Not exactly sure what the official release date isi, except that it will be in November, just in time for Holiday shopping.
And this version of Let It Be will be sans all of the hideous strings/background singers and orchestral overdubs that Phil Spector drowned the original album in.
Interestingly enough, Phil Spectors production was one of the main reasons for the lawsuit filed by Paul McCartney against the other Beatles.
I’m looking forward to it.
Nov 16-18th. One or 2 cuts won’t be on the “Let It Be” Cd- there will be another cut -a" b "side- forget what it is. Also- 20 minutes of other stuff. AFAIK, the lawsuit was mostly about Allen B Klein controlling the Beatles; any Spector involvement was a minor, if any, part of the suit. Of course Lennon continued to work w/ Spector. Wonder if Phil will have to listen to it in jail.
I’ve been reading various Beatles books and Spectors involvement really pissed McCartney off and it was one of his major complaints in his lawsuit, along with the whole Allen Klein thing.
“Dig It” and “Maggie Mae” won’t be on it. I doubt anyone will miss them. Lennon’s “Don’t Let Me Down,” flip side of “Get Back,” will be on there now.
Should be an instant classic (duh). I used to go the the Beatles fest in Chicago every year. They have a competition where people get up on stage, either solo or in a group, and cover one of the Beatles songs. I remember the last year I went the winner was a 12 year old boy playing the piano and singing The Long and Winding Road.
And 20 minutes of ?? Agree those two cuts won’t be missed. Question-if Spector was a significant part of the suit, & he may have been ,why so many years for the Spector free CD? As I recall, the suit ended years ago.
doctordoowop, this is just my guess, but I think the four Beatles were burned out and tired of being The Beatles and wanted to do their own things. Things were very acrimonious between the four of them during that time period.
Also, I think that they just never thought to re-release it, since in it’s original form it sold over 10,000,000 copies, so why mess with a good thing?
Up until now, except for the Yellow Submarine Soundtrack (another sort of dud album - in relative terms to the rest of the Beatles work), the Beatles catalogue has been rather untouchable, as far as remixing or track deviations from the original UK releases are concerned. I wonder if this isn’t the beginning of further changes.
The Beatles other albums were released on CD in the 1980’s, and the sound mix is not what it could be if it were worked on today. Plus, other than the Sgt. Pepper CD, there’s not much in the way of liner notes, photos, and so on. Maybe this is just a first step.
While “Dig It” and “Maggie May” won’t be missed, there were some other jams and chatter that were pretty good, or funny, from the anthologies or bootlegs. Maybe if John Lennon’s suggestion during a rehearsal that the group change its name to “The Motherf-----s” so Billboard will have to print that name as #2 behind Engelbert Humperdinck on the charts is put in there, we can have the first Beatles album with a parental advisory.
I will miss both, but welcome “Don’t Let Me Down” as an addition.
This is VERY cool.
Muldoon- I agree, but the anthology video, done in early-mid 90’s on video & now on DVD showed no acrimony at all. I also recall a statement from McCartney re: alternate takes, outtakes etc.(interesting to come from a music fan who talked lovingly about reading album liner notes as a kid),“why would any one want to hear the 40 or so out takes of ‘Can’t Buy Me Love?’ we released the best one.”
This was the exact opposite stance taken by Lennon. He collected Beatles bootlegs and said what you heard on the final release wasn’t really the Beatles. If you wanted to hear what they were really like, listen to the bootlegs.
I find the bootlegs interesting because it allows you to listen in on the creative process behind the songs.
I’ve never really understood why McCartney didn’t like the Spectorized version. Sure, it’s schmaltzy, but only like half as schmaltzy as McCartney’s post-Beatles stuff.
I, however, would probably prefer a de-Spectorized version.
Mr Blue Sky- long ago the Beatles seemed to intentionally screw up, “How Do you do what You Do to Me”(later a hit for Jerry/Pacemakers), so they could get GMartin let them do their own stuff. For years this was available only on bootleg. Gee, this means I actually agree(d) w/ Lennon about something.
Oh, hell yes!
While this isn’t my favorite Beatles song, I’ve long considered it to be the culmination of their songwriting and musicianship.
It’s just such a frickin’ grooving, laid-back, but still rockin’ song.
Not-bad article here.
I call shenanigans on this, though:
Made possible by State-of-the-art Digital Dumptheproducertronic Technology?
doctordoowop,
That is a slightly twisted version of events.
After Love Me Do hit it’s peak of #17 on the charts, George Martin and The Beatles went back into the studio to record a follow-up single. However, Martin didn’t think that the Beatles material was strong enough to go much higher on the charts and he had a demo of a song called How Do You Do It which was written by a professional songwriter. The Beatles objected, but they did record it and according to Martin while they weren’t happy to be recording it, they gave it their best effort, no holding back.
I for one, **will ** miss Maggie Mae and Dig It. Is the version of Don’t Let Me Down the same as on Past Masters? If so, why bother with the whole thing? If not, then I’ll shut up and buy it.
Will you still be able to buy the original Spectorized version of Let It Be?
Muldoon-I’m not so sure. Listen to their off key singing & Harrison’s weaK guitar. Then listen to their next release-I believe From Me to You- quite a difference. I know it’s easier to get into your own material, but the difference is striking. (That writer was Mitch …uh??) Murray?
The title of the proposed CD is awful: “Let it Be…Naked”. What is The Paul trying to do, attract the Beavis and Butthead crowd?
This says “Naked”. Heh heh-heh he-heh heh.
Isn’t there something horribly ironic and hypocritical about remaking a song called “Let it be”? Like the lyric “I’m too sexy for this song” or something. On the other hand, I guess the new version is actually “letting it be” more in a way, since a bunch of the added instrumental stuff is being removed.