Yeah, I did, I just never got around to it. I can't d/l mp3s here at work, and by the time I got home it had fallen off the slippery slope that is the front of my mind. Figured I'd just go ahead and get it today as it's cheap (and I hear it has a pretty pretty booklet).
I did take the time to view the back cover and make a snarky comment about it, though, so your effort in sending the link was not wasted...
Ryan
So it's going to be called "Let It Be Naked" ?????
-
Rspaight
- Posts: 4386
- Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2003 10:48 am
- Location: The Reality-Based Community
- Contact:
OK, I just listened to it. First, let's get one thing out of the way.
There's a sticker on the shrinkwrap that says this is "THE BAND'S CUT FROM THE ORIGINAL SESSIONS."
Whazzahuh? Let's take this word by word.
THE BAND: What band? The Beatles? The Beatles never made a version of this album. Glyn Johns made a couple, which the Beatles (rightly) rejected. Phil Spector made a version, which was put out to the dismay of at least one member of the Beatles. And now there's this thing, which was made by some guys in a studio after the death of two of the Beatles. Whatever we've got here, it was not produced by "the band."
CUT: Cut? Are they targeting the DVD market? That's just bizarre. Between that and the "Naked" title, it's like you're buying the home video version of some movie with another thirty seconds of tits included.
ORIGINAL SESSIONS: Well, that's a relief. I was worried this would be recorded by Bernard Purdie, Greg Lake and Jimmy Page.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, onto the record itself. Leaving aside the issue of what this is as opposed to what it coulda/shoulda been, I quite like it. The sound to these ears is just fine. Nice big soundstage and full, clear sound. Maybe a bit too NRed, but it in no way sounds like a "modern" production to me. Lots of things popping up hard left and right, and things sounded pretty open. The details are clear -- Ringo's fills, the spoken asides, all that comes out more than on the Spector album. The vocal on "Across The Universe" is the only thing that sounds too hyped, everything else seemed natural. It works for me.
The hard fades, though, just freak me out. The end of "Get Back" sounds like a tape dropout. Yow.
Having heard this and Get Back, I'll take this in a heartbeat. For all its rustic charm, Get Back is a trainwreck of an album. The boot I had (a CD from 88-89ish) sounded dire, too, but there may well be better versions out there. If someone wants Get Back, it's easy enough to track down. Would I have objected if they'd filled up Disc Two with one or the other Johns versions? Of course not, that would have been a cool set. But that's getting back into the whole woulda/coulda/shoulda game.
The book is neat, as I've never seen the old book from the first issue LP. Fun stuff.
So, this was worth 12 bucks for me. (Could have got it from Meijer for $9.88, but I got groceries after stopping at Best Buy.) YMMV.
Haven't listened to "Fly On The Wall" yet. I've never heard a Beatles cover of an AC/DC tune, so I'm pretty excited. And 22 minutes long! Must be awesome.
Ryan
There's a sticker on the shrinkwrap that says this is "THE BAND'S CUT FROM THE ORIGINAL SESSIONS."
Whazzahuh? Let's take this word by word.
THE BAND: What band? The Beatles? The Beatles never made a version of this album. Glyn Johns made a couple, which the Beatles (rightly) rejected. Phil Spector made a version, which was put out to the dismay of at least one member of the Beatles. And now there's this thing, which was made by some guys in a studio after the death of two of the Beatles. Whatever we've got here, it was not produced by "the band."
CUT: Cut? Are they targeting the DVD market? That's just bizarre. Between that and the "Naked" title, it's like you're buying the home video version of some movie with another thirty seconds of tits included.
ORIGINAL SESSIONS: Well, that's a relief. I was worried this would be recorded by Bernard Purdie, Greg Lake and Jimmy Page.
OK, now that I got that out of my system, onto the record itself. Leaving aside the issue of what this is as opposed to what it coulda/shoulda been, I quite like it. The sound to these ears is just fine. Nice big soundstage and full, clear sound. Maybe a bit too NRed, but it in no way sounds like a "modern" production to me. Lots of things popping up hard left and right, and things sounded pretty open. The details are clear -- Ringo's fills, the spoken asides, all that comes out more than on the Spector album. The vocal on "Across The Universe" is the only thing that sounds too hyped, everything else seemed natural. It works for me.
The hard fades, though, just freak me out. The end of "Get Back" sounds like a tape dropout. Yow.
Having heard this and Get Back, I'll take this in a heartbeat. For all its rustic charm, Get Back is a trainwreck of an album. The boot I had (a CD from 88-89ish) sounded dire, too, but there may well be better versions out there. If someone wants Get Back, it's easy enough to track down. Would I have objected if they'd filled up Disc Two with one or the other Johns versions? Of course not, that would have been a cool set. But that's getting back into the whole woulda/coulda/shoulda game.
The book is neat, as I've never seen the old book from the first issue LP. Fun stuff.
So, this was worth 12 bucks for me. (Could have got it from Meijer for $9.88, but I got groceries after stopping at Best Buy.) YMMV.
Haven't listened to "Fly On The Wall" yet. I've never heard a Beatles cover of an AC/DC tune, so I'm pretty excited. And 22 minutes long! Must be awesome.
Ryan
RQOTW: "I'll make sure that our future is defined not by the letters ACLU, but by the letters USA." -- Mitt Romney
Here is an interview with the production team I found on rec.music.beatles:
An interview with the production team for "Let It Be...Naked":
Allan Rouse (AR), Paul Hicks (PH) Guy Massey (GM) forklarer historien
bag det nye Beatles-album.
August 2003
Q: So when did this project begin, how did it all start?
Allan Rouse: Good question, we had a phone call from Neil Aspinall at
Apple.
Q: How long ago was that?
AR: About a year and a half.
Paul Hicks: The main mixing was done in August of last year. We were
prepping it before that; actually we probably started properly the
beginning of last year.
Q: And how long did the three of you work on it?
AR: The first thing was that we knew we were making a new album. And
therefore there was no reference made to the old album, because there
was no point. So the first thing that Paul and Guy did was they went
through all of the eight tracks and listened to every title and take and
version of each title again, to make sure that we had the best.
Q: How many tracks was that?
AR: It's about 30 reels of tape, half an hour of tape; so it's a few
days of listening.
Q: What was it like working on, as you say, a Let It Be that is a new
version?
PH: I thought it was exciting; as Allan pointed out it's a very intense
process, because of the historical value of absolutely everything you
have to be so careful. Normally you're trying to make improvements but
you can't stray too far away because you have to be completely stuck to
a rigid set of boundaries to work to. Whereas with this, we had absolute
freedom to do whatever we wanted really, just to make it sound as good
and as raw as possible.
Q: For someone who has heard the original album, what's the basic
difference between that and this?
PH: From the people who've heard it, one comment came that was one of
our main initial aims on it - which was everyone says `I can really hear
everything, there's so much clarity'. And that was one of our goals;
when we were going through the tracks and listening there were so many
elements. Like there's some amazing playing from Billy Preston, some of
his electric piano work is great and so we were just aiming to hear
Billy more clearly and you can hear John's guitar and you can hear
George's guitar. We were just trying to create some space, so you can
hear it all. So that compared to the version that was previously
released, you could say that in a lot of ways this version is dryer. As
in not so much reverb, it's a lot tighter. That's what we wanted to do.
AR: Now there's a lot of people that think that remixing is the wrong
thing to do. But we're not remixing to change it, we're remixing it to
make it sound better. What's happened here is that the difference
between this and any other previous projects is that, whilst remixing
it, we're still trying to make everybody think they're still listening
to the same thing but they're just hearing it better. But we treated
this as a new project. And there were no guidelines.
PH: One of the things when you listen to the original Let It Be there is
that element of the fly on the wall thing, because you hear the tape
starting up, you hear the comments. But our thought was that compared to
all the other albums it was a bit like an extension of the film - but
with this we wanted to make a really good album. As in these are the
songs; we're not going to have clapping at the end or whatever. It was
just let's just make this a really strong Beatles album to go with the
others.
Guy Massey: It was making something that people would want to listen to.
AR: That's just it. All three of us are Beatles fans, which is quite
useful, and this is what we wanted. It's like anybody who produces
anything, it's what the producer and the artist want. So as the artists
have already done their work, now we're going to do our little bit
towards it and it's what, as fans, we would rather listen to.
AR: There's no dialogue because people can get bored with hearing it; a
song you can hear again and again and again and again - and like it. And
if the DVD comes out you'll get your dialogue on that.
Q: So you don't have `Doris gets her oats'?
AR: No, none of that. There's no dialogue.
Q: So what did you essentially do with this album?
PH: Really the thing is that most of the tracks are the same takes as
what people have known before; the absolute obvious change is The Long
And Winding Road - it was a very different version that Phil Spector
over-dubbed on and when going through it all we discovered that the
version that's on the film, the one that they did on the last day, that
we felt had a really good sort of sentiment and the emotion was just
fantastic. Just the playing of the drums and Paul's vocal on that are
great and it really suits it. That's the stand-out different one.
PH: And because of the nature of when it was recorded, there are certain
things on the tracks where if they're not playing, they're making noises
and stuff. So one of the first things we did was to go through it all
track by track and just clean it up; clean up the little pops or when
they're moving around between the takes you can hear on the original. We
basically made every track completely clear.
AR: In my view there's two things about an album, there's two
experiences you get; you get the experience of the music and the songs,
which you love, and you get the audio experience. And this is the one
thing, the major alteration, that's changed, the audio experience - to
make it sound good anyway but also to extend its life because we all
listen to things totally different from how we did 30 years ago. If you
take the early Beatles recordings, a lot of people think it's a great
novelty to have a vocal coming out of the left speaker and the drums
coming out of the right. But kids today don't understand it. It's `why?'
So all of these aspects of remixing the album which we've used for other
projects, the whole purpose behind it in this instance was besides the
fact that it's a completely unique album, was to make all these
improvements that Paul and Guy can do to make it sound like a much more
exciting audio experience.
Q: Are all the tracks live, as in the take you hear is a complete take?
PH: When we sifted through the tracks we basically took anything that
was an overdub. It's what they were playing. I Met Mine is an exception
because...
GM: I think there was only two of them playing on the original take, I
think it was just drums and guitar..
PH: Another example is Let It Be; we used the original guitar solo that
George did because he overdubbed the solo.
Q: That's a fantastic solo, the original; just the necessary notes.
GM: Yeah, there's no floweryness.
PH: It's the same one that's in the film and he just looks like he's
enjoying it.
PH: I was explaining to someone exactly what we've done and I was saying
that this now is a different version of The Long And Winding Road, and
this person said `Well, why?' And then I thought `Yeah, actually, why?'
But the basic thing is what Phil Spector did was he covered up on the
actual version they used on the original album. If you strip it out you
can see that he covered up on what was quite an early rehearsal take,
the one they used, and there were many things that weren't fantastic and
it wasn't that strong as a piece on its own. But that's the reason why
we changed The Long And Winding Road, because this is a much stronger
basic performance. That's what we were going for; we didn't want to do
any editing, but we were basically going for the strongest performances.
Q: So of the eleven tracks, how many are different takes from what Phil
Spector used?
PH: As a basic take, just Long And Winding....Actually, let's go through
the tracks. Get Back, that's basically as it's been heard before. But
it's a studio take and what they did on the original album was they
added the audience and an ending to make it sound live. But Get Back's
essentially always been a studio performance. And, again to just keep
the album feel of it and because it is what was on the original, we
haven't got the ending, the reprise, that you'd heard before. Now it's
compact. It's two and a half minutes and just punchy and sounding
exciting. And that was done by remixing and just cleaning it up,
removing noise and hiss and the limitations of the speakers in those
days. In cleaning up the tracks it meant cleaning up wind noise and some
hum and also you have to remember that there were film crews around,
they didn't know if that would be the take so there were people making
noises. In stripping it back we have had to do a few little edits, to
avoid actually changing things.
PH: So I've Got A Feeling is a mixture of the two rooftop performances;
it's a completely new edit.. We basically got the best out of both of
the two takes that they did. That'll be a field day for people to try
and work out what it is.
Q: But as you were saying, it's the album they could have made if they'd
have made it now, with the technology of now.
PH: Yes. Totally. It is embracing today's technology. Dig A
Pony...that's from the rooftop, as was the original.
GM: Basically we just cleaned it up; there was lots of popping on the
vocals. Phil Spector did some edits that we re-did, they made sense.
AR: Apart from the four Phil Spector tracks in which the changes are
obvious, if you know your Beatles well enough you'll know there's
something missing. But if you listen to the other original tracks which
have got nothing extra on them apart from maybe a bit of Phil Spector
echo, the difference for a lot of listeners is subtle and it's not the
sort of thing that they would immediately recognize until they dug out
their old version and heard the difference.
Q: The Beatles 1 album introduced The Beatles to this new demographic of
teenagers that marketing people call `The 1 Generation'. If they were
weaned on 1, do you think that the new Let It Be is a good introduction
to the Beatles as a good rocking band?
AR: I think it is now, yes. I think the concept of doing it this way has
made it so.
Q: The new album certainly explains, now, Paul McCartney's point about
The Beatles being best at being a good little rock and roll band.
PH: It certainly does, yeah.
AR: I go back to what I said before; I know there are people who are
opposed to remixing but this project couldn't have been done without
remixing, because the whole purpose was to remove things - so it had to
be remixed. The argument exists as to whether anything else should be
remixed but so far we've done tracks on Yellow Submarine and some
hundred and twenty tracks on Anthology. And the simple fact is, perhaps
a little bit more so on this album than anything before, we've tried to
make it sound more `now'. We're not trying to do away with 1969-70 but
we've tried to make it sound a bit 2003.
PH: With the 1 Generation, we want them to put on this album and then
put on their other new stuff and there not to be too much of a
difference in the sound; that was one thing we've always been thinking
about with this project.
AR: Once they invented the CD everybody put their CDs out straight from
the flat tape, everybody did it because that's all they thought was
necessary because they thought CD reproduces everything so well, there's
no tape noises, no problem, and so we'll just do that. And then people
sussed out that they could remaster them. Now remastering is fine and in
a lot of cases it's adequate and good enough. And remastering is purely
to enable the reduction of tape noise and to improve the sound and to
make it more of an enjoyable audio experience. Remixing is just one more
stage, a more expensive stage, up on that. Because that's all we are
attempting to achieve. Somebody could go to a remastering room and say
they could do with a little bit more vocal, so you add some EQ to pull
the vocal out. But you don't just pull the vocal out; anything either
side of the vocal in terms of the EQ will be affected by it. OK, if you
want more snare drum so you add EQ to that - it's going to affect other
things. But if you do it in a remix, you want more snare drum, you have
more snare drum. And that's all there is to it - it's the definitive way
of remastering. And, fortunately in the instance of this album, we had
no choice and we had to remix it. So it's remastering by remixing.
Q: Which brings us back to `is this a new album?'
AR: It is a new version of the album. It had to feel the same but it had
to sound better. We were given very little information as to what was
expected with this album, but I think we all knew what was wanted. And
it could only really be achieved by taking a blank canvas and starting
again. That's basically the way it was. And that's why, at no point, did
we really reference to Glynn Johns' mix or Phil Spector's, because there
was no need to. That wasn't the purpose.
PH: Back to the tracks....For Your Blue; that's just a matter of getting
more clarity, really. It was a really good recording on that one,
actually; really clear and crisp and we took advantage of that and, like
Get Back, just tried to make it as punchy as possible.
PH: There's really not much that can be said about that track; it's
hopefully a bit clearer. We noticed that Paul's doing like a weird piano
sound that he got by putting paper in it. You know that weird little
percussive sound in it, that's basically Paul playing the piano that's
been muted, so it's got that percussive sound. Again, all we've tried to
do is to get it so that you can hear all those elements....The Long And
Winding Road, we've spoken about that; that's the version from the 31st
of January, the last day of recording.
AR: Talking about The Long And Winding Road, one of the biggest problems
we had was that the lyrics changed....It was only a small, subtle change.
PH: Not `you'll never know' but `you'll always know'...
AR: Once we realized that the lyric had changed we then had this
quandary as to whether or not this was acceptable now, because this was
something really, really obvious. It's one thing having a different
take, but you expect the lyrics to be the same because otherwise God
knows what people might assume. The conclusion we came to in this
instance was that, because it was the very last take that he probably
ever did, therefore it was probably more correct. So that's how we
resolved our problem, we figured that Paul had tuned his lyrics and that
was probably what he really wanted. But then Phil or Glyn use the take
that was done beforehand and, of course, that's how those lyrics became set.
Q: It's interesting that Paul still sings the Phil Spector version of
his lyrics onstage.
GM: He did comment on that when he heard this album.
AR: Didn't he turn around and look at us at that stage?
PH: Oh yeah, he did. He noticed.
AR: Well he was obviously singing along and it went wrong...But he was
happy with that.
PH: But then, again, that's the version that's in the film.
Q: But so few people these days have seen or can remember exactly the film.
AR: Very few people have seen it for a long time.
Q: Exactly, so for a lot of people who will be interested in buying this
album it's a case of `what film? `When's that out?'
AR: This reminds me that both Paul and Guy have used some artistic
license in that, and The Long And Winding Road is a good example of
this, the instrumentation which starts all at the beginning doesn't
necessarily start at the beginning in our version. In other words we've
done little subtle things to build a song. Guy did the same thing in
Across The Universe.
PH: Arrangements...
AR: We've arranged it, a little. So in other words if we felt it needed
a build we wouldn't necessarily have everything in from the beginning.
Across The Universe is probably the best example. Guy did Across The
Universe and he had a bit of a problem there, because he had two tracks.
And that was all. On track one was guitar and vocal, John singing, and
the only other thing that was played live was tambora. And that was it.
Yoko's heard it and thinks it's beautiful, so that's fine, but the point
was that all that was running from beginning to end was John playing
guitar, singing, and tambora. And that was it, all the way through.
GM: There was tom-tom as well.
AR: But Guy has done various things to the tambora and changed the
overall sound of the tambora throughout the structure of the song, to
build it, to change the concept of it - because otherwise you're missing
so much from that song with just those two things going on. There were
loads of overdubs on top of that. Not all of the songs were treated in
that way, but some leant themselves to a build. Let It Be was another
example of when that was done.
AR: We actually spent a long time, the three of us, to get the right
running order. It's completely different and I think it makes you want
to listen to the album more. For instance, One After 909 now starts
within split seconds of the track before it. If you think about Beatles
albums or any album recorded in the Sixties with the exception of albums
like Abbey Road, there was always three seconds between each track. It
didn't matter how it felt, you just measured three seconds of white
leader and stuck it in. But we didn't do that because people don't do
that anymore, people use feel for when the next track should come in.
All of this is slightly different to the usual Beatles album.
PH: I personally think that these changes are good if only to show
people that this is a different product. It's instant, you can see and
hear instantly that it's something different.
AR: You can probably see why we are rather excited by this album. It's a
privilege to be given a free hand and it is incredibly satisfying to
think that in all probability this is the only time that it's going to
happen, you can't do it with any of the other albums. It's a privilege
to be able to do it.
Q: And the rest of the tracks....?
PH: Two Of Us, we've used the same take and not a lot of editing done on
that, just a straightforward remix. I've Got A Feeling is an interesting
track; I've Got A Feeling is the rooftop performance - the rooftop
tracks, by the way, are I've Got A Feeling, Dig A Pony, The One After
909 and Don't Let Me Down. I've Got A Feeling is actually quite
different than has been heard before; that's the one on which we did a
lot of work to get the most exciting bits out of the two takes that were
on the rooftop.
PH: It was just block multi-track edits, just `that verse is better than
that one'. On one of the takes the guitar was really distorted and very
exciting, I love the excitement of I've Got A Feeling; with Paul just
screaming away on it it's a really good moment on the album. Next, One
After 909 - again, taken from the rooftop which was also used on the
original album but now one of the main improvements is the drum clarity.
No edits there, it's pretty naked. Next, Don't Let Me Down - also from
the rooftop.
GM: John fluffed his lyrics on one take....
PH: But the other take had the correct lyrics.
AR: One of the things that is very comforting for us in all of this, by
the way, is that Ringo appeared to be really knocked out after he first
heard the new album, he became very vocal about it. And then we heard
that Paul was really knocked out too, so that made it all matter.
PH: I Me Mine - again basically just the take from the original.
AR: I think it's important to recognize that it is the take with
overdubs because some people might start saying `I thought this was
meant to be without overdubs, but it's got loads of overdubs on it'. But
you have to understand that we couldn't pare down what was there; it
didn't have a vocal anyway, the backing track if you like.
PH: It would have just been drums and a guitar for I Me Mine.
AR: And that obviously doesn't work.
PH: Because even the vocal was really a guide vocal and he overdubbed
that on I Me Mine.
AR: So it is important to realize that there was reason behind what we
did and the reason was that in attempting to achieve what we'd done with
everything else the only choice we had was to have left some of the
overdubs there. Otherwise it would have sounded bare and it wouldn't
have worked. What track's next? Across The Universe, what did you do
with that, Guy?
GM: Well, there wasn't a lot that we could do with it, really. We
stereoized the tambora as it was building, we had it in mono first and
then for the first chorus we opened it out so it was stereo. We did the
same with the vocals, widened it out a little. And then Alan suggested
why doesn't it all fade into beautiful reverb at the end; so we all
laughed, did it, and it sounded great. Originally we thought that was
going to be the end track on the album, just a lovely thing to go out
on, just disappear on it. But then when we did the running order it
didn't flow quite as well, so we put Let It Be last, which seemed to fit
as well.
AR: I was just thinking about the irony of that, we spend a year and a
half getting rid of the sound of Phil Spector and then we go and put a
tape delay and then a reverb right on the end of it. It's just a little
present to Phil Spector, so he doesn't feel completely left out.
Q: Was Across The Universe recorded at the Let It Be sessions?
AR: No. They did it numerous times. You would assume they were intending
to put it on the album because it was rehearsed quite a few times within
the (Let It Be) sessions, but the version that ended up on the album was
recorded a year before. We were very worried that because this wasn't
recorded during the actual Let It Be sessions then maybe the track
wouldn't go on the album. But the way I saw it was that Across The
Universe needed to be there in order to go with Paul's Long And Winding
Road. And, as I said, they rehearsed it numerous times during those
three weeks.
Q: What did you do with Let It Be?
GM: Again, we just wanted it to build, so we started it as it does
start, pretty quietly and then we just introduced bits and arranged it a
bit more than it had been previously.
AR: We made a bigger thing of the other Beatles in the "oo" section. It
works, it's nice, it's much more ethereal as these lovely voices come
out. They were always there but we just made it a little bit more.
Q: George's guitar solo on Let It Be is different from what has been
heard before?
GM: We loved that and we wanted to get that in. It's only been heard
before in the Let It Be film.
Q: But anyone who saw the film back in 1970 would not have heard it in
such quality as this, in their local Odeon.
AR: And in mono then.
Q: Now they sound like the songs you imagined they wanted them to be
when they first did them.
AR: Hope so.
Q: As with any Beatles project there is a contradiction of expectation
in this one; over recent years there has been a move - probably started
with The Beatles Anthology series - to cram as many minutes of music
onto a CD as a disc can take, up to the last second. They did that with
The Beatles 1.
AR: The album length has hardly changed, despite the fact that we took
Dig It and Maggie Mae out and all the dialogue, because Don't Let Me
Down wasn't on the original album and that has made up the difference.
This is the same length as The Beatles first four albums, practically.
We were worried about that. When CD first came out and people realized
they could put 80 minutes of music on a disc, I think some thought they
had to put on 80 minutes, or at least 75.
Q: That's a point that Neil Aspinall made with this album; he said "it's
a very listenable album".
AR: I think it is, actually. I enjoy listening to it.
Q: But it's not just that the content is listenable, it's that the
whole, as a 35-minute album, is listenable. People can find 35 minutes
in a day to hear music, whereas they can't always find 80 minutes to spare.
PH: I just think that if any artist records 17 songs and eight of them
are good, why not just release the eight good ones? As a record buyer, I
wouldn't feel cheated if I got eight or 10 really good songs on an
album, as opposed to getting 17 and half of them aren't so great.
Q: So, was this a good project to work on?
PH: It was very satisfying.
GM: It was an honour. To do something like this with a free rein, but
treating it with respect, was great.
AR: There's always that worrying moment when you send a CD out and, in
this case, you know that two, sadly only two now, of the biggest
musicians in the world are going to listen to something you've done and
you want to know what their reaction will be. The least you expect
`Well, yeah, it's good, but I wonder if perhaps you could just do a bit
more vocal on this' or `maybe the bass wasn't quite as good on this as
it was on that'. But the fact that we've actually not changed anything
since the first pressing of the first CD was sent out to them, we hoped
that we were satisfying them and it appears that we have. And that is a
huge kick.
An interview with the production team for "Let It Be...Naked":
Allan Rouse (AR), Paul Hicks (PH) Guy Massey (GM) forklarer historien
bag det nye Beatles-album.
August 2003
Q: So when did this project begin, how did it all start?
Allan Rouse: Good question, we had a phone call from Neil Aspinall at
Apple.
Q: How long ago was that?
AR: About a year and a half.
Paul Hicks: The main mixing was done in August of last year. We were
prepping it before that; actually we probably started properly the
beginning of last year.
Q: And how long did the three of you work on it?
AR: The first thing was that we knew we were making a new album. And
therefore there was no reference made to the old album, because there
was no point. So the first thing that Paul and Guy did was they went
through all of the eight tracks and listened to every title and take and
version of each title again, to make sure that we had the best.
Q: How many tracks was that?
AR: It's about 30 reels of tape, half an hour of tape; so it's a few
days of listening.
Q: What was it like working on, as you say, a Let It Be that is a new
version?
PH: I thought it was exciting; as Allan pointed out it's a very intense
process, because of the historical value of absolutely everything you
have to be so careful. Normally you're trying to make improvements but
you can't stray too far away because you have to be completely stuck to
a rigid set of boundaries to work to. Whereas with this, we had absolute
freedom to do whatever we wanted really, just to make it sound as good
and as raw as possible.
Q: For someone who has heard the original album, what's the basic
difference between that and this?
PH: From the people who've heard it, one comment came that was one of
our main initial aims on it - which was everyone says `I can really hear
everything, there's so much clarity'. And that was one of our goals;
when we were going through the tracks and listening there were so many
elements. Like there's some amazing playing from Billy Preston, some of
his electric piano work is great and so we were just aiming to hear
Billy more clearly and you can hear John's guitar and you can hear
George's guitar. We were just trying to create some space, so you can
hear it all. So that compared to the version that was previously
released, you could say that in a lot of ways this version is dryer. As
in not so much reverb, it's a lot tighter. That's what we wanted to do.
AR: Now there's a lot of people that think that remixing is the wrong
thing to do. But we're not remixing to change it, we're remixing it to
make it sound better. What's happened here is that the difference
between this and any other previous projects is that, whilst remixing
it, we're still trying to make everybody think they're still listening
to the same thing but they're just hearing it better. But we treated
this as a new project. And there were no guidelines.
PH: One of the things when you listen to the original Let It Be there is
that element of the fly on the wall thing, because you hear the tape
starting up, you hear the comments. But our thought was that compared to
all the other albums it was a bit like an extension of the film - but
with this we wanted to make a really good album. As in these are the
songs; we're not going to have clapping at the end or whatever. It was
just let's just make this a really strong Beatles album to go with the
others.
Guy Massey: It was making something that people would want to listen to.
AR: That's just it. All three of us are Beatles fans, which is quite
useful, and this is what we wanted. It's like anybody who produces
anything, it's what the producer and the artist want. So as the artists
have already done their work, now we're going to do our little bit
towards it and it's what, as fans, we would rather listen to.
AR: There's no dialogue because people can get bored with hearing it; a
song you can hear again and again and again and again - and like it. And
if the DVD comes out you'll get your dialogue on that.
Q: So you don't have `Doris gets her oats'?
AR: No, none of that. There's no dialogue.
Q: So what did you essentially do with this album?
PH: Really the thing is that most of the tracks are the same takes as
what people have known before; the absolute obvious change is The Long
And Winding Road - it was a very different version that Phil Spector
over-dubbed on and when going through it all we discovered that the
version that's on the film, the one that they did on the last day, that
we felt had a really good sort of sentiment and the emotion was just
fantastic. Just the playing of the drums and Paul's vocal on that are
great and it really suits it. That's the stand-out different one.
PH: And because of the nature of when it was recorded, there are certain
things on the tracks where if they're not playing, they're making noises
and stuff. So one of the first things we did was to go through it all
track by track and just clean it up; clean up the little pops or when
they're moving around between the takes you can hear on the original. We
basically made every track completely clear.
AR: In my view there's two things about an album, there's two
experiences you get; you get the experience of the music and the songs,
which you love, and you get the audio experience. And this is the one
thing, the major alteration, that's changed, the audio experience - to
make it sound good anyway but also to extend its life because we all
listen to things totally different from how we did 30 years ago. If you
take the early Beatles recordings, a lot of people think it's a great
novelty to have a vocal coming out of the left speaker and the drums
coming out of the right. But kids today don't understand it. It's `why?'
So all of these aspects of remixing the album which we've used for other
projects, the whole purpose behind it in this instance was besides the
fact that it's a completely unique album, was to make all these
improvements that Paul and Guy can do to make it sound like a much more
exciting audio experience.
Q: Are all the tracks live, as in the take you hear is a complete take?
PH: When we sifted through the tracks we basically took anything that
was an overdub. It's what they were playing. I Met Mine is an exception
because...
GM: I think there was only two of them playing on the original take, I
think it was just drums and guitar..
PH: Another example is Let It Be; we used the original guitar solo that
George did because he overdubbed the solo.
Q: That's a fantastic solo, the original; just the necessary notes.
GM: Yeah, there's no floweryness.
PH: It's the same one that's in the film and he just looks like he's
enjoying it.
PH: I was explaining to someone exactly what we've done and I was saying
that this now is a different version of The Long And Winding Road, and
this person said `Well, why?' And then I thought `Yeah, actually, why?'
But the basic thing is what Phil Spector did was he covered up on the
actual version they used on the original album. If you strip it out you
can see that he covered up on what was quite an early rehearsal take,
the one they used, and there were many things that weren't fantastic and
it wasn't that strong as a piece on its own. But that's the reason why
we changed The Long And Winding Road, because this is a much stronger
basic performance. That's what we were going for; we didn't want to do
any editing, but we were basically going for the strongest performances.
Q: So of the eleven tracks, how many are different takes from what Phil
Spector used?
PH: As a basic take, just Long And Winding....Actually, let's go through
the tracks. Get Back, that's basically as it's been heard before. But
it's a studio take and what they did on the original album was they
added the audience and an ending to make it sound live. But Get Back's
essentially always been a studio performance. And, again to just keep
the album feel of it and because it is what was on the original, we
haven't got the ending, the reprise, that you'd heard before. Now it's
compact. It's two and a half minutes and just punchy and sounding
exciting. And that was done by remixing and just cleaning it up,
removing noise and hiss and the limitations of the speakers in those
days. In cleaning up the tracks it meant cleaning up wind noise and some
hum and also you have to remember that there were film crews around,
they didn't know if that would be the take so there were people making
noises. In stripping it back we have had to do a few little edits, to
avoid actually changing things.
PH: So I've Got A Feeling is a mixture of the two rooftop performances;
it's a completely new edit.. We basically got the best out of both of
the two takes that they did. That'll be a field day for people to try
and work out what it is.
Q: But as you were saying, it's the album they could have made if they'd
have made it now, with the technology of now.
PH: Yes. Totally. It is embracing today's technology. Dig A
Pony...that's from the rooftop, as was the original.
GM: Basically we just cleaned it up; there was lots of popping on the
vocals. Phil Spector did some edits that we re-did, they made sense.
AR: Apart from the four Phil Spector tracks in which the changes are
obvious, if you know your Beatles well enough you'll know there's
something missing. But if you listen to the other original tracks which
have got nothing extra on them apart from maybe a bit of Phil Spector
echo, the difference for a lot of listeners is subtle and it's not the
sort of thing that they would immediately recognize until they dug out
their old version and heard the difference.
Q: The Beatles 1 album introduced The Beatles to this new demographic of
teenagers that marketing people call `The 1 Generation'. If they were
weaned on 1, do you think that the new Let It Be is a good introduction
to the Beatles as a good rocking band?
AR: I think it is now, yes. I think the concept of doing it this way has
made it so.
Q: The new album certainly explains, now, Paul McCartney's point about
The Beatles being best at being a good little rock and roll band.
PH: It certainly does, yeah.
AR: I go back to what I said before; I know there are people who are
opposed to remixing but this project couldn't have been done without
remixing, because the whole purpose was to remove things - so it had to
be remixed. The argument exists as to whether anything else should be
remixed but so far we've done tracks on Yellow Submarine and some
hundred and twenty tracks on Anthology. And the simple fact is, perhaps
a little bit more so on this album than anything before, we've tried to
make it sound more `now'. We're not trying to do away with 1969-70 but
we've tried to make it sound a bit 2003.
PH: With the 1 Generation, we want them to put on this album and then
put on their other new stuff and there not to be too much of a
difference in the sound; that was one thing we've always been thinking
about with this project.
AR: Once they invented the CD everybody put their CDs out straight from
the flat tape, everybody did it because that's all they thought was
necessary because they thought CD reproduces everything so well, there's
no tape noises, no problem, and so we'll just do that. And then people
sussed out that they could remaster them. Now remastering is fine and in
a lot of cases it's adequate and good enough. And remastering is purely
to enable the reduction of tape noise and to improve the sound and to
make it more of an enjoyable audio experience. Remixing is just one more
stage, a more expensive stage, up on that. Because that's all we are
attempting to achieve. Somebody could go to a remastering room and say
they could do with a little bit more vocal, so you add some EQ to pull
the vocal out. But you don't just pull the vocal out; anything either
side of the vocal in terms of the EQ will be affected by it. OK, if you
want more snare drum so you add EQ to that - it's going to affect other
things. But if you do it in a remix, you want more snare drum, you have
more snare drum. And that's all there is to it - it's the definitive way
of remastering. And, fortunately in the instance of this album, we had
no choice and we had to remix it. So it's remastering by remixing.
Q: Which brings us back to `is this a new album?'
AR: It is a new version of the album. It had to feel the same but it had
to sound better. We were given very little information as to what was
expected with this album, but I think we all knew what was wanted. And
it could only really be achieved by taking a blank canvas and starting
again. That's basically the way it was. And that's why, at no point, did
we really reference to Glynn Johns' mix or Phil Spector's, because there
was no need to. That wasn't the purpose.
PH: Back to the tracks....For Your Blue; that's just a matter of getting
more clarity, really. It was a really good recording on that one,
actually; really clear and crisp and we took advantage of that and, like
Get Back, just tried to make it as punchy as possible.
PH: There's really not much that can be said about that track; it's
hopefully a bit clearer. We noticed that Paul's doing like a weird piano
sound that he got by putting paper in it. You know that weird little
percussive sound in it, that's basically Paul playing the piano that's
been muted, so it's got that percussive sound. Again, all we've tried to
do is to get it so that you can hear all those elements....The Long And
Winding Road, we've spoken about that; that's the version from the 31st
of January, the last day of recording.
AR: Talking about The Long And Winding Road, one of the biggest problems
we had was that the lyrics changed....It was only a small, subtle change.
PH: Not `you'll never know' but `you'll always know'...
AR: Once we realized that the lyric had changed we then had this
quandary as to whether or not this was acceptable now, because this was
something really, really obvious. It's one thing having a different
take, but you expect the lyrics to be the same because otherwise God
knows what people might assume. The conclusion we came to in this
instance was that, because it was the very last take that he probably
ever did, therefore it was probably more correct. So that's how we
resolved our problem, we figured that Paul had tuned his lyrics and that
was probably what he really wanted. But then Phil or Glyn use the take
that was done beforehand and, of course, that's how those lyrics became set.
Q: It's interesting that Paul still sings the Phil Spector version of
his lyrics onstage.
GM: He did comment on that when he heard this album.
AR: Didn't he turn around and look at us at that stage?
PH: Oh yeah, he did. He noticed.
AR: Well he was obviously singing along and it went wrong...But he was
happy with that.
PH: But then, again, that's the version that's in the film.
Q: But so few people these days have seen or can remember exactly the film.
AR: Very few people have seen it for a long time.
Q: Exactly, so for a lot of people who will be interested in buying this
album it's a case of `what film? `When's that out?'
AR: This reminds me that both Paul and Guy have used some artistic
license in that, and The Long And Winding Road is a good example of
this, the instrumentation which starts all at the beginning doesn't
necessarily start at the beginning in our version. In other words we've
done little subtle things to build a song. Guy did the same thing in
Across The Universe.
PH: Arrangements...
AR: We've arranged it, a little. So in other words if we felt it needed
a build we wouldn't necessarily have everything in from the beginning.
Across The Universe is probably the best example. Guy did Across The
Universe and he had a bit of a problem there, because he had two tracks.
And that was all. On track one was guitar and vocal, John singing, and
the only other thing that was played live was tambora. And that was it.
Yoko's heard it and thinks it's beautiful, so that's fine, but the point
was that all that was running from beginning to end was John playing
guitar, singing, and tambora. And that was it, all the way through.
GM: There was tom-tom as well.
AR: But Guy has done various things to the tambora and changed the
overall sound of the tambora throughout the structure of the song, to
build it, to change the concept of it - because otherwise you're missing
so much from that song with just those two things going on. There were
loads of overdubs on top of that. Not all of the songs were treated in
that way, but some leant themselves to a build. Let It Be was another
example of when that was done.
AR: We actually spent a long time, the three of us, to get the right
running order. It's completely different and I think it makes you want
to listen to the album more. For instance, One After 909 now starts
within split seconds of the track before it. If you think about Beatles
albums or any album recorded in the Sixties with the exception of albums
like Abbey Road, there was always three seconds between each track. It
didn't matter how it felt, you just measured three seconds of white
leader and stuck it in. But we didn't do that because people don't do
that anymore, people use feel for when the next track should come in.
All of this is slightly different to the usual Beatles album.
PH: I personally think that these changes are good if only to show
people that this is a different product. It's instant, you can see and
hear instantly that it's something different.
AR: You can probably see why we are rather excited by this album. It's a
privilege to be given a free hand and it is incredibly satisfying to
think that in all probability this is the only time that it's going to
happen, you can't do it with any of the other albums. It's a privilege
to be able to do it.
Q: And the rest of the tracks....?
PH: Two Of Us, we've used the same take and not a lot of editing done on
that, just a straightforward remix. I've Got A Feeling is an interesting
track; I've Got A Feeling is the rooftop performance - the rooftop
tracks, by the way, are I've Got A Feeling, Dig A Pony, The One After
909 and Don't Let Me Down. I've Got A Feeling is actually quite
different than has been heard before; that's the one on which we did a
lot of work to get the most exciting bits out of the two takes that were
on the rooftop.
PH: It was just block multi-track edits, just `that verse is better than
that one'. On one of the takes the guitar was really distorted and very
exciting, I love the excitement of I've Got A Feeling; with Paul just
screaming away on it it's a really good moment on the album. Next, One
After 909 - again, taken from the rooftop which was also used on the
original album but now one of the main improvements is the drum clarity.
No edits there, it's pretty naked. Next, Don't Let Me Down - also from
the rooftop.
GM: John fluffed his lyrics on one take....
PH: But the other take had the correct lyrics.
AR: One of the things that is very comforting for us in all of this, by
the way, is that Ringo appeared to be really knocked out after he first
heard the new album, he became very vocal about it. And then we heard
that Paul was really knocked out too, so that made it all matter.
PH: I Me Mine - again basically just the take from the original.
AR: I think it's important to recognize that it is the take with
overdubs because some people might start saying `I thought this was
meant to be without overdubs, but it's got loads of overdubs on it'. But
you have to understand that we couldn't pare down what was there; it
didn't have a vocal anyway, the backing track if you like.
PH: It would have just been drums and a guitar for I Me Mine.
AR: And that obviously doesn't work.
PH: Because even the vocal was really a guide vocal and he overdubbed
that on I Me Mine.
AR: So it is important to realize that there was reason behind what we
did and the reason was that in attempting to achieve what we'd done with
everything else the only choice we had was to have left some of the
overdubs there. Otherwise it would have sounded bare and it wouldn't
have worked. What track's next? Across The Universe, what did you do
with that, Guy?
GM: Well, there wasn't a lot that we could do with it, really. We
stereoized the tambora as it was building, we had it in mono first and
then for the first chorus we opened it out so it was stereo. We did the
same with the vocals, widened it out a little. And then Alan suggested
why doesn't it all fade into beautiful reverb at the end; so we all
laughed, did it, and it sounded great. Originally we thought that was
going to be the end track on the album, just a lovely thing to go out
on, just disappear on it. But then when we did the running order it
didn't flow quite as well, so we put Let It Be last, which seemed to fit
as well.
AR: I was just thinking about the irony of that, we spend a year and a
half getting rid of the sound of Phil Spector and then we go and put a
tape delay and then a reverb right on the end of it. It's just a little
present to Phil Spector, so he doesn't feel completely left out.
Q: Was Across The Universe recorded at the Let It Be sessions?
AR: No. They did it numerous times. You would assume they were intending
to put it on the album because it was rehearsed quite a few times within
the (Let It Be) sessions, but the version that ended up on the album was
recorded a year before. We were very worried that because this wasn't
recorded during the actual Let It Be sessions then maybe the track
wouldn't go on the album. But the way I saw it was that Across The
Universe needed to be there in order to go with Paul's Long And Winding
Road. And, as I said, they rehearsed it numerous times during those
three weeks.
Q: What did you do with Let It Be?
GM: Again, we just wanted it to build, so we started it as it does
start, pretty quietly and then we just introduced bits and arranged it a
bit more than it had been previously.
AR: We made a bigger thing of the other Beatles in the "oo" section. It
works, it's nice, it's much more ethereal as these lovely voices come
out. They were always there but we just made it a little bit more.
Q: George's guitar solo on Let It Be is different from what has been
heard before?
GM: We loved that and we wanted to get that in. It's only been heard
before in the Let It Be film.
Q: But anyone who saw the film back in 1970 would not have heard it in
such quality as this, in their local Odeon.
AR: And in mono then.
Q: Now they sound like the songs you imagined they wanted them to be
when they first did them.
AR: Hope so.
Q: As with any Beatles project there is a contradiction of expectation
in this one; over recent years there has been a move - probably started
with The Beatles Anthology series - to cram as many minutes of music
onto a CD as a disc can take, up to the last second. They did that with
The Beatles 1.
AR: The album length has hardly changed, despite the fact that we took
Dig It and Maggie Mae out and all the dialogue, because Don't Let Me
Down wasn't on the original album and that has made up the difference.
This is the same length as The Beatles first four albums, practically.
We were worried about that. When CD first came out and people realized
they could put 80 minutes of music on a disc, I think some thought they
had to put on 80 minutes, or at least 75.
Q: That's a point that Neil Aspinall made with this album; he said "it's
a very listenable album".
AR: I think it is, actually. I enjoy listening to it.
Q: But it's not just that the content is listenable, it's that the
whole, as a 35-minute album, is listenable. People can find 35 minutes
in a day to hear music, whereas they can't always find 80 minutes to spare.
PH: I just think that if any artist records 17 songs and eight of them
are good, why not just release the eight good ones? As a record buyer, I
wouldn't feel cheated if I got eight or 10 really good songs on an
album, as opposed to getting 17 and half of them aren't so great.
Q: So, was this a good project to work on?
PH: It was very satisfying.
GM: It was an honour. To do something like this with a free rein, but
treating it with respect, was great.
AR: There's always that worrying moment when you send a CD out and, in
this case, you know that two, sadly only two now, of the biggest
musicians in the world are going to listen to something you've done and
you want to know what their reaction will be. The least you expect
`Well, yeah, it's good, but I wonder if perhaps you could just do a bit
more vocal on this' or `maybe the bass wasn't quite as good on this as
it was on that'. But the fact that we've actually not changed anything
since the first pressing of the first CD was sent out to them, we hoped
that we were satisfying them and it appears that we have. And that is a
huge kick.
Thom
-
lukpac
- Top Dog and Sellout
- Posts: 4591
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Contact:
I bought the damn thing. The sound seems pretty good aside from the NR, but the NR still bothers me. The quiet spots just seem *too* quiet. Hell, guitar amps have hiss, don't they?
"the crackle of tape hiss"? WTF?
As a side note, the other day I was playing around with the new version of LIB, putting it next to the single. I think there are about half a dozen edits on the new version, switching back and forth between (apparently) two takes. More comments on that when I get farther.
"the crackle of tape hiss"? WTF?
As a side note, the other day I was playing around with the new version of LIB, putting it next to the single. I think there are about half a dozen edits on the new version, switching back and forth between (apparently) two takes. More comments on that when I get farther.
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD
-
lukpac
- Top Dog and Sellout
- Posts: 4591
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Contact:
I found this somewhat amusing bit on the All Music Guide:
The rest pretty much sounds very close to how it did on the original album, only with much better fidelity — so much better that it raises the questions why the Beatles' entire catalog hadn't been remastered yet (ideally, it would be released as hybrid SACDs mastered with DSD, much like how the catalogs of the Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan were).
The rest pretty much sounds very close to how it did on the original album, only with much better fidelity — so much better that it raises the questions why the Beatles' entire catalog hadn't been remastered yet (ideally, it would be released as hybrid SACDs mastered with DSD, much like how the catalogs of the Rolling Stones and Bob Dylan were).
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD
-
lukpac
- Top Dog and Sellout
- Posts: 4591
- Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2003 11:51 pm
- Location: Madison, WI
- Contact:
Yet in the entry for Yellow Submarine, Mr. Erlewine is singing a different tune:
How are the differences on YS "slight" but LIB has "much better fidelity"?
Not that I take any of that crap seriously, but...
It's a little jarring not to hear the songs from the soundtrack in a different order on the songtrack, but ultimately the record is entertaining, if a bit familiar. That's not the case with the sound, though. The Beatles (or their managers or their company, since the three surviving members feel as curiously uninvolved with the songtrack as they did with the soundtrack) have decided to make this the first remixed CD in their catalog instead of simply producing a new remastered tape. The differences are slight but never really an improvement, making this an enjoyable but unnecessary addition to the group's catalog.
How are the differences on YS "slight" but LIB has "much better fidelity"?
Not that I take any of that crap seriously, but...
"I know because it is impossible for a tape to hold the compression levels of these treble boosted MFSL's like Something/Anything. The metal particulate on the tape would shatter and all you'd hear is distortion if even that." - VD
It's been so long since I've heard that disc. I didn't even buy it, I just burned both discs on to a CD-R and broke up the stupid "fly on the wall" hack job into individual tracks. Soon after I tossed it somewhere and haven't touched it since.
If memory serves, I was okay with it at first, but after awhile, switching it back and forth with the old LIB CD (which I'm not a big fan of, musically speaking), LIB...N felt sterile sounding. I think the mix is partially to blame. I dug the mix initially but VERY quickly I grew to favor the original's 'openess.' I have to find it again, but I think LIB...N sounded like a real compressed mix that mixed the rhythm section up too much and mixed down some of the stuff I liked. Probably to make it sound more 'rocking,' but I didn't like it after a few listens.
I think they butchered "I've Got A Feeling." The best take/edit/whatever it is came on the LIB CD. LIB...N chose bits and pieces that were good but ultimately inferior.
If memory serves, I was okay with it at first, but after awhile, switching it back and forth with the old LIB CD (which I'm not a big fan of, musically speaking), LIB...N felt sterile sounding. I think the mix is partially to blame. I dug the mix initially but VERY quickly I grew to favor the original's 'openess.' I have to find it again, but I think LIB...N sounded like a real compressed mix that mixed the rhythm section up too much and mixed down some of the stuff I liked. Probably to make it sound more 'rocking,' but I didn't like it after a few listens.
I think they butchered "I've Got A Feeling." The best take/edit/whatever it is came on the LIB CD. LIB...N chose bits and pieces that were good but ultimately inferior.
Agreed. It's a lackluster disc, with a bizarre marketing campaign and a general "why bother?" air to it. It sounds "clearer," but not necessarily better. For all of its goofs and gaffes, the Yellow Submarine Songtrack was far more daring, far more purposeful, and in the end far superior.
And is anybody else seeing boxes and boxes of "...Naked" choking used CD stores everywhere? I got mine for $3.99. It was one of about 20 that had been sold to the store that week.
And is anybody else seeing boxes and boxes of "...Naked" choking used CD stores everywhere? I got mine for $3.99. It was one of about 20 that had been sold to the store that week.
-------------
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911
"Fuckin' Koreans" - Reno 911
