|
Post by Beach Boys Fan on Jan 6, 2019 5:41:40 GMT -5
The 1962 debut by The Beach Boys which placed #32 on Billboard chart. 5 songs went to be 3 singles. Genres: surf rock, garage, pop.
|
|
|
Post by Beach Boys Fan on Jan 6, 2019 6:32:19 GMT -5
Fans don't ordinarily cut slack to it. I think kiddie Beach Boys did fine, there IS ambition in their debut, else they'd be dumped, wouldn't get to Billboard's. It's cool fact. 7.5-8.
|
|
Departed
Former Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 6, 2019 9:16:56 GMT -5
6/10
I gave it a 6, but there is a part of me that wants to give it a higher score for effort and the knowledge of just what was to come, and also for the fact that for being so young and inexperienced, they really pulled this together in a charming way. I think it’s impressive how many of the songs on their first album are originals during a time when recording covers of existing songs, or songs written by other people, was the norm.
There was just so much promise in this album and flashes of the brilliance that would soon follow.
And I don’t care what anyone says, Ten Little Indians is awesome. Yeah, I love a rock ‘n’ roll version of a children’s nursery rhyme, I’m fine with it, LOL.
Highlights: Surfin’, Surfin’ Safari, 409, Ten Little Indians, Chug-A-Lug
Lowlights: Cuckoo Clock, The Shift
|
|
|
Post by kds on Jan 7, 2019 13:51:45 GMT -5
6/10
It's a fun debut album. Other than the title track and 409, I like You're My Miss America a lot as well as Heads I Win Tails You Lose. I do wish The Beach Boys did a better version of Summertime Blues though.
|
|
|
Post by filledeplage on Jan 7, 2019 14:10:17 GMT -5
Surfin' Surfin Safari 4-0-9
Pretty good to mine 3 singles from a 1st LP. All of which are still performed - that gets an 8 in my book.
Not my vintage - but something that endures and is performed 57 years later deserves a great grade.
Didn't Brian's teacher end up giving him an A, decades after giving him an F, in his Music Composition class? 8!
|
|
|
Post by Jason (The Real Beach Boy) on Mar 28, 2019 11:38:44 GMT -5
6. Sure, it's a debut and it's rough around the edges, but with the highlights to be found, it's not bad.
|
|
|
Post by jk on Feb 26, 2020 7:44:05 GMT -5
I'm not sure how to rate the entire album. As for the closing track, this was my very first post on my very first Beach Boys forum (the now-defunct Capitol BB MB), posted in late December 2004:
"I have often wondered why no one (to my knowledge) has ever mentioned 'The Shift' as a pointer to the future. Most reviews quickly dismiss it as 'a fashion statement by Brian and Mike' or words to that effect. On the face of it, the main tune is a 12-bar blues (I I I I IV IV I I V IV I V). However, Brian 'shifts' the key up a whole tone in bar 3 and back down again in bar 12 (in Carl's solo too). As far as I know this is unique--no-one else has ever done this."
Curiously, Philip Lambert (Inside the Music of Brian Wilson, p. 46) describes it as a downward shift!
"Overall the song is in the key of A major, but when the A section begins we hear two bars of G chords. After that there are two bars of A chords, and then the song continues as a blues progression in A through the end of the section. In other words, Brian plays on the song's title by "shifting" the first two bars of a blues progression down a whole step from A to G. This is all anticipated in the introduction, where a C chord similarly shifts up to a D chord. In fact, at the beginning of the song, when we hear the intro C and D chords and then the vocals enter above G and A chords, it's hard to tell exactly what key the song is in; the key only becomes clear when blues progression eventually asserts itself. This is Brian in experimental mode, placing his personal stamp on a time-worn convention."
|
|
|
Post by Moon Dawg on Aug 22, 2020 10:39:46 GMT -5
If a group of teenage kids down the street formed a garage band and came up with something like this within 8 months, you'd probably agree they were off to a solid start. On those terms, this is a decent album, highlighted by "Surfin' Safari", "409", "Surfin", and of course "Moon Dawg." Odd they opted to leave "The Lonely Sea" in the can until next time...it would have added impressive depth to these ditties. Well, it found a great home on the SURFIN' USA album anyway.
|
|
|
Post by #JusticeForDonGoldberg on Dec 25, 2020 12:15:34 GMT -5
I have no idea if anyone else is going track by track, but I’m going to because I feel like it. Surfin' Safari: The first absolute classic in the catalog, that already shows progress from their first single. County Fair: I kind of like it, but “I Do” eats this song for breakfast. Also, the Carnival barker is quite annoying. Ten Little Indians: one of the worst songs they would ever record. Mike’s Voice is unbearable, the background vocals are obnoxious, the instrumental is boring, and the lyrics are dated and atrocious. Chug-A-Lug: compared to the last track, this thing sounds amazing. On its own, it would’ve been a better third single choice, but it’s still pretty goofy. Also, Mike still hasn’t come into his own vocally.
Little Girl (You're My Miss America): it’s fine, and Dennis’s young, 17 year old Voice is charming, but the instrumentation is just so similar to everything else on the album, that it doesn’t really stand out as much as it should. 409: The quality jump between this and the previous four tracks is incredible. The second classic in the catalog, and, even though the instrumentation is still pretty basic, it shows that they’re quickly finding their voice. Also, not to make this a comparison or anything, but our boys were using sound effects 4 years before The Beatles. Surfin: it’s a good first attempt, but it really stands out here. Also, some of the references are extremely dated, and I’m one of the few people that finds the “ Bom, bah, dip, di-di-dip” vocals to be distracting and annoying. Also, speeding up the track is one of the worst decisions they ever made. Heads You Win, Tails I Lose: this is what should’ve been the third single. Not only does it stand out in my opinion from the rest, it’s probably the third best track here, and the lyrics are charming in a “Beach Boys Love You” kinda way. Plus, the instrumental to this track actually has some energy. Summertime Blues: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... The instrumentation is on auto pilot, Carl and David sound half asleep, and the entire track is lifeless. Cuckoo Clock: it’s quirky, but it’s nothing great. Brian sounds like he barely knows the lyrics, and the entire track is quite annoying. Nothing I really come back to. The solo is good though. Moon Dawg: zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz... It’s fine I guess. The Shift: forgettable. Also, “ With the slit up the side, you can't resist that touch” doesn’t exactly send the best message. I know it was 1962, and a lot of the lyrics here are dated, but that one really stands out as something that’s just... eww. Speaking of dated lyrics, that’s my main problem with this album. Almost all their other albums don’t really suffer from this problem, but, outside of the title track and 409, “ Surfin' Safari” just sounds dated. A lot of the lyrics are dumb, The subject matter is late 50s early 60s novelty, and the majority of the instrumentals basically sound the same. Also, even though the harmonies are there, all of the lead vocalists really don’t sound comfortable at all. Also, I find it funny that in the original liner notes, Mike was labeled as the leader. I mean, it makes sense, he sings 8 out of 11 lead vocals, but it’s still an interesting historical note that, in 1962, Capitol marketed Mike as the leader. Another interesting note, this album began the very long and tedious trend of them not including their best material on their actual releases. Lonely Sea, Surfer Girl, lavender, Karate, and Judy are all better and more interesting than a lot of the filler on here. Overall, I give it a 4/10. It’s not terrible, and a couple great songs lift it from mediocrity, and it’s also short enough to not overstay its welcome. But it’s also basic, and a lot of it hasn’t aged well at all. Good cover photo though
|
|
|
Post by drbeachboy (Dirk) on Dec 25, 2020 17:35:23 GMT -5
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but when critiquing a song like The Shift that is 58 years old with 2020 sensibilities is ridiculous. The whole reason for listening to old songs is to enjoy them for their 1960’s sensibilities.
|
|
|
Post by #JusticeForDonGoldberg on Dec 26, 2020 12:38:58 GMT -5
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but when critiquing a song like The Shift that is 58 years old with 2020 sensibilities is ridiculous. The whole reason for listening to old songs is to enjoy them for their 1960’s sensibilities. Nope, non-consensual touching is still non-consensual touching, and it doesn’t matter if it was 1962. Let’s “ resist that touch” and the world will be a better place
|
|
|
Post by drbeachboy (Dirk) on Dec 26, 2020 13:07:48 GMT -5
Everyone is entitled to their opinions, but when critiquing a song like The Shift that is 58 years old with 2020 sensibilities is ridiculous. The whole reason for listening to old songs is to enjoy them for their 1960’s sensibilities. Nope, non-consensual touching is still non-consensual touching, and it doesn’t matter if it was 1962. Let’s “ resist that touch” and the world will be a better place Grow up!
|
|
|
Post by #JusticeForDonGoldberg on Dec 26, 2020 13:23:53 GMT -5
Nope, non-consensual touching is still non-consensual touching, and it doesn’t matter if it was 1962. Let’s “ resist that touch” and the world will be a better place Grow up! I mean, at least it’s not as bad as Tomboy, a song I actually like. But you still would never catch me trying to justify those lyrics.
|
|
|
Post by jk on Feb 13, 2021 18:31:20 GMT -5
Here we go again! I feel eternally blessed by the fact that lyrics mean nothing to me. For me the magic of "The Shift" is in the music -- it's a tonal shift, nothing more, nothing less.
|
|
|
Post by drbeachboy (Dirk) on Feb 13, 2021 20:25:15 GMT -5
Here we go again! I feel eternally blessed by the fact that lyrics mean nothing to me. For me the magic of "The Shift" is in the music -- it's a tonal shift, nothing more, nothing less. I’m not crazy! I thought I had this discussion before. It’s Deja vu, all over again.
|
|
|
Post by AGD on Feb 14, 2021 2:10:44 GMT -5
I mean, at least it’s not as bad as Tomboy, a song I actually like. But you still would never catch me trying to justify those lyrics. Hang on... you like "Tomboy" despite the lyric being at least nine times worse than "The Shift" ? Uh, can we have a little consistency here, please ? When they recorded "The Shift" (August 8th, 1962), Mike was 21, Brian was 20, Dennis was 18, Carl was 15 and David was almost 14. In October/November 1976, when they recorded "Tomboy" (the original version with the truly disturbing spoken section), they were respectively 35, 34, 32 and 29, with Alan being 34. Yet that doesn't wierd you out ? Congratulations. you just disqualified yourself for ever being taken seriously again here.
|
|
|
Post by #JusticeForDonGoldberg on Feb 17, 2021 18:18:04 GMT -5
I mean, at least it’s not as bad as Tomboy, a song I actually like. But you still would never catch me trying to justify those lyrics. Hang on... you like "Tomboy" despite the lyric being at least nine times worse than "The Shift" ? Uh, can we have a little consistency here, please ? When they recorded "The Shift" (August 8th, 1962), Mike was 21, Brian was 20, Dennis was 18, Carl was 15 and David was almost 14. In October/November 1976, when they recorded "Tomboy" (the original version with the truly disturbing spoken section), they were respectively 35, 34, 32 and 29, with Alan being 34. Yet that doesn't wierd you out ? Congratulations. you just disqualified yourself for ever being taken seriously again here. The Shift: bad music, bad vocal, bad lyric Tomboy: good music, good vocal, bad lyric
|
|
|
Post by boogieboarder on Jul 26, 2021 11:09:53 GMT -5
“With the slit up the side, you can't resist that touch.”
Perhaps my opinion will be called absolute hogwash, but “you can’t resist that touch” doesn’t mean what people are saying it means. It seems perfectly obvious to me that they are referring to the meaning of “touch” as something done with care and thoughtfulness. As in “That adds a nice touch.”
If one was going to imply that they couldn’t resist touching someone, or that they thought someone couldn’t resist being touched, they would not say “You can’t resist that touch.” It’s not really grammatical.
|
|
|
Post by filledeplage on Jul 26, 2021 11:16:14 GMT -5
“With the slit up the side, you can't resist that touch.” Perhaps my opinion will be called absolute hogwash, but “you can’t resist that touch” doesn’t mean what people are saying it means. It seems perfectly obvious to me that they are referring to the meaning of “touch” as something done with care and thoughtfulness. As in “That adds a nice touch.” If one was going to imply that they couldn’t resist touching someone, or that they thought someone couldn’t resist being touched, they would not say “You can’t resist that touch.” It’s not really grammatical. Everyone wore a shift, and it did not have an untoward connotation. This revisionist lens is absurd. It could be lost in over analyzed linguistics. A young lady would only hope to be noticed and pursued. Isn’t that the point? Does not mean you are an out-and-out slut. Or, that the guy was a predator. Fashion plays a big role in that old game-of-love. ❤️ Human sexuality is flirtatious.
|
|
|
Post by boogieboarder on Jul 26, 2021 14:25:18 GMT -5
“With the slit up the side, you can't resist that touch.” Perhaps my opinion will be called absolute hogwash, but “you can’t resist that touch” doesn’t mean what people are saying it means. It seems perfectly obvious to me that they are referring to the meaning of “touch” as something done with care and thoughtfulness. As in “That adds a nice touch.” If one was going to imply that they couldn’t resist touching someone, or that they thought someone couldn’t resist being touched, they would not say “You can’t resist that touch.” It’s not really grammatical. Everyone wore a shift, and it did not have an untoward connotation. This revisionist lens is absurd. It could be lost in over analyzed linguistics. A young lady would only hope to be noticed and pursued. Isn’t that the point? Does not mean you are an out-and-out slut. Or, that the guy was a predator. Fashion plays a big role in that old game-of-love. ❤️ Human sexuality is flirtatious. Yes, and anything more provocative than that wouldn’t have gotten past the record company, let alone Murray, in 1962. Remember Jan & Dean couldn’t release “Gonna Hustle You.”
|
|
|
Post by filledeplage on Jul 26, 2021 15:02:24 GMT -5
Everyone wore a shift, and it did not have an untoward connotation. This revisionist lens is absurd. It could be lost in over analyzed linguistics. A young lady would only hope to be noticed and pursued. Isn’t that the point? Does not mean you are an out-and-out slut. Or, that the guy was a predator. Fashion plays a big role in that old game-of-love. ❤️ Human sexuality is flirtatious. Yes, and anything more provocative than that wouldn’t have gotten past the record company, let alone Murray, in 1962. Remember Jan & Dean couldn’t release “Gonna Hustle You.” Don’t remember that about Jan and Dean. Yes, Murry. Censorship was very much alive and well in the 60s. Some priest/minister would have been on the pulpit sermonizing about provocative or untoward lyrics. WIBN is exactly how that was captured. “If we were older, and we would not have to wait so long.” There were no condoms in vending machines. Pretty much aspirational and wishful thinking in that context of mores. We are at the other extreme with “anything goes,” which has its own set of problems.
|
|
|
Post by boogieboarder on Jul 27, 2021 9:28:08 GMT -5
Yes, and anything more provocative than that wouldn’t have gotten past the record company, let alone Murray, in 1962. Remember Jan & Dean couldn’t release “Gonna Hustle You.” Don’t remember that about Jan and Dean. Yes, Murry. Censorship was very much alive and well in the 60s. Some priest/minister would have been on the pulpit sermonizing about provocative or untoward lyrics. WIBN is exactly how that was captured. “If we were older, and we would not have to wait so long.” There were no condoms in vending machines. Pretty much aspirational and wishful thinking in that context of mores. We are at the other extreme with “anything goes,” which has its own set of problems. From Wikipedia:The song was initially titled "Gonna Hustle You", but Liberty Records made Jan and Dean change the title and lyrics because the label thought the general public would interpret the song as being too raunchy, insinuated by the word "hustle". Jan and Dean then renamed the song to "Get A Chance With You" and changed some of the lyrics, however, the record company still thought the meaning of the song was too suggestive. Jan & Dean retitled the song to "The New Girl in School" and brought in a fourth songwriter, Roger Christian to help rewrite the lyrics. Things must have changed in just four years, because by 1966, the original version appeared on the post-auto accident Filet of Soul album. According to Dean, it was “adult types” who originally rejected the song. Compare that to the lyrics in todays top ten rap/ hip hop songs, none of which I would dare quote from.
|
|
|
Post by filledeplage on Jul 27, 2021 9:33:24 GMT -5
Don’t remember that about Jan and Dean. Yes, Murry. Censorship was very much alive and well in the 60s. Some priest/minister would have been on the pulpit sermonizing about provocative or untoward lyrics. WIBN is exactly how that was captured. “If we were older, and we would not have to wait so long.” There were no condoms in vending machines. Pretty much aspirational and wishful thinking in that context of mores. We are at the other extreme with “anything goes,” which has its own set of problems. From Wikipedia:The song was initially titled "Gonna Hustle You", but Liberty Records made Jan and Dean change the title and lyrics because the label thought the general public would interpret the song as being too raunchy, insinuated by the word "hustle". Jan and Dean then renamed the song to "Get A Chance With You" and changed some of the lyrics, however, the record company still thought the meaning of the song was too suggestive. Jan & Dean retitled the song to "The New Girl in School" and brought in a fourth songwriter, Roger Christian to help rewrite the lyrics. Things must have changed in just four years, because by 1966, the original version appeared on the post-auto accident Filet of Soul album. According to Dean, it was “adult types” who originally rejected the song. Compare that to the lyrics in todays top ten rap/ hip hop songs, none of which I would dare quote from. That was exactly the sentiment of the times. Very controlled lyrics so as to avoid the wrath of those who could cast a bad light on a musician or group and try to ruin their careers. That is not to say that certain musicians got on stage and did exactly, what they wanted in defiance. 100%. www.university.fox.com/stories/little-known-facts-ed-Sullivan-show/He (Ed Sullivan) was called the Kingmaker. If you scroll down you will see how - if a musician sang lyrics he did not approve of - he would pull the amp. And they would never be invited back.
|
|
|
Post by jk on Jan 7, 2022 6:34:22 GMT -5
My wife was playing some LPs while dusting, one by Joan Armatrading, another by Barclay James Harvest (bought on the strength of a mid-'70s concert we attended in Amsterdam) and... Surfin' Safari (in mono). And I caught myself thinking well actually that sounds pretty good!
|
|
|
Post by Rick Bartlett on Jan 7, 2022 6:48:46 GMT -5
8/10. It's a great fun record for a bunch of kids y'know. I'm still 'amused' by it. Love to hear The Beach Boys/Brian tackle a few of the early tunes just for fun in a live show... 'Chug a Lug', 'Little Girl', 'Head You Win'......
|
|