|
Post by ian on Feb 20, 2024 10:45:24 GMT -5
So, I completed 1975 on my site Beachboysgigs.com -here is the link- www.beachboysgigs.com/1975-2/You can look at photos, reviews, etc-some updates since the book. You can of course look at 1962-1974 as well
|
|
|
Post by John Manning on Feb 20, 2024 12:05:32 GMT -5
Thanks Ian, looks great. Terrific website.
|
|
|
Post by E on Feb 20, 2024 12:36:51 GMT -5
Thanks. Really enjoyed that
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on Feb 20, 2024 12:43:49 GMT -5
Thanks Ian, looks great. Terrific website. Yeah. Guy looks like he knows what he's doing.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 20, 2024 13:40:49 GMT -5
He has you fooled
|
|
|
Post by jay on Feb 20, 2024 19:18:20 GMT -5
I just read through about half of the entries from that year. What a great site and fan resource! One interesting thing that stuck out to me was the memories of a certain member of the backing band(I can't recall his specific name) who talked about an apparent disparity between "the beach boys" and the treatment of backing band. This is the first time I've ever read of any real tension between the two.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 21, 2024 7:26:59 GMT -5
Putter Smith-who played bass during the 1973-75 period when Guercio was busy (Ed Carter was mostly absent during that period).
|
|
|
Post by drbeachboy (Dirk) on Feb 21, 2024 8:16:35 GMT -5
Putter Smith-who played bass during the 1973-75 period when Guercio was busy (Ed Carter was mostly absent during that period). Ian, wasn't this the timeframe when the band started to split into factions? I remember reading that the guys Mike brought into the backing band didn’t speak much with Carl and Dennis. And, I think Carli said that he was part of the Dennis and Carl faction and didn’t have much of a relationship with Mike and Al. Maybe Putter Smith was not in either camp since he was not one of the regular backing band musicians. Also, rarely if ever, has anyone had a bad word about working with Carl, or Dennis, for that matter.
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 21, 2024 11:12:33 GMT -5
Yes....as Mike got more and more involved in TM ...he began to try and place fellow meditators into the group. He also was becoming militantly anti-drug by this time. Al also shared the interest in TM. Meanwhile the Wilsons continued to all, to some degree, live the 'rock and roll' lifestyle and Mike's 'Holier than thou' attitudes irritated them (meanwhile their behavior-such as Dennis playing gigs high or drunk-infuriated Mike and Al). So you can see both points of view make sense. It obviously led to tension-the fact was that most rock musicians in the wild and crazy 70s liked to indulge-so many in the backing band preferred to hang out with the Wilsons, where they could 'relax' without being scolded. So factions developed. Mike tried to place musicians and people in that shared his views-like Steve Moffat and Ron Altbach. As I related, Ron A definitely felt a chill from Carl-because Carl considered himself the 'band leader' and did not like Mike trying to place a musician in the band but Mike wanted a fellow meditator on the road with him and was always trying to promote 'clean-living' on the road. Putter Smith had nicer things to say about the Wilsons-who hung out with him a little-but his relations with Mike were strictly business-it's fair to say that Mike kept his distance-after a gig he did not hang out at the hotel with musicians-He was very serious about TM-many times after the gigs that I discuss, he then went and spoke about TM on the campus and tried to get people to do it.
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on Feb 21, 2024 13:03:40 GMT -5
Yes....as Mike got more and more involved in TM ...he began to try and place fellow meditators into the group. Mike tried to place musicians and people in that shared his views. After reading that, I immediately thought of what Stephen Desper said one time concerning his departure from the band; that Mike preferred to be surrounded by people who subscribed to the practice and philosophy of TM, but Steve didn't align with it, and that didn't help their relationship. [Steve, if you're reading this, please clarify if I'm off base].
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 21, 2024 14:35:52 GMT -5
Yes, that is what Stephen told me when I interviewed him for the book ten or eleven years ago.
|
|
|
Post by jay on Feb 21, 2024 15:57:27 GMT -5
Putter Smith-who played bass during the 1973-75 period when Guercio was busy (Ed Carter was mostly absent during that period). I sensed a bitterness from some of his comments, particularly about the money issue.
|
|
|
Post by jay on Feb 21, 2024 16:02:03 GMT -5
Yes....as Mike got more and more involved in TM ...he began to try and place fellow meditators into the group. He also was becoming militantly anti-drug by this time. Al also shared the interest in TM. Meanwhile the Wilsons continued to all, to some degree, live the 'rock and roll' lifestyle and Mike's 'Holier than thou' attitudes irritated them (meanwhile their behavior-such as Dennis playing gigs high or drunk-infuriated Mike and Al). So you can see both points of view make sense. It obviously led to tension-the fact was that most rock musicians in the wild and crazy 70s liked to indulge-so many in the backing band preferred to hang out with the Wilsons, where they could 'relax' without being scolded. So factions developed. Mike tried to place musicians and people in that shared his views-like Steve Moffat and Ron Altbach. As I related, Ron A definitely felt a chill from Carl-because Carl considered himself the 'band leader' and did not like Mike trying to place a musician in the band but Mike wanted a fellow meditator on the road with him and was always trying to promote 'clean-living' on the road. Putter Smith had nicer things to say about the Wilsons-who hung out with him a little-but his relations with Mike were strictly business-it's fair to say that Mike kept his distance-after a gig he did not hang out at the hotel with musicians-He was very serious about TM-many times after the gigs that I discuss, he then went and spoke about TM on the campus and tried to get people to do it. I've never quite understood why Carl was so...."unfriendly" to Ron. Obviously he wasn't happy about somebody being hired without prior knowledge (or without his permission), but shouldn't the brunt of his anger have been put on Mike?
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 21, 2024 16:21:49 GMT -5
In my experience, there are often people you can confront and other people that you feel like you can’t confront. Mike and Carl had to keep it civil or the band would have imploded
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on Feb 21, 2024 18:15:22 GMT -5
It probably didn't help the Wilson's to have Steve and Stan Love in the mix.
|
|
|
Post by AGD on Feb 22, 2024 3:08:15 GMT -5
In my experience, there are often people you can confront and other people that you feel like you can’t confront. Mike and Carl had to keep it civil or the band would have imploded Family bands, huh?
|
|
|
Post by gerry on Feb 25, 2024 11:11:03 GMT -5
Very good job Ian. Reading this I was reminded how pretentious reviewers were. It was almost as if they went in, hating what they had to review and were just above it all. In San Francisco we had a rock press writer, Joel Selvin, same attitude. After you read a review you couldn't tell if he liked the show or hated it, but he to, was above the fray.
|
|
|
Post by karmafrog on Feb 26, 2024 12:22:42 GMT -5
So, I completed 1975 on my site Beachboysgigs.com -here is the link- www.beachboysgigs.com/1975-2/You can look at photos, reviews, etc-some updates since the book. You can of course look at 1962-1974 as well These are always a pleasure, and enlightening. Thank you, Ian, for doing them.
|
|
|
Post by Will/P.P. on Feb 26, 2024 15:23:06 GMT -5
In my experience, there are often people you can confront and other people that you feel like you can’t confront. Mike and Carl had to keep it civil or the band would have imploded The group did implode. Dennis was held in check and Mike created Celebration. Then came the "team" albums. On one side we got M.I.U., then the other team gave us the delightful L.A. (Light Album). Then the implosion continued into the 1980s. This thread opens a big can of worms. Probably not your intention.
|
|
|
Post by Will/P.P. on Feb 26, 2024 15:27:54 GMT -5
And don't forget, Brian considered himself a solo artist in the 1975-1977 period. In my way of thinking, Brian considered himself a solo artist after Friends. But, he had a vote and used it. He continued to work with Mike and the group as best he could.
|
|
|
Post by lonelysummer on Feb 26, 2024 16:23:29 GMT -5
Very good job Ian. Reading this I was reminded how pretentious reviewers were. It was almost as if they went in, hating what they had to review and were just above it all. In San Francisco we had a rock press writer, Joel Selvin, same attitude. After you read a review you couldn't tell if he liked the show or hated it, but he to, was above the fray. Selvin, one of my least favorite writers. The man who reviewed a certain show as "Dylan's God-awful gospel". He always came across as very full of himself.
|
|
|
Post by Will/P.P. on Feb 26, 2024 17:19:40 GMT -5
Yeah, Selvin was terrible. We have the right to our own opinions, tho. He liked who he likes but is not very professional. I left San Francisco in 1998. Is he still around?
|
|
|
Post by jeremylr68 on Feb 26, 2024 20:10:08 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by ian on Feb 27, 2024 14:36:36 GMT -5
Glad you like the website....as to the reviews....yes well some reviewers were very critical, though to be fair not always out of ignorance or malice...for example, as petsite has noted, I don't think you could attend a BBs show in 1981 without being a little critical, so the fact that some reviewers have nothing negative to report about some 1981 shows, sort of beggars belief....The 1960s reviewers often were totally ignorant (if the newspaper even bothered to review the concert)...I've said before that it seems like newspapers did not start to see youth culture as something worth taking seriously till around 1971...The difference between the people hired to review concerts in the 1970s and those employed in the 1960s really illustrates the changes taking place in the culture. A reviewer in 1964 seemed to always be some middle aged gentleman who did not think rock music was music period and tended to just make fun of it...whereas by 1972 a reviewer was usually a younger person that was more knowledgable about the artists and their music. Sometimes those people were not BBs fans...but at least they knew who the BBs were!
|
|
|
Post by Mikie on Feb 27, 2024 14:50:46 GMT -5
|
|