out in terms of archival releases, etc.

It seems a bit like, in selecting the tracks, they are taking the CD a bit too seriously, sequencing the tracks as if they were working out the order for another "Pet Sounds" or something. Maybe it's just me being too much into the historical data side of things, but just about any track order other than more or less chronological is going to sound a bit disjointed to me. Capitol has got my number though, because I probably wouldn't be buying the CD if not for the stereo remixes.

I highly doubt this CD will be as successful as "Sounds of Summer", just as "Greatest Hits Vol. 2" on CD probably sold less than "Greatest Hits Vol. 1."

I'm very much looking forward to the stereo remixes, though. I fear they may have too much echo/reverb on them based on clips I've heard, but I'll wait to rate them until I hear the entire CD.

Apparently, as with last years "Pet Sounds" reissue, Best Buy will once again be offering an exclusive download with their copies of the "Warmth of the Sun" CD. However, this time it will be a previously unreleased track. Could it be a "Smile" outtake? A Dennis track like "Wouldn't It Be Nice To Live Again"? Um, no. It will be............a live version of "409" from Chicago, 1965.

I'm not sure what to think about this. On the one hand, I don't like doing the download thing, not even for a freebie like this (I've actually never accessed one of these types of download deals before, but I've read accounts of some people having trouble getting the thing to work), and I don't like the idea of online exclusives or retailer exclusives, so I'm glad that they didn't release anything terribly substantial as a download-only, exclusive to one retailer. On the other hand, this is about the least substantial unreleased track they possibly could have come up with.

Anyway, you can order it (or, right now, pre-order it) from the Best Buy website, which is also offering free shipping for the CD. Here is a link from the Best Buy website with info about their "exclusive":

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/olspage.jsp;jsessionid=NLTNKIDS0PSW3KC4D3GFAFQ?type=category&id=pcmcat120600050004

The strangest live version of "Wouldn't It Be Nice" that I've heard is from an Arizona show in 1988. It's actually kind of a mess, as it sounds like nobody can decide who is supposed to be singing the lead. At various points, Carl, Al, Mike, and Jeff Foskett all kind of trip over each other singing the lead parts, sometimes in unison, sometimes unintentionally so. Even Mike starts doubling (or tripling) the lead prior to his bridge.

Hey everybody! We've just launched a brand new Lost Beach Boy website. This is where you can purchase tickets for the L.A. book launch party coming up on May 29th. The list of guest performers continues to grow and I expect some interesting additions to come. Here's the link http://www.thelostbeachboy.com/

Jon, I noticed on the new website that it mentions that ordering from the US Amazon site will have the book shipping now to the US. But according to the US Amazon site, it is a pre-order right now not released until May 29th. Will it still ship now? I was going to order from another website that was a bit cheaper, but if the US Amazon site is shipping now, I'll order from them.

Regarding the local newspaper interview comments, I'm not sure if a reference to the record company being desperate would be applicable in the case of this potential beachboyscentral website. Obviously there isn't much concrete info to go by, but I thought that part of the idea behind the website was for the group/Brother to circumvent trying to sell record labels on issuing relatively obscure material that won't sell terribly well by simply issuing the material themselves. Isn't Alan Boyd's work in the vaults related to Brother as opposed to Capitol, etc.? Perhaps Capitol has been pressing the group on unreleased material and that is what the interview references, but I can't see how such a comment applies to Alan Boyd working in the Brother vaults and trying to get the band's own website up and running to sell its own music on its own.

It is troubling that the project that has been discussed the most is the "Warmth of the Sun" CD, which is just a "Best of What We Left Off Of Sounds of Summer" disc, although I won't be surprised if a remix or two or something semi-"new" is added to that so we need to buy it. Then there will be the CD/DVD deluxe version issued the following summer, etc.

I'm also a bit perplexed by both the question and answer regarding the proposition of releasing previously unreleased material considering the amount of unreleased material that has been issued in the last 16 years:

-Bonus Tracks on Two-Fers
-Bonus Tracks on GV Boxed Set
-Pet Sounds Sessions Boxed Set
-Endless Harmony Soundtrack
-Hawthorne, CA set
-Knebworth 1980 CD
-Songs From Here & Back

What was so daring about Brian Wilson playing Smile live? Someone explain THAT one to me.

Don't bother preaching to me, I don't care what anyone thinks anyway.

EDIT - If Brian performs Love You live, then and only then will I rethink my post. Until then, no dice.

Okay, even though you "don't care what anyone thinks anyway", I'll bite one more time for the fun of it and ask you this: What is "daring" (keeping in mind that you introduced the word "daring" to describe the Mike/Bruce show) about the Mike/Bruce setlist/show, and how is it more "daring" than anything Brian Wilson has done live? John Stamos singing "Good Timin'" or Mike singing "Bluebirds Over the Mountain" is more "daring" than attempting the entire "Smile" album in concert?

Of course, I'll understand completely if you don't want to talk anymore about this considering that you "don't care what anyone thinks anyway" and probably wouldn't care to waste time discussing this. Of course, if you don't care what anyone thinks, I'm sort of perplexed as to why you're here at all. I do care what you and other fans think insofar as discussion on this board is concerned. I'm not sure what other purpose one would have for posting here.

Apologies to those who are smart enough to not be baited by "Smile-what's the big deal?" type of comments. I'm just making one more attempt at discussion in case such a thing is really possible in this particular case. As much as I do care what others think when it comes to generating discussion here, there is no explanation for someone actually being serious in questioning what is more daring about performing "Smile" live versus Scott Totten and Chris Farmer covering Beach Boys songs that would make me want to invest anymore time in discussing this.

Christian Love has joined the band, but why would Chris Farmer (musical director) need a replacement for either Totten or Kirsch? Both men do their jobs very well.

And if you heard Mike and Bruce's UK setlists in late 2004, you wouldn't be calling them the Endless Sounds of Summer Travelling Jukebox. I personally would call them The Mike and Bruce More Daring Than Brian Wilson Has Been Live In Years Band.

Yeah really. I mean, what was Brian's setlist like in 2004 and 2005? Just that tired old "Smile" album that we had heard for year after year, that every two-bit cover band can easily pull off live, right? 

C'mon,  let's keep everything in perspective. The Mike/Bruce setlists certainly have been more adventurous and interesting in the last few years as compared to the late 90's for instance. (My humble opinion based on nothing but my own gut feeling is that part of the motivation behind Mike/Bruce spicing up the setlist has been the early attempts by Al to do so with his own band, attempts which by 2000 were no longer possible, and Brian's continued setlist diversity). But Brian's setlists have been quite interesting as well, even aside from the "Smile" sets. Sure, we get "Love and Mercy" every time, and we usually get stuff like "Surfer Girl", "Please Let Me Wonder", a few "Pet Sounds" tracks, and a handfull of other workhorses that you would hear at a Mike or Al show as well. But Brian in 2004 and 2005 has worked in songs like "Marcella", "When I Grow Up", "Good Timin'", and the list goes on and on. Sure, his 2005 setlist didn't vary a great deal from the 2004 setlist, but that hardly leaves room to crown the Mike/Bruce band as all of a sudden having a more "daring" setlist than Brian. And as for the handfull of 2006 Brian shows, you see the same problem that has occured with Al in recent years. That is, it is hard to work up a dymanic setlist that differs a great deal from the setlists of the recent past when you're not regularly touring and are only throwing together the band for a gig here or there once in awhile.

But wow, I have to give credit for being bold enough to suggest that the Mike/Bruce setlists are more "daring" than doing "Smile" live. I don't agree with this, and I haven't a clue how one could arrive at this conclusion other than the possibility that Brian is somehow expected to work up a new long-lost never-before-heard live album performance on every one of his tours.