Jump to content


Please note: You can easily log in to MPN using your Facebook account!

Beach Boys... best I've ever seen


LiveMusic

Recommended Posts

In 30 years of concert-going, last night was tops. Beach Boys in a showroom that seated no more than about 600. I (and every single person in there) was blown away. How can any group possibly sound this good? A few observations:

 

1. They played at least 30 songs. Most acts I see, I'm lucky to hear 15.

2. They appeared to be having a blast. Very much the perfect good-time band.

3. How can any band sound this good? There were SIX guys singing, a total of eight band members. Mike Love and Bruce Whatzizname plus six others. I am curious if this was all totally "real" or was some of it digital. I mean, I don't know much about the digital wizardry available these days but I can't see how they could possibly sing this perfect. What an incredible "wall of sound."

4. The place was small. How can a group that has been so big and who sstill sounds this good, not pack 'em in in large venues? Maybe they do, I dunno. But I just don't understand how they would NOT fill larger places. I'm telling you, if anyone likes music, they would like this show. Is it just the age thing? That younger people don't know their music? Gosh, how many freakin' hits did they have? I've always been a fan but now, it's gone up a big notch.

 

If you get a chance to see them, go; you won't be disappointed.

 

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

Duke

> > > [ Live! ] < < <

Link to comment
Share on other sites



  • Replies 17
  • Created
  • Last Reply

It's all so weird...Mike Love...with Bruce Johnson (Bruce wasn't an original, but he's been with 'em for a long time...decades). And then you read about the crap that's going on with Al Jardine...who was an original...and he's trying to tour with an act with some semblence of "Beach Boys" in the name...and Love is throwing lawsuit threats at him. And Carl and Dennis are dead, and Brian's, well, Brian...although I guess he did have his shit together for his recent tour with Paul Simon.

 

Hmmm...

 

Like, I saw the Temptations in New Orleans. Only one original guy in the band. Both the original lead singers, Ruffin and Kendricks, are dead. So this incarnation was almost like a cover vocal group playing Temptations songs. Was it really the Temptations??? They did kick ass..the new guys are really good at what they do...but are they the Temptations?

 

Kinda like if McCartney put a new band together and called 'em the Beatles...

 

How do y'all feel about this kind of capitalizing? Under what circumstances should a group be able to go out and use the original name, after tons of personnel changes? Under what circumstances shouldn't they?

"Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Right on, Duke!!!

 

I caught the Boys at a place called the Keswick Theater, just outside of Philly, just this spring. All I can say is...amazing! It was all you said, and more. The guy they have playing guitar and singing Brian's parts was a revelation. Sounded exactly like Brian, yet stronger.

 

They also did a set of tunes exclusively from the Pet Sounds record that blew me away. And throughout the show, Mr. Love gave all props possible to Brian and the other members of the original band.

 

Interesting topic you've brought up, Ted. This sort of thing has bothered me in the past.

 

The hard and fast rules on the matter? Well, I don't think there is any, really, but I would have to say that if you founded the original band, you can do whatever you wish with the name. As long as you understand that it may not go over to well with your core fanbase if you're not true to the original lineup's spirit and feel. Vague terms, to be sure, but you would understand if it happened.

 

I also don't have a problem with an artist capitalizing on his former band's name if he does it as a variation. Al Jardine's current 'group' is called The Beach Boys Family or some such stuff. Or how about Creedence Clearwater Revisited? (It's a sin the Fogerty brothers can't straighten out THAT mess...)

 

Jeff Lynne just recorded a new album and is touring with an act called ELO.

The only other original member involved is the keyboardist, Richard Tandy. I just caught the show on PBS the other night, and it was great.

 

On the other hand, if you were the replacement bass player for 2 years in a band that had had a big fan base in the late 60's as a long time established group, and now you're trying to push your own new record with a tour or something, then you should eat ka-ka and die, IMHO.

 

Steve

(fun, fun, fun...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I think it's tacky for someone to continue using their former band's name unless they are the acknowledged founder/leader, and even then, if there aren't two or three original and SIGNIFICANT members left then I still don't think I'd use it.

 

Now there'd be nothing wrong with billing yourself as, say "The Sons of Surf - A Beach Boys tribute featuring original Beach Boy Mike Love" or something of that nature. But the Temptations thing for example - it might be a great show but it's tacky IMO to call it the Temptations, it cheapens what might otherwise be great entertainment and a lot of folks probably wouldn't go see it for that reason.

 

Now it is certainly acknowledged by any fan that Jeff Lynne WAS ELO in most respects, and he has every "right" to tour as ELO even without any other original band members (although if I were him [perish the thought!] I still wouldn't do that). But that's kinda different because it was clearly him running the show all along. It's not like the original keyboardist is touring with a band that does all Lynne's songs and is calling it ELO. THAT would be really tacky.

 

I guess you're kinda damned if you do and damned if you don't - 'cause some people really look down on the idea of "tribute bands" too...LOL...

 

--Lee

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's in a name???

 

Kinda funny...John Fogerty kinda WAS CCR...wrote the tunes...sang 'em, etc. and yet he tours as "John Fogerty". And, Stu and Doug hate his guts for all the crap that's happened, and, perhaps they have a point. Fogerty does come across as a bit of an arrogant, controlling kind of guy. Ah well, that really doesn't have a lot to do with the discussion. I've heard of groups like "The Platters"...not a ONE of 'em had anything to do with the original Platters (if any of those guys are still around)...but, they bought the rights to use the name, and sing the old songs. Then, there are groups like The Temptations and The Beach Boys...who continue to use the names with one or so of the original members (and, actually, I believe Brian Wilson was the founding Beach Boy)...and then, groups like Page and Plant, who could probably have toured under "Led Zeppelin" with very few objections, but didn't.

 

Lineup changes are bound to happen in any band. But, if the focus is on certain key players...and the said player leaves...then IMHO they should pick a new name. Or should they???

"Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

Now there'd be nothing wrong with billing yourself as, say "The Sons of Surf - A Beach Boys tribute featuring original Beach Boy Mike Love" or something of that nature.

 

 

I guess you're kinda damned if you do and damned if you don't - 'cause some people really look down on the idea of "tribute bands" too...LOL...

 

--Lee

 

I'm not sure the "Sons of Surf" thing would fit on a ticket stub. And it's weird to think of a founding member of a band being a member of a tribute band to his band...uh....or something like that...

"Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

There was a time recently when Brian Wilson had more "Beach Boys" in his touring band than in the Beach Boys itself (only Love in the Beach Boys, and BW had Al Jardine with him).

 

I saw Brian Wilson early this summer, and I can't imaging his music sounding better than in the reverent hands of his backup band, The (expanded) Wondermints. And while Brian certanly does NOT seem to "have his shit together" on stage (at least not at the show I saw, nor on the TNT July 4th special), having him front the band playing that wonderous music is a very special experience.

 

There's something just wrong about groups that continue to milk the legacy of a name (ex. every doo-wop group, the Duke Ellington Orchestra, the Temptations).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by jflush:

After seeing Brian this summer, my mother says," He appears to have no rythm, but sings in time..." Couldn't have said it better myself! We both loved the show ... the Wondermints rocked! [/b]

 

Your mother is amazing! (if you don't mind my saying so http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/wink.gif )

 

Steve

(still highly medicated...)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Lee Flier:

I think it's tacky for someone to continue using their former band's name unless they are the acknowledged founder/leader, and even then, if there aren't two or three original and SIGNIFICANT members left then I still don't think I'd use it.

 

It's not like the original keyboardist is touring with a band that does all Lynne's songs and is calling it ELO. THAT would be really tacky.

 

I guess you're kinda damned if you do and damned if you don't - 'cause some people really look down on the idea of "tribute bands" too...LOL...

 

--Lee

 

Lee

good point the spookiness about your comment is that the other members of ELO do indeed tour as ELO part 2, cos Jeff Lynn owns the name, and a very good friend of mine was imported as the lead singer. He finds it embarrasing but the pay is good and mentaly he treats it as a tribute band although they have a new record deal with a german label. The sad part about it is that at their live shows they mainly only play the old hits..... Shame!

 

Simon

...remember there is absolutely no point in talking about someone behind their back unless they get to hear about it...
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, as far as the Beach Boys go, I grew up with their music and have a great respect for much of it, but as far as the band members, the names of the brothers and who did what, the labrynthine details of the splits, legal scraps, drugged years, etc. I never could keep track of it enough to have an opinion about who deserves what.

As far as names go I can only offer this. I've loved The Who ever since I first heard the feedback in "My Generation". (It was by the way, a great song to dance to, back when people still DANCED) Personally, I prefer the first half of their career.They were the quintessential rock band and literally HAD IT ALL. The union of 4 unique individuals that made up the whole. I saw them 4 times live, the last in '74. all with Keith Moon, and despite the stories about him he never disappointed at any show I saw, live or otherwise. When Moon died it was no longer The Who, one of the wheels was off the car. I really think that Townshend should have acknowledged that and called it something else. (Who's Left or something). It was no longer possible for them to be The Who anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Which begs the question...Mick, Keith, Charlie...Ron Wood is a replacement...he even replaced a replacement...as is the guy who replaced Bill Wyman.

 

So, are they the Stones or not? How about the Eagles? They've been through numerous personnel changes, too, although each incarnation has had Henley and Frey.

 

And were the Beatles really the Beatles without Pete and Stu? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

"Cisco Kid, was a friend of mine"
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One thing I don't understand is why guys like this still tour. Like they need the money. I don't know if it's true but Bruce Johnston said in print that he recently sold his house to Oprah Winfrey. $51 million. Yikes, why would you tour to 600 seat venues? I don't know how much they get paid but he probably earns more interest in a day than he earns in tour profits.

 

They have been on the road for the entire summer without going home. I forget what Mike Love said but it was staggering how many dates they have done this year.

 

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

Duke

> > > [ Live! ] < < <

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Tedster:

Which begs the question...Mick, Keith, Charlie...Ron Wood is a replacement...he even replaced a replacement...as is the guy who replaced Bill Wyman.

 

So, are they the Stones or not? How about the Eagles? They've been through numerous personnel changes, too, although each incarnation has had Henley and Frey.

 

And were the Beatles really the Beatles without Pete and Stu? http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gifhttp://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/biggrin.gif

 

Well, I never thought that Mick Taylor "fit" although he was good. But they couldn't have made a better choice than Ron Wood. Stewart and the Faces worked similar ground with the Stones. I saw them with both guys. With Wood (in '75) they were "the Stones" again.(in my humble opinion).

A complex issue, I know........... http://www.musicplayer.com/ubb/smile.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by LiveMusic:

One thing I don't understand is why guys like this still tour. Like they need the money. I don't know if it's true but Bruce Johnston said in print that he recently sold his house to Oprah Winfrey. $51 million. Yikes, why would you tour to 600 seat venues? I don't know how much they get paid but he probably earns more interest in a day than he earns in tour profits.

 

They have been on the road for the entire summer without going home. I forget what Mike Love said but it was staggering how many dates they have done this year.

 

A lot of these guys are playing what is sometimes referred to as the "corporate circuit". Corporations booking them at fantastic rates for private shows. A guaranteed full house with an enthusiastic alcohol-primed audience that was young when the band was big. The audience is on an expense paid holiday(company perks), everything for the band is first class. No worries about advance radio play, ticket sales and all that shit. In short, not bad if your over the hill and itching for the road and your lost youth again. I suppose some of them have more than they need but a lot of them got screwed or spent it all. We should all be so lucky.........

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Originally posted by lynx:

Well, as far as the Beach Boys go, I grew up with their music and have a great respect for much of it, but as far as the band members, the names of the brothers and who did what, the labrynthine details of the splits, legal scraps, drugged years, etc. I never could keep track of it enough to have an opinion about who deserves what.

 

The Boys are simply..." Better than Spinal Tap!"

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...