|
Post by kds on May 1, 2022 0:35:35 GMT
For the record, I'm glad the band never broke up, but for fun, my choice is after In Concert.
In my fake universe, they tried to shake things up with adding Blondie and Ricky. But, after limited success and the failure to really light a fire under Brian, The Beach Boys decide to pack it in.
However, they still exist kind of like The Who did between 1983-1998. Gone, but not really gone. A tour here, a show there, maybe even a one off single. So, in my universe, Kokomo still exists.
Without the band, Brian embarks on a solo career in the mid 70s. However (based on his real life output from the 70s and 80s), commercial success eludes him.
In my universe, C50 / TWGMTR still happens. It's the band's first studio album since Holland. The tour goes great, and the band tours every other, or every third, summer from here on.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 0:37:17 GMT
You guys gave a lot more credit, or retrospectively had more confidence in the Beach Boys as potential solo artists than I ever would've given them - even in 1970-71 before the rot set in. Even if that's the case, there are still arguments to make. As fans, we might have ended up with less music to enjoy, but maybe things would have worked out better for some (or all) members on a personal level. The reputation/legacy of the group could have been better in certain scenarios as well (like in KDS' alternate timeline above). That said, I think the real wild cards are 1966 and 1967 (particularly the latter). There are a lot of fans who are mostly fans for Smile, so if there's any chance he completes that project as a solo artist (or with other collaborators) then that could have radically altered history as we know it. Or not...but I think there's no denying the magnitude of the demise of Smile on Brian's life and the rest of the group.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 1, 2022 0:54:03 GMT
You guys gave a lot more credit, or retrospectively had more confidence in the Beach Boys as potential solo artists than I ever would've given them - even in 1970-71 before the rot set in. See, for me, it has nothing to do with how well their various solo or alternative projects might have been. It's just that I think they obviously had those diverse interests. I think had they explored them, then if they came back together, it might have been that much better. And instead, they tortured themselves (pardon the hyperbole) by staying together and fighting one another's visions.
Maybe Dennis, fully on his own in 1972, has a massive solo career. Maybe he sells 173 albums and has his tail between his legs. (Brian, it may be noted, is almost entirely left out of my inventions. He has his same "occasional contributor" role he actually did have.) But the difference is that they get to really go for it rather than begrudgingly hang together and split the baby.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 0:55:27 GMT
While not my final choice, I think "Fall, 1977" is a very intriguing possibility because, for one, it seems they actually did break up for a few weeks. Dennis had just released Pacific Ocean Blue and was still hard at work recording the follow-up. A solo tour is also in the works. We know Brian had more material at the ready, but only "My Diane" and "Hey Little Tomboy" ended up on MIU. We know there was a lot of tension between the factions at this time, that there was a power struggle...it may very well have been the height of the tensions and the source of a lot of the lingering baggage for years to come. Somehow, it's said, Mike gains control of Brian's corporate vote, and Steve Love is brought back as manager. There's an uneasy truce, probably fueled almost entirely by not wanting to lose their record contract, but the factions remain. Dennis' tour is cancelled and his follow-up is never completed. There was still a lot of pressure on the guys NOT to go solo in 1977, but how long before Mike's Celebration projects and Carl's solo albums? Not long at all. But, I don't think Dennis had time to wait. I think there's a possibility (however slight) that things could have turned out much better for him if this period had played out differently. It was after this that he really started to spiral. Soon, the group would be suspending him. They'd even kick Brian out, eventually. Clearly, the group, itself, recognized that it was doing some of its members more harm than good. I realize it's sort of a catch 22, in that it's tough to get your life on track by quitting your day job, but sometimes that's exactly what's needed.
Then again, things would be much worse for the group a few years later (so, I could vote for "1981") but I think I've been convinced of breaking up earlier before things get so bad (moreso on a personal level than musically, even). I kinda like the idea of keeping everything intact through In Concert, so 1974 is my choice. I think that this gives the guys enough time to regroup (individually or collectively), to not let those three years slip by (artistically), and, potentially, entirely avoid some of the real dark days ahead. I see no reason that they couldn't have graced us with a few nice reunions. And much of what we like about the latter eras could have still existed in some form or another. They could have resembled CSNY in a way, in that all sorts of combinations of collaborations could have existed amongst them.
|
|
|
Post by lonelysummer on May 1, 2022 1:36:00 GMT
It's interesting to me, the idea of Dennis going solo. He might have established a cult following (as he has today), but he was never going to be a big solo star. His material was not commercial enough, and the man himself probably would have collapsed under the pressure. I think it's more realistic to imagine him being part of a new group - maybe a group with Carl in it. Carl did actively pursue a solo career for a couple years in the 80's, but I don't think he had any long term goals in that respect. I think he was more likely to join/start another band - i think he was most comfortable as part of a team. There is a story about Carl trying to start a band circa 1977 with Peter Cetera and Jimmy McCulloch. Mike, of course, would have fought to continue with the Beach Boys name at any point in their history. He was never ashamed or embarrassed by the cars, surf, and girls songs, and enjoys playing what people want to hear. And Al? Maybe he would have gone back to dental school.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on May 1, 2022 1:50:38 GMT
Drugs, mansions, farms, cars (expensive ones ), boats, investments, girlfriends, alimony, child support, doctors, and attorneys cost a lot of money. Other than Brian (who was getting paid anyway for NOT touring) and Bruce who was independently wealthy, I can't see Mike, Dennis, Carl, or even Al giving up the cash cow - and the perks that go with it - which was touring constantly as The Beach Boys.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 2:22:51 GMT
Drugs, mansions, farms, cars (expensive ones ), boats, investments, girlfriends, alimony, child support, doctors, and attorneys cost a lot of money. Other than Brian (who was getting paid anyway for NOT touring) and Bruce who was independently wealthy, I can't see Mike, Dennis, Carl, or even Al giving up the cash cow - and the perks that go with it - which was touring constantly as The Beach Boys. Avoid the drugs and girlfriends and the alimony, child support, doctors, and attorneys go away. Sell the farms, a mansion, and a car or two, and you're left with a boatload of investments. Problems solved.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 1, 2022 11:49:53 GMT
Drugs, mansions, farms, cars (expensive ones ), boats, investments, girlfriends, alimony, child support, doctors, and attorneys cost a lot of money. Other than Brian (who was getting paid anyway for NOT touring) and Bruce who was independently wealthy, I can't see Mike, Dennis, Carl, or even Al giving up the cash cow - and the perks that go with it - which was touring constantly as The Beach Boys. This is another one of those questions where it depends on when we're talking. I think it's another reason my choice--and yes, just in the spirit of the thread, I'll just keep defending that choice--is a pretty good solution. There weren't many alimony payments yet. Brian had some occasional medical bills but hadn't been under Landy's expensive care yet. They weren't nearly as overextended yet. Yes, they had been making (and in at least some cases) spending a lot of money, but this isn't yet the cash-strapped batch of guys of later years.
What's more, in 1971, the guys were young enough to see a future, as opposed to old enough to see their future past past and they had to capitalize on that. I'm not saying they would have been right, but it's easy to imagine Dennis thinking he could sustain a solo career, Carl thinking he could start a new successful band, Mike thinking he could keep writing hit songs if only he had the right, more like-minded collaborators.
The longer you go, I think the harder a break becomes.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on May 1, 2022 12:29:19 GMT
Drugs, mansions, farms, cars (expensive ones ), boats, investments, girlfriends, alimony, child support, doctors, and attorneys cost a lot of money. Other than Brian (who was getting paid anyway for NOT touring) and Bruce who was independently wealthy, I can't see Mike, Dennis, Carl, or even Al giving up the cash cow - and the perks that go with it - which was touring constantly as The Beach Boys. This is another one of those questions where it depends on when we're talking. I think it's another reason my choice--and yes, just in the spirit of the thread, I'll just keep defending that choice--is a pretty good solution. There weren't many alimony payments yet. Brian had some occasional medical bills but hadn't been under Landy's expensive care yet. They weren't nearly as overextended yet. Yes, they had been making (and in at least some cases) spending a lot of money, but this isn't yet the cash-strapped batch of guys of later years.
What's more, in 1971, the guys were young enough to see a future, as opposed to old enough to see their future past past and they had to capitalize on that. I'm not saying they would have been right, but it's easy to imagine Dennis thinking he could sustain a solo career, Carl thinking he could start a new successful band, Mike thinking he could keep writing hit songs if only he had the right, more like-minded collaborators.
The longer you go, I think the harder a break becomes.
Yeah, I see your points, and they're good ones. But, the timing...I don't know. After The Beach Boys were dropped by Capitol Records in 1969 and, according to Brian (I know, not the best source) were almost broke, they sign a new multi-album deal with Reprise. Surf's Up is a commercial and critical success. The band is experiencing a revival on the road, with their inspired setlist of oldies and newies. They're even on the cover of Rolling Stone! And, THEN is a good time to...break up?
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 1, 2022 12:35:21 GMT
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on May 1, 2022 12:43:10 GMT
OK, in my ongoing effort to keep arguing my vote's merits (whether or not I fully believe them...), how about this?
Sunflower and Surf's Up allowed the band some semblance of saving face. The former was a commercial disaster domestically, but performed reasonably well elsewhere and seems to have been an album the band itself felt good about. The latter was a relative success.
That said, this period also shows the band--working relatively closely together as opposed to in bigger productions with more session musicians--that they have indeed grown apart. All those reasons I mentioned earlier as to why it's a good time to split come to light. Carl wants to play with Blondie and Ricky. Bruce doesn't feel fully integrated, and probably doesn't want to. Brian is busy doing nothing. Dennis is bursting with ideas and ambitions that are the polar opposite of Mike's.
While they may have felt like breaking up at other times--during the Smile debacle, or when they cobbled together the facade of 20/20--this time it doesn't feel like breaking up out of necessity after a failure. With the majestic coda of "Surf's Up" swirling, they realize that this is the end of an era they can be proud of and walk away from with heads held high.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on May 1, 2022 12:44:16 GMT
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 12:55:47 GMT
OK, in my ongoing effort to keep arguing my vote's merits (whether or not I fully believe them...), how about this?
Sunflower and Surf's Up allowed the band some semblance of saving face. The former was a commercial disaster domestically, but performed reasonably well elsewhere and seems to have been an album the band itself felt good about. The latter was a relative success.
That said, this period also shows the band--working relatively closely together as opposed to in bigger productions with more session musicians--that they have indeed grown apart. All those reasons I mentioned earlier as to why it's a good time to split come to light. Carl wants to play with Blondie and Ricky. Bruce doesn't feel fully integrated, and probably doesn't want to. Brian is busy doing nothing. Dennis is bursting with ideas and ambitions that are the polar opposite of Mike's.
While they may have felt like breaking up at other times--during the Smile debacle, or when they cobbled together the facade of 20/20--this time it doesn't feel like breaking up out of necessity after a failure. With the majestic coda of "Surf's Up" swirling, they realize that this is the end of an era they can be proud of and walk away from with heads held high.
On top of that, I think it's actually a good idea, business-wise, to break up at a relative high point...when your stock is up...when there's still interest in what you'll do next.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 13:38:53 GMT
While I chose 1974, I think much of the material of CATP and Holland would have found other homes (much of it sounding more like solo tracks or an entirely different band to begin with). But, consider this, if the guys were (or weren't, for that matter) able to capitalize on the renewed interest in them surrounding Surf's Up as solo artists (or in new bands), just imagine how much interest there would have been in 1974 and 1975 after Capital releases their inevitable Greatest Hits compilations. There was a chance to take another path, or at least try to, because let's face it: post-Endless Summer, they could have turned into a traveling jukebox at ANY time. That music is gold. Instead, THREE whole years were wasted, artistically, from 1973-1975. That period I think is their greatest missed opportunity. Yes, they successfully toured during those years, and I bet if you saw some of those shows you wouldn't want to trade them for anything, but...
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on May 1, 2022 13:48:03 GMT
Also, I just want to throw it out there that I think Mike could have found a home as a frontman of new a group. There must have been some young, hungry straight-ahead rock 'n' roll groups that would have been lucky to have MIKE LOVE singing lead. Seriously. High energy stuff, maybe heavy on covers. If they tapped into "Student Demonstration Time"-Mike, "All I Want To Do"-Mike, "Papa-Oom-Mow-Mow"-Mike, etc. I would have dug it. Might not have lasted long, but could have been cool.
|
|