'Let it Be' album severely under-rated!
-
LIB is not the best Beatles lp, but: Get Back, Let It Be, The Long And Winding Road, Across The Universe. Most, say: 99% of all groups will never make 1 song on this level, let alone 4.
-
Bruce M.:
Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
beatlesfanrandy:
So now we have both. The over-produced version that everybody was used to, and Paul's version as it was meant to be originally and finally set right. I personally like Let It Be...Naked better.
I'm in your guys' camp. Much prefer "... Naked". "If being in the minority is wrong then I don't want to be right."
-
unclesox:
Bruce M.:
Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
beatlesfanrandy:
So now we have both. The over-produced version that everybody was used to, and Paul's version as it was meant to be originally and finally set right. I personally like Let It Be...Naked better.
I'm in your guys' camp. Much prefer "... Naked". "If being in the minority is wrong then I don't want to be right."
I don't think it is a wrong or right argument. The OP posed the question whether LET IT BE (original release) was an under rated LP. NAKED is really a whole other topic with a history all its own. I like LET IT BE-NAKED. But most people are much more acquainted with the original LP.
-
RMartinez:
... most people are much more acquainted with the original LP.
It goes without saying. 'Let It Be' (original album) had a 33 year head start with the general public. But with that being the only option for so many years it can sometimes be refreshing to hear a different version, so refreshing that the newly released unheard version becomes the favorite for some. I'm sure this was the case with a few individual songs when the Anthology albums came out. There are probably some (possibly many) people who prefer the Anthology version of a particular song over the well acquainted version that had been around 25+ years. For example, I much prefer the Anthology version of 'Lucy' over the Sgt Pepper version. And I stress, that's strictly my opinion which is neither right or wrong. Simply my preference. 'Naked' is the same for me. Similarly, I very much prefer the 2010 'Stripped Down' version of Double Fantasy over the 1980 original.
-
I enjoy the 'naked' version but I prefer the one that the author of this thread is referring to.
-
unclesox:
RMartinez:
... most people are much more acquainted with the original LP.
It goes without saying. 'Let It Be' (original album) had a 33 year head start with the general public. But with that being the only option for so many years it can sometimes be refreshing to hear a different version, so refreshing that the newly released unheard version becomes the favorite for some. I'm sure this was the case with a few individual songs when the Anthology albums came out. There are probably some (possibly many) people who prefer the Anthology version of a particular song over the well acquainted version that had been around 25+ years. For example, I much prefer the Anthology version of 'Lucy' over the Sgt Pepper version. And I stress, that's strictly my opinion which is neither right or wrong. Simply my preference. 'Naked' is the same for me. Similarly, I very much prefer the 2010 'Stripped Down' version of Double Fantasy over the 1980 original.
Yes. I agree. But when they reissue the Beatles albums in collection form, Spector's LET IT BE will always be included, and NAKED won't. And since this was an after thought, really, I can't imagine in twenty years people listening to NAKED but not the original LET IT BE. I just don't see that happening. Stripped down DOUBLE FANTASY will never over take the original as the one most people listen to.
-
RMartinez:
unclesox:
Bruce M.:
Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
beatlesfanrandy:
So now we have both. The over-produced version that everybody was used to, and Paul's version as it was meant to be originally and finally set right. I personally like Let It Be...Naked better.
I'm in your guys' camp. Much prefer "... Naked". "If being in the minority is wrong then I don't want to be right."
I don't think it is a wrong or right argument. The OP posed the question whether LET IT BE (original release) was an under rated LP. NAKED is really a whole other topic with a history all its own. I like LET IT BE-NAKED. But most people are much more acquainted with the original LP.
So, getting back to the original question: No, Let It Be is not underrated. It's a good album -- hey, it's the effing Beatles -- but much less consistently brilliant than their best stuff. And as for the original being more well-known than Naked: Well, duh. It was a huge hit and it was the last Beatles album before they broke up. Of course a stripped-down reissue of 40-year-old album isn't going to be as well known. This has nothing whatever to do with the merits or demerits of either version. Personally, I still think Phil Spector should be dropped out of an airplane with no parachute.
-
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
unclesox:
Bruce M.:
Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
beatlesfanrandy:
So now we have both. The over-produced version that everybody was used to, and Paul's version as it was meant to be originally and finally set right. I personally like Let It Be...Naked better.
I'm in your guys' camp. Much prefer "... Naked". "If being in the minority is wrong then I don't want to be right."
I don't think it is a wrong or right argument. The OP posed the question whether LET IT BE (original release) was an under rated LP. NAKED is really a whole other topic with a history all its own. I like LET IT BE-NAKED. But most people are much more acquainted with the original LP.
So, getting back to the original question: No, Let It Be is not underrated. It's a good album -- hey, it's the effing Beatles -- but much less consistently brilliant than their best stuff. And as for the original being more well-known than Naked: Well, duh. It was a huge hit and it was the last Beatles album before they broke up. Of course a stripped-down reissue of 40-year-old album isn't going to be as well known. This has nothing whatever to do with the merits or demerits of either version. Personally, I still think Phil Spector should be dropped out of an airplane with no parachute.
-
Spector took a pile of bubbling badly recorded lesser tired Beatles and made it decent.
-
While I think Let It Be (original) is still a fine album it could of been so much better, if not one of their best, if they had originally given more time to putting it altogether. They should of polished it up with some, dare I say, overdubs, editing and remixing but leaving that essentially live feeling. I think they should of pleaded with George Martin to" re-produce" it. I think at that stage however George Martin wanted nothing to do with it. Although there was enough great material recorded, tracks like The Ballad of John & Yoko and Old Brown Shoe (demoed during Let It Be sessions) recorded not that long after would of made great inclusions and of course where was Don't Let Me Down. Although LP time limits may of made this difficult the studio chatter could be edited out to give more time. But as we know they put it on the shelf except for the Get back/Don't Let Me Down single. Then much later John and Allen Kliein brought in Spector to tart it up.
-
I put Let It Be with the White Album. It is what it is. Or was what it was. It is part of Beatle history and hardly tarnishes their legacy in any way. It's a cool LP. The Beatles always had a "thing" about them, like Let It Be. Abbey Road was the last official LP, but Let It Be was released after. Which is kind of cool. The End is a fitting eulogy to the Beatles. But so are Let It Be and The Long and Winding Road.
-
I like Let it Be a lot. There are great songs on it as has been discussed already. But the reason its under-rated is down to the comments Lennon made, McCartney?s objection to the choral and string arrangement to The Long and Winding Road and it doesn?t help that George called it this period the ?winter of discontent.? When Spector came around, it was like, 'Well, all right, if you want to work with us, go and do your audition, man.' And he worked like a pig on it. He'd always wanted to work with The Beatles and he was given the shittiest load of badly recorded shit - and with a lousy feeling to it - ever. And he made something out of it. It wasn't fantastic, but I heard it, I didn't puke. I was so relieved after six months of this black cloud hanging over, this was going to go out. I thought it would be good to go out, the shitty version, because it would break The Beatles, it would break the myth. That's us with no trousers on and no glossy paint over the cover and no sort of hype. 'This is what we're like with our trousers off. So would you please end the game now?' But that didn't happen, and we ended up doing Abbey Road quickly and putting out something to preserve the myth. John Lennon, 1970 Lennon Remembers, Jann S Wenner How can an album recover from that type of promotion!! Before I started reading Beatle biographies it was my favorite LP. Then I read about how tumultuous the recording sessions were and the arguments, and film shows how strained the sessions were. But they pulled it together for the rooftop concert and as Ringo says ?put the bullshit behind us?. But as Beatle fans we are waiting impatiently for the release of Let it Be and outtakes, hopefully, on DVD/BlueRay. I?ve listened to countless outtakes of The Long and Winding Road and Spector?s version is horrible. I?ve never liked it. He took a simple piano ballad and made it too syrupy. I can?t listen that version anymore.
-
Sometimes John demonstrated why Twitter is a bad idea. If you always have a forum to display every stray thought that passes through your head, like he did, sometimes people hear what you might not have said had you thought twice about it.
-
I just saw on the news a fews days ago a drunken guy wearing a Let It Be T-shirt being arrested by policemen. No, he wasn't arrested for wearing a Beatles t-shirt. He was arrested for public alarm and scandal. This just shows that Let It Be is not underrated. In fact, Let It Be T-shirt is the most popular Beatles shirt in our country. And, oh, by the way, way back in 2002/2003, I acquire a bootleg DVD of - you guessed it - Let It Be on a - you guessed it again - bootleg DVD store. The only let down is that the audio and video quality is very poor. But the music and images still cheered me up.
-
I think from the critics' point of view, this album is "dismal with only a few good tracks." For me this album is a classic. Well, I only say an album is a classic if I enjoy listening to it. Yes, I use a good, quality music player.
-
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
With all the tarnished history, it's THAT version that people know and love. Including Long and Winding Road with Spector's angelic voices and orchestra. Let It Be-Naked it cool but almost sounds like demos by comparison, and how ingrained the original release is in our collective memories.
Uh, speak for yourself. Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
Bruce, you sound like such a tool. If Paul loved Spector, you'd love him too.
-
I've always felt that it was the way it was done and not really the Spectorism that bothered him. It was a kind of polarization, the other three + Spector against McCartney. If I got something out of "Let It Be... Naked", it must be that Phil Spector got the best out of a chaos of recordings and a band that was not a team anymore. His orchestrations are gorgeous. And a little laughter and nonsense... The snippets of songs, so it sounds like they're having fun. I can agree with the 'conventional truth' that "Let It Be" is not their greatest album. But pull it apart... What's not to like.
-
I've always had a soft spot for this album. I like the rawness, chatter, live feel of the songs. My all time favorite Beatles song is I've Got a Feeling. That song to me embodies the classic rock sound.
-
Martin Luther:
Bruce M.:
RMartinez:
With all the tarnished history, it's THAT version that people know and love. Including Long and Winding Road with Spector's angelic voices and orchestra. Let It Be-Naked it cool but almost sounds like demos by comparison, and how ingrained the original release is in our collective memories.
Uh, speak for yourself. Since I bought "Naked," I've listened to the original LIB exactly twice, and one was by accident when I grabbed the wrong CD off the shelf. While neither version is quite up to the standard set by the likes of Abbey Road and Revolver, the Naked version to me is the closes thing to a definitive version there is. If I never again have to listen to Phil Spector pissing all over Paul's songs it'll be just fine by me.
Bruce, you sound like such a tool. If Paul loved Spector, you'd love him too.
You've clearly never read my posts, have you? I criticize Paul and his artistic judgments all the time -- to the point that I've been accused repeatedly of not being a real McCartney fan. I distinctly remember first hearing The Long and Winding Road at age 14 and thinking, "Nice song, but somehow this doesn't sound like a Beatles record. Something's wrong." At the time I had no clue what had happened with the album or of Paul's unhappiness with Spector's production, I just sensed something was amiss and didn't like it.
-
No, I've read plenty of your posts. You're hard to miss, you post all the time. You're hard to ignore because you come across like a snarky know-it-all.