|
Post by B.E. on Jul 3, 2023 14:18:22 GMT
In my opinion, the only area where '67-68 has 1964 (or '63-66) beat is in regard to their lesser/filler tracks. Otherwise, in terms of quality, I think the classic period wins hands down. A big part of quality is production, both the arrangements and performances of the instrumentation and vocals. And on top of that, the songwriting of the best material during that era is also better. I love '67-68. It's my favorite era outside of '63-66, and I'll take it over many other artists best eras, but by no means do I consider it equal to the classic era (whether that be strictly 1964 for this discussion or '63-66).
|
|
|
Post by lonelysummer on Jul 3, 2023 19:06:50 GMT
I think 1967-68 ranks right alongside 1964 in terms of quality. I have mixed feelings about that, but I'm coming from a diehard's point of view, as are you. And then there is the history.
During this period (1967-68), Brian was true to his muse. He was still very creative and writing/producing music that HE WANTED TO. I'm still not exactly sure how the band felt about it, but I do know how the fans felt about it, and to a lesser extent, the record company. In the end, everybody followed Brian Wilson...right off a cliff.
The Beach Boys' days of having big hit albums (Top Ten) came to an end. "Darlin'" did a lot for Wild Honey's success, and that's the way it should work, but I wonder how much Wild Honey hurt the subsequent album, Friends. The Beach Boys' run of hit singles (Top Ten) came to a screeching halt. Some people view "Darlin'" (peaked at #19) and "Wild Honey" (peaked at #31) as successful singles, but just a year or two previously they would've been considered disappointments. Also, it has been documented how the band's live audience decreased and how they played to dwindling crowds. In the end, while there were several reasons (I'm not ignoring this), the Beach Boys were dropped by their record company and faced bankruptcy. Yes, the 1967-68 music was different, it was good, it was creative, it was still "Brian", but it was probably more significant for what it wasn't. It wasn't the type of music that many people wanted, not at that specific, particular time in music history. If the 1967-68 music was as good quality-wise as the 1964 music, would any of the above happened?
The years have been kind to the 1967-68 music - BUT JUST THE MUSIC. It HAS become more praised and more accepted. Mostly by Beach Boys' fans. Mostly by diehards. But, still, the effects? The history? Did the band ever really recover...in many ways? Did Brian Wilson ever really recover...in many ways? With Brian it is more complicated, I realize that. The Beach Boys' days as "the best" or "the most popular" were over. Because of Endless Summer there would be the fluke hit album ( 15 Big Ones) and the massive crowds (which they slowly but surely lost). There would be the fluke hit record ("Kokomo") but mostly disappointments. Hey, it is what it is. The music of 1967-68 is what Brian came up with. That's what he wanted. That's what we got. I'm sure Brian - and many fans - wouldn't want it any other way. I guess. You're talking commercial success. If that is the arbiter of quality, then Kokomo is the best BB record ever. 15 Big Ones is one of their best albums. And Summer in Paradise is by the far the worst.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Jul 3, 2023 19:08:10 GMT
I have mixed feelings about that, but I'm coming from a diehard's point of view, as are you. And then there is the history.
During this period (1967-68), Brian was true to his muse. He was still very creative and writing/producing music that HE WANTED TO. I'm still not exactly sure how the band felt about it, but I do know how the fans felt about it, and to a lesser extent, the record company. In the end, everybody followed Brian Wilson...right off a cliff.
The Beach Boys' days of having big hit albums (Top Ten) came to an end. "Darlin'" did a lot for Wild Honey's success, and that's the way it should work, but I wonder how much Wild Honey hurt the subsequent album, Friends. The Beach Boys' run of hit singles (Top Ten) came to a screeching halt. Some people view "Darlin'" (peaked at #19) and "Wild Honey" (peaked at #31) as successful singles, but just a year or two previously they would've been considered disappointments. Also, it has been documented how the band's live audience decreased and how they played to dwindling crowds. In the end, while there were several reasons (I'm not ignoring this), the Beach Boys were dropped by their record company and faced bankruptcy. Yes, the 1967-68 music was different, it was good, it was creative, it was still "Brian", but it was probably more significant for what it wasn't. It wasn't the type of music that many people wanted, not at that specific, particular time in music history. If the 1967-68 music was as good quality-wise as the 1964 music, would any of the above happened?
The years have been kind to the 1967-68 music - BUT JUST THE MUSIC. It HAS become more praised and more accepted. Mostly by Beach Boys' fans. Mostly by diehards. But, still, the effects? The history? Did the band ever really recover...in many ways? Did Brian Wilson ever really recover...in many ways? With Brian it is more complicated, I realize that. The Beach Boys' days as "the best" or "the most popular" were over. Because of Endless Summer there would be the fluke hit album ( 15 Big Ones) and the massive crowds (which they slowly but surely lost). There would be the fluke hit record ("Kokomo") but mostly disappointments. Hey, it is what it is. The music of 1967-68 is what Brian came up with. That's what he wanted. That's what we got. I'm sure Brian - and many fans - wouldn't want it any other way. I guess. You're talking commercial success. If that is the arbiter of quality, then Kokomo is the best BB record ever. 15 Big Ones is one of their best albums. And Summer in Paradise is by the far the worst. Well apparently judging on commercial success is like a broken clock, correct every so often.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Jul 3, 2023 19:13:49 GMT
I absolutely do think commercial success/widespread appeal/etc. is part of the "quality equation", but only a part. And a very tricky one, at that.
|
|
|
Post by lonelysummer on Jul 3, 2023 19:19:02 GMT
I absolutely do think commercial success/widespread appeal/etc. is part of the "quality equation", but only a part. And a very tricky one, at that. So I guess Sunflower was a pretty bad album, too. It stiffed at #150. Surf's Up is a bit better, it peaked at #29. I'm not questioning the greatness of 1963-66; it's not like I would trade 1963-66 for 1967-68. This is where I fail; I'm not good at "i'll give up this for that". This is why I'm not successful at thinning out my record collection. Years ago, I dumped Rumours, Frampton Comes Alive, Fly Like An Eagle; but I could not force myself to give up ANY Beach Boys, Beatles, Kinks, Dylan.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Jul 3, 2023 19:21:35 GMT
I absolutely do think commercial success/widespread appeal/etc. is part of the "quality equation", but only a part. And a very tricky one, at that. So I guess Sunflower was a pretty bad album, too. It stiffed at #150. Surf's Up is a bit better, it peaked at #29. But you're not actually responding to what B.E. said. He very specifically said "part" and "only a part" and "a very tricky one, at that." So no, commercial performance does not mean Sunflower was a pretty bad album, etc.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Jul 3, 2023 19:32:05 GMT
This is where I fail; I'm not good at "i'll give up this for that". This is why I'm not successful at thinning out my record collection. Years ago, I dumped Rumours, Frampton Comes Alive, Fly Like An Eagle; but I could not force myself to give up ANY Beach Boys, Beatles, Kinks, Dylan. I have been thinking about my music and movie collections. Part of me wants to be more of a minimalist, but I also like collecting. I have been tempted to thin out my vinyl and DVD collections in particular, but I bet I'd just end up wasting a lot of time deciding what to lose and it only amount to less than 10% of my collection or something. What would be the point of that? Besides, what I value today is different from 10 years ago and different from 10 years from now, so might as well just keep everything. I went through the trouble of acquiring it, who knows when I'll want to listen to it, watch it, reference it, whatever. I don't know. Just thinking out loud. There's value in collecting, but probably not as much as we sometimes assign. In conclusion, I'm become very selective with what I add to my collections, but I haven't committed to parting with anything. To be continued.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on Jul 3, 2023 20:26:34 GMT
I have mixed feelings about that, but I'm coming from a diehard's point of view, as are you. And then there is the history.
During this period (1967-68), Brian was true to his muse. He was still very creative and writing/producing music that HE WANTED TO. I'm still not exactly sure how the band felt about it, but I do know how the fans felt about it, and to a lesser extent, the record company. In the end, everybody followed Brian Wilson...right off a cliff.
The Beach Boys' days of having big hit albums (Top Ten) came to an end. "Darlin'" did a lot for Wild Honey's success, and that's the way it should work, but I wonder how much Wild Honey hurt the subsequent album, Friends. The Beach Boys' run of hit singles (Top Ten) came to a screeching halt. Some people view "Darlin'" (peaked at #19) and "Wild Honey" (peaked at #31) as successful singles, but just a year or two previously they would've been considered disappointments. Also, it has been documented how the band's live audience decreased and how they played to dwindling crowds. In the end, while there were several reasons (I'm not ignoring this), the Beach Boys were dropped by their record company and faced bankruptcy. Yes, the 1967-68 music was different, it was good, it was creative, it was still "Brian", but it was probably more significant for what it wasn't. It wasn't the type of music that many people wanted, not at that specific, particular time in music history. If the 1967-68 music was as good quality-wise as the 1964 music, would any of the above happened?
The years have been kind to the 1967-68 music - BUT JUST THE MUSIC. It HAS become more praised and more accepted. Mostly by Beach Boys' fans. Mostly by diehards. But, still, the effects? The history? Did the band ever really recover...in many ways? Did Brian Wilson ever really recover...in many ways? With Brian it is more complicated, I realize that. The Beach Boys' days as "the best" or "the most popular" were over. Because of Endless Summer there would be the fluke hit album ( 15 Big Ones) and the massive crowds (which they slowly but surely lost). There would be the fluke hit record ("Kokomo") but mostly disappointments. Hey, it is what it is. The music of 1967-68 is what Brian came up with. That's what he wanted. That's what we got. I'm sure Brian - and many fans - wouldn't want it any other way. I guess. You're talking commercial success. If that is the arbiter of quality, then Kokomo is the best BB record ever. 15 Big Ones is one of their best albums. And Summer in Paradise is by the far the worst. Fair point, lonelysummer. Most of my post does address the commercial aspect of that time frame (1967-68), but I tried to convey that those three albums really "did a job" on the band's overall career. While I wasn't around back then (well, actually I was ), from what I've read, the Beach Boys were fast becoming has-beens or ancient history. They were no longer a major force on the radio which was always the bread-and-butter for the group - and Brian Wilson. Forget about competing with The Beatles and other groups with their albums, and I'm NOT just talking commercially. I'm not sure Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, and Friends were influential or inspiring anybody. Friends peaked at #126; that must tell you something, more than commerciality. Brian himself went from being this sought-out, trailblazing, dare I say "genius", to becoming somewhat of a recluse. For the most part it was bye-bye The Wrecking Crew. I could go on again about the live shows' attendance and the record company's frustration, but I don't want to beat a dead horse.
OK, what prompted my comments was your comparison of the 1964 songs with the 1967-68 ones. As I look at the final standings for 1967-68, I see songs like "Aren't You Glad", "Country Air", "I'd Love Just Once To See You", and "Wake The World" - all really nice songs. Clever, homey, cute (in a good way), still very "Brian" songs. And I like them all, I really do. But, to compare them with "Don't Worry Baby", "I Get Around", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "All Summer Long", "Little Saint Nick" and others, it's almost like apples and oranges. However, I think the group's audience or fanbase was able to make their decision, their comparison. They spoke, or didn't speak. One last thing - think of those old black-and-white videos of The Beach Boys from The T.A.M.I. Show in 1964, and compare THOSE Beach Boys with The Beach Boys of 1967-68. Compare them in every way. Every. Way. It's amazing how much changed in 3-4 short years. It seems like a lifetime now. I almost sound like a politician , but were you better off after four years?
|
|
|
Post by lonelysummer on Jul 4, 2023 2:26:01 GMT
You're talking commercial success. If that is the arbiter of quality, then Kokomo is the best BB record ever. 15 Big Ones is one of their best albums. And Summer in Paradise is by the far the worst. Fair point, lonelysummer. Most of my post does address the commercial aspect of that time frame (1967-68), but I tried to convey that those three albums really "did a job" on the band's overall career. While I wasn't around back then (well, actually I was ), from what I've read, the Beach Boys were fast becoming has-beens or ancient history. They were no longer a major force on the radio which was always the bread-and-butter for the group - and Brian Wilson. Forget about competing with The Beatles and other groups with their albums, and I'm NOT just talking commercially. I'm not sure Smiley Smile, Wild Honey, and Friends were influential or inspiring anybody. Friends peaked at #126; that must tell you something, more than commerciality. Brian himself went from being this sought-out, trailblazing, dare I say "genius", to becoming somewhat of a recluse. For the most part it was bye-bye The Wrecking Crew. I could go on again about the live shows' attendance and the record company's frustration, but I don't want to beat a dead horse.
OK, what prompted my comments was your comparison of the 1964 songs with the 1967-68 ones. As I look at the final standings for 1967-68, I see songs like "Aren't You Glad", "Country Air", "I'd Love Just Once To See You", and "Wake The World" - all really nice songs. Clever, homey, cute (in a good way), still very "Brian" songs. And I like them all, I really do. But, to compare them with "Don't Worry Baby", "I Get Around", "Fun, Fun, Fun", "All Summer Long", "Little Saint Nick" and others, it's almost like apples and oranges. However, I think the group's audience or fanbase was able to make their decision, their comparison. They spoke, or didn't speak. One last thing - think of those old black-and-white videos of The Beach Boys from The T.A.M.I. Show in 1964, and compare THOSE Beach Boys with The Beach Boys of 1967-68. Compare them in every way. Every. Way. It's amazing how much changed in 3-4 short years. It seems like a lifetime now. I almost sound like a politician , but were you better off after four years? It seems in retrospect that the 60's were like 50 years crammed into 10. The changes came so fast and affected every area of life. Singing I Want To Hold Your Hand, or I Get Around in 1964 was acceptable. A mere 3 years later, it was square, unhip. The 60's was like adolescence - things changed in a matter of months. It must have been the acid. For the Beach Boys, these rapid changes meant fans rejected them at some point for not keeping up, for going all homespun and understated. This is in contrast to Bob Dylan, who went a similar direction, and yet the fans didn't stop following him - they just berated him for abandoning the cause. What a crazy time it was. So here we are over 50 years later, still talking about a band that was considered done in 1968. How strange.
|
|