[mkmelt]

Has anyone else heard the newly remixed and remastered Beatles, Let It Be album? I just listened to the CD twice and think it is just great.
The song line up is more cohesive than on the original.

These new mixes remove all of the additional strings, horns, drums, and bass guitar tracks and other fluff (performed by session musicians not the Beatles) that producer Phil Spector added to the original session tapes.

This version of Let It Be completely trounces the one Spector was brought in to finish after the Beatles broke up as a group. I predict that in another 30 years, if people are still listening to Beatles music, this is the version of the Let It Be album that people will be playing.

New song lineup:
1. Get Back (originally released as a single)
2. Dig A Pony
3. For You Blue
4. The Long and Winding Road *
5. Two Of Us
6. I've Got A Feeling
7. One After 909
8. Don't Let Me Down (song added, originally released as side B of Get Back single)
9. I Me Mine *
10. Across the Universe *
11. Let It Be *

* De-Spectored

The new version of Let It Be is significantly different than the one Spector produced. In addition to losing the horns and the heavy bass guitar line, the new version is more basic and raw. It is also a different mix than the one on Beatles Past Masters - Volume II (this version was from the original 45 RPM single), which is similar to the version on Beatles - One (an improved and remastered version of the single mix).

If I had to rate the sound quality as well as musical appeal of the different mixes of the song Let It Be, I would place the version from Beatles - One (1st), Past Masters - Vol II (2nd), Let It Be - Naked (3rd), and Phil Spector's Let It Be (Last)

The only part of the new Let It Be I don't care for is the piano break in the middle of Long And Winding Road. Every other part of Let It Be -Naked works for me.

The guy at Tower Records said that the new Let It Be had been selling briskly since he started his shift. I predict this new Beatles album will be a huge success.

 

[Sovkiller]

And you believe that people will hear the Beatles after 30 years more?????
With all those Britney Spears and Puff Daddy around....I doubt that....

 

[akio]

with mounting legal costs, Michael Jackson had to release a "new" beatles album

 

[FCJ]

mkmelt,

IIRC, there was a story in the NY Times a couple of Sundays ago which said that the "Let It Be Naked" release were not the original Glynn Johns mixes of the album, but another mix altogether. Given that, the "Naked" mix falls in between Specter's re-mix and the original recording that Johns made.

I guess that I'm so used to the original release that I found the "Naked" mix a bit disorienting at first . The one cut on "Naked" that I'm not particulary fond of, in it's "de-Specter" version", is "The Long and Winding Road." The vocal is different from the original, and I agree that the piano break in the middle doesn't work. I also miss the longer ending on "Get Back," some of the between-song chatter, and "Dig It."

Regarding "The Long and Winding Road," say what you will about Phil Specter (for "Let It Be" demon or hero, depending on your viewpoint

), I still prefer his mix. Other than that, this is still a very worthwhile purchase.

 

[grinch]

i almost picked this up yesterday, but opted for tori amos' new remastered greatest hits set instead. i was planning on picking it up, but at this point i'm not sure.

my big question is: has this been remastered in normal stereo or full mono? in other words, can i listen to this on my headphones and not get an instant headache?

 

[mkmelt]

The remastered Let It Be album is in stereo.

 

[fractus2]

It's nice when someone else gets it for you (re: amaz wish list).

First, the liner notes are horrible. mkmelt's post is more coherent by leaps. After a google search there is more interesting reading to accomplany this listen. All in all I like the changes, and the fact that you can have different versions of these songs, from the original albums or various other releases, this one included.

I like the closing paragraph to the Guardian review:

Quote:

The upshot of all this is clear enough. Even with George Harrison rapidly turning into a seething ball of anti-McCartney resentment, John Lennon momentarily lost to heroin, Yoko Ono sitting threateningly next to him and a film crew recording their every argument and belch, The Beatles were brilliant. Oh, and one other thought: this is the last thing Phil Spector needs, eh?

 

[chadbang]

Because the cd is copy protected, I hesititated buying the album. I finally decided I had to buy it. I'm sorry I did. "Let It Be" had become my favourite Beatles album over the years, precisely for some of the elements on the album which have been removed in "Naked". It feels very cold and bare compared to the original. Yes, I really miss the "chatter" and the tibits like "Maggie May". And this was The Beatles original intention - all the hoopla about Spectre aside. They wanted it to be an intimate, raw, personal album. Along with Specter, all that has been removed. Damn.

But my major problem is that the sound quality isn't really all that I expected. The only really decent sounding tracks are the "de-specterized" tracks "Across the Universe" "Let it Be" ("I me mine" still sounds pretty good") and the Paul's voice is nicely miked on "The Long and Winding Road". I have to say I disagree with the NY Times reviewers comments that the album sounds better than the original release. I found the recording very "dry" sounding with a noticeably poor soundstage on all the "rooftop" songs. Granted, these were recorded live, but they sound very flat cleaned up. Dull. That's something - at least psychologically - that the live chatter and roughness of the original album perhaps helped to hide.

All in all, I was quite disappointed and I wouldn't recommend shelling out your money for this album. Get the original or try to track down the Glynn Johns mixed version. Its available as a bootleg. I used to have a copy on tape, but it got ruined. Sorry I can't help you there.

 

[Tom M]

hmmm I'll have to give this one a listen and see what I think.

 

[timoteus]

Here is some more background information and history, much of which I didn't know. A pretty good read.

http://www.audiorevolution.com/equip...ed/index.shtml

 

[fractus2]

Quote:

Originally posted by timoteus Here is some more background information and history, much of which I didn't know. A pretty good read. http://www.audiorevolution.com/equip...ed/index.shtml

Nice find. Now that would make for some better liner notes. I remember listening to hours and hours of the Beatles story on the radio and it was fascinating. LIBN really shines with it's smoother, cleaner sound, and the alternate version facet of it.

 

[augustwest]

Oh no! Not Copy Guarded. . . . . .I wanted to get this, but refuse to invest in anything that is "copy guarded"

(thanks for the "heads up")

- augustwest

 

[grinch]

i picked up this release and decided that i really like it a lot. the remastering job was very well done and the sound quality is top notch. i'm also quite imperssed to see beatles music mixed properly for normal stereo, as oppose to the majority of their earlier cd releases which all have drum/vocals in left, and guitar/bass in right. the extreme separation really gives me a headache most of the time, and i found myself mixing both channels to mono so that i could listen to the album with headphones (this works for all kinds of mono->stereo releases, by the way).

anyway, i like it a lot. haven't spent much time with the second cd though.

 

[RickG]

I really dig this version. I've always felt that the Phil Spector version with the lush strings sounded like an after thought and not a part of the plan...(obviously McCartney felt the same way).

It was like you had this mish/mash of the Beatles playing and singing in an intimate setting (garage style) and then added the London Philharmonic Orchestra...

The original album just never sounded right to me, and this one does.

 

[Guild]

Quote:

Originally posted by augustwest Oh no! Not Copy Guarded. . . . . .I wanted to get this, but refuse to invest in anything that is "copy guarded" (thanks for the "heads up") - augustwest

So does this mean that I couldn't rip it to my hard drive? That's lame if it's true.

And I was really planning on buying it this week.