Re: Let it Be... Naked

Just for the fun of it I took the old LIB for the ride to work today because
I've been listening to LIBN so much lately. It really dawned on me what a
revelation these new mixes are. It got me to thinking, why has EMI not
remastered the Beatles catalogue yet? It sure can breath new life into old
music and one would assume generate all sorts of new sales. I guess they
will get around to it eventually.
 Case in point: the other night I was listening to Abbey Road for the first
time in a long while. One song that I always used to really enjoy was "I
Want You" especially the long instrumental part that closes the song. I
found it rather hipnotic sounding, it kind of had a undescribable background
noise (kind of like wind) and very cool organ and bass work that was only
just audible. I don't know if I'm describing it properly but it was a real
pastiche of sounds that sounded really cool. The cd mix is just awful, it
takes the wind like background noise and other elements and separates them
too much or something, it just doesn't have that same dense hipnotic groove
to it. It could be that I remember it differently than it was but if ever
there was a song that needs to be remastered it's this one IMO. Anyone else
feel that this song suffered when transferred to cd?
Anyhow it will be nice when they do finally decide to remaster as I'm sure
I'll listen to the Beatles more if they do.
-Alan

"vintar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> It's funny but it's just the reverse for me. I too was 13 in 1970 (are we
> really that old!!) but I didn't have the single version and didn't really
> get into the Beatles until the album release of Let It Be. In fact it was
> the first real album I bought ( I'm not including several Monkee albums!)
so
> I've always been more partial to Spector's version of this song. It
sounded
> more finished to me plus I liked the guitar solo better. I'm with you on
the
> new version though, a great performance. It's a wonder it's stayed under
> wraps for so long. Is it the actual version from the film?
> -Alan
> "Bruce Mirken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Well said.  For me, the "original" of the song "Let it Be" was the Glyn
> > Johns mix that was the original U.S. single, released when I was a mere
> lad
> > of 13.  I played it to death before the album came out, and the
> Spectorized
> > album version just never felt right to me.  The LIBN version, though
> > different, is in the same spirit as the single release, and hearing it
> just
> > felt like going home.
> >
> >
> > "vintar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > Well, as Dinah Washington once said "What A Difference A Day Made".
> > > I've now listened to LIBN about five or six times and am starting to
> > change
> > > my initial opinion. I still can't get used to the abbreviated "Get
> Back",
> > I
> > > can't imagine why they would do this. I'm finding on the other songs
the
> > > initial shock of hearing them has worn off and I'm really enjoying the
> > > improved fidelity of the recordings. I never knew George was saying
> "Same
> > > old twelve bar blues" during "For You Blue" for instance. I always
> thought
> > > it was "they won't tell my blues" or something! I 'm really impressed
> also
> > > with "Let It Be" which initially was one of the tracks I had
> reservations
> > > about. I love the new guitar solo! "The Long And Winding Road" is also
> > > growing on me, I still prefer the original but do now like this
version.
> I
> > > actually prefer the new "Across The Universe", It was the one track on
> LIB
> > > that I didn't really like, stripping it back has vastly improved it
IMO.
> > > All in all, I'm fairly impressed. I guess it just goes to show that
> first
> > > impressions aren't always accurate. One has to live with an album for
> > awhile
> > > before getting a true feel for it, especially in a situation such as
> this
> > > where you're so used to the original version.
> > > -Alan
> > > "Bruce Mirken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > Funny, I LOVE this version of "Let it Bee" (the song), and the
> > Spectorized
> > > > version always made me ill.  No accounting for taste.  I agree,
> though,
> > > that
> > > > the abbreviated "Get Back" is unfortunate, and in general I miss
the
> > > > between-song chatter.
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > "vintar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > I just got LIBN today and have only listened to it twice so it
might
> > be
> > > a
> > > > > little early to judge but I'm not overly impressed. I think I
> actually
> > > > > prefer the original album. I know many people feel Spector went a
> > little
> > > > > overboard on his production and I too could have done without the
> > choirs
> > > > but
> > > > > overall I think he did a pretty good job with what he was given to
> > work
> > > > > with.
> > > > > A few initial thoughts: Why the abreviated "Get Back"? It sounds
> awful
> > > > > ending so abruptly. Why not use the Anthology version of "The Long
> And
> > > > > Winding Road" which if I'm not mistaken is the same version of the
> > song
> > > as
> > > > > the "Spectorised" version but without overdubs. Wasn't that the
> point
> > of
> > > > > this album, to strip it back to it's original form, not give us
some
> > > > > inferior take just because it hasn't been released before. Why not
> put
> > > on
> > > > > the original version of "Don't Let Me Down" which I always felt
> should
> > > > have
> > > > > been on the album anyway? I think the answer is that the producers
> > felt
> > > > that
> > > > > they had to use alternate takes in order to make it a "new"
product
> > but
> > > it
> > > > > looks to me like Phil Spector already picked the best takes so, as
I
> > > said
> > > > > before, why not just strip them back and put some of these
different
> > > takes
> > > > > on disc two?
> > > > > One track I think Spector actually improved is "Let It Be". His
> > version
> > > > just
> > > > > sounds more cohesive and finished to me than the original single
or
> > this
> > > > new
> > > > > version. He drowned out John and George's rather distracting (to
me
> > > > anyway)
> > > > > background vocals and used the better guitar solo in my opinion.
> > > > > Anyhow, like I said I'm not overly impressed with this project. I
> > think
> > > > they
> > > > > should have just let it be. :-)
> > > > > Cheers,
> > > > > Alan
> > > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message
> > > > > news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > > > > > Bruce Mirken wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > >"Let it Be":  I'm not sure whether I like this or the Glyn
Johns
> > mix
> > > on
> > > > > the
> > > > > > >original single better, but either is light-years better than
> > > Spector's
> > > > > > >version with its needless, annoying overdubs.  What an
exquisite
> > song
> > > > > this
> > > > > > >is.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't like the effect on john & georges background vocals.
> Sounds
> > > > > > very similar to the choir they wanted to remove so badly.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > I don't care for the echo/fade on Across the Universe.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > The rest of the album kicks ass though
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>