Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 20, 2021 4:43:53 GMT
I listen to the live album because I just love hearing Dave play all his great guitar parts. Is the problem that the sound is very dry and you can't hear the audience or because they use a lot of auto tune? Or is it that they threw in some studio stuff such as with the song God-made the radio where you can hear parts of the studio track super imposed? It's likely all those things and do you consider the concert in Japan to be any bettet? Even though that's not a live album it's a full length show that you could play like a live album. And there must be tons and tons of footage from those concert that could be turned into a really good rock and roll movie if they wanted to. Another botched opportunity was with the live documents from 2012. Instead of a full two plus hour concert film, we got a film that would've seemed short even in the days of truncated concerts being released on VHS. And possibly the worst sounding officially released live album I've ever heard.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 20, 2021 12:47:13 GMT
I listen to the live album because I just love hearing Dave play all his great guitar parts. Is the problem that the sound is very dry and you can't hear the audience or because they use a lot of auto tune? Or is it that they threw in some studio stuff such as with the song God-made the radio where you can hear parts of the studio track super imposed? It's likely all those things and do you consider the concert in Japan to be any bettet? Even though that's not a live album it's a full length show that you could play like a live album. And there must be tons and tons of footage from those concert that could be turned into a really good rock and roll movie if they wanted to. Another botched opportunity was with the live documents from 2012. Instead of a full two plus hour concert film, we got a film that would've seemed short even in the days of truncated concerts being released on VHS. And possibly the worst sounding officially released live album I've ever heard. The autotune is my main issue as it destroys the vocals. And the band just sounds flat on the album. The Japan show is good, but they only did 33 songs, unlike the US shows where they did 45-50 a night, or in the UK where they did as many as 61.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on Feb 20, 2021 13:08:28 GMT
My biggest problem with Live - The 50th Anniversary Tour is the mix. It has no guts. The Prof mentioned his enjoyment of hearing David Marks' guitar playing. I find it frustratingly under-recorded. As a fan of Joe Thomas, I was very disappointed in the mix. If it ever happens (and it probably wouldn't be for a long time), a serious remix could save this live album.
kds, I don't know how much influence Iconic/Azoff will have over the actual recording and final product. From what I'm reading, I guess they would be involved in the initial planning and development of any new "product". But as far as the final decisions on the producer, the tracklist, the final mix, and other "artistic" decisions - is that something that Iconic/Azoff will have a say in? Using the Live - The 50th Anniversary Tour album as an example, I suppose they would've been involved in the planning and marketing stages, but would they have anything to do with the actual recording, specifically the autotune and mix? I mean, are they going to be telling Brian Wilson and Joe Thomas how to make records? That would be going back to the 1970's when Reprise was rejecting every Beach Boys' album that was submitted.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 20, 2021 13:24:51 GMT
I mean, are they going to be telling Brian Wilson and Joe Thomas how to make records? That would be going back to the 1970's when Reprise was rejecting every Beach Boys' album that was submitted. I think the odds that Brian Wilson had anything at all to do with the making of the live C50 album are slim to none, performance and eventual sign-off/approval notwithstanding. So in that respect, I'd bet Iconic would be at least as involved as Wilson.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on Feb 20, 2021 13:33:44 GMT
I mean, are they going to be telling Brian Wilson and Joe Thomas how to make records? That would be going back to the 1970's when Reprise was rejecting every Beach Boys' album that was submitted. I think the odds that Brian Wilson had anything at all to do with the making of the live C50 album are slim to none, performance and eventual sign-off/approval notwithstanding. So in that respect, I'd bet Iconic would be at least as involved as Wilson. I don't think Brian Wilson ever listened to a single note of the C50 live album. But, back to the issue of Iconic/Azoff's involvement in any new recordings (and, let's be honest, it's still a long shot that there will be any). Will the old topic of "Brian isn't allowed to make the records the way he wants to" be revived? From what I'm reading on the various message boards, several fans are assuming this is a good move. If push comes to shove, I guess I'm one of them. But, is there a possibility that the people with Iconic DON'T know what they're doing, and it turns into a "be careful what you ask for" situation. I know I'm getting waaaaay ahead of things, and I know that things couldn't be any worse. Could they?
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 20, 2021 13:45:47 GMT
Heh, this is speculation upon speculation, to be sure. But what the hell, here goes...!
Of course it could be a case of "be careful what you ask for" but so is literally every other decision. That's the nature of making decisions. If the future course were certain, there would be no decisions to make.
The reason I think it's a positive (meaning I think the downside is probably lower than it would have been with the status quo) is that Iconic removes the emotional aspects and the personal baggage from making decisions. Those are things that have led to error after error in the past, to say nothing of split decisions/non decisions.
It's like a basketball team with two guys who think they're the go-to guy and the other guys waxing and waning, sometimes thinking that while they may not be #1, maybe they're #2; or maybe waffling between their preferences on who's #1; and regardless, everyone thinking they ought to be running a different offense and defense. Does adding a strong-willed coach guarantee that team will win? No, he might be a Timberwolves coach, i.e. incompetent. But somebody has to be in charge, and it's probably best at this point that it not be one of the participants.
But as I was saying yesterday, Iconic's decision for best business decision may well conflict with various groups of fans' preferences for the group.
I WILL say this: if your idea of the best future Beach Boys is Brian Wilson writing great new songs and producing great new records like in the old days, it doesn't matter whether Azoff/Iconic is in charge, or Jon Landau is in charge, or Rick Rubin is in charge, or Elon Musk is in charge, or Bozo the Clown is in charge. It isn't going to happen, and you are going to be disappointed.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on Feb 20, 2021 13:59:27 GMT
Yes, I think going forward, 99% of Iconic's work will involve previously released material. Marketing, marketing, and more marketing. For the relatively short time that the surviving Beach Boys have left as artists/performers, I guess Iconic will have some say. Obviously there will be "something" new. But this move is primarily for packaging/re-packaging things - comps, documentaries, merchandise, etc. It's maximizing profit of the brand, not making an 80-something Mike Love and Brian Wilson relevant recording and performing artists.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 20, 2021 15:11:18 GMT
I think at least half of what is released as music or video will be "new" in the sense that it will be previously unreleased, be it live recordings, archival studio stuff, or interviews. So in that way, I don't agree that it's going to be 99% repackaging. As time goes on, the ratio will obviously skew toward pure repackaging and rereleases though.
But I definitely think you're right in the sense that we're highly unlikely to get much, if any, actually, truly new music. Newly released, yes. Newly written and recorded, barely if at all. (I could totally see the occasional, single new song included on a comp of rarities or a new greatest hits album, though.)
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 20, 2021 15:12:05 GMT
I doubt Azoff would tell them how to make a record, but I feel like Iconic/Azoff would direct them on what not to do. Any form of management that's even remotely competent wouldn't have allowed the C50 live album to hit the street as it exists.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 20, 2021 15:25:14 GMT
I doubt Azoff would tell them how to make a record, but I feel like Iconic/Azoff would direct them on what not to do. Any form of management that's even remotely competent wouldn't have allowed the C50 live album to hit the street as it exists. Agreed. For that kind of thing, I think Iconic would be involved in terms of concepts, bigger picture, but not to the level of "OK now, that vocal take you've comped together could have been better; you should use the first line of the bridge from Take Six. And more of a medium-room reverb with longer decay." That's not happening.
But "we want a new song in the classic '64 upbeat style to kick off this new More Sounds of Summer? Or "No, we don't think a re-re-re-remake of 'Do It Again' featuring Tone-Loc and Billy Bob Thornton is what we're going for here" Or even helping select producers to help guide projects? Yes, I do think they would be involved in that regard.
|
|
|
Post by Sheriff John Stone on Feb 20, 2021 15:41:26 GMT
I would think that the 50 year/copyright protection releases will continue, and hopefully continue with Alan Boyd and Mark Linett producing. Maybe Iconic could ensure that all of them are released in a physical (CD) format in addition to digital. That has been an issue.
Supposedly, there are hours and hours of great live stuff in the vaults. I guess they could be assembled in a way that makes sense, without stepping on the toes of those copyright protection releases.
As was mentioned above, The Beach Boys could use - and deserve - a well-done, multi-hour/multi-episode documentary. Yes, like The Beatles! What we've gotten in the past has been OK but not spectacular. Sadly, such a documentary might not come to fruition until you-know-who passes.
As far as capitalizing on the legacy (The Beach Boys as a lifestyle?), I'm afraid it HAS to be more repackaging of the surf & turf classics...in some way. More giving the people what they want. Some very creative marketing will be necessary to advance the legacy of the 1967-1973 period. Despite its musical merit, let's be honest, only a segment of Beach Boys/music fans are drawn to it.
It will be fascinating how they address the post-1974 - present era(s).
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 20, 2021 15:48:54 GMT
As was mentioned above, The Beach Boys could use - and deserve - a well-done, multi-hour/multi-episode documentary. Yes, like The Beatles! What we've gotten in the past has been OK but not spectacular. Sadly, such a documentary might not come to fruition until you-know-who passes. Luckily this is something that was mentioned in the Rolling Stone article. Well, not specifically "well-done [though I'd hope that much is obvious! History notwithstanding...], multi-hour/multi-episode," but documentary. And I actually have some new hopes on this front because of Azoff, considering he has been in this role for the Eagles, right? Well the Eagles had a fantastic, two-part, probably 4-5 hour long documentary that pulled no punches. I don't even like the Eagles, and I really liked that doc.
Now, as I've been saying for 20 years, I'd like to see it more like a Beatles Anthology or Ken Burns style 6-, 8-, 10-part kind of thing. But something new, something good, with a lot of new interviews and never-before-released interviews and footage? That would be heaven.
And a lot has happened in Beach Boys world since their last truly good, thorough documentary, Endless Harmony.
|
|
|
Post by kds on Feb 20, 2021 19:32:10 GMT
And I'm sure the 60th anniversary will see some sort of repackaging of the hits. Probably something in between a Sounds of Summer and MiC, like a career spanning 2-3 disc collection with all the hits plus some deep tracks, and probably a rarity or two to entice the diehards.
|
|
|
Post by Kapitan on Feb 21, 2021 14:15:03 GMT
Interesting...
Stephen Thomas Erlewine is a music critic and senior editor of All Music. Note his comment on the Iconic purchase ... and note who liked it.
Edit - seems the like I could see doesn't come through here, though you could see them all if you were to go to the tweet and check them. I'll make it easier: Van Dyke Parks liked this tweet.
|
|
|
Post by B.E. on Feb 21, 2021 17:19:30 GMT
Gosh, so many comments I'd like to reply to...oh well, I think I'll try to make this quick.
I support this move 100%. (Damn, did it come out of nowhere, though!)
Brian, Mike, and Al's vote ain't worth what it used to be. Actually, it's worth next to nothing - 51% rules. Do I think Mike will continue to tour as "The Beach Boys"? Yes, but only because I'm assuming that Azoff/Iconic would want one group touring as "The Beach Boys" and for that group to include as many founding (and former) members as possible. If only Mike and Bruce agree to work together, then so be it. But, it would be entirely up to Azoff/Iconic. I imagine Mike wouldn't have agreed to this deal if he suspected his touring situation was in jeopardy, and indeed he's quoted as saying that he thinks he'll be able to continue to tour as "The Beach Boys". In light of this deal, I'm actually warming up to the idea of "The Beach Boys" touring after the founding members have passed away. There won't be any misrepresentation or confusion or regret associated with it. There won't be split camps. Everyone (or, most people), at that point, would understand you're seeing a tribute band, but no tribute name will ever compare to "The Beach Boys" (commercially, or otherwise), IMO. It being sanctioned, being "official", will be beneficial. Moving forward, in the short-term, I'd be wary of projecting disunity - if I were Azoff/Iconic. But, maybe they'll put up with competing touring groups in the short-term as they focus on the long-term (and in other areas).
As for new music? Yes, I think Azoff/Iconic will be involved and signing off (or not) on any and everything. Considering we've only gotten one album in 30 years, it may not come up (although this deal makes it somewhat likely that we'll get a new recording of some kind - perhaps just one song).
As for the relative success of the last 20 years, I'm not sure I agree. Better than the 10 years prior? Okay. But that's a very low bar. At least they were still a band of sorts. And that's the thing, really. I separate the band from archival releases. The band situation has been pitiful. The archival side has been good. But, it wasn't bad in the 90s, or even the 80s to an extent. And, to be fair, were "archival releases" even a thing back then? Not like they are now, I don't think.
|
|