Forums dot lukpac.org

It's stuff like THIS, that makes me retch !

From a posting at the Beatles, abbeyard, fan site...

The October issue of ICE (ICE #199, which I just got today) seems to agree with reports, just posted on your "Beatles News Briefs" website, that the upcoming re-release of "Let It Be" (the album) might be called "Let It Be Naked". Here's the text, from page 13 of that ICE issue, in their catch-all "ICE Cubes" column:

"Finally, Beatle circles were buzzing at press time about an unnamed project on EMI/Capitol's schedule for November 18. It's easy to deduce that the mystery project is the stripped-down 'Let It Be' album that McCartney told the world about earlier this year. ICE spoke with an insider who had just heard the planned release, and this source tells us that 'Let It Be...Naked' is actually a serious working title. Isn't that a bit... goofy, we wondered? 'It depends on how they present it on the cover, in the graphics,' our source says. 'But it really is the naked tracks, without overdubs, with Paul's voice breaking, without any echo on the drums, without multi-tracking... and it's the band naked.' Our source also reports that 'de-Spectorizing' 'Let It Be' may go beyond just removing the strings... that things like John Lennon's silly spoken interludes ('phase one, in which Doris gets her oats,' 'I hope we passed the audition,' etc.) had been removed from the version they heard. But so had 'Maggie Mae' and 'Dig It'... could the overhaul be that drastic? More details as they emerge..."

Other things noted just before that in the ICE column are the already-reported news that the 2-DVD "Ed Sullivan Presents The Beatles" set will be officially released (on shelves, not just via the Internet), that a gold Mobile Fidelity CD of "Imagine" has just come out (I've got it... it sounds VERY nice!), and that a two-DVD "Concert For George" set is forthcoming, along with reissues of George's Dark Horse Records/Warner Bros. catalog, with "previously unreleased material" and "will be available early next year, both individually and in a special boxed set."

http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/news/403letitbeagain.html

Is this *anyone's* favorite Beatles record?

Ron,

Lots of people have fond memories of this, with the Rooftop scene, one of the all time favorites.

Unfortunately, for me, in general, it's like having root canal, watching the unraveling of the group.

One wonders, "why" of all of the Beatle albums to officially remaster, and not only to revise, Macca picked this one. I can only feel, he has some deep psychological need to put his personal "stamp" on his legacy, at this point in his life. What with the stuff about the songwriting credits, and everything, it seems, it's his Mission, to let people know...at least these newer generations....what he accomplished...AND to amass more money.

It's not a crime, but it seems so unnecessary. Yet, he continues.

I hope you're wrong about his motives.

Paul has always wanted this out, practically since the Spectorized Let It Be was released over his objections. John and George were the obstacles. Now that both of them are dead, here it is. Not much more to it than that, I think.

Personally, I think they should have made this a bonus disc for Anthology 3 and called it Get Back with Don't Let Me Down and 11 Other Songs. Of course, George was still alive then...

Ryan

Not sure why this is a big deal *at all*. It's not as if this is replacing the regular issue or anything. It's even got a new name.

It should be interesting.

Although I've agreed for years with the assertion that "oh, well, if x and x bootleg ever came out officially, I'd buy it..."

If this ends up being subpar in *any* way, I'm steering clear. I mean, it's only a fucking official release of something which has been out on bootleg for...gee golly gosh, close to 40 years now (far longer than 30 days!). If it ends up being the "Let It Be" album, without the goofiness (Maggie May) and without Spectorization...big fucking deal, unless it sounds absolutely stellar, and it probably won't.

What's next? A re-release of the Hollywood Bowl album?

I agree. This bootleg has been out for at least 25 years and once you get a rightious copy, you have a direct from stereo master *copy* which is actually quite good and listenable. But if the price is right, I don't mind speniding a few bucks for any decent sounding Beatles material. BTW the two songs cited are ones contributed by the deceased members. Any connection?

lukpac wrote:Not sure why this is a big deal *at all*. It's not as if this is replacing the regular issue or anything. It's even got a new name.

It should be interesting.

The name is like a FOX or SPIKE Tv show.

"Let It Be"? Oh . . . the "Naked" bit. [Just running my post total up--I wanna be a friggin' ICON here at forums.com.lukpac.org.com.com.org.]

The latest news....

Update (9/24/03)
An answer to a question a couple of people have asked us: Capitol Records tells us there are no plans to delete the original "Let It Be" CD from the catalog.

Remember that link we posted the other day to the Brazilian site that was said to have the cover of the CD on it? The one with the reversed images that we said didn't seem likely to be it? Well, a second source -- with a connection said to be inside EMI -- has sent us the same picture, saying it's the cover. However, a third source, a more official contact we asked directly, couldn't confirm whether it was the cover or not because they hadn't seen it yet. So is it or isn't it?

From Carolyn Hurwitz:

All I have to say is that if that photo the Brazilian site showed IS the cover, then it's emblematic of the lack of imagination behind the entire work from the very start. First the crummy title, now this. My suggestion (which will be ignored by most fans, I'm certain) is to boycott the album and let Apple/EMI know that we'd like a higher standard for future releases. Thanks for listening!

http://abbeyrd.best.vwh.net/news/403letitbeagain.html


Here's a link to the alleged artwork....

http://www.thebeatles.com.br/review-cd- ... -naked.htm

Oh, gimme a break. If that piece of Photoshopped garbage is the real cover, then I don't even want to think about what's inside.

Ryan

Rspaight wrote:Oh, gimme a break. If that piece of Photoshopped garbage is the real cover, then I don't even want to think about what's inside.

Ryan

It does look kind of creepy, doesn't it. But, abbeyard is a respected, dependable, source of Beatle news, so.....

There was a rumor, by a poster in another forum I was looking through, that said the extra disc was going to be a DVD sampler of the remastered "Let It Be". That would be nice, but it doesn't jive with what was "officially" released from EMI about this set.

It does look kind of creepy, doesn't it. But, abbeyard is a respected, dependable, source of Beatle news, so.....

George's teeth are really scary.

Ryan

mikenycLI wrote:It does look kind of creepy, doesn't it. But, abbeyard is a respected, dependable, source of Beatle news, so.....

I'd say they are a very dependable source of *rumors*. Sometimes they get it right, but they also post a lot of stuff that turns out to be wrong too.

Assuming that really is the cover (call me a doubter), yeah, it's pretty lame. But I think Carolyn Hurwitz's comments are a bit over the top. We should boycott it because the name and cover art are stupid?

(Assuming it wasn't used,) it's too bad they didn't use the original Get Back concept cover, with the picture of the stairwell. Obviously they'd have to change some of the wording, but...