OK from what I gathered when I hear/saw it on TV, they didn’t like what Spector did to the music in his production, but they finally gave him the tapes, I guess to shut him up?
Paul was quoted as saying that the newer version is what The Beatles originally wanted released, that it sounds more like “them in the room” whatever that means.
I dunno, but it smacks a little of what Col Parker did after Elvis died: released ton after ton of garbage. One I remember was Elvis singing his songs without the music track. “Pure” I think they called it. What a rip. Let’s hope the new Let It Be is worth it.
Any of y’all gonna buy it? It’s due for release mid-November, I think.
Q
To me, anyway, “in the room” means just the core instruments such as piano, drums, guitar, and bass as recorded in the main studio room, without the orchestra or any other “extravagant” musicians that would be overdubbed, such as the orchestra on “The Long and Winding Road”.
I’ll look out for it. I look forward to hearing the album as they intended.
I’m not going to buy it, but I am interested to hear what it sounds like. It does seem like a publicity stunt to drum up sales.
The title is going to be “Let It Be… Naked”. I think that is an awful title - sounds like a complete marketing stunt. Why didn’t they choose the original title “Get Back”? It’s a more interesting title, it represents what The Beatles were trying to do with the album, and it still maintains some of the silly marketing goo.
This was discussed ad nauseam here about 2 weeks ago.
Yes, Let it Be naked is a terrible title. Get Back would’ve made loads of sense(it’s also rather poignant at this point), but it takes some explanatin (psst it’s let it be) but not really because it’s the beatles and people are going to buy it anyway. So yes they certainly could have gone with Get Back, but I suppose from a marketing perspective blah blah blah more money blah
Not all of the Beatles were happy with what Let it Be became. Paul hated it. Lennon gave the Get Back tapes to Spector to work on them, and continued to work with Spector in his solo years(so did George, I believe), so I doubt he was horribly displeased with the outcome. He did however, have some bad things to say about the final product of Across the Universe.
Basically the original idea was Paul’s. He decided the best way to move forward was to simplify. He had a song written called Get Back, and the idea of the album was a stripped-down Beatles performance, at odds with the heavy production of the previous two albums. There was also to be a video, to comply with a contract. He wanted the guitar-bass-drum formula that the Beatles started with, but after the friction in the band escalated, (George quit the band and came back a week later) the sessions were scrapped. Then came Abbey Road, an album that the Beatles felt was more representative of where they were at the time.
Then the album was redone, titled let it be, after one of paul’s songs he wrote and recorded late in the sessions.
If the recording quality is as good as Rubber Soul, my all-time favorite album, I’ll be a happy boy.
Q